Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
Lars and ChuckD face off on Charlie Rose

By Anonymous Zero in News
Sun May 14, 2000 at 12:31:24 PM EST
Tags: Music (all tags)
Music

I know you're probably all sick of the Napster debate as I am, but last night while channel surfing I happened upon Lars from Metallica and Chuck D of Public Enemy going back and forth about Napster on the Charlie Rose show. Chuck D is very pro-Napster, and obviously Lars is not. Chuck had certainly done his homework and had all the bases covered, but Lars raised a few good points as well. Here's my sloppy transcript of some of the finer moments in the proceedings.


ChuckD about the perception that artists are losing money due to file sharing: "People thought that back in 1967 when FM radio came out, artists complained that people would stop buying records. Then when cassettes came out they complained again that people would stop buying records, but instead records sold more than ever... you see, an accountant looks at a copy and sees it as a lost sale but it's not, it's really just another promotional vehicle..."

Lars: "I'm not against small artists that want to use Napster to get more exposure, then great, I'm happy for them. But Napster should've notified artists before they started this service and given artists like us a chance to opt out of it..."

ChuckD suggesting to Lars that there lots of other revenue streams for a major rock band: "There are still a lot of insular areas that Metallica controls that can't be downloaded..."

Lars: "I hear a lot about the greed of record companies but Napster is not doing this for charity or for the good of mankind. There are investors backing them and there will soon be a Napster IPO... they're capitalizing on artists without the artist's permission..."

ChuckD: "Lars, people will still buy your record even after they download it from Napster... fans will buy the record anyway..."

Lars on the prospects of angering Metallica fans caught in the Napster sweep: "If I ask you not to redistribute my work and you keep on doing it than I don't want you as a fan anyway."

ChuckD regarding Dr. Dre singing the same tune as Metallica: "Dr. Dre is clueless about this. Dre's a friend of mine and I talked to Dre recently... his lawyer called him and said "Dre, they're taking your money" so of course Dre says they'd better stop it because that's what his lawyers are telling him..."

Lars on other artists who support Napster: "Fred Durst [from Limpbizkit] is saying record companies are bad, but Fred, who paid $600,000 so you could make your "Nookie" video, I mean, come on..."

Final thoughts:

Lars: "We're looking at making our next record available in some enhanced format but under our terms... we're looking what other technologies are out there..."

ChuckD: "The technology is changing the industry. You have to adapt... I thrive on the enthusiasm of the people. I guess I don't have that typical American enterpeneural spirit..."

EOM

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Related Links
o Charlie Rose
o Chuck D is very pro-Napster
o not
o Also by Anonymous Zero


Display: Sort:
Lars and ChuckD face off on Charlie Rose | 45 comments (45 topical, editorial, 0 hidden)
Man, I love Charlie Rose. Best int... (none / 0) (#1)
by joeyo on Sat May 13, 2000 at 10:56:52 PM EST

joeyo voted 1 on this story.

Man, I love Charlie Rose. Best interviews around. When was this on?

--
"Give me enough variables to work with, and I can probably do away with the notion of human free will." -- demi

I saw the interview and I support N... (4.70 / 3) (#2)
by Nyarlathotep on Sat May 13, 2000 at 11:12:55 PM EST

Nyarlathotep voted 1 on this story.

