As musicians who have been around for a long time, we want to publically state that "sharing" our music with others without our permission is not only NOT in our best interests, it is also illegal and despite any argument to the contrary, we have demonstrable proof that it has drammatically hurt sales. There are many ways to legally sample our music, Internet Radio is one excellent source, as are our band pages, myspace pages and record label pages. There are many hundreds of other artists and labels associated with our group and it takes time to get everyone on the list, but we wanted to start our statement and the dialog. We don't believe in suing people or any of that, but we do want you to understand the damage you are doing. Please help us to continue making music that you enjoy by supporting us and purchasing that music instead of downloading it:
Martin Orford (IQ)
Nick Barrett (Pendragon)
Tom Truyers (Mindgames)
Hansi Cross (Cross)
Kim Stenberg (Magic Pie)
Tomas Bodin (The Flower Kings)
Göran Fors (Galleon)
Tomas Hjort (Cross)
Vynce Leff (Sensitive To Light)
JP Louveton (Nemo)
Myles Mangino (Planet of Sound Studio)
Tony Spada (Holding Pattern)
Cinthia Link (Surveillance)
Ulf Pettersson (Galleon)
JT Johanessen (Magic Pie)
Göran Johnsson (Galleon/Cross)
Malcolm Parker (Cyclops Records)
Gilbert Marshall (Magic Pie)
Birgitta Garpe (Progress Records
Kristoffer Gildenlow (Dial, ex-Pain of Salvation)
Jim Gilmour (Saga)
Michael Sadler (Saga, Psychic For Radio)
Kurt Barabas (Under The Sun, Amaran's Plight, Psychic For Radio)
Shawn Gordon (Psychic For Radio, ProgRock Records)
Erik Norlander (Rocket Scientists, Lana Lane)
Lana Lane
Jorge Alvelais
Rowen Poole (Persephone's Dream)
Hugo Flores (Project Creation)
Johnny (Transubstans Records)
Linus Kåse (Brighteye Brison)
Per Hallman (Brighteye Brison)
Matthias Harder (Sylvan)
Sebastian Harnack (Sylvan)
Daniel Eggenberger (Cosmos)
Will Mackie (Hoggwash)
Matthew Cohen (The Reasoning)
Rachel Cohen (The Reasoning)
Dylan Thompson (The Reasoning)
Lee Wright (The Reasoning)
Gareth Jones (The Reasoning)
Vinden Wylde (The Reasoning)
Per Malmberg (Salva)
Johan Lindqvist (Salva)
Stefan Gavik (Salva)
Lasse Bolin (Salva)
Fredrik Lindqvist (Salva)
Rikard Sjöblom (Beardfish)
Brian Cobb (Split Personality)
Steve Brockmann
Stefan Fredin (Trettioåriga Kriget)
Jens Lundberg (Blue Lemon)
Alex (Lizette &)
Martin Leamon (Crimson Sky)
Tim Burness
Steve Babb (Glass Hammer)
Mark Colton (Credo)
Tim Birrell (Credo)
Jim Murdoch (Credo)
Martin Meads (Credo)
Mike Varty (Credo)
David Robinson (F2 Music)
Olov Andersson (Grand Stand)
Kent Kroon (Friendship Time)
Derek Cook (Echoes)
Ron Brown (Ghost Circus)
Nicklas Barker (Anekdoten)
Michel St-Pere (Mystery, Unicorn Digital)
Henning Pauly (Frameshift, Chain, Solo)
Robert Berry (Alliance, Hush, 3, GTR, Magellan)
Nad Sylvan (Unifaun)
Bonamici (Unifaun)
Mats Johansson (Isildurs Bane)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
42 comments:
it is one thing to voice your displeasure but another to come up with a solution. the blog will become far more interesting a viable counter weight once you begin to express your solutions. the music blogs provide excellent information, apart from the mp3 files, but alas, too many just slap up an album with the sole intent to share it w/out authorization, credit, or link. but the ones that really go out of their way are excellent and make for great resources. how do you monetize those blogs is the key.
There are MANY ways to sample music without stealing it and the blogs should point to those sources. One of the blogs that we encountered early on was frustrated with the 'give me, give me' attitude of his visitors and when we approached him, he realized it was time for a change, he now has a new site, where he has legally approved content, provided by labels and artists that he is free to include on his site.
