|
|
|
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
 Post subject: Posted: Tue Dec 07, 2004 5:10 pm 
pzykotic wrote: and I made the quicktime files so that you could throw the ref (eisley_telescopeeyes_ref.mov, etc) into iTunes on a Mac or PC and it'd play just like an MP3, while still streaming and letting WB know you're listening. (I made that bold cuz it's important) actually, i noticed that and i thought to myself "whoever put those files up was pretty clever, now i can just play it in itunes all i please"  good work luke _________________ welcome to the no pants club boone |
|
|
Joined: 18 Mar 2004 | Posts: 8693 |
|
|
   |
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Tue Dec 07, 2004 5:51 pm
i know i'm inviting getting apples thrown at me here but... first off the guy who said there will soon be 1000 chads is right. and really, is that so bad? let's say that means there will end up being people who download the mp3's and therefore don't buy the album; clearly those won't be the fans here on the forum cause i can speak for at least most of us when i say that we'll all be buying copies of this album no matter what mp3's we have. so the people in question who eisley would not be getting their what... 50 cents from (while the label and distributors get the other 15 bucks) are people who otherwise might not have taken the time (and certainly not the money) to get into eisley. 95 percent of those people wouldn't have bought the album anyways! on the other hand, (God willing) a good percentage of those people will actually fall in love with eisley, or at least take enough interest in the band to go see them in concert, which is something where eisley gets paid much more proportionally. this early in the band's career, the most important thing is exposure. if eisley's album leaked tomorrow, by this weekend 10-20 people i know would have a burned copy of the album or the mp3's on their computer. am i screwing the band? well, not really cause of those 20 people not one of them was going to buy the album since they probably will never hear of eisley at least for another year. now there might be as many as 5-6 of them that actually buy the album of their own accord, or at least go and see the band in concert. and there will be at least 10 of them that cause someone else to hear about eisley because those original 10 had the songs playing in the background or whatever. this whole security crap is more of a defense of the label than the band. although i'm sure we won't hear boyd or eisley endorsing this view (they can't, really), if you look at most of the recording artists that we admire and respect they couldn't care less if all their songs are traded for free on the internet. this whole indignant attitude of people towards file sharing is really strange to me... you're just screwing yourselves! _________________ "You're my favorite person." - David Carradine, Kill Bill vol. 2 |
|
|
Joined: 23 Mar 2004 | Posts: 497 | Location: aventura, FL
|
|
  |
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Tue Dec 07, 2004 6:44 pm
Ok, it was really hard to follow all that due to no paragraphs. I did read through it, though. It seemed kind of like circular reasoning. Basically, yes, there will be people that share Eisley tunes. So? The forum doesn't need to be a place for that. The band might not care if their music is traded, but they care if it's illegal and respect that. And Chad is respectful of the band and their wishes. _________________ "The revolution starts today, not tomorrow." :: got g-Love? |
|
|
Joined: 02 Nov 2002 | Posts: 4224 | Location: Chicago, IL
|
|
  |
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2004 1:57 am
ideal wrote: i know i'm inviting getting apples thrown at me here but...
Here's an apple....Chad ducks and it hits Ideal. Has it occurred to you that it's called stealing? And there's no way to justify stealing! It's not yours--no matter how bad you want it-- and you can't have it till you pay for it. You have to honor the band and their contract with the label--even if you don't like the label. It's just the right thing to do. _________________ So there I go, Without my no. Only a yes And passive aggressiveness. |
|
|
Joined: 10 Apr 2003 | Posts: 313 | Location: Tyler, Texas
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2004 2:10 am
but how can it be stealing if they are putting up the songs for all to hear as many times as they like? thats like a cd store handing out samples at the door and then accusing you of stealing them when you leave. If the streams shouldn't be copied then there should be a note that says "please don't copy and distribute these, thanks" that would fix everything. btw, i have no intentions of ripping the lp and posting it so don't include me in the file sharing lot. If I was one of them then marvelous things and laughing city would be up on straylight6 for download. But, i do plan to rip the cd for my ipod... which i plan to let everyone at work listen to. Is that the same thing? edit: an even better fix would be to just post a 30 sec clip of the song. who wants a 30 sec mp3? ps if you're just now reading this topic the links have been broken pending an official response from boyd. _________________ "Religions have started on lesser revelations" - investor on MarketWatch.com |
|
|
Joined: 01 Jul 2003 | Posts: 4403 | Location: Dallas
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2004 2:29 am
gRegor wrote: Star Wars: Attack of the Chads? Wait, didn't that already happen in Florida a few years ago? 
