I would - First Person Sneaker. We need more of those, dangit. The Thief trilogy is one of my absolute favorites and needs to come back! That, and No One Lives Forever. Totally overlooked, IMO.
Good theory, but I'm afraid it'll never work. Because one of the functions of language is to express a range of distaste, there will always have to be a top end to the level of offense meant to the listener. This, in my completely unresearched opinion, necessitates words that are reserved for the absolute maximum impact. If "fuck" were to be removed from speech due to casual use there would inevitably be something new invented to take its place. Look no further than the recent symbolic "burial" of the dreaded "n-word" by (IIRC) the NAACP. There's a perfect example of a community where, to one side, a word is so vile that it needs to be stricken from any and all use, and to the other side, it's so inoffensive that it's used as a term of endearment. I'm not exactly sure what rap fans use in place of it when they're shouting at each other, but you know there has to be something.
As long as there are people cutting other people off in traffic, there'll be a search for something to yell at them. Language is funny like that.
As someone with a deathly fear of squid *and* octopus I have to say that it really feels like Satan and Mother Nature have decided to tag-team together in an all-out effort to make my darkest nightmares become incarnate. Next week they'll find a jellysquidfishapus and I'll end up like one of those H.P. Lovecraft characters who sees the most horrible thing possible and just dies on the spot.
> this is saying... AllofMP3 has a better business model than the current RIAA one, which I agree with completely.
Any business model that reduces the costs of creating, developing, and producing your product to virtually zero is always going to be a winner. When you reduce those costs by assigning all those debts to your direct competition by stealing (oh, sorry... sharing) their intellectual property then yes, I suppose in some interestingly twisted way you can call that "better."
I was playing Half-Life 2 last night, so that's gonna be trouble. I could plead self-defense on all the dead Combine, and since they're not *really* people then I could probably dodge a manslaughter charge, but I shot a medic right in the head when he wouldn't get out of my way in the hall and like ten people saw it. Better get Robert Blake's lawyer on speed dial...
Troll? Hardly. As a veteran of a zillion copyright arguments on Slashdot I think it's a completely legitimate position. If I were trolling I'd be posting AC so as to keep it out of the eyes of people who stay out of the murky depths of 0-rank posts.
> Why don't you go back to your cave and buy more crappy products like a good little consumer whore.
My cave doesn't have ethernet and I don't like to buy crappy products on account of, well, they're crappy.
> If you're going to support the mafIAA
I don't support any of the *IAAs, which is ironic considering my line of work. They're horrid associations that are unable to adapt to the changing media distribution landscape, they're outright hostile to the very people who consume their products, and in many cases have acted with highly questionable methods in an effort to protect their products. That doesn't change the fact that they have a legitimate beef with people who want to snag all their stuff for free, though.
> at least make sure you've got a signature saying something about how much of a tool you are, so we know who to ignore.
You're free to keep on scrolling whenever you see my name. That, or convince Slashdot to create an "ignore" feature to protect your fragile constitution.
> Do you work for them? Did they pay you money to insult people into paying for shitty inferior products and music?
No, I don't work for them, and if my argument sent you into such a frothing tirade then you really should consider a new site to hang out on. Eventually you're going to stumble across a GNAA post that will probably make your head explode.
> By the way, I do pay for products and music.
So do I. Gold stars all 'round.
> I own about 100 CDs of independent musicians, whether it be punk rock or electronic.
I own about 900, do I win? We should probably give you some sort of handicap, though, as a good number of the albums I own are by those evil, soulless major label artists that we shouldn't support. You know, Hendrix, the Beatles, Beethoven, sellout pop shit like that.
> Bad business practices does not demand my respect, much less my hard earned money.
I don't respect the *IAA any more than you do, but if I have to validate their efforts to make sure that the artists I value can make a living then I'll treat them as a seething, corrosive, and necessary evil. It doesn't really matter in the end, though, as their death is right around the corner.
> Why would I pay 400 +/- USD for a photo editing program to which there is a free clone of available on Linux?
I have no idea, unless you like having the support of a large company like Adobe for your software. GIMP's good enough for me.
> This is about right and wrong, good and evil.
I hope you were wearing a mask and a cape while you posted that.
> There are many people who say things like "I'm sick of buying a whole album for one song" or who disparage popular music who then go buy single tracks and indie music at iTunes and eMusic.
Yes, and those people are rarely represented in these discussions.
> I think you go too far by implying that this is the sole or even primary motivation for everyone on that side of the discussion.
