RSSMusic Artists Rally Support Behind P2P
By Ed Oswald | Published March 1, 2005, 10:21 AM
Several musical artists have told the U.S. Supreme Court that they believe peer-to-peer networks should not be blamed for illegal file sharing. Instead, they are urging the court to keep P2P services alive in order to give musicians another outlet to distribute their work, the Washington Post reported on Tuesday.
According to the filing, the group of artists claims that not all musicians think file sharing is bad. "To the contrary, many musicians find peer-to-peer technology...allows them easily to reach a worldwide online audience. And to many musicians, the benefits of this..strongly outweigh the risks of copyright infringement," they wrote.
The group includes contemporary artists like Jason Mraz, as well several popular artists from years past such as Steve Winwood and Heart. Mraz said in the court filing that illegal file sharing has given him more exposure; according to Mraz, half of his concertgoers found out about him through file sharing.
Shutting down P2P services would rob musicians of an outlet for exposure and additional income, the group says. "Distribution of recordings to retailers was controlled largely by a few large national record companies and by several 'independent' labels" before P2P, the group argued.
They say that while they think copyright infringement is wrong, artists who may no longer be commercially viable still have a way to keep their music out in the open.
The legal posturing comes as the Supreme Court is about to hear arguments on the case against Grokster. The company is accused of aiding users in breaking copyright laws and not doing enough to prevent illicit file sharing from occurring. The court will hear arguments March 29.
Good for them. I can agree with Mraz especially, as I just bought the Federico Abuelle cd, someone I heard listening to (free) LaunchCast. Let's face it... unless you're U2 or Britney Spears, you're not going to get airplay on the major stations, and you're not going to get your music to the masses. Not only do services like LaunchCast assist, but file trading on P2P so you can try before you buy.
Thinking about it, the inability to try has always prevented me from buying stuff. And the more accessible a sample is (test drive a car, food samples in grocery stores, game demos, etc.) the more likely I am to shell out the money for it.
Score: 0
|It's good to hear a voice against banning P2P from once-unknown artists instead of major record labels and associations speaking on behalf of 'Music'. If every artist had a record label pushing their music down everyones throat you'd almost have as much coverage as P2P. Although it would cost you more to put it out there then for it to be transfered around over the internet for Free!
People aren't stupid, if they like what they hear then they'll buy it to support the artist in hope that they'd produce more music. If they don't like what they hear then it wasn't worth producing and money shouldn't be wasted by forcing us to listen to crap on radios and on TV.
Score: 0
|Can't stop p2p. If someone really wants some file, they're going to get it if they look hard enough.
Score: 0
|Don't kill the technology, just cause it's being used for illegal purposes - If your stuff is being distributed, then sue the violators themselves (if that's what you gotta do).
you dont make cars illegal just cause people speed, dont use turn signal... just the same as you shouldn't make P2P illegal.
Many of these artists are not belonging to RIAA, and dont want to belong to them either. I don't think you can legally "share" music that has been released through RIAA - even with the artist's say so, as the artist signs the copyright over to their label - who would want to do that when you have the internet, you dont need the RIAA anymore...
Score: 0
|" Don't kill the technology, just cause it's being used for illegal purposes"
They should shut down the postal service while they are at it because it can be/is being used for illegal activity daily :)
Score: 0
|Are you serious or what of course P2P Technology is one of the many reasons why the ever so popular programs such as Morpheus, Napster and Kazaa in the past had used those technologies to serve as an outlet to have others download music and such and Oh No! it doesn't stop there Let us not forget of other areas where people can access their "illegal" frenzy , which I will only say as Relay Chat. You figure out the rest.. Either way, I think that if this story holds true whomever those artists are must be high on dope. They are stealing from you not helping you. I mean if the technology is used in the proper manner YES! it can do much good than rather copyright infringement as does say the DMCA ( Digital Millennium Copyright Act). you figure it out!
Score: 0
|figure it out?
I look here so I don't have to figure things out. ;)
Score: 0
|The MPAA made the same arguments about VHS recorders in 1980's and we all know that the movie studios made a lot of money off those videos. I think a lot of ways these P2P networks will work out the same way. The studios will find ways to shut down the most egregious infringement, chalk off a certain percentage that will get illegally copied, and take their profits.
Yep these artists are stupid. Just as stupid as the people who released their movies on VHS tapes who didn't care that there was no DRM preventing them from being copied. Those who are willing to release work on non restrictive licensing terms at a reasonable price will laugh all the way to the bank. Those who feel they need to license under high priced and restrictive terms to make up for piracy are going to have join those that have embraced the technology eventually or see their sales dwindle as fewer people willing to deal with the hassles that are imposed.
Score: 0
|Ah I love when people rally insults against another before giving any thought to the situation. Allow me to help you think with this question, do you have a better method for distributing your music world wide with no money?
For many emerging artists this portal is the only way that they can become known and then afterwords believe it or not people actually go out and pay money for the physical copy. P2p networks are often used to sample music this way and in fact are causing a great boom in sales because of it. So next time give some thought before making a comment.
the _shadow
Score: 0
|This is the best thing I have heard so far about P2P. The record industry is far to concerned about suing people, rather than to take a look at the fact that using these programs is a good way for people to discover new artists they like. And spend more money. It gives struggling artists a chance to get their name out there. Besides, who cares what the recording industy says because they dont really help out the artists much anyway.
Score: 0
|If record companies were smart, they'd flood all the P2P networks with good, low quality copies of songs as they're released to CD.
Not so called "Easter Eggs" with a high quality intro, then squawking, but low bitrate files that are cassette quality.
And when I say flood, I mean flood - overwhelm the networks with these files, so it's easy to find the songs, quick to download the songs, but difficult to find CD quality files.
This way, it's easy to find the music, the music spreads, but people who want CD quality music will have to buy the CD... and everyone who likes the music will go to the concerts :)
Score: 0
|where did The blod hound gang and Blink 182 come from .. Thin air ..
what napster did was to take control
of the music industry and place it in the hands of the artists .I enjoyed the early days of mp3.com where the artist realised a few freebies and one could purchase further music directily from thoes artists .Bypassing the record industry all together
napster put the wind up ther a**
which has got them frightened so rarther than embrase the technoligy they try as they might get it shut down
Times have changed and are changing
Its called evualtion .. Record tape CD DVD Mp3 what next
then of course their was and no dought a positive affect on music sales .I can remember hearing,reading that record sales had jumped 25% when napster was the only means of file shareing on the net
Napster 2 is failing because they are charging 99p per track so is anybody in their right mind going to buy music that was @that price a 40 track double cd or 1 dvd would cost £39.60 where as a 40 track double cd in the shops works out @37p per track
As I have said before and I will say it again I will susport where susport is due if i like all the tracks on the cd
I have bought Sylver chances
Sylver Little things
Dido No Angel
Dido Life for Rent
Because the artists are woth what they do
Score: 0
|