The People Who Were Sued for Downloading Music... What Ever Happened?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 лис 2020
- Lawsuits against downloaders were meant to scare people into buying CDs again. However in the late 2000s a pair of cases went way too far, with even the judge calling the outcome "monstrous and shocking." Interestingly, the fight against digital music began as early as the 1980s. Enjoy the full history of the RIAA vs digital music!
*I am now very aware that I mispronounced DIDO*
Here's links to some of the title/theme music throughout the vid:
/ bandsplaining-theme
enginesummer.bandcamp.com/tra...
Also, I now have a twitter account for updates, music shares and what not: / bandsplaining - Розваги
I think the music industry solved the piracy problem in a most unique way in the end. Make music so terrible that nobody would ever bother downloading it.
Hahahaha *starts crying*
There’s great music still being made, but you have to spend an awful lot of time looking for it. Of course it’s true that there is a lot of would-be artists put off pursuing a career in music since there’s no money in it. Only the top 1% make any money these days.
@@enigmatwist6548 Best to go the Spark Master Tape route. Stay anonymous, stay independent, and build a loyal following from the ground up. Platoon gon' rise. #swoup
Especially the rap genre. What garbage.
Truthfully, I parallel this to what's happening in other mediums like comics right now. Marvel & DC have seen huge declines in sales and seemingly endless amounts of outrage from fans that are salty about what the big 2 have been doing for years now. At the same time independent sales have never been better. Likewise in the music industry, artists have vastly more resources to take matters into their own hands than before to at least make a decent living off of their work, even if they never reach super stardom. Which pretty much leaves the naive and the industry plants left in what used to be considered the "mainstream." Ultimately what this means is that it's not a downgrade in quality, but rather a shift in platform for the artists, and fans can't expect to be spoon fed anymore.... you actually have to do a bit of leg work for once. But with suggestion algorithms, it's not all that difficult to find things you like, especially on UA-cam. lol
I love when the CEO's of these record labels pretend they care about the rights of the artists on their labels..
Imagine selling an album for 30$ and giving 50 cents to the artist
@@IDC45 Well, It depends on the profit of live concerts, merch and other profits. Not every band or artist only get 50 cent from 30$ album.
@@ranjanbiswas3233 No not every one just most of them except the top 0.5%. The industry brought it on themselves. The artists who moved to the web proved that they did not need the greedy companies.
record labels do be looking kinda SUS.
Yeah they convinced the artist this would be bad when the internet ended up giving them the creative freedom they wanted. Artists don’t need labels anymore.
This unlocked memories of my grandmother yelling, “you better not be stealing music & get me sued” to me & my cousins when we went over to use her computer. I miss that lady😢
Love it
Who else read that using an old grandma's voice?
hahahahaaa
yep!@@sbalogh53
Streaming companys are now stealing not just from us but from actors and musicians to crazy how time changes yo
I think it’s not fully understood by a lot of people how severely the RIAA going after regular people for millions of dollars damaged the music industry’s reputation for decades.
Not to mention that most artists weren't behind them since they practically never saw a dime of record sales, aside from some exceptions. The secondary effect of a lot of people downloading music and discovering artists and then going to see them live is also understated.
you mean the reputations of ALL the scumbags and assholes that spent decades fucking over artists and consumers alike?.... Yeah, it's going to be tough to regain that sort of admiration.
What really angered me was when I couldn't legally make a CD from a (largely obsolete) cassette tape of music for my elderly father -- music he had BOUGHT with the record label on it, etc.
The music industry wasn't interested in fair use or dealing fairly with changing (and rapidly obsoleting) electronic media -- but ONLY with making as much money as possible. Period.
I remember stating that I would never feel sorry for them again re piracy.
For a couple decades, I deliberately bought a lot less CD's, as a matter of principle.
Ironically, in modern times, I'll buy a physical CD if it's cheaper than the MP3 equivalent, and have a nice physical backup.
But otherwise, I just buy the MP3 collection, and make very sure I keep my entire MP3 collection backed up independently to multiple sources. (Luckily, large flash drives of decent speed have gotten quite cheap). Even smallish SSD's.
Why the hell would you buy music? It's free on UA-cam with AdBlock, and you can just torrent everything
I fully agree, i still cant stand alot of the artists who spoke out against it back then, reminds me of current times and how people are treating AI
I think it's fucking hilarious that record labels call downloaders pirates when they in fact take such a big share of artist's money without having to do shit for it.
Record labels do invest a few million dollars on an artists. Lots of them fail. That's why they're paid like crap
@@JR-xn6yu I personally think it's ridiculous that a good deal share wise is 50/50. I am lucky that I signed for a contract that has a 60% for the artists and 40% for the label. It's kind of like how steam takes so much of the share of the sale of a game. They are not doing much, but they can charge so much because they have the power to do so.
@@Jalmaan If you think about it Steam does a lot without doing much. Steam is just a great hub for games on computer. What they did was create a platform that everyone turns to because of availability, reliability, simplicity. One way to see how their doing is by looking at the direct competition. Which Steam doesn't really have, rather multiple launchers that wish people would look at them like Steam. Like look at epic games for example, they give out so many free games for the hopes of getting near steam. Steam is like the Google of launchers.
@@bigbosslive69 yea, which is why i like what the epic games store stands for, just don't like their execution in how it's done. Steam really needs to up their revenue share so devs can get more. Would be so much better for the industry
@@Jalmaan I don't know much about Steam revenue shares but really the only reason people would be there is for the amazing games that these devs produce. So I also agree people should get paid for their hard work in any field. It's just another thing to look at with these powerhouse company's, because they can really do what they want without a direct competitor.
A friend of mine was working for one of the record companies during part of this period doing royalty "clearance". The record company formula deducted all kinds of charges against sales before calculating the profit that they gave a small percentage of to the artists. One charge was for a percentage of "breakage" going back to the older, brittle phonograph records, but still charged, even against CDs. There also was that they frequently just kept the royalties in an account that were owed to lesser known artists that they didn't have contact information for and couldn't be bothered to try to find. Composers, arrangers and performers often got checks for less than $10.00 when tens of thousands of recordings had been sold. But, the RIAA insisted that the artists were the victims of piracy, when in reality the thievery was being done by the record companies, the agents and the lawyers.
THAT is a BRILLIANT analysis that never occurred to me. Why spend millions on pointless lawsuits unless it is all an act to distract from the real thievery? Makes perfect sense.
There have been cases where the company's agreement with the artist timed out but the record company kept selling the music. They never sued themselves though.
this is exactly why music piracy is and will always be popular. and i support it 100%
EXACTLY.....A con job for the Record companies to ROB legit artists and blame piracy 🤣😂
Classic capitalism~
The Napster affair made me realize how badly the record industry was screwing us over. Most albums only have 1 or 2 good songs on them, but we are forced to buy entire album of crap just to get those few songs that we want.
Or you can listen to the mindless droning on the radio.
No way that's so untrue. Lots of excellent 60,70,80s, 90s albums have lots of excellent songs on them. It's something you young wants won't ever know.