I agree, which is why I inevitably end up mea culpa-ing to the person who points out that I'm making sweeping generalizations. So, mea culpa.
> And apparently some people believe that it advances understanding to attack people who may be honestly mistaken and giggle like a schoolgirl about it.
Oh, I don't believe that for a moment. It's just that the moment a copyright/**AA discussion starts up in here there'll be some pedant tossing out the "IT'S NOT THEFT, IT'S COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT!" argument, and I like to be the balance to that. If I'm in a hurry, I'll toss in the anecdote about my mother.* If I have a minute, I'll take the "If you hate pop music so much, why do you have six terabytes of it RAIDed on your server?" position. If a rational person comes in later to raise the level of the debate I do my best to match their efforts. Otherwise, yes, I default to agent provocateur.
> It's probably worthwhile to think about whether that might also be an error.
I agree completely. You'd think I would have tired of it now.
* "I don't care what you call it. The song costs a dollar on iTunes and you got it for free. That's stealing."
> If you want to hurt the major labels and the RIAA, BUY DIFFERENT MUSIC.
Which is exactly what they would do if they were, in fact, interested in buying music. The truth is that what they're interested in is getting *free* music. All of this ranting and raving about "I'M SICK OF BUYING A WHOLE ALBUM FOR ONE SONG!" and "ALL POPULAR MUSIC SUCKS, THAT'S WHY IT'S POPULAR AND I'M DOWNLOADING IT!" and "IT'S NOT THEFT, IT'S COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AND I'M ONLY DOING IT TO STICK IT TO TEH MANG!" is simply a convenient excuse to get something they value for nothing. The same people in this discussion giddily announcing that all of their credit at allofmp3 has magically reappeared at mp3sparks are the same ones who would demand you be assraped at the Super Bowl on live TV if you violated the GPL, which never fails to make me giggle like a schoolgirl.
Yeah, what service! They've sold over 500,000 of our songs now! Talk about exposure! With that kind of notoriety it should be a cinch to talk the Exxon girl into filling up our tanks before we go to our day jobs tomorrow. And hopefully we can save up enough to print up some shirts to sell on our self-financed tour that we're planning to go on if we can all coordinate our vacation time, because we're *huge* now. With any luck, allofmp3 will also distribute the live cds we sell on tour, too! When that t-shirt money comes rolling in, we're gonna be bigger than Metallica! THANK YOU, ALLOFMP3.COM!
"Somebody running a server in their basement on our network and uploading illegal copies movies raises the costs for everybody else and jams the network in ways we're not compensated for," said Mr. Cicconi..."
Right, because pirate bytes are... bigger? I guess they're all wearing hats and carrying parrots or something.
No, no. In keeping with the "made famous by" theme of the 80's edition of Guitar Hero, they've decided to go with the fabulous Def Leppard cover of that Smashing Pumpkins song from a few years back. I forget which one it was. "Bullet With Butterfly Wings?" "1979?" "Cherub Rock?"
> The artists are being ripped off now by the labels.
Yes, they are.
> This has been amply documented
I know. I've seen it.
> you can o adn find this information if you care to do so
I have. On many occasions.
> In your "fast forward" pseudo-exercise I don't see any elelments of abuse from the guy running the servers
That's because my "pseudo-exercise" was about the reason that record labels exist, not about financial mismanagement and abuse. I wasn't talking about abuse, and neither was the parent post to which I was replying. For that matter, neither was the grandparent. Say what you will about my crappy writing, it runs circles around your reading skills.
> Nowadays the artists are screwed over and over and yet some more
You keep making that point and I haven't disagreed with you yet. What were you saying about crappy writing again?
Well, that was certainly some tortured English and *fascinating* modding there, but I'll do what I can...
> It's awesome how anybody wants to "flash forward" to a future that neither knows nor can make their arguments strong with when they can look at a past that can be known for sure.
I see. So what you're saying is that with careful observation of past events, findings, and trends, there's absolutely no way to give a forecast of future events within a certain degree of probablity? I'll be certain to pass that on to every scientist and statistician who ever lived.
"I don't care if it's 110% humid outside and there's lightning and it rained the last 100 times that happened, you fraud! You take that voodoo witch-doctor bullshit somewhere else!"
