Italian DJ fined 1.4m Euros for playing mp3's in clubs

[massplanck]

ROME (Reuters) - An Italian DJ has been fined a record 1.4 million euros ($1.8
million) for using thousands of pirate music files in a nightclub near Rome,
police said on Wednesday.
Police in the town of Rieti, near Rome, said they raided a popular nightclub
earlier this week as part of a crackdown on piracy and seized 500 illegally
copied music videos and more than 2,000 MP3 music files.
Police said the files belonged to a "well-known" Italian DJ.
"For the MP3 files, which were kept on the DJ's personal computer, the DJ has
received a fine of 1.4 million euros," Rieti finance police said in a statement.

The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) said the fine
was the biggest ever slapped on an individual for unlawful music copying and the
use of copyrighted music in the MP3 format.
More than 7,000 legal actions have been launched against alleged uploaders in
the United States, Canada and countries in Europe as the music industry fights
to stop piracy which it blames for a decline over a number of years in CD sales

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?t...storyID=7651166

[dirty_bass]

I think CD sales have decreased because the companies pump out so much andyne shite too.
But holy phook :shock:
Well there ya go, I`m glad I don`t have a drive full of naughty mp3`s

[FUSION]

did he have 1.4 million euros to pay the fine with??? if so he had too much cash anyway and deserved it :lol: :lol:

[massplanck]

the fine worked out at about 200 euro per track!!

[koma]

hah, I know kids that have bought FS and now they are downloading mp3s which they didnt pay of course, thinking its ok to play them in club if they have original program :doh:

btw link doesnt work..

[DJ Corbzy]

cor bloody ell thats a stinger!! :shock:

[jon connor]

holy :wtf:

[NDKj]

:evil: I don't know where's the place or the dj.........but i say only one thing................BASTARDS!!!!!!!!!.......

[fatcollective]

ha ha ha im glad this has happened, serves his own right ..should'nt use illeagal mp3s...maybe this is a lesson to be learned :rambo:

[dulash]

I´m also glad it happend, it´s like you have no respect for the artist and the music iff you play illegal mp3.

[gumpy green]

I´m also glad it happend, it´s like you have no respect for the artist and the music iff you play illegal mp3.

not that i do, i only own deks no final skratch or that...but what if you coulny find the orig to buy.....

anyway, i think music is made to be heard and i dont think if i was a producer id mind if folk were doing this.......as long as folk got to hear the music/art then i think thats the main thing.


id rather 2000 folk heard it and enjoyed it(illegally) than 500 folk buying it....

so once im a producer, feel free to copy my stuff and let the world hear it....its why i made it apart from the fact i enjoy it. ;)


i aint in techno to make money........

[massplanck]

not that i do, i only own deks no final skratch or that...but what if you coulny find the orig to buy.....




You can find pretty much everything on www.gemm.com. I download the odd mp3 album through bittorrent sites. If I dont like it I delete it. if I do I go and buy it. I think it sucks having a little yellow folder full of files. I much prefer something tangible in my hand & the artwork on blank CD's suck!

Each to their own but I think techno nerds are cooler than most when it comes to letting people download their stuff.

[gumpy green]

cheers but im a vynil junky..........i only want da wax, plus i want to support the labels to keep the scne alive

[dulash]

for sure the music is made to be heard but the thing is bread is also made to eat but you dont get it for free. from buying a mp3 or a record there´s a profit for the distribution and the label (they have to live to) and with they´re help you as an artist benifit cause you gain recognition, in other words you might get some cool gigs where you then collect your fee to upgrade your studio... and so on

[TheRev]

id rather 2000 folk heard it and enjoyed it(illegally) than 500 folk buying it....

so once im a producer, feel free to copy my stuff and let the world hear it....its why i made it apart from the fact i enjoy it.

Not a producer yet?

So you haven't spent late nights just tweaking a few sounds, and wondering to yourself...shit this takes time, my effin job is getting in the way!

While its wishful thinkin that makin techno will get rid of that need for a dayjob, its nice to get a kickback for those long sessions.

When you both not get that kickback AND some other guy is making money by playing something you've labored hard for and he didn't pay YOU any scratch, that burns.

[gumpy green]

id rather 2000 folk heard it and enjoyed it(illegally) than 500 folk buying it....

so once im a producer, feel free to copy my stuff and let the world hear it....its why i made it apart from the fact i enjoy it.

Not a producer yet?

So you haven't spent late nights just tweaking a few sounds, and wondering to yourself...shit this takes time, my effin job is getting in the way!

While its wishful thinkin that makin techno will get rid of that need for a dayjob, its nice to get a kickback for those long sessions.

When you both not get that kickback AND some other guy is making money by playing something you've labored hard for and he didn't pay YOU any scratch, that burns.totally understand what your trying to say ther man but as ive said im not into music for getting payed......

believe me ive spent just as long on my deks as any producer prob has in their studio.........basically cos i like doing it....i actually sit sumtimes and cant wait to get in to have a skratch/mix, i actually crave it, i dont see why i have to get money aswell, the enjoyment is enuf......and im starting to feel like that with reason....been getting the urge to write beatz, and just now id feel glad if someone played that even if they didnt buy it....would just make me happy to know 500 folk danced to it......

sure some folks see ther techno as a way to get by, but not me or most folks i know that write beatz.......they do it for the luv and like getting together, having a smoke and getting some techno written.....we sell crack to kids for money ;)

plus if the guy has bought yer record you have had some kick back.....

