back to article IFPI wants another stab at OiNK

One of the world’s top music trade bodies warned today that the fight against UK BitTorrent tracker OiNK won't end with the recent acquittal of its creator and administrator, Alan Ellis. John Kennedy, chief executive of the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), said the industry is considering civil …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Ioannis Mavroukakis


    "Speaking at a press conference to launch the IFPI's annual Digital Music Report, Kennedy called the verdict a "terrible disappointment" and indicated that UK legislation is "out of touch with where life is these days," according to The Guardian."

    Pot.Meet Kettle.

    Sore loser :)

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    He was an easy target

    They joined the site, they could access the torrent, get the seeders IP addresses and pursue anyone violating THEIR CLIENTS copyright.

    But it's the same old same old, they go after Google, they go after ISPs, they always go after a target ONE STEP DEPARTED from the copyright violation, and if they win against that target then it's on to the target TWO steps departed from the copyright violator.

    If it wasn't worth their time to defend their copyright, then he cannot be expected to spend his time defending it on their behalf.

  3. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge

    "Can't sleep at night"

    My heart bleeds.

    "Digital piracy remains a huge barrier to market growth and is causing a steady erosion of investments in local music."

    Ok. Suppose there were no "digital piracy" (Arrrh!) Would the "barrier to market growth" be lowered? People would rush the shops to spend income on a percentage larger than epsilon on additional CDs? Local music (What the hell is 'local music'? Oh, it's a feel-good word.) would suddenly see large investments not laden with extortionate clauses and florish? Sure... never happened so far. Never will.

    Readable study of such a miraculous economic environment or it's all bullshit.

    1. Steen Hive

      That miraculous environment.

      Is only the beginning. These fat fascist fucks won't even be satisfied when your bank account is debited automatically every time you hear a tune in your head - they'll want to monitor your head traffic just to make sure.

    2. The Fuzzy Wotnot


      IFPI can bog-off!

      Ticket sales are actually up and more money than ever is coming in from concert venues across the country! That money is going mostly promoters, sadly, but the artists are getting more of a cut and making more money from merchandise. What's more that money is going straight into the artists pockets, not some fat bastard music bod like this tosser from the IFPI or ****'s like Simon Cowell!

      If these media types bothered to take their heads out of their arses once in a while and actually go to a gig and see real musicians playing real music to real music fans, perhaps they might not be so f**king patronising and arrogant!

      Nope,easier to peddle the same of money making pop-pap dross to bored housewives and 9 year old kids! Then blame the same, when they download it for free!

  4. DavCrav


    I'm confused. If piracy, I mean copyright infringement, is harming 'local' artists in Spain, France, whatever, disproportionately, then isn't that great news for the international, predominately English-speaking music scene? That means that they will do better, right? So as an English-speaking nation we should be encouraging copyright infringement?

    Maybe it's all the wine and liquers that I've been drinking...

  5. David 45


    Typical bleating from the recording industry. Ooh, that's sheep - not pigs. Oh well, perhaps both apply, eh?

  6. Anonymous Coward

    The labels are filth, but filesharers are still thieves

    Apart from a few bands at the very top, most bands make nothing from their label careers. (They struggle to make enough to pay back the cost of recordings.)

    Sure, the labels deserve to die, as they're adding almost nothing to the world of music while taking enormous amounts of money.

    But the bands - you're also thieving from the bands, you filesharers.

    So don't kid yourselves about that. You're still common thieves - thieving equally from the bad guys and the good guys, just 'cos you know you won't get caught.

    When you lay your head on the pillow tonight, remind yourself - "I'm a thief, and I'm thieving from the bad guys, but I'm thieving from the good guys too".

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Dead Vulture

      Re: The labels are filth...

      So, what did unrecouped bands blame it on 20 or 30 years ago?

      Oh, that's right "Home taping is killing music".

      BTW, recent studies by the music industry have shown that, while CD sales are down, the amount of money spent by the public on the MUSIC industry (as opposed to the RECORDING industry) is not only very healthy, but rising. Just goes to show that the only ones really hurting are the middle-men.

      (Tombstone for the Big Labels)

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      How dare you....

      even if I was a thief I would not be a "common" one having been raised better than that.