I saw the interview and I support Napster and ChuckD, but I did not think ChuckD didthe best job he could at defending Napster. I will try to fill in the details which the format did not allow ChuchD to express: 1) ChuchD he mentined that Napster is like radio, but he did not explain how Napster is like radio or why Napster is better then radio for artists. Radio stations play songs and sell advertising time, but the artist only gets promotion for their air play. Napster's mp3 distribution allows both Napster and artists to include advertsing (Napster can sell advertising in the service and artists can sell advertising in the song). 2) Lars critisized Napster as ripping off the artists wose the the industry. ChuchD's radio analogy shoots this down, i.e. Napster really is like radio because Napster controls none of the side buisness of the artist. This eans Napster can not really rip off artists any more then radio dose now.. and we have argued that Napster ose not rip them off as much as radio dose. BTW, I suppose I should point out exactly why Napster is no worse then radio for the artist. I could program a PC radio card to record songs off the radio while I'm lissening to them, so that I can save the song if I like it. This would be just as effective as Napster for getting those one hit wonders. Do you see the RIAA fighting PC radio cards? 3) Lars tried to paint Napster as a "money grobbing corperation." It is true that Napster's dominance of online music distribution could be as harmful to artists as the RIAA. Specifically, Napster could start charging artists to place their songs in the searches for other artists sngs. I would have liked to see ChuchD make more of a point about how open source and Gnutella could keep this from happening. 4) Finally, I would have liked to see ChuchD point to the online mediums (like comics) which are doing a great job of moving to the internet, increasing profits, increasing diversity, etc. I would also like to see a buisness plan layed out for internet musicians. Example: Use scripts to blinket the pirate sites, Napster, IRC, etc. with versions of you songs which contain advertising blurbs like "This is D.J. Bob comming at you thanks to sonny, check out my web site at djbob.com" D.J. Bob's website would offer to see diffrent mp3 mixes of these songs (without ads), CDs, shirts, etc. I would also like to see a major name like ChuckD arguing for small internet artists to band together. A group of say 20 artists could manage to release a song/mix per day which would bring a lot of return coustomers (like an internet commic). They could give away some songs (wint ads), sell fan club memberships (like $30 per year) to DL more songs (like past songs of the day), sell other shit, etc. A group of artists could get a lot more attention then a single artist.
Campus Crusade for Cthulhu -- it found me!

Looks like what I'd suspected is cl... (4.50 / 2) (#4)
by Perpetual Newbie on Sun May 14, 2000 at 12:25:17 AM EST

Perpetual Newbie voted 1 on this story.

Looks like what I'd suspected is close to the truth; The lawyer told Metallica and Dre that Napster was a Big Evil Corporation that is making money by stealing their music. Though the bands are fully within their rights to demand an end to the bitlegging of their work, given misinformation they came out very angry at the start of this mess and ended up pissing off a lot of people with their hostility.

It is the volume and the indiscriminate anonymity of the music trading on Napster that raises the ire of some musicians. The trading is not between a small circle of friends; The Napster user is offering a copy of the songs to anyone and everyone. To use a bad analogy, it is the difference between making a tape for your friends at school, versus sitting on the sidewalk with an industrial-strength tape recorder and handing out copies to everyone who passes by. Metallica is asking their fans to have the respect to not mass-distribute their work.

Another point: I have never used Napster, but I have heard that it is difficult to not share files with it. Among the things I have heard are that it scans your drive for *.mp3 and shares them all, that you cannot choose not to share any files, and that any files you download with it become shared. These features, if they actually exist, would make it more likely for a user to be breaking copyright either unintentionally or because it's not worth the trouble to configure the program to not share copywritten files. Anything like this could be seen as recklessness on Napster's part, and a lawyer could easily swindle a judge into considering such features to be aiding and abetting.

-Perpetual Newbie

Hey Rusty, a preview button at the story moderation voting would be nice.

Re: Looks like what I'd suspected is cl... (none / 0) (#18)
by Anonymous Hero on Sun May 14, 2000 at 01:58:50 PM EST

I think that Napster will share any songs that you download, but you can set a limit on the number of simultaneous uploads by any user. If you set that at zero, the files are effectively not shared. Also, it doesn't scan your hard drive, you have to specify a directory for your 'library'.

-Drew

[ Parent ]
Re: Looks like what I'd suspected is cl... (none / 0) (#25)
by Imperator on Sun May 14, 2000 at 05:12:06 PM EST

In previous versions (of the official Win32 client; open source clients never had this problem) your download directory was automatically shared. This wasn't a real problem so long as you moved songs out of it immediately. The latest version removes this automatic sharing, so you can in fact prevent others from downloading anything.