[Traxx]

Rumour has it it was picotto who got nicked :doh:

Stupid really he surely doesnt need to be getting involved in all this illegal mp3 business.

[SlavikSvensk]

i used to be a big napster fan back in the day...now i only download mp3s legally. for things which are out of print, maybe, but i can't take something from someone unless they are willing to give it to me. just doesn't help the industry.

of course, if anyone wants to give away their mp3s for free...i'm all for it!

[tioneb]

here in france most of the people attacked for owning illegal mp3s are the big uplaoders or the ones who use them to make money (ex : grabbing the music on CDs they sell)

on the same way, a guy djing with illegal files makes his money on other's back, i thnik its really lame... thats also why i recommend software producers to use registred or freeware softs !

[dirty_bass]

id rather 2000 folk heard it and enjoyed it(illegally) than 500 folk buying it....

so once im a producer, feel free to copy my stuff and let the world hear it....its why i made it apart from the fact i enjoy it.

Not a producer yet?

So you haven't spent late nights just tweaking a few sounds, and wondering to yourself...shit this takes time, my effin job is getting in the way!

While its wishful thinkin that makin techno will get rid of that need for a dayjob, its nice to get a kickback for those long sessions.

When you both not get that kickback AND some other guy is making money by playing something you've labored hard for and he didn't pay YOU any scratch, that burns.totally understand what your trying to say ther man but as ive said im not into music for getting payed......

believe me ive spent just as long on my deks as any producer prob has in their studio.........basically cos i like doing it....i actually sit sumtimes and cant wait to get in to have a skratch/mix, i actually crave it, i dont see why i have to get money aswell, the enjoyment is enuf......and im starting to feel like that with reason....been getting the urge to write beatz, and just now id feel glad if someone played that even if they didnt buy it....would just make me happy to know 500 folk danced to it......

sure some folks see ther techno as a way to get by, but not me or most folks i know that write beatz.......they do it for the luv and like getting together, having a smoke and getting some techno written.....we sell crack to kids for money ;)

plus if the guy has bought yer record you have had some kick back.....


Well, to be really good at your craft you need to be able to put in the time . And a day job, 9-5 slave plus the time either side to get in, and wind down will stop you from allowing yourself to devote the time needed.
DJing is a very physical/Manual skill, and you can pick it up with a couple of hours of practice a night, pretty easily.
Producing to a high standard takes years.

I don`t want a rolls royce, or a mountain of charlie and a beachfront hone in the Caymens. But I woul dlike to be able to pay my rent, and feed my cats.

Piracy is stealing someone elses effort.

Would you do a week at work, for free?
I doubt it.

Shouldn`t everything be free in that case. Some farmers enjoy their work, why should we pay for their produce?

I know it`s a bit of a wild extrapolation, but it`s the same thing.

Well to steal someones music, that they have spent time to craft, and then earn from it. Is wrong.

[davethedrummer]

just don't steal anything o.k.
it's wrong and you know it.

[j_s]

but does music belong to anyone in the first place?
its there to share, surely?
i often fail to see how can anyone seriously say 'yeah, if you make the air vibrate in this specific way then you have to give me dollar'?

[massplanck]

but does music belong to anyone in the first place?
its there to share, surely?
i often fail to see how can anyone seriously say 'yeah, if you make the air vibrate in this specific way then you have to give me dollar'?

:nono:

[j_s]

wassat supposed to mean?

[Mirsha]

not that i do, i only own deks no final skratch or that...but what if you coulny find the orig to buy.....

This is why being able to buy mp3's online is such a killer, for no cost a label can provide an endless supply of those classic back cats that only people in the know from in the day have.


so once im a producer, feel free to copy my stuff and let the world hear it....its why i made it apart from the fact i enjoy it. ;)

all you have to do is write a licensing agreement somewhere which states thats the case and your sorted. Just a "Feel free to play this anywhere anytime and stick it to the man but I still hold copyright over the intelluctual property".

Actually why don't we make this a publicly usable licensing agreement like GNU or something, we'll call it the "FREE BOABY" licence.


i aint in techno to make money........
I was there that night you were all rolling in a sack of filthy mad cash that was the door takings from Jak-N. Remember getting a roll of pound coins up yer jacksie?

[massplanck]

wassat supposed to mean?

It means i'm waggin my finger at you.

Surely your own voice is yours or do I part own it two?

[SlavikSvensk]

it would be nice if we lived in a world where techno producers were subsidized to make art for the people, but we don't.

people make the mistake of thinking capitalism is an ideology. it's not...it's a comprehensive set of floating price ratios, and everyone is dependent on it for survival. understanding this and compensating artists in order to keep them producing and drive innovation is not the same as pandering to corporate greed.