@@thedappercook yeah... the "greatest hits" compilations maybe.
@@themonsterunderyourbed9408 oh man I'm so sorry you didn't get to experience whole albums of magic. They're still out there, tonnes and tonnes of great albums end to end, lots of shit too of course but the initial statement/comment made couldn't be further from wrong.
Which is an example of how SOME things really do get better. It's easy to buy one good song now for a buck or so, legally, as an MP3.
Re the one or two good songs per album, it very much depends on the group, IMO.
The best groups, it's near 100 percent songs I like. Many groups I like, it's roughly half.
But yeah, for many others, to buy the greatest hits album and get 20 or so songs, of which ONE you wanted to listen to, that was a huge rip-off, so I tended to just do without owning it.
Everytime I’m in traffic at a red light and hear Metallica coming from someone’s vehicle, I mail Lars Ulrich a few bucks so I won’t get sued for listening for free.
hahahaha
wtf ahhaha
Well we can listen to songs on the radio I was poor growing up so I saved to get a tape deck stereo and a brick of tape and recorded songs on the radio. So was I illegally copying music cause I wasnt buying it????
@@josephcontreras8930 Yes, that would have been illegal but not immoral. So don't worry about it.
I've never forgiven that creep for Napster..
The real thieves here are the record companies who pay the artists only 50 freakin cents(!) for every $20 CD they sold.
yes.
Sounds bad and there are greedy scumbags out there. But imagine someone honest being a label. Say they're paying for everything up-front. It's a risk. If you liked a band would you gamble $300k on what sell zero? Music videos made no money for anyone except MTV who kept all the ad revenue. The videos were at times million dollar commercials for the music. Artists made most from radio royalties and touring. 50c a cd is low, but if it was 50/50 and a video was $200k, the artist might not be able to drop $100k, so the label gets more equity since they bear more risk. Studio time, session players, producers, engineers and other marketing add up too. David Byrne's book on music has a great breakdown of costs as an indie artist.
@@BenWeeks I actually knew an artist in high school. She wrote her own music and had to pay the costs up front. So there are cases of artists eating the costs. And even when the company covers those costs, it makes more sense to do that to an unknown.
Why do you think so many big names end up making their own record company? Because even if there is no risk they will still only be paid pennies.
The standard contract with any artist for streaming is even worse, and the costs for the company is even lower. Pandora, for example, pays an artist pennies and there's np up front cost making this a CDs. Instead, the infrastructure cost is the same no matter who it is and of no one likes the music they will just press the skip button and the artist won't be paid at all anyway.
Depends on the company/artist. most of the ultra popular artists don't even write their own music, they have ghostwriters doing that, they are basically just "mascots".
Don't sign the contract then
RIAA: we are here to protect artists.
CD costs 75 cents to produce, artist makes 50 cents per cd, company sells cd for $17 making $15.75 profit. Remind us again RIAA who the thieves are🤔
And the artists defend them...
Then artists don't have to make deals with record companies. But they do, because companies provide them with marketing and exposure. It's not pure profit.
Closer to 25 cents. I remember an idiot Congressman complaining that CDs were all printed in South Korea, wanted the jobs back in the US. The printing companies were making a fraction of a cent profit per CD. The international shipping cost was inexpensive too. Almost all the $17 price tag was split between the retailers and the record labels, with a small percent to the artists. The reason CD sales collapsed was because most CDs only had one song anyone wanted to listen too. $17 a song vs $1 on iTunes was what killed CDs. Albums that had multiple good songs were the big sellers of CDs in the 80s and 90s because the price per good song fell. An interesting result of the $1 song has been the trend in artists touring instead of pumping out studio albums. The artists tend to earn their living from live performances these days, instead of from album sales. So it has been a great era for live music.
Aye Aye! This is FACT. Artists protected their only "middle man" as it was their only source of revenue. Nowadays they can sell their work directly for a smaller price and get way more money without those middle man recording / retailer companies. Not to say I dont support music stores, after all there's plenty of peoplo who collect CDs and Vinyl still.
@@Dudemon-1 Marketing? If you like shitty corporate bands. I get all my band info from Spotify, YT, and interweb word of mouth.
I love that the RIAA probably spent more in legal fees than they got out of suing private individuals.
thats exactly why they stopped doing it
The sad part is, these people the RIAA decided to make examples out of were probably nothing compared to what my neighbor was supposedly doing. During the file sharing era, he bought himself a CD burner and would make CDs with any songs you wanted for a flat fee, $5 or something. Never got caught.
You have crooks on Etsy doing this same shit today with cassette tapes. They claim they are selling their personal artwork as a tape label and the music is free.
Exactly
i hada 2x burner i think, it sucked when a disc failed lol. 1 hr burn was rough
Man everyone was doing this. I didn’t know a single person who didn’t have a bunch of burnt CDs in their car. It got to the point where every single soul had limewire, we all knew how to burn cd-r’s by the time we were teenagers, and it’s crazy they outed these 2 people when I personally knew 50+ people within a 5 miles radius lol
"Now that Napster is shut down, the labels can go back to being the ones screwing over artists". - John Stewart
Don't forget Spotify
Based
You mean yet another subversive progressive *Jewish* "comedian." Just a coincidence I'm sure.
@@hawhafunnyraffs5568 everytime
*Jon
Fun fact since Napster became a legal streaming service they pay their artist more than spotify ironic.
Yeah didn’t they merge with rhapsody?
@@lilyteeth yeah bandcamp is basically the itch.io ot music whereas spotify is more like steam
@@jlewwis1995 whats itch.io?
@@girishkumarpeddi6266 An infection of the bottoms of human feet and toes. Can be cured with a special medical cream.
@@jlewwis1995 steam keeps around 30% as publisher's fee IIRC. Spotify is far more greedy than that.
That woman was tough. All the way down to practically all you have to do is make a video for us and she still held her ground. Good for her.
Yup. I worked with a woman who wore a pin that said "Piss me off, and pay the consequences".
I remember her slamming her office door on some jerk, and the sonic boom sound that resulted, and picturing, comic book style, the entire large 3 story office building crumbling to dust as her office, closed door intact, stood undamaged...
That didn't happen of course, but as her number 2, I told the jerk that NO ONE on MY team (I was the team leader, she was the brains of the outfit) was going to help him AT ALL until he apologized to her and meant it.
That was a very satisfying day at work.
But yeah, piss the wrong woman off and she justifiably goes fists up -- and good luck winning THAT.
She should of been honest about the download though, that's what left a sour taste in the jury mouth. Though I think they were set up to be honest. For those wondering, I don't cuc to the RIAA, I sail the seven seas
After what they did to her, and school children for downloading a few songs, and the countless artists under them who gave them the rights over their art, I wouldn't have given them anything at all. Bankruptcy is a small price to pay for integrity and the satisfaction to what was coming to these criminals --the *real* criminals.
The RIAA spent 2.9 million dollars to sue people that are barely getting by. Yet Ticketmaster is running around charging "service fees" to concert goers because they know we ultimately have no choice. Can we sue Ticketmaster? Should we? Or do we just shrug our shoulders and say "F..k it..I might as well pay the fees..."
