Actually, this isn't too far off from the way the government deals with militia groups. The groups have guns which they train with. Most of them don't like the government. That's means and motive. What frequently happens is a government agent infiltrates a group and when the agent hears someone talking trash about the government and mouthing off about what they would like to do, even in jest, they have intent, and the group gets busted for conspiracy. Many of those groups are pretty nutty (and dangerous), but consider the implications.
If you (previous poster) own a gun and if you or someone close to you has been screwed by the man (irs audit, random search, etc) then with your current post to a public forum, you have already come within a hair's breadth of doing everything you need to put yourself in prison for a long time.
In fact, there are militia organizations which are not crazy, they simply believe in the second amendment and believe that if the time comes when we need to take the land back from the government, (we're not there yet) we should be ready. This is not an unreasonable viewpoint considering that the founders of our country were revolutionaries who took the land from the British. They then screwed up with the articles of confederation and had to scrap them in favor of the constitution. They were certainly aware of their own fallability and that the system they created may someday need to be taken down by force. Some people say that this is the real intent behind the second amendment. I'm not sure they are wrong.
However, once an organization like that exists, all it takes is one member getting drunk and spouting off to the wrong person and everyone goes to prison for conspiracy to overthrow the US government. This has happened a number of times, and the bad press that militia organizations get is partly the result of government propaganda. Unfortunately, it is also the result of the fact that many of them are complete lunatics.
Why is it a surprise to anyone that most of the music doesn't sell? The sites don't exercise any editorial control. An artist puts his or her music up and takes his chances. The only difference between mp3.com and a vanity book publisher is that you don't have to pay for publishing.
In a traditional setup, the record company decides you have a marketable sound, then they take the risk of paying for promotion, recording, distribution, etc.
I think there's room for a music site which carefully selects the music they would like to host. They would then promote the music they have chosen, both on the web site and off, and make money from sales. However, they then start to resemble the traditional record companies.
Sony, CBS, et al may be screwing the little guy, but in between screws, they are selecting the artists they think are saleable, promoting them, distributing discs, etc.
Traditional media companies are running scared because they think that all they have to offer is buggy whips (printing presses, broadcast studios, etc). What they don't yet realize is that content selection is a necessary and valuable service.
It's not worth my time to sift through thousands of mp3s to find the few bands that I like. I would rather listen to radio stations (online or other) where I like the DJs taste. I then discover that I like Basia, Maria Muldaur, Tuck and Patti, Madeleine Peyroux, and Diana Krall. If I want to expand my horizons, I listen to a different radio station for a while. You might say this is lazy of me, but remember: I am the consumer. I'm allowed to be lazy. If you want to sell to me, it's your job to get your content to me. I'm not going to spend hours looking for a needle in a haystack when there are people out there who will do most of the sifting for me.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, this isn't too far off from the way the government deals with militia groups. The groups have guns which they train with. Most of them don't like the government. That's means and motive. What frequently happens is a government agent infiltrates a group and when the agent hears someone talking trash about the government and mouthing off about what they would like to do, even in jest, they have intent, and the group gets busted for conspiracy. Many of those groups are pretty nutty (and dangerous), but consider the implications.
If you (previous poster) own a gun and if you or someone close to you has been screwed by the man (irs audit, random search, etc) then with your current post to a public forum, you have already come within a hair's breadth of doing everything you need to put yourself in prison for a long time.
In fact, there are militia organizations which are not crazy, they simply believe in the second amendment and believe that if the time comes when we need to take the land back from the government, (we're not there yet) we should be ready. This is not an unreasonable viewpoint considering that the founders of our country were revolutionaries who took the land from the British. They then screwed up with the articles of confederation and had to scrap them in favor of the constitution. They were certainly aware of their own fallability and that the system they created may someday need to be taken down by force. Some people say that this is the real intent behind the second amendment. I'm not sure they are wrong.
However, once an organization like that exists, all it takes is one member getting drunk and spouting off to the wrong person and everyone goes to prison for conspiracy to overthrow the US government. This has happened a number of times, and the bad press that militia organizations get is partly the result of government propaganda. Unfortunately, it is also the result of the fact that many of them are complete lunatics.
Why is it a surprise to anyone that most of the music doesn't sell? The sites don't exercise any editorial control. An artist puts his or her music up and takes his chances. The only difference between mp3.com and a vanity book publisher is that you don't have to pay for publishing.
In a traditional setup, the record company decides you have a marketable sound, then they take the risk of paying for promotion, recording, distribution, etc.
I think there's room for a music site which carefully selects the music they would like to host. They would then promote the music they have chosen, both on the web site and off, and make money from sales. However, they then start to resemble the traditional record companies.
Sony, CBS, et al may be screwing the little guy, but in between screws, they are selecting the artists they think are saleable, promoting them, distributing discs, etc.
Traditional media companies are running scared because they think that all they have to offer is buggy whips (printing presses, broadcast studios, etc). What they don't yet realize is that content selection is a necessary and valuable service.
It's not worth my time to sift through thousands of mp3s to find the few bands that I like. I would rather listen to radio stations (online or other) where I like the DJs taste. I then discover that I like Basia, Maria Muldaur, Tuck and Patti, Madeleine Peyroux, and Diana Krall. If I want to expand my horizons, I listen to a different radio station for a while. You might say this is lazy of me, but remember: I am the consumer. I'm allowed to be lazy. If you want to sell to me, it's your job to get your content to me. I'm not going to spend hours looking for a needle in a haystack when there are people out there who will do most of the sifting for me.