[Stella Boy]

but does music belong to anyone in the first place?
its there to share, surely?
i often fail to see how can anyone seriously say 'yeah, if you make the air vibrate in this specific way then you have to give me dollar'?

I can understand where you're coming from ( I think :neutral: ) but what you posted makes absolutely no sense. Could you possible expand on why artists should work for free ?

Sorry if my reply is deemed as negative to the mods but i'd be interested to hear what the answer is.

[dirty_bass]

it would be nice if we lived in a world where techno producers were subsidized to make art for the people, but we don't.

people make the mistake of thinking capitalism is an ideology. it's not...it's a comprehensive set of floating price ratios, and everyone is dependent on it for survival. understanding this and compensating artists in order to keep them producing and drive innovation is not the same as pandering to corporate greed.
Exactly.
Intelligence over blind anarchy

[davethedrummer]

but does music belong to anyone in the first place?
its there to share, surely?
i often fail to see how can anyone seriously say 'yeah, if you make the air vibrate in this specific way then you have to give me dollar'?

oh boy :doh:
straight out of the 1985 stonhenge free festival handbook.
( property is theft man!!) ( groan)
what the hell do you want then ? no art at all ?
because if people never got paid for making art that's what you'd eventually get.
wake up man , there's a real world out there , it has money and everything
, cars , boats , planes you know people....food....problems...like real life type stuff man!
sorry about that.

[Si303Dirt]

:clap: :clap: couldnt have said it better

[davethedrummer]

double posts grrrr! :rambo:

[audioinjection]

isnt there a law that says, even if you bought the music (records) and play them out in a nightclub or whatever, you can still get sued for not having the rights to play the music out in public?

i heard that, if they want they can go after you even if you're playing music in a little ol market or whatever, as long as the place is bringin in money, you have to pay royalties :doh:

[Mirsha]

wake up man , there's a real world out there , it has money and everything
, cars , boats , planes you know people....food....problems...like real life type stuff man!
sorry about that.
What about those people that eat, shit and breathe techno? Surely they don't need anything else!

[fatcollective]

just don't steal anything o.k.
it's wrong and you know it.

:clap:

[SlavikSvensk]

wake up man , there's a real world out there , it has money and everything
, cars , boats , planes you know people....food....problems...like real life type stuff man!
sorry about that.
What about those people that eat, shit and breathe techno? Surely they don't need anything else!

they're malnourished

[dan the acid man]

im glad this has happened, lets hope it scares a few people into not doing this

[SlavikSvensk]

im glad this has happened, lets hope it scares a few people into not doing this

i really, really hope people start supporting artists, rather than undercutting them, but i'm also uncomfortable with the idea of some dj having a 3 million euro fine leveled at him. it seems a bit drastic...

[j_s]

wassat supposed to mean?

It means i'm waggin my finger at you.

Surely your own voice is yours or do I part own it two?

it came from me, but i don't see why i should want to charge you money to hear it. music is for people to hear - let them hear it, does that make sense?

i suppose there are those who are so deeply involved with music that their relationship with it requires their undivided attention. perhaps those people couldn't operate in the way they do with other time consuming distractions (jobs etc.). i hadn't really thought of music in that way. however i do feel that it is possible for people to progress creatively and produce work of value at the same time as holding down a regular job and supporting themselves through non artistic means. i can't help but think that with some of the money taken out of music distribution, more people would be encouraged to produce and share music, which has got to be a good thing. i suppose i don't have any real problem with the way the music industry generally works, just with the attitude that music can only operate within that system...

[dirty_bass]

Haha
The best writers, were mostly poor, as they devoted their life to their art.
Same with painters.
And with musicians.
To be good at your craft you need to put in the time.
Personally I have a job that fits around my music, but it sucks.
What is wrong with earning your living doing something you enjoy. Isn`t that everybodies dream.
What is your job?
Do you do it for free?
Do you go into a shop when you want to update your PC and say to the shopkeeper "man, you should give it to me for free, computers should be free. Computers are for people to use, why should you charge me money to want to use it? Let me use it?
Does that make sense?
Why should nurses get paid?
Do surgeons really need to get paid?
Surely they can get another job to support them, as the fact that they are saving lives should be enough for them.

Your argument just doesn`t hold up man.

And to those people and artists who genuinely work hard for their art. It`s kind of an insult.

[MARKEG]

100% agree :clap:

[j_s]

Haha
The best writers, were mostly poor, as they devoted their life to their art.
Same with painters.
And with musicians.
To be good at your craft you need to put in the time.
Personally I have a job that fits around my music, but it sucks.
What is wrong with earning your living doing something you enjoy. Isn`t that everybodies dream.
What is your job?
Do you do it for free?
Do you go into a shop when you want to update your PC and say to the shopkeeper "man, you should give it to me for free, computers should be free. Computers are for people to use, why should you charge me money to want to use it? Let me use it?
Does that make sense?
Why should nurses get paid?
Do surgeons really need to get paid?
Surely they can get another job to support them, as the fact that they are saving lives should be enough for them.

Your argument just doesn`t hold up man.

