FAC seem to be more about having a gripe with record labels that in the past have taken a way too big a cut of the artists profits. so this begs the question why did these artists sign with these major labels in the first place? they are all very well known established artists now after being built up by major labels over decades, its easy for radiohead to say filesharing is good, if they were just starting out on the toilet circuit woiuld be interesting to see if they felt the same?

But the genie is out of the bottle, and free mp3 downloading is not going away no matter how many people are banned from uploading files etc, and also ISPs banning people is really unenforcable. Alot of these new business models being pushed concern the artist doing a lot of the donkey work in the past the record label would do. ….marketing the record, organise the tour, sort out the publishing etc…so now instead of making music the artist has to clog up his/her time with all these issues, surely the label should be doing that? and alot of young artists would have no clue to organise a tour etc..

Those swedish morons piratebay and their followers are confusing two issues. copyright and net freedoms. Sure no-one wants the web to be policed, BUT also no-one wants the idea of creative copyright to be eroded for the artist. some kid downloads gigs of free mp3s and then wonders why his mate and him cant get a record deal………thats because all the labels have gone out of business. It devalues the worth of music and creativity.

Musicians unions are strong in the uk, they need to join ranks, decide what they want to achieve and lay the ground work for it.

FAC seem to be more about having a gripe with record labels that in the past have taken a way too big a cut of the artists profits. so this begs the question why did these artists sign with these major labels in the first place? they are all very well known established artists now after being built up by major labels over decades, its easy for radiohead to say filesharing is good, if they were just starting out on the toilet circuit woiuld be interesting to see if they felt the same?

But the genie is out of the bottle, and free mp3 downloading is not going away no matter how many people are banned from uploading files etc, and also ISPs banning people is really unenforcable. Alot of these new business models being pushed concern the artist doing a lot of the donkey work in the past the record label would do. ….marketing the record, organise the tour, sort out the publishing etc…so now instead of making music the artist has to clog up his/her time with all these issues, surely the label should be doing that? and alot of young artists would have no clue to organise a tour etc..

Those swedish morons piratebay and their followers are confusing two issues. copyright and net freedoms. Sure no-one wants the web to be policed, BUT also no-one wants the idea of creative copyright to be eroded for the artist. some kid downloads gigs of free mp3s and then wonders why his mate and him cant get a record deal………thats because all the labels have gone out of business. It devalues the worth of music and creativity.

Musicians unions are strong in the uk, they need to join ranks, decide what they want to achieve and lay the ground work for it.

The biggest problem facing emerging artists is obscurity. File-sharing sites can get your name out to the other side of the world for free, something you can’t get from the labels.

The three-strikes plan has been rejected three times in the EU parliament and has been called unconstitutional by the highest legal authority in France, citing how it infringes on people’s freedom of speech as guaranteed in the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen.

This latest plan probably comes out of a EMI/Sony/Warner/Universal boardroom full of sycophants who haven’t actually stopped to think about it for a minute. Sure, kicking file-sharers off the net sounds good to them. But why on Earth should a company have the authority to police the web just because of copyright issues? There are huge sections of a user’s Internet service that have nothing to do with the labels’ copyright. Why on Earth should they be able to cut someone off of that?

Three-strikes will not actually get any more money into artists’ pockets.

What we need is a solution like that proposed by the EFF since 2003 http://www.eff.org/wp/better-way-forward-voluntary-collective-licensing-music-file-sharing
It allows for the use and development of new and exciting file-sharing technologies whilst paying artists. Win-win. It’s also being supported by the Green Party http://iwouldntsteal.net/support.htm and the Songwriters’ Association of Canada http://www.songwriters.ca/studio/proposal.php

The biggest problem facing emerging artists is obscurity. File-sharing sites can get your name out to the other side of the world for free, something you can’t get from the labels.

The three-strikes plan has been rejected three times in the EU parliament and has been called unconstitutional by the highest legal authority in France, citing how it infringes on people’s freedom of speech as guaranteed in the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen.

This latest plan probably comes out of a EMI/Sony/Warner/Universal boardroom full of sycophants who haven’t actually stopped to think about it for a minute. Sure, kicking file-sharers off the net sounds good to them. But why on Earth should a company have the authority to police the web just because of copyright issues? There are huge sections of a user’s Internet service that have nothing to do with the labels’ copyright. Why on Earth should they be able to cut someone off of that?

Three-strikes will not actually get any more money into artists’ pockets.

What we need is a solution like that proposed by the EFF since 2003 http://www.eff.org/wp/better-way-forward-voluntary-collective-licensing-music-file-sharing
It allows for the use and development of new and exciting file-sharing technologies whilst paying artists. Win-win. It’s also being supported by the Green Party http://iwouldntsteal.net/support.htm and the Songwriters’ Association of Canada http://www.songwriters.ca/studio/proposal.php

http://www.popjustice.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4077&Itemid=206

http://www.musicweek.com/story.asp?storycode=1038756

http://www.musicweek.com/story.asp?storycode=1038756

FAC seem to be more about having a gripe with record labels that in the past have taken a way too big a cut of the artists profits. so this begs the question why did these artists sign with these major labels in the first place? they are all very well known established artists now after being built up by major labels over decades, its easy for radiohead to say filesharing is good, if they were just starting out on the toilet circuit woiuld be interesting to see if they felt the same?

But the genie is out of the bottle, and free mp3 downloading is not going away no matter how many people are banned from uploading files etc, and also ISPs banning people is really unenforcable. Alot of these new business models being pushed concern the artist doing a lot of the donkey work in the past the record label would do. ….marketing the record, organise the tour, sort out the publishing etc…so now instead of making music the artist has to clog up his/her time with all these issues, surely the label should be doing that? and alot of young artists would have no clue to organise a tour etc..

Those swedish morons piratebay and their followers are confusing two issues. copyright and net freedoms. Sure no-one wants the web to be policed, BUT also no-one wants the idea of creative copyright to be eroded for the artist. some kid downloads gigs of free mp3s and then wonders why his mate and him cant get a record deal………thats because all the labels have gone out of business. It devalues the worth of music and creativity.

Musicians unions are strong in the uk, they need to join ranks, decide what they want to achieve and lay the ground work for it.