>Metallica suing Napster has nothing to do with denying other startup bands their >chances to be heard. There are alternative and legal websites that startup bands can >post their songs, like the modern day legit mp3.com website.
Metallica certainly did not help in any constructive way. And although a band can get onto MP3.com, it lacks the community aspect of Napster. You can't get a buzz going. There was a new technology that could have been used to support new bands and rather than work with the community, be it Napster or MP3, the record companies, with the backing of a few select successful artists, drove them into the ground.
And I don't even particularly mind the RIAA doing up. But, Lars, for chrissakes, why are you voluntarily in a courtroom? Not since George Lucas have I seen a core fan base so masterfully turned off. Jar Jar Ulrich.
>With respect to tori and alanis, I am just saying that when they were paid millions >of dollars of stock options (that were thought to be able to be flipped for hundreds >of millions of dollars), they were all for consumer rights. But when those stock >options went under water, then they are suddenly silent on the consumer rights >matter.
I understand now. I really wasn't sure which angle you were playing with those two, since they made headlines on both sides of the fence. Makes sense. But I'm still bitter that you made me see the word Toriphile.
>With respect to indie labels, by virtue of indie bands (like Metallica decades >before) making demos and circulating it --- they become in effect indie labels >themselves. So in a sense that a trade body representing indie label --- it mostly >likely represent indie musicians who put out their cassettes or cd's themselves (ie. >they are their own labels.)
No, an individual group circulating demo tapes is not an indie label. Ask an invidual group circulating demo tapes.
So, the ultimate question. Have the record companies or the radio companies effective used technology to bring more diverse music to their audience? And, are you happy with the current state of music?
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:stock options
Posted by: DCallaghan on July 16, 2002 06:45 AMMetallica certainly did not help in any constructive way. And although a band can get onto MP3.com, it lacks the community aspect of Napster. You can't get a buzz going. There was a new technology that could have been used to support new bands and rather than work with the community, be it Napster or MP3, the record companies, with the backing of a few select successful artists, drove them into the ground.
And I don't even particularly mind the RIAA doing up. But, Lars, for chrissakes, why are you voluntarily in a courtroom? Not since George Lucas have I seen a core fan base so masterfully turned off. Jar Jar Ulrich.
>With respect to tori and alanis, I am just saying that when they were paid millions >of dollars of stock options (that were thought to be able to be flipped for hundreds >of millions of dollars), they were all for consumer rights. But when those stock >options went under water, then they are suddenly silent on the consumer rights >matter.
I understand now. I really wasn't sure which angle you were playing with those two, since they made headlines on both sides of the fence. Makes sense. But I'm still bitter that you made me see the word Toriphile.
>With respect to indie labels, by virtue of indie bands (like Metallica decades >before) making demos and circulating it --- they become in effect indie labels >themselves. So in a sense that a trade body representing indie label --- it mostly >likely represent indie musicians who put out their cassettes or cd's themselves (ie. >they are their own labels.)
No, an individual group circulating demo tapes is not an indie label. Ask an invidual group circulating demo tapes.
So, the ultimate question. Have the record companies or the radio companies effective used technology to bring more diverse music to their audience? And, are you happy with the current state of music?
#