We totally need to sue them. On the basis of legal scalping where people buy boat loads of tickets for big names, then resell them BACK on ticketmaster for 300-1000% the original price. Ticketmaster doesnt give a shit cause they get twice the fees for one ticket!
Idk how this is considered legal but definitely shouldn't be!
I dont . I don't pay ticket Master anything and refuse to . My kids don't either.
Ticketmaster has already been sued a few times and not much has ever happened to them.
Real question is. Who the fuck are you going to see? Modern music is garbage in all genres. And half the time you are just paying to watch someone lip sync poorly.
Ticketmasters arbitration clause is so vague it’s nearly impossible to sue them.
It showed the true colors of "artists" like metallica, kiss, Dr Dr, et al who sold the image of being a rebel and fighting the man, but in reality were the man.
ie every popular artist ever. You don't get to the top of billboards and become cultural phenomenon, just selling mixtaps from the back of your trunk/underground. Takes the whole apparatus of entertainment industry, to go from just another "super talented" artist to a cultural icon.
Well… no one joins the music industry without a desire to make money from it.
Who're the last two?
@@maxborn7400 Tom Macdonald has been able to do it. ua-cam.com/video/fCMwlorNEZk/v-deo.html
@@maxborn7400 Well, there's one rapper in my home country that already is a cultural phenomenon and everybody knows him here. Yet whenever he drops a new album (and that usually happens every summer) he makes it available to download in mp3 for free from his website. In the same time he's never been advertising anything and I don't recall any interview with him. Yet he makes good buck simply by being able to sell out a concert hosted on a biggest stadium in the country.
Limewire did FAR more damage to my PC downloading music illegally than I ever did to the music industry.
For real, I think back then I was re-installing windows weekly because of it.
You didn't have anti Spyware back then? Lol
🤣🤣🤣
@@Omegaxtreme bro there was a blue gorilla on my pc. Thats all the protection I need
@@gabrielmedeiros6886 haha
10:25 a multi millionaire sueing a single mom that's native American is pretty low. She should have countersued them for spying on her hard drive breaking privacy laws.
As someone who recorded music off of the radio all the time as a kid, and later recorded all my friends albums onto cassettes, I feel the entire thing was ridiculous.
mp3s were such a step up though, once you heard them you never go back
@@flytoday mp3s are a huge giant step down from records and CDs. The music is compressed and missing much of it sound
@@drunvert CDs and records are better than mp3s but mp3s are probably better than cassette. The best thing about mp3, is the number of songs you could have on a very small device, which was portable.
We take it for granted now, but it was a big thing in the early 2000s.
My favorite CDs are downloaded with flac, not mp3, because file size doesn't matter anymore. Now, most people stream anyway. That was not an option back then.
@drunvtrue , but the commerical crap folks listen to is mostly. Artificial from the start, and not worth that much musically rt
@@drunvert that's why you use .flac
I cannot imagine being on a jury and handing out a $220K verdict for sharing 24 songs to anyone.
that wasnt a jury of her peers it was probably a jury full of recording industry insiders
Imagine a bunch of then-middle aged boomers who barely know how to use a computer.
@@BlueSatoshi Sure. But it couldn't be that hard to equate it to giving away bootleg CDs for free. I can't imagine anyone decent choosing to charge tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars per song. I mean I can believe it because it happened, but it's really very disturbing. Corporate propaganda is incredibly powerful.
Jury nullification is a thing, but even attempting to rule it is contempt. The courts are screwed and need new judges that understand the internet
@@RandyRandersonthefamous Jury nullification is a right.
“It’s a very dangerous machine” translation “I can’t make money off of abusive contracts and I’m scared”
Make their artists work like slaves while they sit on their lazy asses and get 90% of the Profits..
My thoughts exactly! :) A very dangerous machine that might prevent me from ripping you off while leeching of artists with actual talent.
@Liam AOC worked her way thru college and Obama had the inherent disadvantage of being black so right off the bat that part is horseshit
and the fact that *any computer* does it anyways… he's referring to _copying files_
Not to mention, all of the skeevy scummy "casting couch" stuff these execs were doing to young girls to get their albums propped up.
It's crazy how many artists were on the side of the record companies knowing how little money they made from sales. The ceos were literally stealing their profits.
Scared of change? Paid to do it by the record labels? Forced to do it by the record label contract? Those seemed to be as plausible as ignorance.
Lars Ulrich whined and complained about royalties while remaink silent about proper pay for Dave Mustaine. I also recall someone asking him if he ever had bootleg music on a cassette tape... silence and crickets ensued
@@wolphin732 I'm thinking the very successful ones had to because the labels had the power to shut down their live performances over anything the artist said that they didn't care for.
They couldn't afford to promote themselves..
The real screwed up part about this whole riaa and file sharing story is that while they were using Shawn Fanning for Napster, the record companies were going behind the RIAA's back and asking Napster to provide data to them because they realized that people weren't just downloading music, they were making decisions about what they like and that had value. So on one side you're being sued for damages, on the other side you are being paid for user data. It's all a big mess and nobody came out of it undamaged or a head. The music industry today is nothing like it was in the 80s and 90s and nothing will ever be like that again. It's such a sad story.
As an ex signed guitarist I will tell you in the mid 2010’s we realized as touring artists that we’d rather kids got our music for free and show up to our shows and buy merch than them never getting ahold of the music at all. That was quite the revelation back then.
I was in an after school music group with my daughter at her school and the teacher was always talking about copyright infringement and such things as he knew musicians that were getting royalties from playing on some hit TV show.
Then one Sunday at my church they played some older hymns out of a book and I heard a tune that was very familiar sounding even though it was very old.
I found out it was a section of a piece of music we were playing in our music group from a tune that was SUPPOSED to be only a few years old.
Hmm. I wonder where that came from?
The Japanese music industry is the most ridiculously hardass about this, and has never even warmed up to any kind of digital distribution. Consequently only members of freakishly esoteric communities in the U.S. (which makes up about half of the world's music market) are aware that Japan has ever made music. Meanwhile the Koreans have gotten to #1 in the U.S. by putting 4K quality videos on YT and pushing them to get millions of views and a dozen K-pop acts are touring the U.S. right now.
@@I_Have_The_Most_Japanese_Music The Japanese are absurdly stringent about digital distribution and image licensing. Sega almost killed a blooming game franchise because they couldn' iron out the image and voice licensing of the main character - who was a boy band singer if I'm not mistaken.
That's awesome, wish more saw it like that!
We went into touring with that mindset. But by the time we were booking Big tours and crossing the country, the music industry had gone to shit. I had become "You fit the bill, you go broke touring, your go broke for studio time, and then if you're successful, we wanna sign you" Then the icing in the cake is the offers you get require you to provide said company with at least 3 albums and you can't do your own thing in between them. We did all the left work, and once we had offers we all quit.
All of this happened because they didn't have NORD VPN back then
😂
Tails OS
LMAOAO
@@informitas0117 Nah we're pirating music not ordering hits here...
i cant believe people are stupid enough to believe that your ISP cant see the shit thats going through their network just cause its "encrypted" like literally all web traffic. SPOILER : netflix will permaban your account if you use a VPN to illegally access shit not allowed currently in your country.