And to those people and artists who genuinely work hard for their art. It`s kind of an insult.

you're right, the only real point i was trying to make was that music can be a worthwhile means of communication without necessarily spending your whole life being 'the best' at it.

and when i said music is for people to hear - i don't think the computer analogy is quite fair. the person who took the time to make it wasn't trying to express anything when they made it, the computer wouldn't mean any more to it's maker once someone had connected with it. the jobs that medical workers do are perhaps more similar, though, which i imagine is why some people do opt to do work of that nature voluntarily - which kind of relates to my point above. i think thats enough rambling for now....

[SlavikSvensk]

if an artist wants to distribute their music for free, then no one--and i mean no one--is ever going to stop them. the problem is that a lot of people spend a ton of money to get the gear they need to make music, then put a ton of hours into making that music, and a sh*tload of elbow grease into getting that music out.

i don't mind if someone has a few illegal downloads for personal consumption (i am definately talking about limited numbers here), but playing them out and making money from them...well...that's just robbery to me...

[heavy beats]

there's got to be plenty of loopholes around this. for example, what happens if u received the mp3s directly from the artist, label or distributor, before the tracks are signed to a label or maybe received as a promo for that release? would it still be ok to play them after they are signed and released?

[Rizage]

there's got to be plenty of loopholes around this. for example, what happens if u received the mp3s directly from the artist, label or distributor, before the tracks are signed to a label or maybe received as a promo for that release? would it still be ok to play them after they are signed and released?

That or just like burning a copy of your own cds...I don't believe it's illegal to make a copy of a record that you bought, so what if you actually owned all of the records that you now play MP3s of??? Wouldn't they have to first prove that you don't originally own the recs themselves?

[karlo]

did he have 1.4 million euros to pay the fine with??? if so he had too much cash anyway and deserved it :lol: :lol:Prison, hmmm isnt funny to have that money and **** around with mp3 ? :rambo:

[davethedrummer]

there's got to be plenty of loopholes around this. for example, what happens if u received the mp3s directly from the artist, label or distributor, before the tracks are signed to a label or maybe received as a promo for that release? would it still be ok to play them after they are signed and released?

That or just like burning a copy of your own cds...I don't believe it's illegal to make a copy of a record that you bought, so what if you actually owned all of the records that you now play MP3s of??? Wouldn't they have to first prove that you don't originally own the recs themselves?

aaaah now that's interesting!!!
i hadn't thought of that...good point....let's ask someone.

[killarava2day]

This'll do Picotto's image a world of good :shock:

[davethedrummer]

This'll do Picotto's image a world of good :shock:

erm.......
italian+dj=picotto........it's a bit obvious?

[heavy beats]

it's not picotto.

I heard it was the dj from Eiffel 65.

[massplanck]

it came from me, but i don't see why i should want to charge you money to hear it. music is for people to hear - let them hear it, does that make sense?



What If i stole you voice somehow using some mad new plugin on abelton live version 6c and rang up your boss & mates and told them that they were all wankers? :lol: ;)



however i do feel that it is possible for people to progress creatively and produce work of value at the same time as holding down a regular job and supporting themselves through non artistic means.

I actually agree with you there but thats because we play/make music which pretty much requires most of us to have day jobs anyway. I dont think I would ever like to be in the position where my music brought in all the money because if things went arseways that would mean that I would proabably have to sell out in some way to keep my income levels up.

[karlo]

it's not picotto.

I heard it was the dj from Eiffel 65.

im blue im di ba da da ....GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

[Joseph Isaac]

im blue im di ba da da ....GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR


LMAO!

[j_s]

however i do feel that it is possible for people to progress creatively and produce work of value at the same time as holding down a regular job and supporting themselves through non artistic means.

I actually agree with you there but thats because we play/make music which pretty much requires most of us to have day jobs anyway. I dont think I would ever like to be in the position where my music brought in all the money because if things went arseways that would mean that I would proabably have to sell out in some way to keep my income levels up.

then allow me to play devil's advocate for a second here and suggest that perhaps less money involved in music = less temptation to 'sell out' = more innovation & creativity?

[SlavikSvensk]

then allow me to play devil's advocate for a second here and suggest that perhaps less money involved in music = less temptation to 'sell out' = more innovation & creativity?

i'd say that's utopian naivety.

a) some people will always sell out

b) investment (i.e. money) drives technology and innovation. even in communist countries, advancement came only with heavy public-sector investment.

that's not to say that people should make art for the sole purpose of making money, but i am absolutely certain that if no one could make a living off making techno, very few records would ever come out, few djs would both playing outside of their local base, and the overall quality of the music being put out would plummet.

[dirty_bass]

I`m a little sick of this argument now, it`s a bit juvenile.
Normally, the people who say "music should be free man" are the ones ripping stuff left right and centre filling up their hard drives with other peoples work.
Wait till the arse drops out of the scene.
Their will be no "scene"
Nightclubs don`t run on air.

