The Music Industry Thread (Articles)

[Don Crack]

Pirate Bay prison sentences are final, court rules

THE SWEDISH Supreme Court will not grant leave to appeal The Pirate Bay criminal verdicts, meaning the prison sentences already handed down are final.

According to

Torrent Freak, the prison time and fines imposed on Peter Sunde, Fredrik Neij, Gottfrid Svartholm and Carl Lundström will stand.

In November 2010 the Swedish Court of Appeal found Neij, Sunde and Lundström guilty of criminal copyright infringement offenses.

The three had their prison sentences decreased from the levels ordered at their original 2009 trial, but were told to pay increased damages amounting to about $6.8m to the entertainment company plaintiffs.

After the latest hearing in the Supreme Court, Sunde will spend eight months in prison, Neij faces 10 months while Lundström has a four month sentence.

The fourth co-founder of the web site, Svartholm was not at the appeal hearings due to medical circumstances. Because he was also absent from an earlier hearing it was announced last year that his sentence of one year behind bars and a share of the damages would stand.

However, it's still possible that The Pirate Bay lot won't have to go to prison, as in the Swedish justice system it is common to deduct 12 months from any prison sentence on cases over five years old, depending on the court's decision.

Although The Pirate Bay is still running, it was

down this morning in some regions worldwide, including the UK.

The web site claims to be the world's most resilient, but it was down in a range of locations, according to messages on Twitter. "UPDATE: Reports of The Pirate Bay being down in Australia, UK, England, Korea, Canada, Mexico and New Zealand have been confirmed," said a tweet from the @Youranonnews account. µ

Source:

The Inquirer (http://s.tt/15weS)

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2143583/pirate-bay-prison-sentences-final-court-rules

[Don Crack]

'New York Magazine' Condescendingly Dissects WorldStarHipHop

New York Magazine dropped a fairly lengthy story on WorldStarHipHop. The story looked at the website's runaway success, which usually comes at the expense of making people of color look like bumbling, misogynistic, ultra-violence dealing coons.

New York writes:

“WorldStar,” for those who don't know, is WorldStarHipHop.com, which started in 2005 as just one more semi-swag hip-hop blog eventually featuring homemade videos of rappers and “sticky page” pix of buxom ladies. Over the years, however, the site has separated itself from the competition by depicting what founder

Lee “Q” O'­Denat

, a self-confessed “Haitian ghetto nerd” from Hollis, Queens, calls “the whole gamut; A-to-Z; soup-to-nuts; the good, the bad, and the ugly of the urban experience.”

I'm all for slandering World Star, but what exactly is a "semi-swag hip-hop blog"?

New York also asserts that World Star went meta after footage of a security guard catching the fade on the L train hit the site in November 2011. That's clearly suspect when you consider that World Star has been killing the page view game for years now. Vibe Magazine ran a story on World Star and its founder in early 2011. Also, there was the time 50 Cent

.

Again, I am no fan of World Star in the slightest, but the entire story had a tone of condescension that felt like the author could just as easily been belittling a better respected site like Okayplayer or The Smoking Section; if any of those were the site he was assigned to cover.

And while the story brings up some valid points--like most of the f*ckery on a site with "Hip-Hop" in its name being anything but Hip-Hop--moments like calling DJ Vlad's VladTV site WSHH's "upscale competitor" only result in a side eye.

But the worst is WSHH founder Q's attitude about the crap he posts, telling the magazine, "“What can I say? The truth hurts.”

True, coonery sho nuff is a sure fire way to get those unique visitor numbers up, and make a nice living.

http://hiphopwired.com/2012/02/08/new-york-magazine-condescendingly-dissects-worldstarhiphop-media-watch/

[Don Crack]

Let’s destroy the music industry that destroyed Whitney Houston before it claims other stars' lives

Devil’s Advocate: As Whitney Houston becomes the latest tragic singer to follow in the footsteps of Amy Winehouse and Michael Jackson, isn’t it about time to point the finger of blame in the directions of those who ought to bear some responsibility for snuffing out many of our generation’s brightest stars?