      Also theft is a criminal offence, copyright infringement a civil offence so I can sleep well at night knowing that this so called piracy is only unlawful and not illegal (well at least until the secret ACTA negotiations are over)

    3. Anonymous Coward


      And yet I don't feel the least bit guilty about it. Those same artists stole from me for years by offering me one or two good songs i wanted in a format that cost $20 and came with eight other tracks of complete crap. Turnabout is fair play in my mind. And we do it not because we know we wont get caught, we do it because we know so many of us do it they can't possibly sue, prosecute or jail us all. Of course as other readers have pointed out we've heard this swan song many times before from this industry. "Home recordings killing music..." "Home recordings killing movies... " Every time there is some new technology these morons go running under the nearest rock. Two CD's I DID purchase recently: Benjamin Button soundtrack and Carla Bruni's latest for my mom for Christmas. Frankly we don't buy these days because most of the product is crap. Miley Cyrus? Brittney? What is that crap? Rather freetard some Zeppelin thanks! And I don't think Jimmy Page or Robert Plant are going to go hungry as in a former life I owned dozens of their legitimate CDs. Oh and Bono is a tool. That is all...

    4. Anonymous Coward

      I am not a thief

      I have a server at home with terabytes of movies, TV shows, music, you name it. I admit, I haven't paid for (yet) the episodes of [currently airing television shows] that I downloaded from the currently running season. The instant they hit the stores however, I will be purchasing them. I have every other piece of media on my server. Hell, some things I downloaded only because I owned the physical copy. (VHS, Cassette, CD, what-have-you.)

      Make no mistake, I honestly believe that all people in the content creation chain deserve to be compensated for their efforts, and thus I pay for my content. Despite having a physical copy (or eventually obtaining one) of everything I have ever downloaded, I am still a considered copyright infringer, and would be labelled a “digital pirate” because of how I choose to consume the media THAT I OWN.

      These [expletive deleted] would still send my [expletive deleted] to jail and fine me somewhere around seven orders of magnitude more than my net worth because of this. Not because I never paid for my media, but because I choose to consume this media on my [home server/laptops/PMP/phone/whatever] while only buying my copy of that content ONCE.

      I AM NOT A THIEF, either thieving from the good guys or the bad guys. I am a COPYRIGHT INFRINGER, and only so because these cartel [expletive deleted] screwed you, me, virtually every society on earth, and generations of all of our descendants out of the culture that by any sane right belongs to us all.

      By what morality can you possibly condone their requirement to pay for the same content over and over and over for every new medium, for every new device, and even for ever view or listen?

      To hell with ‘em, and their “copyright infringers are thieves” propaganda. Vive la culture libre.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    False statistics

    They keep blaming piracy for the fall in sales in the last few years... IN A RECESSION. Convenient scapegoat. Not the reason.

    The reason is that the music they're releasing lately is shite. People are saving their £15 instead of throwing it at them because the economy is so bad.

    Spain's local musicians are screwed because these guys have much better marketing than them. They promote their music so much that the local music never gets a chance.

    No wonder he can't sleep at night. He's a liar and a creep.

  8. Mectron

    years of criminal abuse

    from the record labels create this mess.

    Instant Piracy solution:

    Music track: 25 cents

    TV show Episode: 99 Cents

    movies: 1.99 Each

    No DRM

    NO premium price for "recent stuff"

    release content planet wide

    here you go, Piracy down to mere annoyance levels.

  9. mwk

    Holy fuck, that counts as an official report?

    It looks and reads like a fucking media students coursework.

    Except that a student would probably be marked down for the biased language and unreferenced blanket statements.

  10. Steve Roper


    Now that he's been acquitted, if they continue hounding him he probably now has a good case for harassment against the BPI/IFPI. I don't know exactly what the law is in the UK, but if it's anything like Australian law (which it most likely is since our laws are based heavily on the UK's) then if you win a case against an accuser who then continues to press the case against you, you can apply for a restraining order or court order enjoining said accuser from contacting you or pursuing you further on the matter. If the accuser continues the harassment after that, not only do they go down for contempt of court but you also stand to win substantial damages from them. Of course, this only becomes possible after the accuser has exhausted all avenues of appeal (e.g. Magistrates Court -> Federal Court -> High Court), but once an appeal has been denied then he's clear to apply for this order.

    And that would be the icing on the cake in this case - a torrent site operator not only winning a harassment injunction, but being awarded thousands or even millions in damages against the copypigs!

  11. Anonymous Coward

    I wonder

    Would the guy from Onik be able to sue *them* for lost income? The coppers shut him down, most likely at their request to intervene, the courts have ruled he did nothing wrong so maybe he should sue them for taking down his business and force them to hand him a billion quid or something....