[ Parent ]
Re: Looks like what I'd suspected is cl... (none / 0) (#24)
by Anonymous Hero on Sun May 14, 2000 at 05:11:04 PM EST

Actually it is *very* easy to stop Napster from sharing your files. You simply set your uploads to 0. The only 'annoyance' that you get is that Napster asks you if you're sure about this, everytime it stars. (I think as a sort of discouragement for not sharing).

[ Parent ]
Global Village (none / 0) (#39)
by zotz on Mon May 15, 2000 at 08:14:08 AM EST

The trading is not between a small circle of friends; The Napster user is offering a copy of the songs to anyone and everyone.

Could this be the 'global village' in action? ~;-) OK, just a dumb comment.

What I find interesting in the online discussion of copyright is how so many people think the ethics or morality of the situation is clear cut. They think that the artists have an inherent right to profit from and control their 'IP' (creation) after it is published.

I have put up Copyright Questions to help get some people to think a little more. The article could use some additional questions as well as some cleaning up. If you would like to help, please do so.

What I find, is that the creative work of some groups is respected and protected, while the creative work of others is not. If it is so ethically and morally clear, why is that? Legally clear is a different issue.

Now when it comes to the legality of a copyright issue, a person trying to find out and comply with all the applicable laws can have a nightmare on their hands. I have found that things to not 'make sense' but are arbitrary.

When I first started looking at US copyrights in the early 80s, to the best I could make out, a single, short (say one or two page) poem could not be copyrigthed. I may have been wrong, or the situation may be different now. An anthology of poems could be copyrighted however.

Also, try finding out sometime who you need permission from and who you need to pay if you want to make and sell "My Greatest Hits of the 60's" as a business.


zotz forever! ~~~the raggeded~~~

bslug.org
[ Parent ]

this topic is over-done. ... (1.00 / 1) (#13)
by Ticker on Sun May 14, 2000 at 12:58:12 AM EST

Ticker voted -1 on this story.

this topic is over-done.

interesting...is there a link to th... (none / 0) (#7)
by pope nihil on Sun May 14, 2000 at 04:00:47 AM EST

pope nihil voted 1 on this story.

interesting...is there a link to the complete transcript?

I voted.

Re: interesting...is there a link to th... (none / 0) (#19)
by Mulad on Sun May 14, 2000 at 02:38:00 PM EST

Well, not that I'm aware, though you can spend several dollars and buy it from a transcript company (I guess the `official' transcript company for Charlie Rose is www.800-all-news.com)

[ Parent ]
Re: interesting...is there a link to th... (none / 0) (#26)
by Marcin on Sun May 14, 2000 at 06:30:26 PM EST

I'm sure someone has probably made an MP3 of it ;)
M.
[ Parent ]
I agree with Chuck D (Whoever the h... (3.00 / 1) (#14)
by Marcin on Sun May 14, 2000 at 06:26:31 AM EST

Marcin voted 1 on this story.

I agree with Chuck D (Whoever the heck he is ;) ).. there aren't THAT many people with the time / inclination / bandwidth / etc to just download as many MP3s as they can for the hell of it. Most people just use it to 'sample'. Well, i've got no proof, but i'd say that's the case [shrug].
M.

Re: I agree with Chuck D (Whoever the h... (none / 0) (#33)
by enthalpyX on Sun May 14, 2000 at 10:37:08 PM EST

As more and more people get cable and ADSL, this will change. I have several non-tech-savy friends who have cable, and their mp3 archive is usually the better half of their 12 gig hard drives. They then complain and screech, "unfair!" when Napster bans them for downloading Metallica mp3s.

I find it kind of amusing that ChuckD claims that he lacks the "enterpreneual [(sp?)] spirit." Playing the Devil's Advocate here, for a moment, it is kind of absurd to rely on people's "ethics" to ever get the artists money.

IMHO, What Should Happen is that Napster should be shut down, and mp3s should actually be sold. But as mentioned earlier, the recording industry is going to fight as hard as it can to keep their sacred paradigm going.

Until then, Napster is an /excellent/ tool to move away from that direction.