I would contend that it isn't the responsibility of the artists and labels to find a way to make money from people stealing, it is the responsibility of those that are stealing to find their moral center and stop doing it, there is just no valid excuse for it. We do appreciate your thoughts however.
thanks for the reply to my initial posting...
i used to be a regular buyer of cd's until i get hooked onto emusic. i just find everything about the site wonderful and i have several prog albums, some of which a royalty was paid to some of the artists here, that why not expand the whole enchilada. 40-trax for $7 - not bad, so i get about 4 albums a month. or you look @ yahoo w/ their modest subscription package, i get to rent an album for as long i want as long as i pay monthly susbription. so for less than $20, i've been able to build a pretty sweet digital library. what the services do not have is the fountain of information that some blogs provide. the emusic's just can't devote that time to a niche segment - nor can yahoo. but what if the prog labels got together and formed their own yahoo like service or expand the likes of mindawn. the costs of manufacture & distrubtion are yesterday, the the cost of recording, engineering & art can be stored in 1 file that never goes away that can create multiple sales again & again. you guys provide the data, the blogs provide the pizzaz, and we're all happy?
Those digital subscription models screw the arist over more than any other deal. As a label owner, I can tell the artist sees about $.01 per song on those systems, I don't think they will survive long because the artists are going to revolt soon.
Mindawn addresses this to a degree by letting the artists and labels customize the information themselves and Mindawn is adding more content all the time. There are however plenty of review sites out there, I personally visit several to help me judge a release I might be on the fence about, actually some of these review sites ARE blogs, we're all for information being out there, whether it is a blog or whatever. We've had blog owners ask if they can add songs or song snippets to the reviews, and we always agree. The point is a cooperation between the artists and the customers, not a sense of entitlement from people that they are somehow entitled to free music.
Distribution costs are reduced with digital, but they don't go away, you still have issues of storage and bandwidth and purchase processing fees, none of these are free. You still have the cost to create the album in the first place, which is also not free, the software, the hardware, the time involved to record, the mixing, the mastering. All these things cost money, maybe less than they use to, but it isn't free.
this is probably the most informed discussion that i've seen on this. too many of the other disvcussions are just folks screaming @ each other.
i appreciate the info.
Well that is the point of this, I'm glad it has been helpful for you. You might also look at some of the older blog posts at our myspace page www.myspace.com/progagainstpirates that has some more hard data and facts.
http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/magazine/16-01/ff_byrne?currentPage=all
Is David Byrne informed enough? What would you say?
I'm going to copy my recent comments on this article.
It seems like I read this a while ago, but while you can't argue with the fact that David has been involved with almost every aspect of the music industry, there are some just blatantly false statements he's making.
* It's basically free to record an album.
- Not really, although it is a lot cheaper than it use to be, but if you were to build your own HD recording studio with all the appropriate hardware and software, you will still spend $20,000 on it, now if you amortize that over multiple albums, then it gets cheaper, but just because you are able to record doesn't mean you are able to produce, mix and master, not to mention something as mundane as recording drums, this isn't easy, or cheap, to do right, and then there is learning how to use all the hardware and software, often times it is cheaper to pay someone else who already has the expertise.
* Distribution is free
- Well, not really, as digital still only accounts for a small percentage of the overall sales of music. Believe me, I'm on board with the whole digital thing (obviously) and it will move that way almost entirely in the next 5 years or so, but by doing this we are creating a whole generation that are the opposite of an audiophile. These are people listening to 128k MP3 files with earbuds. I bet if you put them in a room with surround sound and an album they were really familiar with you'd blow their minds. For now though, you are going to be doing physical packaging for some time. There is even a resurgence for vinyl recently that really surprised me.
* Artists handling it all themselves
- I've signed a number of established artists over the years simply because they don't want to deal with all the promotion, fulfillment and crap. Now if an artist could just record a couple songs, send them to the digital propagators and sell a bazillion copies without doing any promotion, that would be great, but it also isn't going to happen. People need to know it exists and they need to be able to easily acquire it despite their preferred method of acquisition.
so there is my 30 second summary.
Hi All,
I want to share a personal point of view of a kind that I feel often is missing when people are discussion free dowloading.
I am a musician myself but also a fan of other bands. I really enjoy listening to many, many bands.
I buy quite many CD's (I like albums and hope that the CD format will survive and live side by side with digital downloading).
Knowing how much time and effort are spent on composing, practising and alsomt endless rehearsals along with the many hours of recording an album and the money it costs to record it I gladely pay for the music.