[gustavo]

well....

anyone who wants to give his work away fine

of course that means u will hardly make a life in music + u will most likely be exploited in a company (doing whatever)

if u steal u r thief people who download mp3s illegaly are thiefs (to me there is no difference betwen entering a shop and running with a 12" and downloading illegal mp3s

the act is stealiing

and worst u like techno right well stealing is just making it worse to everyone

and to U to

i think the industry should sell mp3s and mp3sets at low cost

i might be wrong but if drumcode or phont start to sell mp3s in theyr site cheap they will earn a lot of money (+ sets imagine listening to a set preview or a track listing (u can listen in a shop before buying the set )and buying a set for 50 c

or 1e

is it expensive think at it this way the more money u put in techno the better for all who like techno because if techno is stronger U have more chances of being a part of it

if labels are not selling they will not sign up new producers etcetcetcetc

[SlavikSvensk]

bravo gustavo! not only do we share a name, but also a way of looking at things.

also bravo dirty...everyone who justifies profiting off illegal mp3s should remember that TECHNO IS IN A F***ING RECESSION!

[j_s]

then allow me to play devil's advocate for a second here and suggest that perhaps less money involved in music = less temptation to 'sell out' = more innovation & creativity?

i'd say that's utopian naivety.

a) some people will always sell out

b) investment (i.e. money) drives technology and innovation. even in communist countries, advancement came only with heavy public-sector investment.

that's not to say that people should make art for the sole purpose of making money, but i am absolutely certain that if no one could make a living off making techno, very few records would ever come out, few djs would both playing outside of their local base, and the overall quality of the music being put out would plummet.

well if there's no money to be made - how can people sell out?

but yeah, making music costs money. though that is changing, the range & quality of free software is improving all the time. but i'm just argueing for the sake of it now. i pay for music and am happy to do so, still, it's always nice to see things going on that don't rely so heavily on money (free mp3 releases, free parties etc.)...

[dirty_bass]

you pay for your dr...ugs though right?

[Tiddlypeep]

Some people really crack me up.

Nobody does anything for nothing and thats a FACT.

Everybody needs to get paid.

It would be good if we lived in a world where we could get everything for free but lets not kid ourselves on here.

Will :)

[Stella Boy]

you pay for your dr...ugs though right?

:eh:

I guess you can call booze and cigs as dr...ugs aswell as the stereotypical example of dr...ugs which the media like to jump on.

[Stella Boy]

there's got to be plenty of loopholes around this. for example, what happens if u received the mp3s directly from the artist, label or distributor, before the tracks are signed to a label or maybe received as a promo for that release? would it still be ok to play them after they are signed and released?

That or just like burning a copy of your own cds...I don't believe it's illegal to make a copy of a record that you bought, so what if you actually owned all of the records that you now play MP3s of??? Wouldn't they have to first prove that you don't originally own the recs themselves?

aaaah now that's interesting!!!
i hadn't thought of that...good point....let's ask someone.

I'm guessing the authorities would check all avenues before implementing the fine; searching the dj's property for cd's that could've been used would probably have been done.

[SlavikSvensk]

well if there's no money to be made - how can people sell out?

but yeah, making music costs money. though that is changing, the range & quality of free software is improving all the time. but i'm just argueing for the sake of it now. i pay for music and am happy to do so, still, it's always nice to see things going on that don't rely so heavily on money (free mp3 releases, free parties etc.)...

time is money too.

besides...the computer, broadband, audio interface, monitors, rent, food don't come free either.

but like i said...anyone wants to give music away for free...be my guest... i'll happily partake in that!

[dirty_bass]

Yeah, exactly, no one is anti free.
But theft is theft.

It`s funny, I was on the free party scene for years.
Well, it wasn`t free, we did charge a nominal fee.
And the trust fund hippies used to moan.

But it should be free man, music is for free?

Ok, I used to say, Who`s gonna pay for our Speakers when they get blown, diesel money, generator, Beers for the DJ`s. Records for the DJ`s.

I always used to laugh at these people.

Cos sure as shit they spend a fortune getting off their nuts.
But they got shitty when asked to pay to hear the music.

[audioinjection]

true that steve

[Komplex]

but does music belong to anyone in the first place?
its there to share, surely?
i often fail to see how can anyone seriously say 'yeah, if you make the air vibrate in this specific way then you have to give me dollar'?

Nice attitude. Can I live in your house and eat your food? Its all just atomic particles, you can't charge me for eating the atoms out of your fridge can you?

;)

[tocsin]

Well, not that it matters much, but here is my own personal opinion of it. I am totally in support of sharing and people pirating my own music. If thy have the means to buy it, I'd definitely appreciate that. But, hell, we're talking about underground techno right? How many records are pressed in a typical run? How many people in turn have access to all those records? It seems there is greater access to the internet than vinyl distributors so if some kid happens to find music of mine on Soulseek, downloads it, likes it and puts on a shitload of mixes or plays it out with a digital tool, I'm in full support of that. If they ever get a chance to buy it, cool. If not, nothing really lost.I don't like groups like the RIAA that run around attacking kids for sharing music because they don't really do me any good anyways. Who sees more of that money in the end? Artists or lawyers? Obviously, in a situation where a DJ at a huge club is getting regular well paying gigs somewhere in Europe, I think it's bullshit. Accessing the music isn't exactly a problem for such a person. But, I just don't see this as such a black or white issue. The amount of roylaties I see per record sold is change that I wouldn't scramble to pick up off the ground if I dropped it most likely. But that's just me. ;) Nobody is stealing food from me, or most other artists, when they download some songs. The roaylties you'd see as payment probably aren't enough to even get you a pack of small fries at a fastfood joint. For me, it's more rewarding knowing someone is enjoying and playing the track than me seeing a few cents here and there. I've been ripped off much more in the long run by promoters than I have music pirates.

