Actually you are Wrong, I am assuming you are talking about the 1989 Earthquake. The Epicenter was in the Santa Cruz Mountains near Loma Prieta. That is about 56 miles south of San Francisco. And Oakland and Berkley had major Damage, The Double Decker Freeway that collaps was caused the greatest loss of life was between Berkley and Oakland. Actually the towns of Watsonville and Santa Cruz sustained greater damage then S.F. did, but as the TV stations wer ein San Francisco it got more coverage. I live in Los Gatos which is about 15 miles from the epicenter and my house recieve no damage. Damage is more dependant on what type of soil you are on not distance from the epicenter. I lived in the foothills with shallow clay soil on Bedrock. The areas most damaged were built on fill that used to be a part of San Francisco Bay. The ironic part is that the North beach neighborhodd is San Francisco that was the most damaged was built on fill that was bulldozed into the Bay in 1909. It was the rubble from the 1908 Earthquake and Fire.
I used to manage an Auto Parts store and played a local Music Station as hold music on my phones. One day I received a letter in the mail demanding I pay royalties for the music that played while people are on hold. I have heard from my Dentist that he has also received a similar letter about the music he plays in his Office. My question is how does these "Royalty payments" ever get back to the artists involved? There was no mention in the letter of me having to provide a play list with the payment. Radio stations are required to keep a log of the songs they play so the royalties get back to the songs copy write holder ( notice I did not say artist or songwriter) often they are not the one who receives royalties. All the letters stated was you owe us $$XXX amount of dollars pay now or be sued. I wonder who pocket these payments go in?
Well the reason they gave was the My MP3.COM service which was reading from Wickapedia
"On January 12, 2000, MP3.com launched the "My.MP3.com" service which enabled users to securely register their personal CDs and then stream digital copies online from the My.MP3.com service. Since consumers could only listen online to music they already proved they owned the company saw this as a great opportunity for revenue by allowing fans to access their own music online. The record industry did not see it that way and sued MP3.com claiming that the service constituted unauthorized duplication and promoted copyright infringement." But also taken from Wickapedia "it is better known for its original incarnation, as a legal, free music-sharing service, popular with independent musicians for promoting their work."
Here is the link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3.com
Sorry you doubt my credibility, but my Band sold a lot of Cd's and downloads of individual tracks on MP3.COM and it really help promote our Music.
Overall Between this and other websites plus our Own Website we sold over 45,000 Cd's in 2000-2001. The cost us $1.68 do have Mass produced and we sold them for $8.00 US plus shipping. I doubt any band starting out would have that kind of profit from signing with a label.
First of all let me say that I am a Musician. The FUD about downloading costing them money is a smokescreen. What they are really afraid of is Musicians bypassing the record companies entirely and selling their music directly to consumers online. Remember MP3.COM it was shut down by the RIAA even though the music that was available on the site was posted by the musicians that held the copyrights to it. They are afraid that musicians will figure out that they are no longer needed as a middleman. There is an excellent article by Steve Albini who was involved with many of the Seattle Grunge Bands during their heyday. The Article shows just how screwed a Band will Get for Signing a contract and having a hit record. And how much money everyone else makes off them. http://www.negativland.com/albini.html
This has nothing to do with "saving the starving Artists" this is just greed.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually you are Wrong, I am assuming you are talking about the 1989 Earthquake. The Epicenter was in the Santa Cruz Mountains near Loma Prieta. That is about 56 miles south of San Francisco. And Oakland and Berkley had major Damage, The Double Decker Freeway that collaps was caused the greatest loss of life was between Berkley and Oakland. Actually the towns of Watsonville and Santa Cruz sustained greater damage then S.F. did, but as the TV stations wer ein San Francisco it got more coverage. I live in Los Gatos which is about 15 miles from the epicenter and my house recieve no damage. Damage is more dependant on what type of soil you are on not distance from the epicenter. I lived in the foothills with shallow clay soil on Bedrock. The areas most damaged were built on fill that used to be a part of San Francisco Bay. The ironic part is that the North beach neighborhodd is San Francisco that was the most damaged was built on fill that was bulldozed into the Bay in 1909. It was the rubble from the 1908 Earthquake and Fire.
I used to manage an Auto Parts store and played a local Music Station as hold music on my phones. One day I received a letter in the mail demanding I pay royalties for the music that played while people are on hold. I have heard from my Dentist that he has also received a similar letter about the music he plays in his Office. My question is how does these "Royalty payments" ever get back to the artists involved? There was no mention in the letter of me having to provide a play list with the payment. Radio stations are required to keep a log of the songs they play so the royalties get back to the songs copy write holder ( notice I did not say artist or songwriter) often they are not the one who receives royalties. All the letters stated was you owe us $$XXX amount of dollars pay now or be sued. I wonder who pocket these payments go in?
Well the reason they gave was the My MP3.COM service which was reading from Wickapedia "On January 12, 2000, MP3.com launched the "My.MP3.com" service which enabled users to securely register their personal CDs and then stream digital copies online from the My.MP3.com service. Since consumers could only listen online to music they already proved they owned the company saw this as a great opportunity for revenue by allowing fans to access their own music online. The record industry did not see it that way and sued MP3.com claiming that the service constituted unauthorized duplication and promoted copyright infringement." But also taken from Wickapedia "it is better known for its original incarnation, as a legal, free music-sharing service, popular with independent musicians for promoting their work." Here is the link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3.com Sorry you doubt my credibility, but my Band sold a lot of Cd's and downloads of individual tracks on MP3.COM and it really help promote our Music. Overall Between this and other websites plus our Own Website we sold over 45,000 Cd's in 2000-2001. The cost us $1.68 do have Mass produced and we sold them for $8.00 US plus shipping. I doubt any band starting out would have that kind of profit from signing with a label.
First of all let me say that I am a Musician. The FUD about downloading costing them money is a smokescreen. What they are really afraid of is Musicians bypassing the record companies entirely and selling their music directly to consumers online. Remember MP3.COM it was shut down by the RIAA even though the music that was available on the site was posted by the musicians that held the copyrights to it. They are afraid that musicians will figure out that they are no longer needed as a middleman. There is an excellent article by Steve Albini who was involved with many of the Seattle Grunge Bands during their heyday. The Article shows just how screwed a Band will Get for Signing a contract and having a hit record. And how much money everyone else makes off them. http://www.negativland.com/albini.html This has nothing to do with "saving the starving Artists" this is just greed.