Now if I could only get in on that upcoming Napster IPO. *grin*

[ Parent ]

Re: I agree with Chuck D (Whoever the h... (none / 0) (#35)
by Marcin on Mon May 15, 2000 at 01:02:35 AM EST

As more and more people get cable and ADSL, this will change. I have several non-tech-savy friends who have cable, and their mp3 archive is usually the better half of their 12 gig hard drives. They then complain and screech, "unfair!" when Napster bans them for downloading Metallica mp3s.

Yeah, I didn't really think of the bandwidth thing.. Australia is only just starting to get affordable cable and so most people here are still on 56k modems, where you really don't feel like downloading more than one song :)

IMHO, What Should Happen is that Napster should be shut down, and mp3s should actually be sold. But as mentioned earlier, the recording industry is going to fight as hard as it can to keep their sacred paradigm going.

Until then, Napster is an /excellent/ tool to move away from that direction.

Now if I could only get in on that upcoming Napster IPO. *grin*

What's the point of being in on the Napster IPO if you want it shut down?? ;) Also, what does napster do apart from the 'napster' program. ie. What would Napster do with the money?

Like i've said in one of the other MP3 threads, no one can get rid of the existing MP3 encoding software so even if everything new was shutdown, there's enough of it already out there such that music piracy via MP3 will always be there.
M.
[ Parent ]

Re: I agree with Chuck D (Whoever the h... (none / 0) (#42)
by enthalpyX on Mon May 15, 2000 at 07:54:36 PM EST

What's the point of being in on the Napster IPO if you want it shut down?? ;)
<idealism>Pure capitalistic selfishness!</idealism> It's a virtue! Haven't you read Atlas Shrugged?! (yes, definitely sarcasm here)

No, really, I dobut I'd go for the Napster IPO, but if it follows the rest of the pseudo-"DOT COM" IPOs, shoot up, shoot down. I'd sell on the "up" part and then get out. Then it can be shut down. ;)

Also, what does napster do apart from the 'napster' program. ie. What would Napster do with the money?
This is just a guess, but maybe advertising? Do something like Hotline does -- make a banner pop up in the client. I can see them making "strategic alliances" within the music industry. I dunno; I'm sure some people will get creative.
Like i've said in one of the other MP3 threads, no one can get rid of the existing MP3 encoding software so even if everything new was shutdown, there's enough of it already out there such that music piracy via MP3 will always be there.
Yes, I think that's a fair assumption, but in absence of things like Napster, it would most certainly be easy to pay $5 for a CD of mp3s, than searching around random FTP sites & IRC channels.

But then again -- there's Gnutella, and.... Ahh, who knows what will happen?

DWB

[ Parent ]

Re: I agree with Chuck D (Whoever the h... (none / 0) (#36)
by Wah on Mon May 15, 2000 at 01:17:54 AM EST

selling MP3's has its own dangers. Think about the ILOVEYOU virus for a second on that one. Here's some other ideas.
--
Fail to Obey?
[ Parent ]
Lars doesn't know his asshole from ... (2.00 / 5) (#12)
by buzzbomb on Sun May 14, 2000 at 07:10:31 AM EST

buzzbomb voted 1 on this story.

Lars doesn't know his asshole from a hole in the ground. Fans are pissed. They already lost their true fans when they sold out and went Top 40...now just piss off the rest of em! Smooth move, asshole.

I've had enough of the MP3 stuff un... (3.00 / 1) (#6)
by Dacta on Sun May 14, 2000 at 07:42:31 AM EST

Dacta voted 0 on this story.

I've had enough of the MP3 stuff until something new comes along. This is almost almost interesting enough to be considered new, though.

Re: I've had enough of the MP3 stuff un... (5.00 / 1) (#21)
by pin0cchio on Sun May 14, 2000 at 03:02:56 PM EST

So if you're sick of MP3, then try Ogg Vorbis.
lj65
[ Parent ]
I think I'm gonna go buy a Chuck D ... (2.00 / 1) (#5)
by Pelorat on Sun May 14, 2000 at 07:57:48 AM EST

Pelorat voted 1 on this story.

I think I'm gonna go buy a Chuck D CD or two.