|
|
|
Joined: 04 Oct 2004 | Posts: 2264 | Location: Lost and Found
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2004 3:29 am
In the beginning... (such an ominous intro) I was one of those fortunate souls who came across straylight6 and discovered the precoius downloads. If it wasn't for that site, I probably would never have felt as connected as I have become. Especially the live audio, that's where it is baby! To hear a live event (or be there in person) is just a thing of beauty. I've had this sort of discussion (about downloading) dozens of times with various individuals on the inside and the outside of the music biz, both in terms of working for a "giant" and the those who play in a band to those who are like you and me who love music of our favorite artist(s). While I applaud chad for helping spread the word and sounds of Eisley, I am quite confident that that time of "sharing" will unfortunately come to an end. I'm sure Eisley in all their generous efforts would love to see the music stay up there. Heck, when I talked to them they said, they love the music and they love knowing their music can be heard by so many people. They love the music. Period. But it maybe from up-on-high that that decision to ensure the rights of the band, the agencies, etc are maintained and hence stop (hopefully not with legal force) those downloads. Unfortunately, disclaimers aren't enough in this day and age. In the words of "Manny the stunt guy" all it takes is to hit a couple buttons and you've reaped all that hard work. Fact is, no one reads the disclaimers today because they appear, in the minds of those bypassing them, that they hold no weight associated with it. Even though they do. The problem exists that the record companies are being influenced by the RIAA and MPAA which (while their intentions are purely monetary) have lost touch with reality on how a person actually goes about buying a CD. For me, I like to have at least heard the CD first before I am willing to shell out $10 - 15 for it. I don't want to just buy it based on a single song and then find out I only enjoyed that one song (which has become quite prevelant in today's commericial driven pop machine). Hence iTunes, buying a song at a time (and then realizing it would have been cheaper to buy the entire CD. lol. Got caught in that last night.) Eisley's set I have heard, thanks in part to chad, boyd and being at the concerts and am fully prepared to buy the CD if not also buy a copy off of iTunes for the sake of saying I did. The RIAA has this idea that every download is a $1 lost. When in fact they are quite wrong. That download could in fact be a $1 earned, but their calculations and greed prevent them from seeing that. How does a non-profit lobby group rake in $15billion+ and becomes the puppet master for various bills ... a topic I shall not venture into. Let's face it, downloads are fine to a point and then it will be pushing it. I might say now if I was an artist that you can go out and download all you want, but when it's my mac & cheese that you're taking away it might be a different tune I'll be signing. Greed is such a powerful thing. I do like what pzychotic did... I set mine up like that right away too... it is showing WB that there is an interest, and a nice guage of the listening habits of those who enjoy Eisley's music. Just sucks when you're internet is down. hehe. I could continue on for an eternity on this topic... _________________  
|
|
|
Joined: 22 May 2003 | Posts: 160 | Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2004 4:41 am
chasd00 wrote: but how can it be stealing if they are putting up the songs for all to hear as many times as they like? thats like a cd store handing out samples at the door and then accusing you of stealing them when you leave. If the streams shouldn't be copied then there should be a note that says "please don't copy and distribute these, thanks" that would fix everything.
btw, i have no intentions of ripping the lp and posting it so don't include me in the file sharing lot. If I was one of them then marvelous things and laughing city would be up on straylight6 for download. But, i do plan to rip the cd for my ipod... which i plan to let everyone at work listen to. Is that the same thing? edit: an even better fix would be to just post a 30 sec clip of the song. who wants a 30 sec mp3? ps if you're just now reading this topic the links have been broken pending an official response from boyd. Sorry chad. I wasn't disparaging you at all. I think you done right. [Like my opinion really counts anyway....huh.] In fact I wanted the mp3 files as soon as I saw them posted. Heck that's why I looked inside this post. My apple throwing was intended for Ideal. I thought I told you to duck!
