I too have felt guilty at times for using Napster. I think I personally
made a mistake some months ago when I shared a lot of the vinyl that I had
recorded onto my computer for my cd's. I got all these people downloading
dope ass 12"s and spreading them all over Napster (I didn't let it go on too
long, but a good dozen or so bomb ass vinyl only tracks got away for free).
I know for a fact these songs weren't on Napster previously because I'd been
searching for them before I bought them and when I see them now, its the
same track length. I think it would have been ok had the songs been only 2
or 3 minute samples. Now, I am selective about what 12"s I share and often
will only put a few minutes of the track.
Sometimes I wonder if people really do buy the stuff they download. I've
downloaded a few hundred songs over the last year or so and most of it has
been stuff that I cant find (old/rare dance music, rare jazz, funk, and
soul, and also cd's I'd lost over the years). I am currently keeping an eye
out for the majority of the mp3's I have and can honestly say that I buy
plenty of music. Enough of making myself feel like it's ok. My thing is, I
know how people are, and know people who don't buy shit and download and
make loads of cd's. And i know a lot of people who don't have a computer,
but if they did, wouldn't hesitate to download everything they could. And I
dont think that's an assault on their character, its like damn... if
somebody is passing out free cd's of your favorite artists are you going to
take them? It is true that anybody who is deeply serious about their music
WILL buy the music and give back to the artists, however, think about this
(it's been said a thousand times)... When you buy a cd for 13 to 16 dollars
and up, how much of that actually goes to the artist you want to support?
From what I hear, very little. Maybe a dollar at most. And the rest??? I
hate to think about it. Is this different for smaller labels? Do they get
all that money. For example if I buy a cd from Delsin for example, do the
owners and artist get most of the money after the record store takes its
cut?
Later,
Beau.
>From: "Dave Haynes" <gvcontact@hotmail.com>
>To: acid-jazz@ucsd.edu
>Subject: Napster
>Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 09:57:24 -0000
>
>I was wondering what everybody's views were on Napster. I have been using
>it
>for several months. I fell a bit guilty about it because I know I'm ripping
>off other people copyright. It is so useful though. If someone mentions a
>tune on the list that I haven't checked out, I can just pop onto Napster,
>download it and give it a listen. Then I can also see what else that artist
>has done. Although not everything is on there especially vinyl only
>releases
>- I can get most of the stuf that I want.
>
>The thing is though that lots of people are vehemntly against this. But
>from
>my own personal experience Napster allows me to preview tracks I may never
>have heard of. I may not pay for it then but I'd say about 70% of the time
>I
>then go onto buy the track on vinyl cos I want to play it out. I'll also go
>and buy more stuff from that artist which I may never have even been aware
>of before.
>
>I'm actually doing a research project on the whole area of digital music
>and
>was wondering what sort of views the acid jazz community had ont the
>subject.
>
>How many people are using? How many are against?
>How many artists on this list mind that there stuff could be getting
>downloaded without royalties being paid?
>
>Any thoughts?
>_________________________________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Mar 30 2001 - 15:36:33 CEST