Re: I think I'm gonna go buy a Chuck D ... (none / 0) (#22)
by Anonymous Hero on Sun May 14, 2000 at 03:24:22 PM EST

"It takes a nation of Millions to hold us back" is a personal favorite. Rap can pretty much be divided up in to two sections, old school which is everything before it takes a nation and new school which is every thing after. a very ground breaking album.

The PE "trilogy" has kind of come to be known as It takes a nation, Fear of a Black planet, and Apocolypse 1991, The Enemy strikes back. All three albums are among the best rap albums of all time. You can't go wrong with any of them, IMO.

The Chuck D. solo album, Autobiography of Mista Chuck is also very good. He has some powerful venom on it.

[ Parent ]

This doesn't seem to be much of a "... (3.00 / 1) (#15)
by duxup on Sun May 14, 2000 at 08:26:44 AM EST

duxup voted -1 on this story.

This doesn't seem to be much of a "discussion" just an argument about $ on both sides. Neither person actually seems to respond to the other's statements. They seem to just bring up another point, doesn't seem either one are dealing with each other.

Re: This doesn't seem to be much of a (4.00 / 1) (#17)
by fluffy grue on Sun May 14, 2000 at 12:44:48 PM EST

This isn't an actual transcript, you know, just what the article poster remembered from the conversation. An actual transcript would have been MUCH longer. :) I'm assuming that it was only key points which stood out in the poster's mind which were there (and notice how each thing is "such-and-such on such-and-such topic").
--
"Is not a quine" is not a quine.
I have a master's degree in science!

[ Hug Your Trikuare ]
[ Parent ]

Sorry, I'm still sick of mp3 stuff.... (2.00 / 2) (#8)
by TomG on Sun May 14, 2000 at 08:42:33 AM EST

TomG voted -1 on this story.

Sorry, I'm still sick of mp3 stuff.

Sorry. I promised myself no more Na... (1.67 / 3) (#11)
by inspire on Sun May 14, 2000 at 11:28:33 AM EST

inspire voted -1 on this story.

Sorry. I promised myself no more Napster/Gnutella/MP3 articles.
--
What is the helix?

Yeah, I am sick of Napster.... (2.66 / 3) (#9)
by Velian on Sun May 14, 2000 at 11:34:12 AM EST

Velian voted -1 on this story.

Yeah, I am sick of Napster.

Chuck D is the man. What is shocki... (3.00 / 1) (#3)
by davidu on Sun May 14, 2000 at 11:50:43 AM EST

davidu voted 1 on this story.

Chuck D is the man. What is shocking is Dre. I have interviewed a few rappers on the whole MP3 thing and as a whole, most artists in the rap,hip-hop genre are generally more pro-mp3 than other genres. I don't know if it cuz ChuckD started it or what, either way, nice transcript, I missed the show but peeps at work taped it...I guess I will see it monday...

Some very good points. I think it s... (3.00 / 1) (#10)
by dzeez on Sun May 14, 2000 at 12:05:24 PM EST

dzeez voted 1 on this story.

Some very good points. I think it shows how, probably, most artists against Napster are misinformed.
..... dzeez

Nice to see something from the arti... (3.00 / 2) (#16)
by kevin lyda on Sun May 14, 2000 at 12:31:24 PM EST

kevin lyda voted 1 on this story.

Nice to see something from the artists themselves rather then fans, lawyers or record producers.

I saw it.. (none / 0) (#20)
by Mulad on Sun May 14, 2000 at 03:02:35 PM EST

I saw the show, though I'm not sure either side really got their pont across. Of course, both of these guys probably weren't very accustomed to the format of the Charlie Rose show.. Anyway, I think the best point made by Chuck D was that technology is changing in such a way as to practically make the whole idea of copyright obsolete. Artists and content producers need to adapt to this new paradigm, rather than try to keep things as they were -- all they can possibly hope to do by fighting so much is to slow it down. I think it shows a lack of education on the side of Metallica, Dr. Dre, and their lawyer.