But in response to you--this is a little like the record stores letting you listen to songs through their headphones and you decide to run off with the headphones and the music. WB in a marketing pitch wants us to listen then buy--not steal. Of course they know that some of those smarter ('cause I ain't that smart) 
tech guys can hack the mp3's. They just hope they won't. I guess they thought it was obvious--that's why no disclaimer. I have all my music ripped to an IPOD, and anyone within earshot can listen to my music. But I won't burn a copy of my music for them. That's crossing the line. Maybe I'm a tad on the sensitive side. I'm a graphic designer and it's a real bummer to rip off another artist. Again I wasn't trying to take a swipe at you at all. Just the notion that stealing can somehow be justified. _________________ So there I go, Without my no. Only a yes And passive aggressiveness. |
|
|
Joined: 10 Apr 2003 | Posts: 313 | Location: Tyler, Texas
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2004 5:17 am
i had no moral qualms with the situation immediately, i'm a musician, and if i had more recordings than 2, i'd try my derndest to share with people at least half of my music for free. Maybe i'm crazy. However after the initial "score!" i thought "uh oh...chad better take that shibby down or there'll be hell to pay" cos yeah, it is wicked illegal, and while illegalities have never stopped me from anything, i think i feared most for chad's safety, not Boyd's disapproval or the label's, mostly the Police's At the end of the day the band won't care if 3 (1 of which we all know by heart laready) songs off their 10-12 track album float to the internet. Anyone ever heard of a single? It gets out on the radio and TV waves BEFORE the album comes out a lot of times. The internet (albeit in a different way) is just another medium to push "singles" like these. WB did put these songs up there to generate buzz, and if they are in MP3 format, they're still gonna generate buzz, and probably more if they pop up on file sharing programs. The only problem i do see is the one presented earlier about WB not seeing the right numbers come up...which sucks...but the damage has already been done, so i guess we can't do much about it _________________ welcome to the no pants club boone |
|
|
Joined: 18 Mar 2004 | Posts: 8693 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2004 5:48 am
diddlebaum wrote: But in response to you--this is a little like the record stores letting you
listen to songs through their headphones and you decide to run off with the headphones and the music. that a good analogy and point. I bet the final word is going to be if it's a stream then it's off limits. _________________ "Religions have started on lesser revelations" - investor on MarketWatch.com |
|
|
Joined: 01 Jul 2003 | Posts: 4403 | Location: Dallas
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2004 7:11 am
I am somewhat baffled by this situation. Why did the WB post a high quality stream. (lower quality = little harm) I am under the impression that the WB knew what they were doing when they posted a stream, and they were aware of the risks of doing so, but really I don't see how this would effect the sales of the album. I was and still am going to buy it whether I had heard any of the mastered tracks or not. All of this has only hightened my exictement for the album. _________________ I am not who I say I am! |
|
|
Joined: 28 Apr 2004 | Posts: 138 | Location: Wherever you want it to be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 30 Nov 2003 | Posts: 570 | Location: Somewhere between Hurst, Plano, and Richardson, TX
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2004 8:10 am
I think the fact that it was made a stream and only a stream says in itself that WB didn't want it to be downloadable. A disclaimer might have been "nice", but it's clearly copyrighted material. I basically go with.. if a label/artist makes an mp3 available to download.. then it's legal. Heh. _________________ "The revolution starts today, not tomorrow." :: got g-Love? |
|
|
Joined: 02 Nov 2002 | Posts: 4224 | Location: Chicago, IL
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2004 9:07 am
gRegor wrote: I think the fact that it was made a stream and only a stream says in itself that WB didn't want it to be downloadable. A disclaimer might have been "nice", but it's clearly copyrighted material.
I basically go with.. if a label/artist makes an mp3 available to download.. then it's legal. Heh. yeah that makes sense, i guess i should have known. oh well, they were only up from about midnight to 830am so hopefully the damage was/is minimal. so rule#n no copying streams. ok game on. _________________ "Religions have started on lesser revelations" - investor on MarketWatch.com |
|
|
Joined: 01 Jul 2003 | Posts: 4403 | Location: Dallas
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2004 9:12 am
chasd00 wrote: gRegor wrote: I think the fact that it was made a stream and only a stream says in itself that WB didn't want it to be downloadable. A disclaimer might have been "nice", but it's clearly copyrighted material.
I basically go with.. if a label/artist makes an mp3 available to download.. then it's legal. Heh. yeah that makes sense, i guess i should have known. oh well, they were only up from about midnight to 830am so hopefully the damage was/is minimal. so rule#n no copying streams. ok game on. Chad if it wasn't for you those songs would not be playing non-stop in my car. _________________ I am not who I say I am! |
|
|
Joined: 28 Apr 2004 | Posts: 138 | Location: Wherever you want it to be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Laughing City Forum Index -> eisleyBlog -> mp3's from the Emerge links
Page 3 of 4 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
|
|
All times are GMT - 12 Hours
|
|