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Claims he was not-for-profit... there's no lost income.

      He could countersue them for defamation or something. He's been proven innocent in court, but these bastards are still saying he's guilty.

    2. frank ly

      I think......

      .....that if the police carry out a 'justifiable' investigation against you, then any inconvenience you suffer (including loss of earnings, sales, etc due to you being in custody or having had equipment confiscated as evidence) is something you have to accept as the price for having organised justice in society.

      The only redress you would have would be against the police (that takes ages) if you could show that their investigative actions were not justifiable (difficult, since it is widely accepted that the police have a duty to 'investigate' all reports of alleged criminal activity), or against the party reporting you to the police if you could show that their complaint against you was not justifiable.

  12. Johnny Canuck


    I've bought the same music collection four times, LPs, 8 tracks, cassettes and CDs. I don't feel bad because I've replaced it all with mp3s I downloaded for free. I don't like any of the new crap that passes for music these days so I don't download it. The music industry will not be getting any more money from me unless they start putting out acts that have talent instead of cookie cutter good looks and juvenile pap.

    1. Ancient Oracle funkie

      Me too ...

      ... except not the 8-tracks!

      But you forgot to mention buying the re-releases/greatest hits with a single bonus track (both vinyl and CD) and the various remastered (sometimes almost impossible to tell the difference) versions - and don't get me started on the rip-off also known as The Beatles Remastered; great music but all the industry heard was "MONEYMONEYMONEY"

      So, while I agree that piracy isn't to be glorified, you can't help but think that the music industry deserves it. If only there was a way of paying the artists something for illegal downloads ...

  13. jon 72

    It's this Septic Isle all Over

    Sue for lost income I say!

    If countless sites dotted throughout the European Union can offer a publically viewable indexing service for music and video without fear or prosecution what gives? Just type the rubric 'Watch Movies' into Google.

    Personally I'm all for this 'underground' sharing of poor quality music and video, if the product is good then people will buy into it. Avatar being a prime example, many versions available to watch online and this does not appear to have harmed the revenue generated, if not then .. well it's straight to DVD. Take a new release like 'The Book of Eli', the trailers look good alas upon closer inspection it's not worth the price of a cinema ticket if you are expecting a 'mad max' type outing. If I had seen a pirated copy first then yes they would of lost some income.

  14. Anonymous Coward

    *cough* *splutter*

    "out of touch with where it is"

    *choke* *splutter* *cough*


    *choke* *splutter*

    Excuse me! That was the funniest thing I have attempted to read from a media bod, while trying to eat my brekkie!

  15. Karuna

    Blowin' in the wind,

    Music industry, you've had your day in the sun, now kindly die. Just as you killed the way things were done before, the internet is now killing you. RIP.

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Lost income

    As I understand it Oink was a free site to join from an invitation from an existing member with the option to donate should you want to. The chap running the site was hardly making money off the site by charging people

  17. lukewarmdog


    Double Jeapordy apply?

    Any further attempt to get this guy back into court would surely be harrassment and wasting the courts time. Judges aren't keen on that.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Yes, but no, but yes.

      The law for England and Wales concerning double jeopardy changed five years ago, which means that someone can be be tried for something that they have been acquited for.

      However, to be tried again, new annd relevant information has to have come to light, so there would be no grounds for a public prosecution.

      A private prosecution might be another matter though...


        but not quite

        >A private prosecution might be another matter though...

        The charges against Alan were via a private prosecution, as far as I am aware. They have to petition the CPS and the CPS either says yay or nay.

    2. David 105

      Double Jeapordy and others

      NuLab got rid of Double Jeapordy a few years back, and IIRC just because someone's been aquitted in a criminal case, you could still bring the same charge against them in a civil case, because the burden of proof is different. You do however, leave yourself open to charges of malicious prosecution, which I strongly suggest Mr Ellis pursue, FFS they've admitted in national press that they're going to do it!

  18. Anonymous Coward

    "Can't sleep at night"

    Don't do so much coke then. Dipshit.

  19. Danny 14

    A bit pointless

    he'll reference his case law with his defence. This will then pave the way for others in similar situations. They should be careful to not set too many more precidents else they will never win a case.