I prefer to pay for it rather than have it for free. Am I stupid? Well, maybe or maybe not.
This is my point of view:
When I listen to an album I like I experience positive things, mainly emotional. Some guys (or girls) in a band have put down lots of work in creatin the music from where I have these experiences.
Paying for it is a way to say
"Thank you" and also to contribute to their next work.
And this makes me feel good.
A suggestion i want to make is this one. Since you guys want to promote selling stuff could you put up a post with links to get prog-stuff from you guys.
There is a ton of names of bands n this thread which i never had in my player and as a music geek i would like to dig into this stuff deeper.
Thanks to a post from Mr. Orford in a comment thread from a closed blog i stumbled on "Giant Electric Pea ltd." and am using that shop since then.
regards
Gert
Thank you Gert, that's a good idea. Pretty much all of this material is easily accessable from your favorite prog reseller or even Amazon and those places or regular stores. There are also a lot of really good internet radio stations that have the material and lots of others:
www.progrock.com
www.audiorealm.com
www.progpalace.com
www.deliciousagony.com
www.thedividingline.com
and many others
I have no problem with my music being on blogs and disagree with what you are doing.I have played in bands since 1972 when i was 16 and started basement jamming.i was one of the first punks in my hometown city of boston,mass and have a variety of cd/vinyl releases.I am Jordan Kratz currently playing in maine with big meat hammer and with the lynn rebels.
i have always shared my music and at 320k bitrates.i want fans not money and if someone can't afford my music they will still get to hear it.
i do not have a problem at all with any of these music type blogs.
i am against the people who would profit by making illegal dvd/cd and selling it but no issues with poor or just interested type people who want to download.
later, jordan aka gorehound13
Well here is the whole point, it is the artists decision to give away their music, not someone elses. If you want to give your stuff away, no one here is saying you shouldn't. What we object to in the strongest possible terms is someone giving it away for us without permission. There are plenty of places around that we've given a song to and let them put on their site or with a review or whatever.
In reaction to Piratekiller:
Thank you!
pointofview has a logical and easily understood concept that i believe is universal for those who share, yes, "share." Simply, if music is good, or thrown in someones face enough (MTV), people will buy it. If neither of the above, then the artists become car washers. I can't help but think how obsurred it is that this discussion revolves around music. The fact that it does suggest plenty about the participating artists and they're label(s).
I bought an album from my friend. He made it in his small apartment, then had it mastered and distributed it to friends. He didn't want any money, but I forced ten bucks on him. That's someone i'll give ten dollars to.
if you close the blogs there will be another way to download the music.........believe me
i know the older times from napster .. p2p..opennap..torrent...
something new will come ...may be more private opennapserver boards or something we dont know today
soso spent your time ....at last you loose......*g*
:D i pass these artists as arrogance money addicts to last.fm boards!
cheers guyz :)))
":D i pass these artists as arrogance money addicts to last.fm boards!
cheers guyz :)))"
No you didnt. I did check that out you know.
Maybe it's time bands get more strict with starting to sue people instead of friendly asking them to stop. Every discussion these "music-fans" keep writing down the same crap. They won't stop.
As Gene Simmons himself said: Sue them of the earth.
Gert
Yes I'll happily admit to being an "arrogance money addict", if that is indeed a valid technical term. Or at least I'd like to be;
I like money and I really wish I had some. Preferably lots of it.
My primary motivation in joining a band all those years ago(in common with pretty much everyone else in the history of the world that's ever been in a band) was because I wanted to be rich and famous.
Unfortunately I didn't entirely succeed but I had a reasonably good time in the process. I think that rich and famous are pretty good things to aspire to - what the hell's wrong with that? That's why there are queues all the way down the street every time auditions for a talent show like the X Factor hit town.
Rich and famous = good; poor and obscure = bad; seems like a no-brainer to me. Nothing wrong in making money out of something if you're good at it.
If you take that dream away will people still want to do music?
Only if they're completely obsessed and delusional and don't mind living in the gutter.
"If you take that dream away will people still want to do music?"
sure they will.
"if you close the blogs there will be another way to download the music.........believe me
i know the older times from napster .. p2p..opennap..torrent...
something new will come ...may be more private opennapserver boards or something we dont know today
soso spent your time ....at last you loose......*g*"
These kind of arguments are stated to make artists feel that they should give up. It is simular to the evil tactics once performed by slave owners.