[Komplex]

I've been ripped off much more in the long run by promoters than I have music pirates.

Haha very true.

Anyway, I think the issue here is that the guy in question is a big name dj, charging big name dj fees (hundreds to thousands of dollars a gig) yet he is not transferring any of this money to the people he relies on to do his job (and thats the guys who do sit in their studio and dont get a cent from this guy and others like him).

Thats wrong isn't it? He's making shitloads of money by using other peoples hundreds of hours of hard work and not compensating them for it.

If the guy was a poor bedroom banger in an almost 3rd world country this wouldn't be an issue. Thats not the same thing. I'm sure heaps of artists don't care if some of their music is gaining publicity thru mp3's. However the line is drawn when somebody is using that music to make a shitload of money and doesn't credit the people who allow him to make this nice big wad of income.

But at the same time I don't agree with the million dolar/euro fine. Will that money go to the artists who created the pirated music that he had? Or will it go into the pockets of some tosser lawyers and corporate record company owners?

[Joseph Isaac]

you pay for your dr...ugs though right?

Yeah, if we could only download our dope...

[Joseph Isaac]

Okay, this is a sound argument that I have and am yet to see it validly objected to.

1) Person (P) has X amount of money for music.
2) If X has been exhausted and P's musical taste exceeds X, then P does not get all the music they want.
3) If P downloads music for listening pleasure (not resale or the like) and does so only because X has been exhausted, then P is not "hurting" the labels financially for P has no funds anyway.

My point is if you only have a set amount of money to begin, say $100 USD, then you can only buy $100 worth of music. Say I spend $100 on music in the first week of a month, being that $100 is my monthly allowance for music. If after the second week I would like more music (for whatever reason, not just gluttony) but don't have any funds, then how am I taking money away from labels if I download music? If I have $0, then the labels are not making any money anyway. Now, if I download a ton of music and then do not go out and buy the music later on that I like, then yes, i am a thief.

Think about this argument very clearly before you go on and attempt to unseat me. Its not that I'm for downloading music or against it, but its a simple economic principle here. In the case of this Italian dj, well, sucks for him...

[dirty_bass]

Yeah, your point is interesting and fair.
But even so.
If you play said music you have "stolen" a lot.
then when you do have the money, you should pay for it. It`s only fair.

I got no problem people getting my shit of the net if they can`t afford it.
Hell, I freely distribute my stuff through BOA anyway.
But if you play it a lot you should buy it.
I do.
Anything I like, that I recieve via the net (which isn`t a hell of a lot)
I end up buying. Although I`m talking albums here. The only way I get my techno is via a record shop.

[Komplex]

Okay, this is a sound argument that I have and am yet to see it validly objected to.

1) Person (P) has X amount of money for music.
2) If X has been exhausted and P's musical taste exceeds X, then P does not get all the music they want.
3) If P downloads music for listening pleasure (not resale or the like) and does so only because X has been exhausted, then P is not "hurting" the labels financially for P has no funds anyway.

My point is if you only have a set amount of money to begin, say $100 USD, then you can only buy $100 worth of music. Say I spend $100 on music in the first week of a month, being that $100 is my monthly allowance for music. If after the second week I would like more music (for whatever reason, not just gluttony) but don't have any funds, then how am I taking money away from labels if I download music? If I have $0, then the labels are not making any money anyway. Now, if I download a ton of music and then do not go out and buy the music later on that I like, then yes, i am a thief.

Think about this argument very clearly before you go on and attempt to unseat me. Its not that I'm for downloading music or against it, but its a simple economic principle here. In the case of this Italian dj, well, sucks for him...

Thats cool but you have to include the doods that make money from downloaded music, thats what we're really talking about here not just downloading for personal listening but for financial gain/profit...

The moment you try and make an income from it is where the big bad line is drawn.

[The Divide]

This whole ‘music should be free’ argument makes me laugh. Thing is I used to have that kind of attitude before I started writing. It was when I realised that I couldn’t support myself, pay the bills and go out on a weekend when that changed. Now with part time work combined with studying I hardly have any time in the studio to actually make music these days.

No one is making money out of releasing techno. The money that comes in just about covers the expenses. My plan was to study and make techno 50/50 hopefully earning enough cash to at least feed myself. -8k Later I realised its not possible haha.:neutral:

The point I am trying to make is that if music was free music wouldn’t exist. We need money to survival and survival is more important than any passion. Piracy is just another nail in the artists coffin. Legitimate use of the internet to distribute, sell and share music is really helping get music out.