> there have been dozens of undisputable bussiness that just were flooded away by the waves of time and technology
I'm not talking "undisputable bussiness," o wise economic scholar. I'm talking about the fact that *any* business that finds its products in high demand will find itself in need of some sort of a support mechanism eventually. Am I using words that are too big for you? SUPPORT MECHANISM. DISTRIBUTION HELP. BUTAN-PUSHIN MAN. My apologies if you're not a native English speaker, but I strongly suspect that it's something chemical in nature that's giving you these amazing insights.
> I don't see how it could be any different with any current profession or bussiness model that today seems to be strongly stablished.
I have no doubt that you can't.
> They are needed no more than people selling ice on the streets, and in fact much less.
Um... right. That correlates. You stick with that.
> almost no singing superstars, but chores on the dozens when one of those pieces required them... They got some names, like Vivaldi, Mozart, Wagner... That industry was simply killed once the phonographic industry "saw the light"
Yeah, man. The good old days. When cats would just gig and riff and scat and shoop-da-woop just for the love of it. You know, for the aaaaaart, man...
> but their time has passed and we will miss all those new rock star bands that won't be no more than our current symphonic composers that are no more.
I feel you. Kurt Cobain was the new Handel. PLAY "WATER MUSIC," MAAAAAAAN!
> Even in the worst case scenario where all current music standards just disappear, do you really miss the Bachs, Behetovens or Mozarts that have not been in the twenty century because the bussiness model pushed by RIAA asociates worked against them?
Dude, you gotta stop. My nose is bleeding. This isn't funny any more.
> You still will be able to listen to them if you really want it, for free, out of the Net just saying -maybe, oh, how great old days that passed away
Ow. Oh shit. Did you hear that? What was that "pop?" Why can't I see? Where are you man? I'm cold. Hold me...
> Just remember that on a free market, really no bussiness is essential or non-reemplazable.
The artists can distribute their music to a huge audience using the internet, the artists can then make all their money off live performances (which is pretty much what happens now). That puts record stores, out of business, and record companies, at least making vastly less money
Okay, let's flash forward to the future and see how that works out.
Awesome Rock Band: Damn, I'm tired of keeping this server running and processing all these credit card orders for our music. Can't we get Steve to take over? He's a computer dude. He knows that Linux Windows shit and everything!
Steve: Sweet! I hate working for The Man anyway.
six months later...
Awesome Rock Band: Thanks for all the help, Steve! We've gone double platinum, and with all the people we've met we've actually met a couple of other awesome bands. We want to help them get distribution, so you wanna add them to the server?
Steve: Sweet! Rock on, fellas.
Awesome Band With Emo Hair: Hooray!
Weak Band With Hot Singer: Beer for my men!
six months later...
Awesome Rock Band: Well, Steve, we have good news and bad news.
Steve: For reals? What's up?
Band With Tattooed Chick With Nice Rack: The good news is that we're the sixth band to go platinum on your server.
Steve: And the bad news?
Solo Bi Alt-Chick Who's Big At Women's Colleges: You represent nine successful bands, contract with our lawyers, help book our tours, and make a decent living at it.
Steve: Sure! And?
Jailbait Hottie Who Made it Because of That Video: That makes you Really Important Artist Assistant.
Steve: wtf?
All: DIE, FASCIST RECORD LABEL STOOGE OF BIG MEDIA! [ka-BLAM!]
My long-winded point being that record companies, however corrupt they may be, are a necessary evil of the world. A band that becomes in any way popular will soon find themselves needing help, and that help can - with a minimal amount of leveraging - offer the same help to several other acts. A band that can manage itself, book itself, do its own merch, handle its own distribution, handle its own releases from recording to pressing, and manage its own finances is really *not* all that popular. Say what you will, the support team behind a band that needs one *is* a record company on some level. They'll never be pointless.
"Rights holders might charge more for discs that can be copied for backup or for use on a media server, however."
Uum, yeah. You just hang on to the $49.95 backup-ready copy of "Finding Nemo" there, and I'll take a "protected" one for $19.95. I don't need to put it on a server or iPod or anything, so I'll just take the cheap, "secure" one.
Slashdot Mirror
There are more than that now.
http://www.mamedev.org/roms/
I would - First Person Sneaker. We need more of those, dangit. The Thief trilogy is one of my absolute favorites and needs to come back! That, and No One Lives Forever. Totally overlooked, IMO.