  20. aNthraXx

    Save the legal fees

    Perhaps the IFPI should have a word with ex-users of OiNK who would be more than happy to tell them about how excellent the site was. How any album or song you could think of was available in any number of high quality formats in an instant. How it was easy to discover new music through recommendations and how it was totally user-dependent.

    Ask any ex-user and I'm sure the majority of them would be happy to pay £5-10 a month for the pleasure of such a 'legal' service. I suggest this is where they should put their money, infact, they could probably ask Ellis to help them with the project.

  21. irish donkey

    Phone Mandy Law you no win no fee law maker

    Tired of old Law that don't get you what you want.

    'Can't get no satisfaction' 'Can't get you out of my head' 'Can't sleep at night'

    Phone Mandy Law you no win no fee law maker.

  22. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Down

    What's being copied

    I'll bet 5 pence that the things which are getting copied most are things like the Simon Cowell and other pop acts that disappear after 2 or 3 nanoseconds anyway. It's almost instantly forgettable "shit-pop" and even teenagers (the target market) aren't foolish to exchange cash for that guff.

    I'll freely admit that I've downloaded copyrighted works before. The first time ever was a record that I'd been looking for for 7 years and had even written to the band to see if they had a copy they could sell/give me (they didn't). Now that the record has been re-released, I own the CD anyway...

  23. Euchrid

    Have legal alternatives not help counter illegal downloads?

    "And while sales from burgeoning markets like Apple's iTunes and Spotify are promising, they have thus far failed to counter damage from illegal downloads."

    Is there any evidence to support this?

    It's been claimed that (on El Reg and other sites) that services like Spotify P2P do attract people away from illegal filesharing. Indeed, I thought this was a major reason why record companies have invested in Spotify - so are they wasting their money?

    One reason I believe there has been so much illegal filesharing is because the music industry was so slow to offer legal alternatives. Because of this lack, people are used to downloading illegally and it’s going to take time to change this mindset.

    Also, isn't it hard to ascertain - like any black market activity - exactly what the level of illegal filesharing is? As such, it’s hard to judge the precise effect of legal alternatives?

  24. Beelzeebub

    They just don't get it, do they

    I bought six albums at Xmas, that I had listened to, for free, on Spotify beforehands. Two were downloads (paid for). And, for the first time, I am discovering new artists that I like and plan to buy their CDs, through hearing them on Spotify and Planet Rock.

    I'm fed up of buying albums where I like 1 track (the single played on the radio) and the rest is filler.

    Spotify, just like filesharing, is a distribution and approval mechanism potentially leading to purchase.

  25. Joe Harrison

    I don't mind paying but I do mind being robbed

    Whenever I bought vinyl or CDs I always liked if possible to leave the price stickers on as a memento, especially if the sticker had the store's name. This was before shrink-wrap when you took the empty case to the counter. Looking back now I think why on earth did I pay £12.99 for a not-very-good record which I bought because there was one song I liked on it. And that's thirteen 1980's quid we're talking about folks, obviously in the days before scanners when Saturday Girls named Sandra had to price everything individually with ticket machines.

    But that's the way it was, that's what everybody did. And no doubt the record companies liked having all that money to put up their noses and are very keen to resurrect those heavily overpriced times NOT GONNA HAPPEN

  26. Mostor Astrakan

    Incomplete quote.

    "It would be great to report that these innovations have been rewarded by market growth, more investment in artists, and more jobs. Sadly, this is not the case,"

    He went on to say that "We blew all the money we made as a result on expensive wine and even more expensive prostitutes and didn't give a cent to the musicians, as God intended." Reappearing from behind the smoke of his Cuban cigar, he added, "Now we've spent it all. Give us more."

  27. SuperTim

    His money!

    The money he made was from people who paid him to be on the site (or get others on the site). As such that is a registration fee and not a fee for downloading anything. It has no bearing on the amount of money the record industry would have got as it isnt for anything they sold. Once the act of downloading takes place, they can sue him and the person for copyright infringement, but they didnt do that, the big eejits.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Payments to Oink

      SuperTim: The money he made was from people who paid him to be on the site (or get others on the site). As such that is a registration fee and not a fee for downloading anything.

      I never paid anything to Oink, for registration or membership. From what I remember, he only asked for donations to the running costs. It was up to the user to keep their upload/dowload ratio >1.0 to keep an active account. That was the only 'cost' of an Oink account.