Btw Steve really like this part of the forum

[j_s]

Yeah, exactly, no one is anti free.
But theft is theft.

It`s funny, I was on the free party scene for years.
Well, it wasn`t free, we did charge a nominal fee.
And the trust fund hippies used to moan.

But it should be free man, music is for free?

Ok, I used to say, Who`s gonna pay for our Speakers when they get blown, diesel money, generator, Beers for the DJ`s. Records for the DJ`s.

I always used to laugh at these people.

Cos sure as shit they spend a fortune getting off their nuts.
But they got shitty when asked to pay to hear the music.

well, admittedly most of the parties in london chrge a door tax, but there are parties in the country that go on throughout the summer & run only on donations, which i willingly contribute towards. and yeah, of course i pay for drugs. i wouldn't give drugs away either, well not all the time cos. i like giving people (my) music though...
maybe thatll change when im struggling to find the time to write...

[j_s]

but does music belong to anyone in the first place?
its there to share, surely?
i often fail to see how can anyone seriously say 'yeah, if you make the air vibrate in this specific way then you have to give me dollar'?

Nice attitude. Can I live in your house and eat your food? Its all just atomic particles, you can't charge me for eating the atoms out of your fridge can you?

;)

waves don't physically exist, we can only observe their effects. atoms (of food) are physical matter. different ball game, surely.....

a record is a physical thing - but the music itself is a little harder to pin down.

i'm gonna shut up now, cos this is going nowhere.

apart from this - profiting from something someone has provided for free (willingly or not) is ****ing shameful - that i agree on 100%.

[The Divide]

waves don't physically exist, we can only observe their effects. atoms (of food) are physical matter. different ball game, surely.....

a record is a physical thing - but the music itself is a little harder to pin down.

i'm gonna shut up now, cos this is going nowhere.


But string theory says that all matter (including air) is made out of vibrating strings :doh: :lol:

[gustavo]

i think this is a extrmely simple affair

anyone who downloads stuff from labels/djs who dont authorize it

is stealing

i would like to imagine all the people who say this and that in a court

with the judge explaining theyr points of view...

in the end

i think he will say well son u stealed now u have to pay

[Joseph Isaac]

But string theory says that all matter (including air) is made out of vibrating strings :doh: :lol:

I'm stoked to see other theoretical physicists, or at least enthusiasts, are on this board...Suffice it to say, some of the most intelligent people I know listen to techno. :clap:

[tocsin]

Again, it just shows how this is not a black or white issue. I certainly don't agree that music "wouldn't exist" if it was free. That is only true for people who have money as an incentive. Not that I have any problem with that. But, I simply know way too many people, myself, included, who have made music or other forms of art without any incentive of getting paid for it. The "stealing" arguments don't really affect me much either. I certainly havern't authorised anyone to download my music but I certainly don't consider it theft. I just don't care enough. Especially when it comes to techno, people get a bit to righteous on the theft side. How many of you here who don't appreciate anyone "stealing" your music have ever used uncleared samples and, possibnly later, released it on vinyl or CD without ever even contacting the owner of the sample? Which theft is worse? Does everyone here only buy music with cleared samples or no samples at all? Where is the line drawn? Honestly, the concept that downloading music in the techno scene was really never something I heard much about until recently when people started blaming it for lack of sales, stores and labels going under, etc. I still have a really hard time believing that given all the other factors involved. One of the thing that always appealed to me about techno and the distribution around it, at least in my environment, was that it didn't act like, or rely on, the greedy business models and ethics of the mainstream entertainment industry. I'm not implying that anyone has to look at things the way I do but, when people make comments on behalf of the artists that almost exactly mimics the statements of the RIAA without leaving room for it to be different, then they are speaking for people like me. I don't agree with guilt trips, ridiculous fines, threats of lawsuits against teenagers and their parents, and other bullying tactics to get people to buy music which is largely disposable. I don't like it when people say every artist depends on the money from the art and that, if they don't see it because people are stealing, they'll stop making music. It just doesn't work that way for all of us which is why I don't like it when people try and make it so black or white. I'm completely grey. I don't authorise people to rip tracks I've worked on that are put out for sale by anyone but, at the same time, I don't really have any problem with someone who does so either. Worst case, some sales are lost and I might not get another release on the same label. But, life goes on and that won't prevent me from doing what I enjoy.

[gustavo]

there r some things i would like everyone to understand


a) if someone gets music from a label or dj (illegal downl for examp)who dont give permission to do so is stealing (if someone gets samples without paying is stealing etcetcetcetc

b) if the label says i dont care that they steal from me thats one thing if they mind and most certainly do because they have to make it work at the end of the month $ thats another thing .........................

one of the most important point is this and it seems that some people r not understanding

if techno is financially down its bad for everyone who likes techno aspiring djs , labels ertc etc

will have a really hard time

im sure the way to make techno forward is certainly not donwloads but buiyng good records

im not sure if u r really understanding what i mean ,why people make excuses for stealing? why they dont see the big picture?

instead of focusing in small details and comparisons?

maybe because many techno djs and people dont really have a lot of life and business experience i think (i mean when u have 19 u see things in one way but when u r 28 u see things in another perespevtive

i hope the guys who r here for some years understand what im triyng tom say

[SlavikSvensk]

totally understand, gustavo. techno is in a recession...