This reminds of the story of the schoolgirl who was illegally downloading music and video off of the Internet and was punished by her father, who is a judge. She was ready with a webcam when her father came into her bedroom to punish her again for a repeat offense. The daughter released the video of her beating online.
What ever happened?
Was it on Dr. Phil episode? I recognize it before
Your pacing, delivery, and production on this video was awesome. I really enjoyed it. Thank you!
Funniest thing happened early this year Metallica tried to live stream a concert on Twitch and it got hit with a DMCA and had random non copyright music played over it.
I’d like to invent some technology to blur an image every time Lars Ulrich appeared so I don’t have to see his smug face.
@@theseoldbeats For now you can watch 'Lars Funhaus compilation' on UA-cam
😂 💯 👍
what goes around comes around I guess
Say what you want about Lars but without him metallica would've gone nowhere
Hi. Thanks for this video. I can confirm as a primary source that I did file for bankruptcy and the RIAA never got a dime. It’s nice to see a retrospective like this showing that the people who fought back were found on the right side of history, that scaring people into an antiquated business model was never going to work.
stealing art is nothing to be proud of.
@@tomektalk4671 LOL "stealing art". Yeah dude, George Clooney and Matt Damon were involved. There was a laser security system and everything.
@@joeltenenbaum7662 good for you for sticking up for yourself and ‘the little guy’ for so many years. Absolute legend, glad they never got a cent from you.
Thank you for paving the way for means like Spotify so we can now have infinite music without having to steal it or worry about what you went through lol
@@joeltenenbaum7662 you’re the true hero fr
This video was absolutely great. And so needed. Thanks for the hard work making a documentary and explainer that just had to exist.
This is a really comprehensive documentary. Please continue to make more great videos like this.
“Did the record labels ever get their money?”
I sure hope not
My response was, no. Of course not...
@@dread-cthulu There was no money to get. If a car is stolen from you, and you wake up finding the exact same car there, as if it were a copy, would you feel robbed?
Supposedly it was brought about to protect the artist. But no artist ever received any money.
*other people's money, and they already had it and just wanted more
Why would anybody go to work, and then give away their product for free, and get zero hourly wage payment? You? Musicians making music is their job, record companies are their employers. Are you really this dumb? I already know you are, just by your statement.
I remember when Radiohead self released their album on the internet cutting the label completely out of the process.. It was relatively epic.
so 5 years ago? everyone remembers it
@Lox Prince I love his music I'm glad you brought that up
@@InfiniteRhombus It was 14 years ago.
@@InfiniteRhombus time goes by quick huh? That was in 2007 bud.
@@Yphrum so 80 years ago
It was really scary at the time I remember I was told by my dad not to bring my mp3 full of pirated music when crossing the border so we don’t risk selling our house and filing bankruptcy. Glad there are streaming services now.
I remember learning the term "rip" music from a CD to put onto my mp3 player. We would show our playlists to friends and compare how many songs we had on our players. That was an indication of how much time we spent ripping CDs, downloading from Napster, and how cool we were. Downloading and sharing files is how I discovered an whole new genre of music! In my small hick town, we had a country station, a religious station, and a classic rock station that played more disco than anything. Metal and grunge were new and exciting, and I never heard of Metallica before Napster. So there's that.
And to think the new "legal" streaming actually gives so little money to artists it's effectively piracy on their end
they realised what was happening and monetised it. I think it's hilarious that we don't use ipods anymore and pay to use Spotify. we are literally just paying them to download it for us. because that's the only hassle Spotify takes from you is having to download a song and put it on your phone. which you still could do for free if you wanted to
@@rastas_4221 it would've missed the point anyway
@@Brandon-cv9uh yeah but being able to pull up any song (not literal of course) that someone around u might wanna hear instantly is cool and no matter how big ur hard drive is u cant hold enough for all tastes
ya screw streaming
Musicians make more off merch and shows depending if they got in a 360 or not
"This will kill the music industry"
No, you guys did that on your own.
@@Bauernade oh no, the record label execs will only be able to afford an 80ft yacht, not the 120ft yacht they wanted 😢
@@Bauernade because CD was a shit medium and the idustry didnt adapt as fast as napster did
@@Bauernade
After so many of the boomers replaced their vinyl with CD's , CD sales dropped significantly. Corporations bought up a large number of record companies that had previously been privately owned after seeing that initial windfall of vinyl replacement. Once that windfall peaked out, like other financial bubbles, it popped.
@@Fhwgads11 imagine u spend time making a song recording it editing it and everything for someone to take it and give it out for free to anyone making ur hard work useless as a job… it’s literally theft… still disagree? What if u made a phone and had to spend let’s say $600 per phone. But then someone took ur creations copied it fully and gave it to people for free then everyone “bought” that phone instead. That would be theft right? Plus a breaking of copy right by them.. it’s the same with msuic people spend time and money to make songs and people steal them… also snout the money thing… u just are jealous of them… unlike u they actually put effort to get into that medium. And do more overall… obvious there gonna make a lot of money.. and remember, if it was u you’d be doing the same thing about piracy
@@anonymouspokemon4623 your easily smarter then me ....
Dude this video was beyond excellent, very well done work man.
That was a trip down memory lane! When I was 15 in 05' I got sued (technically my single mom) for copyright infringement. $22,500,000.00! I forgot to "not share" on lime wire. So I was sharing like 3-4000 songs. We ended up settling for $4000.00 plus another 4k in attorney fees. I eventually paid my mom back after 4 years.
I had over 10,000 songs but i never shared cause it would slow me down.
You actually paid 8 grand over this! 😂
Yeah back in 05'
@@ImionsaeXwb77 Well that kind of destroys the entire idea of file SHARING now don't it!
@@Moonlightshadow-lq4fr Hell I started from a 14.4 dial up modem, do you know how fast that thing was and when the faster modem were released do you know how much them thing cost...? Forget the sharing.....
Imagine a punk band being mad at someone pirating though. The irony.
Nirvana: steal our music.. no problems here... As long as... Dave Grohl gets his coffee -- FRESH POTS
Or rappers , rapping F the police and the law but they go crying to the law when their shit gets infringed
@@2tooful ..or cry when THEIR mommas " get used as bia...es like they need and like it" :-D
@@2tooful Right! It's the most un-gangster thing everrrr 🤣🤣🤣
@@CreditSolutionist especially when the people barely have enough for rent and you’re fucking rich.
When this happened, I never purchased any music moving forward. None. Their greed was disgusting.
A lot of people saying the same thing, and honestly I got real educated on BitTorrent pretty soon after that period of itme
Same here. Especially the outright lies. Claiming that anyone who downloaded a song would've bought it otherwise.
That's like someone handing out free samples of gouda from a wheel of cheese they bought only to get sued by the gouda factory because everyone who had a bite of that cheese would've bought a wheel if they hadn't had that free sample.