Rather than trying to fight back the changes that are happening, the people who want and need to make money off of their `art' (I use the quotes for some fairly obvious reasons..) should help guide things forward, but in a way that is beneficial to both artists and consumers -- instead of something that is only beneficial to consumers (which would leave many artists in the poorhouse).

I'm even lethal when I'm unarmed, cuz I'm louder t (3.30 / 6) (#23)
by Nelson on Sun May 14, 2000 at 03:33:07 PM EST

Public Enemy and Chuck D have been on this stuff for years.

Since their rap is highly political they've not been played by MTV and radio stations as much as other rappers. PE thinks it is because of their message, it could be. Rap is an acquired taste for most but that's particularly insulting when you see the groups like the 2 Live Crue, Wu Tang Clan, and others get so much play with so little to say of any real value. Back as far as 1987 they were writing songs about how the record industry runs and how it controls what is said and what is played. "Louder than a bomb" (1987), Burn Hollywood Burn (1989), "How to Kill a Radio Consultant" (1991) and even up through their most recent album "There's a Poison going on" with "Swindler's Lust" (2000)

I'm not sure if it's been overdue or if PE is just that ground breaking and on top of things, they are certainly one of the best rap groups of all time. It's good to see them leading the way on this kind of stuff. I highly recommend some of their albums if you listen to rap or want to start.

WTF? (4.00 / 2) (#28)
by prod on Sun May 14, 2000 at 07:42:29 PM EST

2 Live Crue, Wu Tang Clan, and others get so much play ith so little to say of any real value.

I find it particularly insulting that you made an unfounded arguement. First, neither Wu-Tang nor 2 Live Crew get almost any airplay (unless you consider ODB's sellout shit, or Method Man and Fred Durst real Wu-Tang). When is the last time you saw a 2 Live Crew video on TV? Secondly, while I might understand how you consider 2 Live Crew's lyrics (although their whole gimmick was never "real content"), I have no idea how you can consider Wu-Tang as having "so little to say". Have you ever listened to the 36 Chambers? Bobby Digital? Ghostface Killah? C.R.E.A.M.?! (that song has everything to do with what you're talking about.)

I do agree with you that the rap you hear on the radio/TV is 95% trash (DMX, Jay-Z, new Ice Cube, etc..). Its a shame how the substance filled rappers are censored by record companies (Dead Prez, the Coup, PE, etc..)

[ Parent ]

Fucking Metallica hypocrisy. (none / 0) (#27)
by torpor on Sun May 14, 2000 at 07:36:28 PM EST

I find it totally ironic and ludicrous at the same time that a band like Metallica, who are mainstays of anti-establishment, breaking the law (pot smoking, binge drinking, groupie raping activities abound in the Metallica universe) are trying to protect their petty interests by trying to enforce the law. It's totally ironic. I've never liked Metallica, never cared for their art or their message, and I guess this is just one more reason why, in my view, Metallica should just disappear off the face of the earth. Who needs 'em.
j. -- boink! i have no sig!
Re: Fucking Metallica hypocrisy. (none / 0) (#30)
by mihalis on Sun May 14, 2000 at 09:08:22 PM EST

I find it totally ironic and ludicrous at the same time that a band like Metallica, who are mainstays of anti-establishment,

Metallica haven't been anti-establishment for a long long time. Probably since the black album. They just say they want to do their stuff their way, which I don't think many people would disagree with, but I don't know of them bucking the trend for large rock groups in any noticeable way. Perhape the snake pit with the allowed taping, but I woulnd't say anything I've seen makes them mainstays.

breaking the law (pot smoking, binge drinking, groupie raping activities abound in the Metallica universe)

You're just making this up aren't you? Groupie raping? How do you know? A friend of a friend told you? Most accounts of Metallica's wild days mentions drinking, yes, groupies, yes, rape NO, pot, well not that I heard of.