Good theory, but I'm afraid it'll never work. Because one of the functions of language is to express a range of distaste, there will always have to be a top end to the level of offense meant to the listener. This, in my completely unresearched opinion, necessitates words that are reserved for the absolute maximum impact. If "fuck" were to be removed from speech due to casual use there would inevitably be something new invented to take its place. Look no further than the recent symbolic "burial" of the dreaded "n-word" by (IIRC) the NAACP. There's a perfect example of a community where, to one side, a word is so vile that it needs to be stricken from any and all use, and to the other side, it's so inoffensive that it's used as a term of endearment. I'm not exactly sure what rap fans use in place of it when they're shouting at each other, but you know there has to be something.
As long as there are people cutting other people off in traffic, there'll be a search for something to yell at them. Language is funny like that.
And that's where the parental duty of discipline comes in. Never underestimate the corrective powers of a sock full of quarters.
*thud*
As someone with a deathly fear of squid *and* octopus I have to say that it really feels like Satan and Mother Nature have decided to tag-team together in an all-out effort to make my darkest nightmares become incarnate. Next week they'll find a jellysquidfishapus and I'll end up like one of those H.P. Lovecraft characters who sees the most horrible thing possible and just dies on the spot.
I'll miss you guys.
> this is saying... AllofMP3 has a better business model than the current RIAA one, which I agree with completely.
Any business model that reduces the costs of creating, developing, and producing your product to virtually zero is always going to be a winner. When you reduce those costs by assigning all those debts to your direct competition by stealing (oh, sorry... sharing) their intellectual property then yes, I suppose in some interestingly twisted way you can call that "better."
Well, *shit*.
I was playing Half-Life 2 last night, so that's gonna be trouble. I could plead self-defense on all the dead Combine, and since they're not *really* people then I could probably dodge a manslaughter charge, but I shot a medic right in the head when he wouldn't get out of my way in the hall and like ten people saw it. Better get Robert Blake's lawyer on speed dial...
> This is a terrible post, and a troll to boot.
Troll? Hardly. As a veteran of a zillion copyright arguments on Slashdot I think it's a completely legitimate position. If I were trolling I'd be posting AC so as to keep it out of the eyes of people who stay out of the murky depths of 0-rank posts.
> Why don't you go back to your cave and buy more crappy products like a good little consumer whore.
My cave doesn't have ethernet and I don't like to buy crappy products on account of, well, they're crappy.
> If you're going to support the mafIAA
I don't support any of the *IAAs, which is ironic considering my line of work. They're horrid associations that are unable to adapt to the changing media distribution landscape, they're outright hostile to the very people who consume their products, and in many cases have acted with highly questionable methods in an effort to protect their products. That doesn't change the fact that they have a legitimate beef with people who want to snag all their stuff for free, though.
> at least make sure you've got a signature saying something about how much of a tool you are, so we know who to ignore.
You're free to keep on scrolling whenever you see my name. That, or convince Slashdot to create an "ignore" feature to protect your fragile constitution.
> Do you work for them? Did they pay you money to insult people into paying for shitty inferior products and music?
No, I don't work for them, and if my argument sent you into such a frothing tirade then you really should consider a new site to hang out on. Eventually you're going to stumble across a GNAA post that will probably make your head explode.
> By the way, I do pay for products and music.
So do I. Gold stars all 'round.
> I own about 100 CDs of independent musicians, whether it be punk rock or electronic.
I own about 900, do I win? We should probably give you some sort of handicap, though, as a good number of the albums I own are by those evil, soulless major label artists that we shouldn't support. You know, Hendrix, the Beatles, Beethoven, sellout pop shit like that.
> Bad business practices does not demand my respect, much less my hard earned money.
I don't respect the *IAA any more than you do, but if I have to validate their efforts to make sure that the artists I value can make a living then I'll treat them as a seething, corrosive, and necessary evil. It doesn't really matter in the end, though, as their death is right around the corner.
> Why would I pay 400 +/- USD for a photo editing program to which there is a free clone of available on Linux?
I have no idea, unless you like having the support of a large company like Adobe for your software. GIMP's good enough for me.
> This is about right and wrong, good and evil.
I hope you were wearing a mask and a cape while you posted that.
> Blow it our your ass.
Strong talk for someone who labeled *me* a troll.
> I think you go a bit too far.
Frequently, and with much gusto.
> There are many people who say things like "I'm sick of buying a whole album for one song" or who disparage popular music who then go buy single tracks and indie music at iTunes and eMusic.
Yes, and those people are rarely represented in these discussions.
> I think you go too far by implying that this is the sole or even primary motivation for everyone on that side of the discussion.
I agree, which is why I inevitably end up mea culpa-ing to the person who points out that I'm making sweeping generalizations. So, mea culpa.