It wasn’t as steep a decline as Amy Winehouse’s, but the video that made the rounds a couple of years back of Whitney Houston on her UK tour massacring greatest hit I Will Always Love You pointed to a star still on a downward spiral, despite the performance being a particular low point of a supposed “comeback” tour.

As with Winehouse, the music business seemed as inclined as ever to suck whatever residual worth was left right out of her and into their coffers, via maintaining a wholly unrealistic touring and recording schedule for somebody who was allegedly hooked on one of the most addictive illegal hard drugs out there.

In doing so they acted with just as much grace as they with regards to the meltdown of Britney Spears, though at least she survived intact – even if that spark she had appears to have been snuffed out. Oh, and as for Jacko...

But news of this latest casualty reassuringly didn’t stop the record label profiting from her – quite the opposite. Indeed, Sony yesterday apologised after admitting “accidentally” hiking up the online prices for her greatest hits albums by a few dollars on Sunday, wasting no time just as the showbiz world was reeling in shock at Whitney’s premature passing the previous day.

Rather than rats leaving a sinking ship, when it comes to the major record labels it feels more as though the rats have instead accomplished some sort of impressive mutiny of the vessel – probably all hiding within the uniform of the deserted first mate, unsteadily waddling up to the controls of the deck as a collective whole then squeakily demanding that they take over.

Mind you, it’s not as though those in control of greatest artists’ record releases have acted particularly honourably in the past. Most of the supposedly greatest performers of the 20th century – such as Elvis, Johnny Cash, the Rat Pack singers, etc – were forced to cheapen their legacy in the latter part of their careers by pushing out dodgy albums, in thrall as they were to a watertight contract which never allowed them the chance to kick back and relax. (Though other parts of the machinery – such as the management, promoters, etc – should also assume responsibility for putting their acts they’re acting in the “interests” of in some sort of invisible straightjacket.)

Those artists at the top who appear the happiest seem to be those most in control over their destiny, and who have abandoned the need to fulfil deals that can stretch to decades and aren’t slanted in their favour. Whether or not you’re a fan of Madonna, that supposed obsessive control-freakery of hers at least allows her to do whatever the hell she wants to do – even if it be release duff movies such asW.E. – whenever the hell she wants to do it.

For years the major record labels have been exhorting us to stop piracy, as according to them it damages their industry. (Seemingly ignoring any evidence to the contrary.) Though, that not being enough, there’s also the allegation that it helps fund terrorism, meaning that a teenager can assure themselves with the knowledge that they’ve simultaneously opened their ears up to the back catalogue of Dire Straits just as they’ve helped push forward the prospects of a nuclear Armageddon. Well done young chap!

But isn’t there also a moral responsibility to bear with supporting an industry that see the careers of innocents – and young girls in particular – as something that’s expendable, as long as the figures work out on their balance sheets? The way in which they’ve acted doesn’t seem to have been affected in any way by the numerous amount of star musicians who have crashed and burned, and who continue to do so. (There’s quite a few who could be next.) As long as we continue to fund such brazenly amoral companies they shall have no quandaries over maintaining industry practises which flagrantly damage the health of those unwittingly stuck at its coal face (however much they might be getting paid).

So let’s put the innocents first, and put these bogus “talent factories” to death – the only thing that will really is a few executives’ sense of self-importance. When somebody needlessly passes away such as Whitney, boycott those who ought to assume some amount of responsibility, and get her music by those other means possible that won’t benefit the paymasters probably looking forward to a sales boost thanks to her death. The music industry can carry on with smaller, more accountable and more reassuringly human indie labels. Let the blood-suckers will move on to whatever other morally dubious enterprise might be the most readily profitable.

Right now those genuinely talent stars of yesteryear can easily subsist off of their own back, and bright up-and-comers are better off retaining creative control, and when they cede control doing so in more reversible and less ominous fashion to those with proper names and faces rather than suited automatons trying to work their way up the greasy company ladder. The music landscape would be far better for it.

