History?

[PatientSaint]

http://www.msnbc.com/news/921872.asp?0ct=-357&cp1=1

This is monumental in my opinion. When PEarljam proves it can go it's own without the backing of a major label... there's plenty to follow in Vedder's footsteps. Leave it to thses guys to be able to really pull it off... how will they ? The yreally do havea grassroots type of appeal like a cult following. I am sure the RIAA right now is really nervous about this. We all knew this could happen it just had to be the righttime and the righttype of band to really be able to pull it off. They have the status in the industry to be able to do this. Any other thought sabout this momentous event?

Props to Cheapprick for thisstory.. just i had to spread the word man :P sorry :cross

[TipYourBartender]

Very good story. I especially that they point out the negatives as well as the positives of going it alone. I think if there is any band that could do it, it's Pearl Jam.

[cheapprick]

:gj It is a cool story. I was pretty pleased when Mellencamp basically did the same a year ago, but he just doesn't have the draw today that these guy do.

[notbob]

luckily, their last 2 albums bombed, giving them the "opportunity" to try new avenues of distribution

a remake of "last kiss" by j. frank wilson and the cavaliers? what in the hell were they thinking?

if you remake something, at least pick a song that doesn't completely suck, and if you do pick a sucky song, at least try to IMPROVE it somehow rather than parroting it!

[NDGAARONDI]

Why don't more bands not be with RIAA? I know some bands don't need that much support from a record label. I know Queen were with EMI but it wasn't that much of a backing than others that I listen to/have listened to......

That way you can have more say etc. - just need a good manager/producer or whatever........

[rainbowdemon]

a remake of "last kiss" by j. frank wilson and the cavaliers? what in the hell were they thinking? I kind of liked it.:wings Anyhow, good article!!!!

[PatientSaint]

NDGAARONDI Why don't more bands not be with RIAA? I know some bands don't need that much support from a record label. I know Queen were with EMI but it wasn't that much of a backing than others that I listen to/have listened to......

umm that is the point... you won't need that....

[Cleric]

Cleric steps through wall of impenatrable monkey poo,

falls to ground as methane attack overwhelms his sense of sensability.


heheh

[NDGAARONDI]

You know what happens when nearly every artist has a replacement studio on a PC. Bet the RIAA ewill try and make that illegal, or you can't release records publicly without us blah blah blah.

[Cleric]

The RIAA is really starting to make me sick. LITERALLY.
I know someone has mentioned this,

But I thought there was a law about Monopoly(ies)

[NDGAARONDI]

OMG, Cleric, what I've said has been mentioned b4?

Mind you, wouldn't surprise me if it has, to be honest.

[Cleric]

yeah NDGAARONDI

That is what Im saying. It is an obivious monopoly, we know and have said so, everyone else knows it but nothing is done about it.

My figure of speach was just that, a figure of speach.
Knowing that someone has mentioned it but still saying, " I know this has been mentioned b4"!

I was just expressing, "AGAIN" that the RIAA is a Monopoly. So I only express that though it has been stated previously because how is it that AT&T is forced to break up and the RIAA is not.
Microsoft was almost forced into having a seperate company all to its own for the development of IE.
WTF is so special about the RIAA that all these politicians are so scared to disagree with them
I HONESTLY WANT TO KNOW> Please someone shed some light on this for me.

I just have to vent, because if I dont I am going to explode.
"SPLAT" Clerics eyes bounce off ceiling fan!

[BigMole]

First of all, the music and film business is "only" an oligopoly = there are a very limited number of companies that together control almost all of the market and thus can keep the prices up. Microsoft on the other hand has more or less a monopoly on the operating system market.

Secondly, the US department that should stop monopolies and oligopolies (don't remember their name) seams to mostly only bother about monopolies on the internal US market. Like for instance the US tele companies. If a US company has a monopoly or oligopoly on the world market the department tend to keep its hands off. Probably since that means the company creates great export incomes for the US. Guess the US government doesn't want to mess with companies that brings home lots of money to the US!

This is at least how it looks from my European perspective.

[NDGAARONDI]

I wander if any issues that seem to be contreverial, say in the DMCA, have been looked at from other countries. Just, reason I say this, no doubt there's less problems in other countries over this issue and just adopt their legislation or their court decisions or something.........could give us a break from hearing about this DMCA :fire

[Cleric]

Microsoft Dominates most of the world market with its OS and browser. True those that were fighting against M$ were US based as well,

but under your analogy, the US would have done nothing to M$ because in turn it would hurt its ability to export M$ producuts to outside US markets.

So IMHO I dont think that is it.