  28. David Cantrell

    More bullshit figures

    107 albums released in France in the first half of 2009? Bullshit. *Maybe* there were only 107 released through IFPI member companies, but I betcha that there were at least that many released in Paris alone by unsigned bands and those on small independent labels. And some of them would actually be decent albums, unlike anything from the big companies.

  29. Anonymous Coward

    How the IFPI work out lost revenue ...

  30. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward


    Bearly a single dissenting voice to the groupthink? This is an excellent example of the Internet acting as a tool for re-enforcing personally held beliefs. You find somewhere that seems to have the same ideas as you and then immerse yourself in the views of others the same as you, while at the same time congratulating youself on being so smart.

    Anon, because I really can't be arsed with the bullying that tends to come from pointing out this sort of elephant in the room.

    It also happens here to a lesser extent with Religion, Linux and Climate Change.

  31. silverguy


    stop using the word freetard.

    just because people get something for free doesnt give you the right to call them retards.

    offensive trolls like you make me not want to use the reg at all...

  32. Sarah Bee (Written by Reg staff)

    Re: greedtards?

    I think in this context the suffix '-tard' has become akin to '-phile', as in 'showing fanatical interest in/devotion to'. Or just to indicate membership of a collective mindset. Like commentards. The original meaning has been discarded. Or um, distarded.

    Anyway, there's plenty of offensiveness around these parts but I don't really feel that's still a source of it. Bubba jokes are still the bottom line for me (yes, I said 'bottom', please be quiet).

    1. Anonymous Coward

      @Sarah is it that after moderating for this long you haven't become a blasted amoral shell of something that might once have been human? How can anything, bubba jokes included even remotely bother you any more? Is it possible that we commenttards have not been doing our job? Have we somehow failed to strip you of all that is right and good?

      It is a sad day when you realise the internet has failed. Perhaps it isn’t all powerful after all…

  33. Anonymous Coward

    Free Music

    Look, I know it's old fashioned but I just nip down the library and take out a few CD's at a time, nip home, rip them to my PC and return, then repeat. Quite simple

    Anon because you never know who's watching :-)

  34. Robert Carnegie Silver badge

    O. J. Simpson

    ...was acquitted of two murders but then technically successfully sued in civil court, "found liable for the wrongful death of Ronald Goldman and battery of Nicole Brown" (Wikipedia). But apparently he mostly avoided paying up.

    Anyway, the Oink case is not quite the same thing.

    I was told some years ago that in the U.S. double jeopardy protection also doesn't apply between state or lower(?) and federal law, so you can be tried twice if a situation is considered to be an offence in two codes. But presumably you can't be double sentenced, so if you're found guilty once and it sticks then you won't be tried again, unless that's a way to get a sentence increased - or to get publicity as a popular prosecutor.

    I disapprove of media bootlegging, but also of some of the legal machinery used against it. The actual laws are stupid and clumsy when applied to twenty-first century media technology, and agile bootleggers easily dodge around it - whilst more naive, often young people who try to use computers to share nice music with other people get stomped on hard. It's a pity.

  35. Steve Skipper

    Musicians should get another job that pays

    Poor old musicians complaining they get no money, Music labels with a business plan from the beginning of last century.

    People who make music should now just accept that they will never earn a living from recording music in this digital age and find a job that does. Does that mean music will die? like the IFPI thinks. No it just means that people who have a passion for music will continue to make music, but only for love. (or maybe a pint if they are lucky)

    In any case why do we need record labels now anyway? aren't they completely redundant?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward


      So a musician shuold expect nothing, but the crumbs from under our tables and think themselfs lucky that they get that. Is that really what you want for society, creative people get no money for their work while everyone else gets to take what they want?

      Could you explain how anything more complex than a guitar band could possilby afford to make music? The sort of band who need multiple synthesisers, or the sort of performers who need obscure or expensive instruments, where would they get those from? some sort of benefactor, I presume?

      As for why do we need record labels, who do you think own the recroding studios or fund bands' time in them?

      1. Anonymous Coward


        "So a musician shuold expect nothing, but the crumbs from under our tables and think themselfs lucky that they get that. Is that really what you want for society, creative people get no money for their work while everyone else gets to take what they want?"

        You're posting a comment like that on an IT site? Wow. I would think up a witty response, but I think the boss is coming around handing out pink slips, pay decreases, and notices that we have to train our Indian replacements.

        My heart bleeds.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          @AC 22:02

          You manage to show up the basic selfish attitude of the anti copyright crowd. Your post reads as: "I'm not doing as well as I want, so screw everyone else, they aren't getting any money if I have anything to do with it."