> And apparently some people believe that it advances understanding to attack people who may be honestly mistaken and giggle like a schoolgirl about it.
Oh, I don't believe that for a moment. It's just that the moment a copyright/**AA discussion starts up in here there'll be some pedant tossing out the "IT'S NOT THEFT, IT'S COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT!" argument, and I like to be the balance to that. If I'm in a hurry, I'll toss in the anecdote about my mother.* If I have a minute, I'll take the "If you hate pop music so much, why do you have six terabytes of it RAIDed on your server?" position. If a rational person comes in later to raise the level of the debate I do my best to match their efforts. Otherwise, yes, I default to agent provocateur.
> It's probably worthwhile to think about whether that might also be an error.
I agree completely. You'd think I would have tired of it now.
* "I don't care what you call it. The song costs a dollar on iTunes and you got it for free. That's stealing."
> If you want to hurt the major labels and the RIAA, BUY DIFFERENT MUSIC.
Which is exactly what they would do if they were, in fact, interested in buying music. The truth is that what they're interested in is getting *free* music. All of this ranting and raving about "I'M SICK OF BUYING A WHOLE ALBUM FOR ONE SONG!" and "ALL POPULAR MUSIC SUCKS, THAT'S WHY IT'S POPULAR AND I'M DOWNLOADING IT!" and "IT'S NOT THEFT, IT'S COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AND I'M ONLY DOING IT TO STICK IT TO TEH MANG!" is simply a convenient excuse to get something they value for nothing. The same people in this discussion giddily announcing that all of their credit at allofmp3 has magically reappeared at mp3sparks are the same ones who would demand you be assraped at the Super Bowl on live TV if you violated the GPL, which never fails to make me giggle like a schoolgirl.
> talk about customer service! =)
Yeah, what service! They've sold over 500,000 of our songs now! Talk about exposure! With that kind of notoriety it should be a cinch to talk the Exxon girl into filling up our tanks before we go to our day jobs tomorrow. And hopefully we can save up enough to print up some shirts to sell on our self-financed tour that we're planning to go on if we can all coordinate our vacation time, because we're *huge* now. With any luck, allofmp3 will also distribute the live cds we sell on tour, too! When that t-shirt money comes rolling in, we're gonna be bigger than Metallica! THANK YOU, ALLOFMP3.COM!
Sincerely,
The Arcade Fire
*thud*
> Hint: it was a Mr. Benz. Mr. Benz had a daughter named Mercedes ...and a generation of American strippers owes their careers to him.
"Somebody running a server in their basement on our network and uploading illegal copies movies raises the costs for everybody else and jams the network in ways we're not compensated for," said Mr. Cicconi..."
Right, because pirate bytes are... bigger? I guess they're all wearing hats and carrying parrots or something.
Yep. I've even seen their offices. They're right across the street from my ATM machine that I access with my PIN number.
No Portman/grits? You're slipping.
> I do value the Inuit culture, but at a certain point clinging to old ways becomes a Luddite reaction to change.
This bears repeating. When the whales run out, do you think the Inuit will change their stance on McNuggets or just die out quietly?
No, no. In keeping with the "made famous by" theme of the 80's edition of Guitar Hero, they've decided to go with the fabulous Def Leppard cover of that Smashing Pumpkins song from a few years back. I forget which one it was. "Bullet With Butterfly Wings?" "1979?" "Cherub Rock?"
Oh, now I remember...
"Disarm."
> The artists are being ripped off now by the labels.
Yes, they are.
> This has been amply documented
I know. I've seen it.
> you can o adn find this information if you care to do so
I have. On many occasions.
> In your "fast forward" pseudo-exercise I don't see any elelments of abuse from the guy running the servers
That's because my "pseudo-exercise" was about the reason that record labels exist, not about financial mismanagement and abuse. I wasn't talking about abuse, and neither was the parent post to which I was replying. For that matter, neither was the grandparent. Say what you will about my crappy writing, it runs circles around your reading skills.
> Nowadays the artists are screwed over and over and yet some more
You keep making that point and I haven't disagreed with you yet. What were you saying about crappy writing again?
Well, that was certainly some tortured English and *fascinating* modding there, but I'll do what I can...
> It's awesome how anybody wants to "flash forward" to a future that neither knows nor can make their arguments strong with when they can look at a past that can be known for sure.
I see. So what you're saying is that with careful observation of past events, findings, and trends, there's absolutely no way to give a forecast of future events within a certain degree of probablity? I'll be certain to pass that on to every scientist and statistician who ever lived.