[PiRaNeTuS]

Metallica isn't backed by the RIAA. They are one of the only bands to be as huge as they are without the RIAA's backing. The reason that they sued Napster was because they own their own music. Most other bands can not legally sue a company like Napster or kazaa or whatever because they do not own the music, the RIAA does. This story has no real groundbreaking content. Metallica did it a long time ago.

[cheapprick]

I'm not sure what you're talking about PiRaNeTuS, Metallica releases under their label Elektra (http://www.elektra.com). Elektra is a subsidiary of AOL Time Warner. AOL Time Warner is most definitely represented by the RIAA.

Not to mention the RIAA has never claimed to own the music, they represent the parent companies that do own it. Perhaps Metallica has struck a finer deal with Elektra than most, but I have no clue about that. Any links?


edit = me no spell good

[NDGAARONDI]

interesting..........

But were Metallica with Elektra at the time of Napster? I mean they've had like at least two producers that I know of so they could have changed labels too.

[PiRaNeTuS]

Originally posted by cheapprick
I'm not sure what you're talking about PiRaNeTuS, Metallica releases under their label Elektra (http://www.elektra.com). Elektra is a subsidiary of AOL Time Warner. AOL Time Warner is most definitely represented by the RIAA.

Not to mention the RIAA has never claimed to own the music, they represent the parent companies that do own it. Perhaps Metallica has struck a finer deal with Elektra than most, but I have no clue about that. Any links?


edit = me no spell good


I guess you are correct. My understanding was that they produced and marketed their own music under their own record company Creeping Death. I had read somewhere at some time that they owned the rights to their music, something alot of groups under the RIAA don't have. Either I may have been misinformed, or my understanding on the subject was wrong.

[FileHoover]

Originally posted by notbob
luckily, their last 2 albums bombed, giving them the "opportunity" to try new avenues of distribution

a remake of "last kiss" by j. frank wilson and the cavaliers? what in the hell were they thinking?

if you remake something, at least pick a song that doesn't completely suck, and if you do pick a sucky song, at least try to IMPROVE it somehow rather than parroting it!
While they are at it, they might be able to add a little bonus to their music, like, something called melody.

[UBER-RAT]

was this story on the front news page? i dont remember seeing it...

[NDGAARONDI]

melody???

[UBER-RAT]

you gotta feel sorry for lars - he bought the rights to Metallica´s music cos he thought he could make lots of money by future ´release packs´ and back-catalogue sales.
but now, everyones downloading the old metallica songs for free.

lmfao. i almost feel sorry for the muppet.

[Ravenshrike]

Many bands aren't with the riaa or, if they are it's because they're too timid or bound by contract to do so. If you really serch however you can find more and more bands are starting to rely on the net to distribute their material

[NDGAARONDI]

I know a whole sub-type of rock that the RIAA does not have, and that's power metal. I find a lot of this music is shared a lot on P2P and the artists and record companies encourage downloads etc. - oh, and there are less leechers on Kazaa who have power metal music :)

[PatientSaint]

The biggestthing is most bands starting lack the leverage to sign a fair deal. Much as Indie labels rock they're Indie for a reason unfortunately when a bigger subsidary even of a large corp like RCA,Sony, Atlantic, Warner, ect ect... comes knocking with a larger sign on bonus it's really hard to say no. When you've been struggling so long and hard and they have the means to get your music out...but at a cost... a large unfair label deal with low amounts per CD, the label gets rights to all songs..(talk about the true irony of intellectual property rigths being stolen!) to see what THEY feel to be fit. That's the artists biggest gripe..and with PEarljam breaking.. I think they havea grassroots following large enough to survive the transfer over to be able to do thier own thing. Hopefully a return to the early sounds.

As for alot of the bigger artists labels(and i TRUELY losely use the word artist) and there upon agreement with their current label and a portion of the money still goes to the parent label. like Elementree(korn's label), Shady records.. etc are all subsidaries of RIAA member labels.

As for the breakup of the oligopolies...you wouldn't be amazed by the power of lobbying in congress as well as the lack of knowledge our representatives really have on the matter.

Big Mole... Bertlesman who was trying to initally buy out Napster is a German Label.

[Undermind]

Originally posted by notbob
luckily, their last 2 albums bombed, giving them the "opportunity" to try new avenues of distribution

a remake of "last kiss" by j. frank wilson and the cavaliers? what in the hell were they thinking?

if you remake something, at least pick a song that doesn't completely suck, and if you do pick a sucky song, at least try to IMPROVE it somehow rather than parroting it!



HAHA, true...


and TYB, nice quote in your sig, WTF is this world coming to when Deftones have to open up for such bands as these, this is not good news at all (sigh), this proves yet again how retarded the youth of today is becoming

[PatientSaint]

btw .. it's tool not muppet hehe :cross