@Tomjo5 During the height of the anti-piracy craze, the record labels went after anyone who was file-sharing and claimed that every IP connected to them downloading a song equalled to the theft of one album.
People were getting 5 to 6 digit fines. They knew full well that most of the people downloading those songs were teens that wouldn't have had the money to buy remotely that many albums. They just inflated the numbers so they could shake people down for more money.
@Tomjo5 I buy meat and invite you to a BBQ at my place...then the butcher knocks at your door, demanding you to pay for that meat...again...
If I reverse that thinking...having the ability to procreate as a male, makes me entitled to state child funding...cuz I could in theory have children...so pay up, state!
Same here.
Good work in this piece. Well done!
Great video, very informative and pleasant. Thanks a lot.
I’m still waiting to download a car.
That’s baby talk, I’m gonna download a house
soon
I'd love to do it as a huge gear head. Hope we can download cars like in Gran Turismo.
@@multistuff9831 im downloading the moon... 1265422849937573 more TB
Multi-material commercial 3d printing is on the way.
Imagine if people starting coming out saying they all pirated until the IRAA wasn't able to even pursue legal action. They would have bankrupted themselves.
I am Sparta- I mean, I am Napster!
In a way, they did. They knew everyone was downloading music. They couldn't really do anything.
The RIAA knew that 'pirating' was widespread. Their strategy was to make examples of a small number to frighten the rest into stopping.
Same if EVERYONE stopped paying their mortgages, what could the banks do? Foreclose on the mortgage and put it on the market to get bought by another person that wouldn't pay the mortgage? Also taking them ALL to court wouldn't work as the courts wouldn't have the time to hear all the cases.
@@TheFalconerNZ The novel "Fight Club" made a similar proposal. If a worldwide 3 day strike took place, wealth would surely be redistributed.
I bet music industry would make us forget the song we heard each time we heard it if they could. For them, even remembering a song in your head can be considered piracy.
100%
Thank you so very much for sharing 😊
I was in college during that period, and my Music History professor correctly predicted the industry should embrace downloading and that it actually would help artists get free exposure.
The music industry doesn't care about artists.
Yes free exposure.
Yeah anyone with a brain was saying that
Exactly, any one who pirates isn't going to purchase anyways. So there is 0 loss. Piraters are future customers.
You know who pirates, kids and broke college kids who don't have money. Once they get a job they are the ones actually buying the games on steam and subscribing to spotify and itunes.
@@itisWhatitis12345 this is my 5th year as an HR Recruiter but I still pirate music and movies lol. I don't subscribe to spotify and itunes haha.
Wasnt there a south park episode where piracy was affecting music artists to where they couldn't afford their premium private jet so they had to settle for a normal one lol
Yeah lol.
sad but true
"NOT A BIG DEAAL UH?" lol great episode
Yeah it was funny episode and applies to some musicians but statistically most musicians don't have it like that and aren't stable financially because of terrible deals where they don't even own their masters or publishing so it did affect those one who already getting less than 50% of revenue for their music
That was Lars on South Park but honestly look at Gene Simmons speak in the beginning of this... He's just trying to stay on top of his own greed ladder
Record company need a search warrant to search those hard drives, how did they know people had illegal music without breaking privacy laws 🤔
I assume those privacy laws were nonexistent back then
Congrats. As a musicologist, semi-pro musician, die-hard music lover from classical music to rock, I lived through all this. And I think I can form a professional opinion. I think you nailed it, and reported as objectively as possible.
Greed played a big role in this. In the pre-digital age records were fairly affordable. When CDs came out the industry promised us that prices would drop as they ramped up production. It did not. Prices remained about 2 to 3 times the price of a vinyl record at that time. People wanted affordable music. The internet only made that easier to get.
exactly! they priced them selves out of the market and to top it off they took a ludicrously high cut and left the actual talent with a tiny fraction of a %.
What, you mean paying $16 ($24 adjusted for inflation since 2001) for only 2-4 good songs on an album with the rest filler garbage was overpriced?
Nooooo.
Yep. CDs also cost a fraction of the price to manufacture compared to vinyl and cassettes.
Ironic that today I buy used CDs for $1 or maybe $2.
Yep, that’s pretty much the size of it. Cassettes never increased in price, but as vinyl was phased out it became more expensive until it was removed altogether (at least this was the case in the UK). Once that happened, CDs just got more expensive. Small wonder people resorted to copying music.
Music piracy has dropped significantly because you can easily buy the individual song you want for usually a dollar and not be forced to spend $20 for an entire album filled with songs you have no interest in.
Or because you can listen to the song/album for free on youtube, youtube music or spotify
@@samppa7901 I always found it easy to find singles in record stores supermarkets and local markets . It wasn’t that hard
@@samppa7901 and convert to mp3 on top of that
@@coolelectronics1759 yup
I doubt it's dropped as much as you'd think. You just don't hear about it due to the RIAA not really being able to do much if anything. Pirating is still alive and kicking. Just technology has progressed so much that's virtually impossible to track any one person down.
Interesting video. Thanks. I always wondered what happened.
Terrific documentary. You know your history.
This is one video I'm actually surprised wasn't sponsored by NordVPN.
It's been a long time since I've heard about the RIAA. It leaves a bitter taste in your mouth.
RIAA after Twitch atm
How old are you people?? 🤣
@@RobertJackson-sl1mk lol You should watch the South Park episode where the music of the next generation sounds like shit to the adults.
@@RobertJackson-sl1mk There's "good" music, you just have to look for it. Most of those bands are touring and doing quite well outside of the US.
Reading "RIAA" also leaves a shitty taste in my mouth. I never uploaded music but these days there are alternatives and musicians still make plenty of money, specially when they have a website to download individual tracks for a small price which I support. Lucky for me, most of the music I listen to, the artists are dead or in geriatric homes :P
Napster was great, it had basically any audio mankind had ever recorded. It took us over a decade to get back to that point
Not as good as newsgroups, where the whole album or discography were available, but it was great for a while.
This was cool. Always wondered if people are ever forced to pay the ridiculous sums. Thanks!
I personally helped digitize my parents' music collection from vinyl and tape, so that they wouldn't have to pay the record companies a third time for the same damn music.
Me too... I mean they had already bought it on vinyl, tape, and CD in some cases. Why pay for the same music 3-5 times each time the media format changes???
It makes me think of the same issue of right to own/right to repair with vhs (rentals), video games, tractors for farming.
@@MrDarthvis yes we also watched that Motherboard video on the right to farm equipment repair
i digitized my tape collection & some family VHS videos several years back.. using an Elgato product back when they were just a lesser known brand. It's nice that i can pull up college radio mixes and such that i recorded when i was younger right on my devices.
Lmao sometimes I buy music on digital download and end up still streaming the same song because it's just more convenient in situations like if I want it to play next in queue to other songs I'm streaming that I haven't bought
I remember being staggered by all this when it happened. The amount of stupid things the industry did to try and stop the 'evil pirates'. I bought a CD which had to be played through its own player that was installed on the CD to stop you ripping it to your hard drive but meant the album never played on a computer and now doesn't play at all. And besides, the industry's still the same. Gatekeepers still exist, artists are still getting screwed, record labels still make a fortune. Not much has changed in my opinion. Record companies have been saying the industry is going to collapse every year like clockwork and it's still making money hand over fist for the labels but not the artists. Anyway. Rant moan complain. This stuff just really makes me mad.