"I don't care if it's 110% humid outside and there's lightning and it rained the last 100 times that happened, you fraud! You take that voodoo witch-doctor bullshit somewhere else!"
> there have been dozens of undisputable bussiness that just were flooded away by the waves of time and technology
I'm not talking "undisputable bussiness," o wise economic scholar. I'm talking about the fact that *any* business that finds its products in high demand will find itself in need of some sort of a support mechanism eventually. Am I using words that are too big for you? SUPPORT MECHANISM. DISTRIBUTION HELP. BUTAN-PUSHIN MAN. My apologies if you're not a native English speaker, but I strongly suspect that it's something chemical in nature that's giving you these amazing insights.
> I don't see how it could be any different with any current profession or bussiness model that today seems to be strongly stablished.
I have no doubt that you can't.
> They are needed no more than people selling ice on the streets, and in fact much less.
Um... right. That correlates. You stick with that.
> almost no singing superstars, but chores on the dozens when one of those pieces required them... They got some names, like Vivaldi, Mozart, Wagner... That industry was simply killed once the phonographic industry "saw the light"
Yeah, man. The good old days. When cats would just gig and riff and scat and shoop-da-woop just for the love of it. You know, for the aaaaaart, man...
> but their time has passed and we will miss all those new rock star bands that won't be no more than our current symphonic composers that are no more.
I feel you. Kurt Cobain was the new Handel. PLAY "WATER MUSIC," MAAAAAAAN!
> Even in the worst case scenario where all current music standards just disappear, do you really miss the Bachs, Behetovens or Mozarts that have not been in the twenty century because the bussiness model pushed by RIAA asociates worked against them?
Dude, you gotta stop. My nose is bleeding. This isn't funny any more.
> You still will be able to listen to them if you really want it, for free, out of the Net just saying -maybe, oh, how great old days that passed away
Ow. Oh shit. Did you hear that? What was that "pop?" Why can't I see? Where are you man? I'm cold. Hold me...
> Just remember that on a free market, really no bussiness is essential or non-reemplazable.
Dave? I can't do that, Dave. What are you doing?
Daisy, Daiiiisy, giiiive meeeee yoouuuuuurr...
*click*
Okay, let's flash forward to the future and see how that works out.
Awesome Rock Band: Damn, I'm tired of keeping this server running and processing all these credit card orders for our music. Can't we get Steve to take over? He's a computer dude. He knows that Linux Windows shit and everything!
Steve: Sweet! I hate working for The Man anyway.
six months later...
Awesome Rock Band: Thanks for all the help, Steve! We've gone double platinum, and with all the people we've met we've actually met a couple of other awesome bands. We want to help them get distribution, so you wanna add them to the server?
Steve: Sweet! Rock on, fellas.
Awesome Band With Emo Hair: Hooray!
Weak Band With Hot Singer: Beer for my men!
six months later...
Awesome Rock Band: Well, Steve, we have good news and bad news.
Steve: For reals? What's up?
Band With Tattooed Chick With Nice Rack: The good news is that we're the sixth band to go platinum on your server.
Steve: And the bad news?
Solo Bi Alt-Chick Who's Big At Women's Colleges: You represent nine successful bands, contract with our lawyers, help book our tours, and make a decent living at it.
Steve: Sure! And?
Jailbait Hottie Who Made it Because of That Video: That makes you Really Important Artist Assistant.
Steve: wtf?
All: DIE, FASCIST RECORD LABEL STOOGE OF BIG MEDIA! [ka-BLAM!]
My long-winded point being that record companies, however corrupt they may be, are a necessary evil of the world. A band that becomes in any way popular will soon find themselves needing help, and that help can - with a minimal amount of leveraging - offer the same help to several other acts. A band that can manage itself, book itself, do its own merch, handle its own distribution, handle its own releases from recording to pressing, and manage its own finances is really *not* all that popular. Say what you will, the support team behind a band that needs one *is* a record company on some level. They'll never be pointless.
I see you have an onion on your belt, so I'll just get off your lawn now, sir...
"Rights holders might charge more for discs that can be copied for backup or for use on a media server, however."
Uum, yeah. You just hang on to the $49.95 backup-ready copy of "Finding Nemo" there, and I'll take a "protected" one for $19.95. I don't need to put it on a server or iPod or anything, so I'll just take the cheap, "secure" one.
What's my credit card number?
09 F9 11 02 9D...
If the radio stations are making money by playing the Supremes' music, I can see why she might say that.