I've never liked Metallica, never cared for their art or their message

Fine but do you actually know anything about them?
-- Chris Morgan <see em at mihalis dot net>
[ Parent ]

Re: Fucking Metallica hypocrisy. (none / 0) (#40)
by Anonymous Hero on Mon May 15, 2000 at 10:25:17 AM EST

pot smoking, binge drinking, groupie raping

Do you have any idea how much money participating in these activities costs? What I'm trying to say is Metallica needs every nickel it can get. :) Smoke a doobie for me Metallica, you washed up boozers. Homer dreaming voice, mmmmm, groupie raping, drool....

[ Parent ]

Naptser is a tool, we don't blame guns do we? (none / 0) (#29)
by Anonymous Hero on Sun May 14, 2000 at 07:57:43 PM EST

Napster isn't the cause, it's a tool. After World War II we didn't blame the weapons that kill the millions, we blamed Hitler, which might have been the cause, but wasn't the final blow for the victims. I think Napster is a great program, but if the bands winge that they are losing millions because of it, they should get their heads checked. I actually try before I buy, and have expanded my musical taste from MP3s. Blah.

Re: Naptser is a tool, we don't blame guns do we? (none / 0) (#44)
by Anonymous Hero on Tue May 16, 2000 at 08:53:00 AM EST

actually, there a lot of idiots that are blaming guns...

[ Parent ]
Napster is very much like FM Radio in the 1960s. (3.00 / 1) (#31)
by AArthur on Sun May 14, 2000 at 09:17:05 PM EST

During the 1960's their were many fears of the new FM-radio standard, it provided fieldicity never heard before -- it would perfectly convey every scratch sound over the radio, and all of the background noise on the noisey (but populuar) 78 and 45 RPM records.

FM radio was feared by many groups to end the sale of records, so you didn't really see FM radio to become a standard feature on radios until 1972 or so. FM radio acceptance was also dratically slowed in 1967 when simuelcasting of radio material was made illegal -- you were not allowed to broadcast 24-7 the same material on multiple radio stations (if you were, companies would just buy up the whole radio specturm).

On the other hand, FM Radio of the 1960s allowed many new stations to get a start. One of the most common uses of FM radio was "Alternative" spaced out music -- stations ran by disc jockeys who obviously had hit a bit to much acid before going on the air. You wanted the weridest hits from the Doors or Jimi Hendrix, you turned to FM radio. If you wanted populuar Top 40 Music, Classical Music, Oldies (from the '40s and '50s) you either bought the record (on LP or EP single format) or tunned into good ole' AM radio.

The music industry generally fears new technology -- with fears of piracy, but eventually it will help music, and possible even bring in new genders.

Andrew B. Arthur | aarthur@imaclinux.net | http://hvcc.edu/~aa310264

Watch your words..... (none / 0) (#32)
by your_desired_username on Sun May 14, 2000 at 09:30:48 PM EST

...even bring in new genders

So... male, female, hemaphrodite, neuter ... what new genders are next ?

I think you meant 'genres'.

[ Parent ]
Re: Watch your words..... (none / 0) (#37)
by Anonymous Hero on Mon May 15, 2000 at 02:50:39 AM EST

So... male, female, hemaphrodite, neuter ... what new genders are next ?
No, those aren't genders, they are sexes. Gender is a language term, i.e. you would say la maison instead of le maison in french because the word maison's gender is feminine. The fact that the word gender has been appropriated and constantly misused by the oh-so-pc "gender issues" crowd does not make such usage of the word any more correct. Sheesh. If you're going to be nitpicky, at least make sure you're right.

[ Parent ]
I would say IMHO, but who are we kidding :) (3.50 / 2) (#34)
by spoon on Mon May 15, 2000 at 12:30:13 AM EST

Lars: "I hear a lot about the greed of record companies but Napster is not doing this for charity or for the good of mankind. There are investors backing them and there will soon be a Napster IPO... they're capitalizing on artists without the artist's permission..."

The thing that he, and the music industry, doesn't realize is that, unlike the record companies, Napster is not making money by taking it out of the artist's pockets. Some say that Napster is taking money out of the artist's hands. They say that since you can download the song for free, they don't buy the CD. This would be something that they want you to believe to strengthen their position. The actuality is that there really hasn't been any research to support this. The only feedback has been unscientific, and usually comes from this and other types of Slashdot/kuro5shin forums. A majority of them state that more CDs are bought due to the fact that with Napster, and the mp3 format, you can try-before-you-buy.