"If you take that dream away will people still want to do music?"
sure they will.
No they won't.
Not unless they're complete idiots.
All that time and money invested in an album just to give it away to a bunch of freeloaders? You've got to be joking.
Are you downloaders in touch with the real world at all?
Mr. Orford, if your primary motivation in doing music is to make money, then why not go into commercial or soundtrack work? If you want to get famous, then why make prog music and not pop? You claim that if there is no monetary incentive, people will stop making music, but yet prog is filled with hundreds (thousands?) of bands that chose to make complex experimental music with no chance of commercial success. Are these bands all "delusional" as you claim? If so, then maybe being "delusional" is a prerequisite for being a good artist! Your assertion that "Rich and famous = good; poor and obscure = bad" thankfully has no relevance for the prog field. All praise to the delusional artists!
Woaw, Martin, read your comments over, again. You have to see that your stance is completely biasis when pertaining to how music is viewed by musicians. You can't speak for the whole. If you have a dream to be rich and famous, does it matter if you're a good musician or not? Can your dream alone make you rich and famous? Do you think you didn't succeed in being rich and famous because you wanted to be rich and famous? I don't mean to make this sound like a personal interview, but revaluate your stance, because right now, it sounds like you care little for the musical output, which gives more reason for people to download music.
proggo...over the line on that last comment. tell me that name of your band so can be sure not to buy.
Yeah, I'd consider doing pop music (Actually I'd love to do the Eurovision Song Contest) and I've done the odd bit of commercial film music in the past. If you're a musician you can't be too fussy about what you do if you want to make a living. And by the way WHAT IS SO WRONG ABOUT A MUSICIAN MAKING A LIVING????!!!!!!
But I do prog rock because I'm good at it and my music is of sufficient quality that I fully expect to be paid for it. If people want to make "complex experimental music" for no money that's up to them but you should still consult them before you give their music away on download sites!
Personally I have no interest whatsoever in experimental music and I hope that my next project will be one of the most accessible and radio-friendly prog albums ever made. I still hope to be rich and famous one day.
But I have no problem with alienating you downloaders because you won't buy it anyway.
"Anonymous said...
proggo...over the line on that last comment. tell me that name of your band so can be sure not to buy."
Anonymous,
I don't believe you are buying any music anyway. You only want the bands to feel that they might loose sales if they not agree to give their music for free.
The "you will sell more if you give it away for free argument" is such a stupid paradox.
Oh, btw, what's your name?
proggo...I'm the one who requested the name of your band. I've got over 1000 albums, mostly accumulated while benefiting from the discount I had when working for a music store for two years. I was referring to your slavery reference. It wasn't appreciated, and out of context.
I, personally, don't think like this: You only want the bands to feel that they might loose sales if they not agree to give their music for free.
Andy,
If you don't think link that then you should know that you are not the one addressed.
Ok some facts for people here who seem to insist that dowloading doesn't hurt the industry.
Fact 1: I know several people who have around 50 dvd's of mp3 downloads and never have the intention of buying the real stuff. I know a lot of people who have less in amount of downloads but also never intend to pay money for it.
Fact 2a: New albums are most times already on the internet for months before they come out officially.
Fact 2b: Of those i know who do fact 2a more then half of them never intend to buy the album
Fact 2c: Most of the guys who do 2b would have bought the album if they didnt downloaded it first.
And that's just a small group and small numbers. I think it's safe to say that what happens in my circle happens far more outside of it.
Still thinking that downloading is hurting the industry?
- In the days of tapes i didnt buy albums that much either. We shared on tape.
Yep i know that excuse too. One thing is different though. Say you have 5 friends who wanted it taped. Ok that's doable. Keep in mind the internet was still a myth.
Bloggers put up albums which at times are downloaded 1500+ times. Are you guys really stating that in the tape-days you would have copied that vinyl album 1500 times? Stop bulshitting around you never would have done that.
Ugh i could go on forever but somehow i feel it is futile anyway since in all the discussions i have read/participated in the downloaders almost never change their attitude. Instead of that they start to insult, start hate campaigns against those that don't agree with them (Shawn knows about this since there is a sticker going around which attacks Shawn and his business) And i won't even mention the hate-mails i have received for speaking up my mind in favor of businesses like the artists who are named in this blog.