My thoughts exactly. When gene said it will kill the music industry I was just like yes let it die please I hate it
I still own a few CDs I can't play because of "anti-Piracy" junk on them. Not even sure why I still have them at this point.
You can actually spool the cd into a program that bypasses all of that and lets you basically drag and drop the tracks off into a folder on your desktop at this point.
@@no1special999 I might have to check that out. Now all I have to do is remember which CDs were locked lol It's been way to long.
@@ErokLobotomist What's pretty crazy about all that is that you were legally able to make backup copies of media which you have license for (buying a copy) but they would illegally put encryptions on the discs that were technically illegal at the time to reverse engineer so the programs that were sold from non compliant countries were frowned upon and buried far from random searches.
CloneCD used to work well back in the day, I suppose it still would serve you perfectly.
Superb documentary. 👌🏼
So glad I didn’t get sued, I had 7000 songs on my Napster until I downloaded a virus that gave me the blue screen of death
I remember the panic in everybody’s face when the police came on a bi-monthly basis to our college dorm to check if we were stealing music. 1996-99 was just a different time
"Show us your downloads now!"
*nervously opens downloads folder revealing your Neopet hacking program you made to make your Poogle OP*
How the hell would they do that? "Police. Open the door!", "Do you have a warrant?", "eh,,no." "Feel free to fuck off then."
@@nicolasmogensen8727 yeah but this was in South Africa not America
Did they really have nothing better to do? Couldn't they be out stopping real crimes and beating up minorities? You know police stuff
@@atlascheethac7869 oh shit I'm also south African but I'm young I didn't know it was a thing back then because now no one cares. I also heard alot of artists where banned under apartheid.
There was nothing like downloading a bunch of songs. 13 hours later your CD was ready.
😂😂😂😂 would take foreeeeevvvvveeeerrrrr lol and worth it tho
Sooo time consuming lol
I remember the first full CD I ever downloaded. Nice person who was chatting with me stuck around so I could get it.
🤣😂🤣😂 yep
Wow 13 hours? Not on my dial-up😂😂 maybe 2 weeks... Unless someone calls
The jury sounded like they were anti-technology and wanted to make someone an example. They pretty much ignored the evidence and went with their feelings against technology
20 years from now let's look back as you say in the end. Well, 18 years and counting now. I'll still be with you!
They pointed out the greatest argument against RIAA. Just because someone is downloading your music for free doesn’t mean the labels and artists were actually losing money. Most people who did it would never go out and pay for it. If you’re going to sue a lone individual for downloads and claim it cost you money, you would have to prove that person would’ve purchased the music in lieu of the piracy, and that’s impossible. Imagine paying $17 for a CD. They scammed us for years. To hell with them.
JmJimmy and the JmJimmy clan were as guilty as sin. Just search dsl reports for JmJimmy and all his thievery.
@@clevertaghere3297 It’s incredible. And you were forced to pay that price for an album where you might like a few songs.
What did he say it costs them? $0.30? They were making a $16+ profit!!
Most people want one or two good songs, not the whole album.
Thats very true. I just wouldnt own any of the things i pirate, especially over priced games
When you pirate music... you're stealing from the record company because they get 99% of the money anyway, not the artist. The artists make their money from merch and concert tickets. Fuck the industry. If you want to support a band, acquire their music however you want, and then donate them money directly on patreon/etc.
Agrre but now with the virus going on there is no concerts going on.unless they do live shows online.
Piracy is not theft, it's copyright infringement. Stop repeating the lie.
@@markusr353 Which is a form of theft.
@@markusr353 you are correct,
if i go into a museum that hosts a super big diamond and I duplicate it using a high tech duplication ray gun. And i put the duplicate my room.
Did i steal it?
@@markusr353 Define Piracy without using a synonym of the word theft. I'll wait.
Thanks for the video. I remember all of this very well, and I knew a lot of people who downloaded mp3s at that time. It needs to be said though, that before (and during) this era, the RIAA were ripping off consumers mightily. People had to buy albums of a dozen or so songs when they really only wanted one or two. Of course it was a very popular practice to get just the songs people wanted. It wasn’t so much the “free” aspect as it was just getting those individual songs. Luckily, this is now the norm. The RIAA is happy, and consumers are happy. Great presentation - thank you.
How is albums being sold as a whole ripping consumers off? Are you suggesting every track should have been sold individually?
If that's the case that DVD boxsets are also a ripoff. Making consumers buy an entire season when all they want to watch are a few episodes is completely wrong.
I appreciate your splaining
You know why pirating took off?
CD’s cost $18, only had one or two good songs on them and if you got a scratch on it you were buying the whole damn thing again.
It wasn’t uncommon to buy the same CD two or three times just from damage especially if you were sliding it in and out of a CD carrier.
The argument that people were downloading music they already owned was probably truer than you might assume.
I never forgave them for the Power Rangers movie soundtrack costing that much. Teens can not often afford that when they have to go to school.
How were you handling CDs that you had multiple or common instances where you bought more than one copy because of damage? I graduated college in 94, so was right there during the CD boom, and I've never damaged any of my CDs to the point that I had to buy another one. Price-wise, yeah, they were expensive, which is why those mail-order 99 cent CD companies were so popular.
My CD still work lol
Some come with track writing glitches on them even, so they start out broken. Had that happen a few times at least.
@Blitzen RC That would kind of be the "how do you handle CDs" part of my question. Why would you have a bunch of CDs sliding around on the backseat of a car? I always had my CDs in those protective books that held 100 or 200 CDs.
*_RIAA finds out a 12 year old girl downloaded music_*
Me: They're not gonna demand money from a chil-
RIAA: GIVE US OUR MONEY LITTLE GIRL!
Im pretty sure fortnite did something similar within the recent years
@@Divisiondoorway it was towards some kid advertising cheats
This part made me legit mad. Like...I have no sympathy for that buisness now
They're dying. Dying people tend to flail a lot before they die.
I can't believe they fucking settled, too - as if a 12 year old girl could be held accountable for her actions lol
Thanks for the video. To me the biggest crime though has been regional encoding if DVDs and Bly Rays. That has done unimaginable harm to consumers and the entertainment industry due to the piracy that regional encoding generated.
I have an old computer in a storage locker with a hard drive that probably contains way too many downloaded songs. Remember the threats of being sued in the media, and always wondered if someone would one day knock on my door notifying me of a lawsuit. I also remember the magic number being +1000 songs, I’m sure I had hundreds, but it was mostly music I already had in another purchased format, or things that were so obscure or bootlegged that would never be obtainable anyway. What a silly time!
I remember back in the 2000s when I thought people should have the right to upload, download, and overall listen to the music they want online without consequences. My brother called me a "communist" and my mother agreed and badmouthed me.
Ironically, he pirated nearly every NES, SNES, and Genesis game on his computer. And my mother is a hardcore conspiracy theory nut now.