In the end, the companies and artists represented by the RIAA are going to find a way to work with this new technology. The movie industry found a totally new market after losing the VCR battle. Not only does the movie industry take video sales/rentals into account when making a film, but also a lot of films are released straight to video and turn quite a bit of profit. This might be a bit charitable, but I think that these industries are smart enough to learn from prior events. The only thing stopping them from using new technology now is basic fear. This is true of the human species and since humans run most of the music industry, they will do human things.



more secure enhanced format? (2.00 / 1) (#38)
by johnmc on Mon May 15, 2000 at 06:12:26 AM EST

shyeah right! as if I'm going to bother with that. The problem is that, more likely than not, this new format will be Windows only.. I don't do Micros~1 products so I won't be able to view it.
Personally, I think Metallica have lost face on this one.. I know I for one will not play metallica on my radio show out of principle. I will be asking others at out radio station to do likewise.
-- johnmc.
can someone explain to me what the big deal is? (4.00 / 1) (#41)
by Anonymous 242 on Mon May 15, 2000 at 03:36:23 PM EST

The only qualitative difference I can think of between napster and broadcast radio (be it AM or FM) or internet radio is that napster might not pay ASCAP dues. Other than that possibility (and napster would be really stupid and begging for trouble if they aren't paying dues to ASCAP or some similiar organization), there is NO, ZERO, NONE, ZILCH DIDDLEY SQUAT difference between what napster is doing and what a radio station does.

But you can save the files on your hard disk when they are MP3's, someone might complain. So what? A decent radio station and a $50 tape deck will store your favorite songs just as easily when they are played on the radio. Get a decent rig (which will cost more than $50) and if you're listening to a good radio station (like one of the AM stereo stations) and your recorded sound will be better than an MP3. It wouldn't even be that difficult to install a tuner card and record a radio broadcast straight to MP3.

But you can choose exactly what MP3's you want to download, whenever you please, someone might object. Whoop-de-do. The radio stations that I listen to are usually quite happy to play requests that I call in (one of the advantages to listening to small radio stations, their glad that at least *one* person is listening).

No to mention that more and more radio stations are 'broadcasting' over IP. Honestly, how much trouble would it be for someone to use some neat little proggy to convert .ra to MP3. I bet its already been done even.

What does this mean? If Lars and Dr. Dre have a problem with MP3, they have the same problem with radio. The benefits (and drawbacks) to MP3 are exactly the same as radio. With (as mentioned above), the artists might not be getting air-play royalties if napster isn't paying some association like ASCAP.

And despite the ragging of Dr. Dre, Lars and the RIAA, profits from cd's have skyrocketed this past year. Where's the blood from the sales that artists are supposed to be losing. Not only that, but the big CD producing monoliths just settled out of court for price fixing. The complaining on the part of artists, their lawyers, and production companies is hypocritical, short-sighted, delusional, and disingenuous.

just my cynical two cents,

-l

Re: can someone explain to me what the big deal is (none / 0) (#43)
by Anonymous Hero on Tue May 16, 2000 at 03:30:11 AM EST

Its amazing isn't it? The amount of denial these people must be going through.. "if I close my eyes, maybe it will just go away.." like this?

[ Parent ]
this is just getting dumber and dubmer (none / 0) (#45)
by Anonymous Hero on Sat Jul 08, 2000 at 05:49:24 AM EST

allright the dubmer was on purpose that is metallica and any other artists that are subjected to this bs mp3's are not bad they are good for artist's wether they know it or not personally i do burn cd's but that is for the fact that i see cd's at 10 cents a piece and i can't afford to buy cd's at 17 18 19 bucks a pop for one or two songs i do support my favorite artists i use verbal advertising for them i do not burn cd's for anyone else its mine and mine alone they pay the tv for advertising things well hell then they should have to pay me to and this is the way im getting my payment

Lars and ChuckD face off on Charlie Rose | 45 comments (45 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!