Some facts about me:
1) I do hate the big guns in labels too? Why? Because for them it's all about profit. They put millions into new artists from who they know they will see millions more coming back. They don't give crap about the "music"
But therefor doing damage against the small labels? As i said before: Why the hell would the label of Mr. Orford do wrong to the artists on it and abuse the music fans who want to buy those artists? Why the hate against Shawn? Why would any business owner insult/abuse any of their customers/clients?
THAT DOESNT MAKE SENSE SINCE THEY WOULD BE OUT OF WORK.
Sorry for the caps but that sentence says everything. Anyone who says that sentence is not true tells more or less they aren't really having part of this discussiion, they are just here for the kicks and for the trolling.
Gert
I have made a point not to download commercially available music (for the most part) and am a consistent music buyer. I have purchased music from many bands that I discovered from downloading. In fact, I would bet that most of the people who make it to this site are the same way.
Thank you for providing a list of bands not to buy any music from.
1. something like 98% of people that download, don't purchase it.
2. so, you are against an artists right to protect his music and copyright? They've given you legal ways to preview their music, but that's not good enough for you? That would tend to indicate you don't in fact buy it.
"I have made a point not to download commercially available music (for the most part) and am a consistent music buyer. I have purchased music from many bands that I discovered from downloading. In fact, I would bet that most of the people who make it to this site are the same way.
Thank you for providing a list of bands not to buy any music from."
Some points:
- Did you buys all the music you thought was worth buying after downloading or did you keep mp3's behind?
- Most downloaders i encountered don't have the intention of buying all the good stuff in a shop. I would win that bet without ever having to worry about the end-result.
- And i don't think those bands would miss "fans" like you.
Gert
You call what 'you the undersigned' do "music"!?! You are the biggest bunch of no talent hairband rejected pompous boring unrecognizable has beens trying to cling to some sort of scene no one will ever care about...so this is how you focus your attention because you will never be famous or even considered progressive or even known as a musician outside your pathetic circle of friends in the light of history. You must be such a great musician since the world is just dying to download your swill, I'm impressed. Can't wait til some of you play a progfest so I can clothesline your corroded pussy ass face first into the stage punk rock style and really shut down your boring ass fake prog music. You think you will really profit from your campaign of hate and jealousy burying stuff that has nothing to do with you or anyone you will ever know - LP only releases that never will be issued!?! I will never buy a CD of a record. I collect LP's and since dicks like you have already ruined the prices of records, this is an invaluable tool to see if I should really pay hundreds for an album. Hope to see any of you at a record show or progfest soon; hope I'm the last thing you see before you black out!
PS I'm not a blogger, just somebody that thinks your scene and jealous greedy people should be erased from the planet!
NO ONE wants to download "YOUR" music! That's the real problem isn't it? if your music was sooo great people would be barreling over each other to get it on itunes wouldn't they??? has downloading killed itunes? don't think so. you're not good enough obviously or you wouldn't have time for these cowardly attacks on music that will never be commercially available or out of print.
blah blah blah - stop stealing our music then, we wouldn't be having this conversation if you guys weren't pirating each and every person here, we've covered this already.
Actually, you pirates must really like the music based on the login time from a lot of you that are listening to our player.
I completely respect what "progagainstpirates" is trying to do here, as well as the way this discussion started out...
but you have to recognize that the way it has devolved over the last 40 commments or so makes both sides look totally ignorant and unthoughtful. Please, and this goes for both sides, don't tell get going on the whole, "well they started it" thing. That was totally on your mind wasn't it?
"Progagainstpirates," you're not going to change any minds by making comments like Pirate Killer's last one or the one comparing downloaders to slaveholders. I recognize that it's frustrating, but you're just going to have to be satisfied in knowing that you're doing the right thing for the artists and keep yourselves from getting sucked into this garbage...
I am a blogger, and I swear I'm not just saying this, through about the first 15 comments, I seriously thinking about replacing a lot of my links to (commercially available) albums with a couple of mp3's and supplementing my reviews. Honestly though, by the end, I couldn't tell the difference any more. I know removing them is the right thing to do so just shut up about it before you start; I just feel you're doing the people you're representing a disservice by stooping to these "sharer's" level...
-William
Aw, Martin. As someone who used to know you many moons ago (and still admires you as a musician), I feel a little saddened by the stance you're taking here.
Of course artists should be be able to make money at what they do - only idiots would argue against that. THe point is; they still can if they keep their wits about them and adapt to today's realities instead of clinging to a past that's just dragging them down.