Ever pirate PSP games? Sht was lit
@@avarice4556 dark alex was a hero
@Wally better then being a closed
Minded sheep
COMMUNUST DETECTED ON AMERICAN SOIL ACTIVATE LAWSUIT
Lmfaoooo the irony
I think USA's Court system is one of the strangest in the world. How in earths name did they come up with 22,500 USD per song!!
As mentioned in the video, its usually meant for commercial fraud. That means an organization producing bootlegs can suffer those penalties and such an organization could cost the record companies millions on their own. The RIAA just got dumb and tried to use it on individuals. The laws in the 90s weren't caught up with the technology. And to be honest they probably never tried because of the evolving landscape to digital media.
@Zyphera The courts don't set the min/max punishment, a legislature does that. The "courts", judge or jury, decide a sentence or fine based on the established guidelines.
The court system was set up by, and made for the rich and property owners. The laws reflect crimes against them as very harsh, and crimes that they commit are usually easy with a small fine
@@ststst981 I will not agree or disagree with your points. My comment was simply made to point out who has dictated the range of "acceptable punishment" when a crime or violation has a mandatory minimum sentence/fine.
In germany it is the same.
It’s neat to see the PMP300 in various videos over time. Still have mine! I have a 16mb smart media card to expand on the 32mb internal memory
1:10 I had that stereo in 76, this is the first time Ive seen a picture of it out side of my photo album
19:59 “...Piracy is not a pricing issue. It’s a service issue...The easiest way to stop piracy is not by putting antipiracy technology to work. It’s by giving those people a service that’s better than what they’re receiving from the pirates.” - Gabe Newell
Like Netflix killed movie piracy
@@apoorv_mc Exactly
Gabe N is on a whole higher level intellectually than almost anybody in any other business. The existence of Half life 2 and Alyx prove that to me beyond a doubt, so does the Steam program itself, Newell is already living in 2100.
@@apoorv_mc he said in this video too that streaming services like spotify, apple music is also helping decline music privacy.
@@gavintantleff my dad downloaded films and music off Newsbin and sold it to the poorer people in my county. He was slowly losing business, so he switched to selling large bundles of movies (like over a 100 or so) for a discount. His business didn't go down till he took 4 to the chest and died about 6 years.
No one was ever sued for downloading music. There were sued for UPLOADING music. (making the downloaded music available to others to download, a default setting of the sharing software)
9:37 this 12 yr old?
@@TheBooban 9:40 "she admitted to swapping music online"
Carey!
Good to hear someone else pointing this out too.
You can definitly be condemned for download in france, they give you warnings before tho.
Most of these record labels are absolute heartless criminals anyway. They care as much about their artists as they did the children and single, working moms they tried to rob with ¼million dollar lawsuits. Screw em. Zero sympathy.
Great video🤟
Now you can't even play a song for 5 seconds on UA-cam without it claiming the whole video. LOVELY.
yea the bots are bad there was a speed runner who let genius show some of his video and they slapped the original video of his with a claim lol they tried to claim his video was there because they showed a few seconds of it in there video it was a nightmare to set straight these companies that run these bots are almost as bad as paten trolls
Good
But sometime there’s is false clam and that suck so much
Like Gabe Newell once said, "Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem."
Steam is so good as a service it makes it very unlikely that I would ever consider pirating a PC game so his philosophy seems to work
@@aidang2717 "very unlikely that i would ever consider pirating" that's probably because you have money
@@user-if6qp1lw2b I have pirated before, it is just I really like steam and it is often free of things in other industries that annoy me about their business practices and how they treat their users so I would be more likely to save up for steam than I would be for other media
For real.. for a long time I would download pirated movies and tv shows because it was ridiculously expensive to have to buy all the cable packages just to get the one with, say AMC so I could watch walking dead. When services like Netflix became affordable and easy to use I completely stopped downloading because the frustration of downloading good versions finally outweighed the cost of the legitimate service.
@@user-if6qp1lw2b a "lost sale" to a "customer" that has "no money" in the first place, is not the "lost revenue in sales" that content "creators" can reasonably ask for compensation in the law suit.
As a person who had an MP3 player in the late 90s, Napster and p2p was used mainly for computer playback and not mp3 players at the time. It wasn’t until later on when the market for mp3 players got larger, in the late 90s it was Avery small niche market.
I recorded my mp3s to cassettes lol
My friends and I never used Napster, we used Limewire. But like many people said, we already had most songs on our own cassettes and CDs so Limewire disappeared, for us. Besides, some CDs came with bonus cases that ya couldn't get on Limewire. Like Joan Jett's 'Notorious', New Kids On The Block's 'Step By Step', etc., etc.
They went after a 12-year-old, that like trying to sue a kid for stealing penny sweats.
A firm telling off and some form of punishment might have been a better idea.
they still do that. epic games took a 14 year old kid to court 2 years ago or something lol
@@Kittysuit LOL. Shut up with the BS, kid was making and selling hacks/cheats. Anybody who does that regardless of age deserves to be sued. Ruining the experience for thousands of people by installing software that breaks TOS and also effects servers.
Country Time suing a lemonade stand. 😂
@@DaggerofTime Yeah, don't do it, but at least make the punishment fit the crime. How many of us have watched private DVDs and even VHS. Who actually took the piracy is a crime advert that seriously as a child. Even games, since the SNES, I've had almost every major title and have no issue with using emulators. I played Pilot Wings the other day on an emulator; I paid for the game at some point, well my parents did, and it has been lost over the years. So technically, it's illegal because I don't have the physical copy anymore.
Cheating on games, yeah, it ruins matches, but I can't remember a time when it hasn't been like that. Take Titan Fall, for example, Respawn won't sort it out, and the second one is going the same way. Respawn isn't bothered and still selling Titan Fall One for £20 when the game is completely broken.
If developers actually devoted time to anti-cheat systems, it wouldn't be such an issue. If 14-year-olds can ruin games that cost hundreds of millions to make, it is pretty poor.
@@DaggerofTime While I agree with the sentiment that, yeah, scriptkiddies definitely know to some extent what they're doing is totally rotten, litigation is definitely not the way. That shit's messy, cruel and unusual on a teenager and there's enough cases of nonsense like that to make a study on.
Plus, there is a revolving door culture when it comes to hacking communities that litigation totally decimates; some of the brightest security experts of our era came from black hat backgrounds and spending time breaking shit.
From personal experience I can say the RIAA is basically a bunch of power hungry executives in fancy offices. Back in the late 2000's, one of my rodeo groups tried to pay the RIAA for the background music we planed to use at our upcoming rodeo. Over several months, we sent many e-mails, several registered letters, and left numerous phone messages. They never responded to any of our attempts to contact them. In the middle 2010s another of my rodeo groups received a legal notice to pay RIAA $20,000 for use of their music at a recent rodeo. (the total box office for that rodeo is generally only a few thousand dollars all of which is either used to rent the facility or is given to charities) This, despite the fact that the IRAA's own rules say that nonprofit events where music is simply used as background are limited to a total of $20 per event. We sent them a $20 check and never heard from them again, even though all our rodeos still use commercial music as background.