[dirty_bass]

I think we`ve said all that needs to be said here now, I`ll leave this topic up for another day and then lock it, as really it`s going round in circles, and the refreshing thing about it, is that the majority of people think that earning bread out of the theft of someone elses work is wrong.

[tocsin]

I think we`ve said all that needs to be said here now, I`ll leave this topic up for another day and then lock it, as really it`s going round in circles, and the refreshing thing about it, is that the majority of people think that earning bread out of the theft of someone elses work is wrong.

I just wonder how much of that is lip service. People here have said it's wrong but haven't answered my questions. Do people use uncleared samples? Do people here not buy music that uses uncleared samples? Do people contact every artist who's work they use on a mixtape? I don't agree that piracy has really had much of a dent on techno sales at all. Techno got big without any help from the mainstream industry and copyright law largely due to advancements in technology that made it affordable for artists to achieve high quality results without using any of the middle men who held onto their positions as a result of the mainstream industry. If techno that we liked started out in the same game as everyone else, it would have fizzled out and died before it ever even took off. The Winston's should be rich as a result of the techno scene. Any good sams here contact them about infringing works? Fake and uneven morality is just hypocritical. For those of you who have never sampled anything nor bought anything with infringing material because that is how strongly you feel about "theft," kudos to you. I'd be surprised if there was a single person on this board who could say they are such a person. And, to those who might be that way, well, in your eyes I guess I'm just a thief but, in the end, I simply don't care. Besides, the whole theft argument pretty much ignores the fact that the trend jumpers who helped the sound blow up for a bit got very sick of it while, at the same time, production of similar sounding crap increased ten fold.

[MangaFish]

who was it? (i'm not reading through 6 pages of rants to find the named and shamed dj)

[djshiva]

what i want to know is...how exactly did they determine the "illegal" mp3s?

what if he bought some, friends gave him some (of their own stuff for argument's sake), and then he downloaded some? most people i know actually do use a combination of these, so how do the authorities make that determination.

i would think that would be pretty importanat if they're gonna fine you 200 euros per mp3 to know exactly which ones are he naughty ones, dontcha think?

[djshiva]

But string theory says that all matter (including air) is made out of vibrating strings :doh: :lol:

I'm stoked to see other theoretical physicists, or at least enthusiasts, are on this board...Suffice it to say, some of the most intelligent people I know listen to techno. :clap:

yay!!! physics geeks unite! count me in too. can't do math but love the theory... :)

[MangaFish]

what i want to know is...how exactly did they determine the "illegal" mp3s?

what if he bought some, friends gave him some (of their own stuff for argument's sake), and then he downloaded some? most people i know actually do use a combination of these, so how do the authorities make that determination.

i would think that would be pretty importanat if they're gonna fine you 200 euros per mp3 to know exactly which ones are he naughty ones, dontcha think?

they probably knew from downlaod streams. alot of big comertial labels set up fake mp3's in the hope to catch regular downlaoders and they trace their ip number

[Mirsha]

what if he bought some,
friends gave him some (of their own stuff for argument's sake),
then he downloaded some?
Legal, legal and illegal. Fairly simple really. If you haven't paid for the track or been giving express permission to use it by someone holding rights to it it's illegal.

[The Divide]

But string theory says that all matter (including air) is made out of vibrating strings :doh: :lol:

I'm stoked to see other theoretical physicists, or at least enthusiasts, are on this board...Suffice it to say, some of the most intelligent people I know listen to techno. :clap:

yay!!! physics geeks unite! count me in too. can't do math but love the theory... :)

:lol:

Know anything about monatomic elements?

(totally off topic)

[djshiva]

then allow me to play devil's advocate for a second here and suggest that perhaps less money involved in music = less temptation to 'sell out' = more innovation & creativity?

as a full-fledged anarchist i am still gonna have to disagree with you and say that as far as techno goes, not too many fuggas are making a shit ton of cash, or play music accessible enough to be corporate sell-outs.

most techno producers i know, even the ones who are fairly well-known, are not making a ton of money. and last time i checked, sony and volkswagen weren't beating down our favorite techno producers' doors, so i am fairly unconcerned that my techno brothers and sisters are selling out.

i may be a dirty, unapologetic anarchist who thinks that capitalism is evil dirty business, but i still gotta eat, and so does everyone i know...

[djshiva]

what if he bought some,
friends gave him some (of their own stuff for argument's sake),
then he downloaded some?
Legal, legal and illegal. Fairly simple really. If you haven't paid for the track or been giving express permission to use it by someone holding rights to it it's illegal.

but again, even if there were illegal ones, how do you determine that, especially if you are being fined PER mp3. that's a pretty important distinction.

and unless italian authorities are really way more sophisticated than american ones (which wouldn't be far fetched prolly), i don't think they're that ****ing smart really...