I defend file sharing not because it's morally right in any way, but because the alternative - an internet police state - is far, far worse. The genie is long out of the bottle, and there is really no way to get it back in, short of killing it.
Yes, it is lamentable that artists have, by and large, lost control of who downloads their stuff, of how it is done and when. Yes, it is definitely too bad that there is no way to get a direct correlation between people enjoying your art and you getting paid.
But that's already been the case with many aspects of creative endeavor before, and it has never killed the art. When radio came, live music was supposed to die out, because who would leave their home just to hear music now? When records came out, musicians were supposed to die out, and so on all the way down the line to file sharing today.
The thing is, you can kick and scream against it all you want, but it will not go away. It just won't. Accept that fact and it'll save you a coronary in five years. (And - hint to the "Pirate Killer" - it'll make you look a hell of a lot less like a smug, clueless and holier-than-thou bastard today)
There are plenty of other ways to make money off of the fact that people enjoy your music (and as noted, Martin, you've definitely chosen the wrong genre if you want to be rich and famous - although that does explain the Menel years).
As I keep saying, you have two incredibly powerful tools at your disposal; convenience and goodwill.
The second one first. Most music fans - even some of those who do a lot of downloading want to pay their favorite acts for providing them with pleasure (and, by and large, those who don't are the ones who wouldn't have bought the music in the first place). Survey after survey bears this out. And fans support their favorite acts in ways above and beyond buying a round chunk of plastic inside a breakable plastic case; from concerts to merchandise to just plain donations. I recall indie favorite Momus noting that he makes more off his PayPal button on his blog today than he did from a fifteen year career spanning as many albums. And preselling not-yet-recorded albums the Marillion and Blow Monkeys way is a viable option for any reasonably popular band.
And then convenience; pirating is work. The time of anyone who has a job is precious (especially if you're self-employed). Spending hours searching out a good download isn't going to be an option for any gainfully employed adult who can instead just get the file(s) (knowing they're of high quality, properly labelled and come with artwork, etc.) at a reasonable price.
These are two factors that any moderately savvy and net-conscious person can leverage into much more money than the standard label-CD-release route.
I've asked it before, and I ask it again; if downloads kill rather than drive sales, why did the Arctic Monkeys have the fastest selling debut album in UK history when it had been downloaded hundreds of thousands of times in the weeks preceding its release?
Please, Martin (and all you others tilting against windmills here), I urge you to let it go. Move on and accept this aspect as an unavoidable reality and then work your business plans from there. It'll work out better for you in the end, and you may well end up making it rich just because you did.
Ahh, the infamous "adapt" without any specifics of course, because you understand nothing about economics, you just like to tell people to use some new method that you don't know what it is.
At this point we've pulled about 60,000 albums and over 200 blog sites, and it has made a significant change in our sales. It's very simple to shut down this stuff, that's the point you people are missing.
You want specifics? Look at Jonathan Coulton. Made most of his fans through file-sharing. Makes a pretty decent living doing what he loves.
As he says; Just a get 1 000 true fans, and they will support you.
http://www.jonathancoulton.com/2008/03/05/1000-true-fans/
And if, in this day and age when you can reach people from all over the world, you can't get 1 000 people to like your art...maybe it's just not good enough.
Hopefully, your envisioned Police State Internet won't come true (although sometimes I fear it will), and hopefully you will see the light of forgiveness and calm before the bitterness and apoplexy kill you.
And I'm happy I posted under a pseudonym here rather than my real name, because your death penalty fetish genuinely worries me. Get help.
Ludophile,
Your posting is full of the same crap as from so many downloaders.
Reading between the lines I see that you guys think that labels (and band) must "adapt" to your greediness. You and your likings are always accusing hard working label owners and staff for the things that you stand for.
Greediness is one of these things.
You wrote:
"And I'm happy I posted under a pseudonym here rather than my real name, because your death penalty fetish genuinely worries me."
Ludo, you are an idiot if you believe anyone should fall for that nonsense, trying to make people like Pirate Killer look bad. The only ones agreeing with you are other greedy thiefs with something to hide. You are using a pseudonym simply because you are a coward and a thief who want to enjoy others work without paying.
Or, at best, getting it for peanuts.
I think you may see more artists start doing what Magellan is doing now: Holding back the release until a minimum threshold of donations and/or pre-sales have been made. Check out the strategy here:
http://magellanband.wordpress.com/2009/03/25/an-end-to-piracy-for-magellan
Post a Comment