Fantastic piece on the history of music and file sharing. In the end it's a bit ironic that it seems like the consumer won, though we all now own, largely digital music, which could be gone in an instant. also, when you're dead, what happens to all of that??? So who really won? 🤔
I remember when Napster was in the final throws. There was the idea that someone could pay between $5-$15 for a monthly fee for unlimited music. It was deemed impossible and would cause the industry to crash.
Also around 2003 the RIAA started flooding the file sharing networks with fake and corrupted copies of popular music. At first the fakes were too short in length and too small in file size to be the real thing, making them easy to avoid, but then they started uploading files that appeared to be the correct length and size, but when you downloaded them, they would play for about 30 seconds and then start making loud screeching noises. This drove away many users, because it often became nearly impossible to find legitimate copies of popular songs among all the fakes.
And meanwhile, the record companies started putting out "copy protected" CDs that could not be played on a computer without installing special software that would limit your ability to make copies of the CD, and would actually install a rootkit virus on your computer. Sony Music was the biggest proponent of this system, and after a class-action lawsuit was filed, they stopped making copy-protected CDs, released software to remove the virus, and offered to recall and replace the copy-protected CDs with regular, non-protected CDs.
Appreciate the knowledge
Oh ok
Bs corporation that sue people for just zero beneficial at all.
That Sony virus actually killed some pcs
VWestlife dropping some knowledge! Surprised to see you in a comment section!
I used to use these sites to find new music I didn’t wanna pay for , found some bands I really liked and even ended up buying merch , the albums, concert tickets , so they made their money back lmao
@Ethan Hammons nah. That is rare. Never accept when someone asks to pay in exposure rather than money.
@@flaglag7672 yes, being payed in exposure is bad, but exposure gets your fans, and fans get you cash.
@Ethan Hammons As someone that works in fine arts, if a client ever tells me they can pay me less/none because of potential “exposure”, they can sod off
@@btat16 that's why your channel is 10 years old and has 53 subscribers
@@shaggy1531 You can tell by my name and profile picture that I care DEEPLY about my channel… I think you seem to care more than I do since you bothered checking ;)
Hey I really LOVE that song at 5:14, sick drum break and sick little background synth and bass. Could you tell me what song you used? sounds sick.
Its a shame that the RIAA was never sued, for allowing it's members sell existing music on new media, without providing a low-cost upgrade route for people who had already purchased the music.
Personally I have bought almost all of my music collection, on at least four different media types.
Great point! ...33 LPs, 8-Tracks, Cassette Tapes, CDs, MP3s. A very good portion of the songs I illegally DLed on Napster, Limewire, etc., I'd already purchased previously.
Yes, that’s because that is what you are buying, or more specifically you are buying the specific music on the specific mass produced product. I think it’s fair to extend that backing up or transferring that particular product to another format either directly or indirectly.
But people seem to think it’s fair that if they bought a film on vhs, they are owed the 4K version too.
Why would it get sued for that? That's legal. Maybe it should be sued for not allowing format-shifting but that wouldn't be a lawsuit you could start, that would be a defense when THEY sued YOU for format-shifting.
I think in hindsight, it’s important we look at how the government and the justice system leapt to the aid of the recording industry. Protecting capital over all else. Even to the point of going after students and poor people to somehow make amends for fictitious losses by a dying industry.
@David Lonnqvist Because it's an unrealistic assumption that all the pirated songs represented lost sales.
@David Lonnqvist - if you are claiming losses that treat pirated copies as equal to lost sales - as the record labels did - then that portion of imaginary money you never got and realistically never would have got are the fictitious losses.
This is America. The entire criminal justice system from the police all the way up to the supreme Court is there to protect the property of the rich, not the people
@David Lonnqvist - I already said what was meant by "fictitious losses". Two times. I'm not sure what else you want explained.
@David Lonnqvist Because you can't prove what I might buy or not buy.
Metallica said in an interview they grew up as teens sharing tapes of albums they didn't have to broaden their music listening and how amazing it was getting new bands on a cassette from a friend,,, decades late they call Napster thieves., this is why Metallica sucks, amongst other reasons..
The thing is usually everyone did Tape trading when the grew up in a certain time. Especially in the Metal scene some of my older friends had in the times before the internet friends in many countrys and where sending out the best stuff weekly and got the same amount of stuff back.
@@mrn234 I know so did I growing up , but its still copyright infringement , whether its taping and sharring a cassette or downloading and sharing, but Metallica seems to think cassettes are different that the internet,. the hypocrisy is deafening,
Truth
I hear you but there's a difference between taping a few mate's albums, then maybe buying stuff yourself if you get into artists, vs wholesale ripping anything & everything because it's literally all $nada being your ethos, and then distributing it all like it's oxygen. I DJ out as an amateur and always pay for every f download so I can in some way support artists (apart from 4 or 5 remixes I'm "not allowed" to buy legally in my "territory" because some licensing BS). I'm amongst dj's who clearly rip their sht for free and make a living from it, as their downloads are BS quality. But then nobody in an audience gives a f. about quality from a bad sound system, so who really cares? I despair for the artists and dj producers :-(
@@mrl4342 these people got done for a minimal amount of downloads .. not thousands, plus if you download one album your still breaking the law , if you tape one album and distribute it your still breaking the law, copyright is copyright, you cant argue the law. thats my point its hypocrisy to nail one person for downloading 3 albums and yet we all say we did it in our youths and its different.
I work full time in the music industry and have dealt with copyright lawyers over an advertising jingle . I know the struggle as a musician to get paid so I dont condone ripping anyone ,but if you dont buy an artists album because you were given a cassette copy, or a usb copy or you found it online and downloaded for free the artist misses out on that sale , period.
Great video, very interesting. One criticism, “In the Hall of the Mountain King” is so overused as a way to convey something spiraling out of control. I fast forwarded through the first playing of it but you used it several more times!
I am actually glad to see Vinyl making a comeback, albeit small. I have always thought Vinyl had one of the best unique sounds. I think the reason for it ( at least back then) is the warmth of the music being played. Music from the studio was being recorded directly to Vinyl, so it is the actual imprint of a person voice, or instrument vs music being converted in to 1s and 0s. I guess you have to kind of come from that era to understand. I have my stands Hi-Fi rack system from the late 70s and early 80s and it has outlasted any of the "newer" stereo rack systems I have purchased over the years. It still runs strong and I would put it up against most systems today. There is just something about putting on a Record on the turntable and laying back in your most comfortable chair, whether it be a sofa or a recliner or whatever and losing yourself with a glass of wine, glass of brandy, whiskey or whatever or even a nice Joint.
I have tons of MP3s and CDs however when I want to really indulge myself I listen to my large collection of Vinyls ranging from classical music, to jazz, to 70s and 80s rock. MP3s and even CDs to a point will never really be worth much, not like Vinyl ( Records). ( yes I am somewhat old, born in 1974 lol)
Looking at that chart near the end it looks like vinyl has out sold everything else almost completely over the years.