          Nice, really nice.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Selfish? Me?

            Maybe. It’s all a matter of perspective. I firmly believe in the right of musicians to work for a living, and earn a decent (read 10% above or below the national average) salary. IF they are absolutely phenomenal at what they do, I see no reason they shouldn’t be allowed to become millionaires, and bask in the fruits of their talents. I would die to defend their right to do so.

            What I don’t believe in, and you will never convince me of, is their right to dine on their past “works” for eternity. More specifically, I don’t believe in the right of the music content industry to dine on those works for life + 70. The rest of us are only as good as our last day at work…this principal needs to apply across the board.

            This isn’t, (in my mind) a matter of being selfish. It’s a matter of being pragmatic. In case you have been living under a rock these past few decades, there’s a war on the middle class occurring. It started out relatively benign, but in the past 15 years or so it has really been heating up. As a member of the middle class, I say to you and to everyone: you are either friend or foe. I can accept no in between.

            The wealth gap gets bigger every year. More and more money is simply removed from the economy by the wealthy and never re-invested. The middle class is evaporating as we all become “proles.” Against this background, rather than try to work out a social compromise that everyone can live with...content owners turn on the middle class to attack it. There’s a bigger battle to fight here. I honestly believe a class war is looming, and as in any war, if you aren’t with us, you’re against us.

            I pay for every scrap of media I consume, but I refuse to pay for it over and over and over. I am simply unable to feel sorry for people who call me “pirate,” and “thief” and try with all their might to take my rights away. They can, each and every one of them, work for a damned living just like the rest of us. Produce new content worth buying, and play live gigs. If they can’t make a living off that, then their war isn’t with us “filthy, selfish middle classers.” Their war is with Ticketmaster and the various tentacles of Big Content.

            If my artist brothers want to stand side by side with me in the fight to reclaim our rights, to end this class war before it really gets started, then I will support them whole heartedly. Instead it looks to me like they have opened another front, and I’ll treat them like the enemies they have chosen to become.

            So selfishness, but no sympathy either. Niether has a place in war.

  36. Gareth


    The million-dollar recording artist is an anomaly in the history of music which lasted for a few decades in the 20th Century.

    The money didn't even come from the music, it came from the packaging and distribution of recordings (as you can see from the artists who're making the most money from music now, manufactured pop acts and aging rockers living off decades old re-issues).

    Now packaging and distribution is heading towards obsolescence it appears the age of the rock star is dying out. I'm sure we will all miss a world without future Britneys and Bonos...

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward


      The million dollar recording artist is a very very rare creature, it's like the muic world's equivilant of the Art world's Damian Hurst - there are thousands of artists, most will never make a large amount of money. Just because some people coin it in, doesn't mean to say that those who are much smaller should be made to suffer loss of income.

      As for you claim that packaging is what sells, do you think that a re-release of an LP would sell if there was no music inside? Really? Packaging is nice, but noone is going to buy a package without a product inside.

  37. L1feless
    Paris Hilton


    There were some stats used by this gentleman (I use the term loosely) which I had questions about. The specific stat i wanted to know is if the # of releases has really gone down or just the number of registered releases has gone down. Local bands can often now just simply release their music directly online. I am not sure if these can or have been tracked.

    Another number I would like to know is the number of attendees at concerts. It seems at least where I am concerts are selling out faster than I can ever remember. Some of the bands here are even adding another date onto their tour to accommodate the demand in sales. Are these stats being counted upon as a counter to album sales? They should be. With more cash in hand having downloaded the album it leaves teens with more cash to go to the show if they so choose.

    Paris because even her songs weren't downloaded. Her video was instead...

  38. Richard Sloan


    Filesharing doesn't seem to be an issue for artists like Jonathan Coulton who for quit his day job with no issues. Most of the music I listen to is Creative Commons these days...

  39. Inachu

    causing “severe damage???????????

    But the report stresses that illegal file-sharing and other forms of online piracy are causing “severe damage” to local music industries around the world such as France, Spain, and Brazil.

    I try to buy American music in Maryland which sits right above washington DC and guess what!

    The local stores here cut the english music in half and replaced 50% with just mexican music.

    I feel alienated in my own country.

    The damage they get is from their own selfish greed.

    They take it away from me in the stores so where else will I get it?

    I refuse to buy online period!

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like