Let’s take a stand: the worst perpetrators of this current subjugation are no better than those slave drivers who would whip their subjects into near-irrelevance in a modern age. Isn’t piracy preferable to this out-and-out cruelty? Whitney was aware of that for years but too weak to resist – now we have a chance to rectify that and pay tribute to her in the best possible way, by taking the moral high ground out from under those who use it only for their own financial sustenance. The major labels can slowly (or hopefully more quickly) wither away: there’s no better time to exorcise their risible memory from our history, and instead of worrying about their survival remember Whitney who – despite her faults – deserved far better.

http://entertainment.stv.tv/opinion/297849-lets-destroy-music-industry-to-stop-it-destroying-stars-such-as-whitney-houston/

[Don Crack]

Music Industry Mulls Suing Google Over “Pirate” Search Results

The recording industry considers filing a lawsuit against Google for allegedly abusing its dominant market position to distort the market for online music. Industry groups including IFPI and the RIAA want Google to degrade links to “pirate” websites in its search results. IFPI has obtained a “highly confidential and preliminary legal opinion” to see if they can force Google to step up its anti-piracy efforts though a lawsuit.

It’s no secret that the entertainment industries believe search engines are not delivering enough when it comes to protecting copyright works.

Two months ago the RIAA and IFPI accused Google of massively profiting from piracy and obstructing efforts of rightsholders to reduce the availability of illegal content.

Thus far, this row between Google and the entertainment industries has largely taken place behind closed doors, but a confidential document circulating among music industry executives shows that a lawsuit is also being considered.

“IFPI’s litigation team, in coordination with the RIAA, is continuing to negotiate with Google to obtain better anti-piracy cooperation in various areas,” the unpublished document obtained by Handelszeitung and partly shared with TorrentFreak explains. It is noted that Google provided recording labels with a special online search interface that allows for mass queries to be marked as infringing.

Using this interface, IFPI reported a massive 460,000 Google search results between August and December 2011. In addition, hundreds of Blogger sites were reported and shutdown upon request from the music industry group.

But IFPI claims this is still not enough, and is considering suing Google because the company fails to censor links to infringing content.

“Google continues to fail to prioritize legal music sites over illegal sites in search results, claiming that its algorithm for search results is based on the relevance of sites to consumers,” the document states.

“With a view to addressing this failure, IFPI obtained a highly confidential and preliminary legal opinion in July 2011 on the possibility of bringing a competition law complaint against Google for abuse of its dominant position, given the distortion of the market for legitimate online music that is likely to result from Google’s prioritizing of illegal sites.”

In other words, IFPI accuses Google of antitrust practices by failing to censor its search results in favor of the music industry. Strong words, and quite unprecedented if a lawsuit does indeed get filed.

A “Voluntary Code of Practice” suggested by the entertainment industries last monthrevealed that the IFPI and RIAA want all search engines to de-list popular file-sharing sites such as The Pirate Bay, and give higher ranking to ‘legal’ alternatives.

Today we learned that if Google doesn’t give in to these demands, an unprecedented lawsuit may follow.

[imhim]

adele sells more albums (or singles cant remember) then whitney houstons bodyguard

and whitney houston grossed $25,000,000 frm that ...

[hardface]

Good Topic

[Yak_Louis]

[Yak_Louis]

[Yak_Louis]

Prime Minister 'disappointed' with music industry over explicit videos

The head of a Church Of England pressure group has accused the UK music industry of a poor response to a report concerning sexualised music videos - and has reportedly been backed by PM David Cameron.

Reg Bailey, author of Government-commissioned report Let Children Be Children and head of the Mothers' Union, said: "Many of the industries mentioned in last year’s report have responded positively to our recommendations. I cannot say that has been the case with music videos... Age ratings should be introduced for music videos. There is also a clear case for age-verification for [music video] sites.”

Bailey's accusation follows recommendations in his report triggered by parents' fears over explicit content in certain music videos. According to The Telegraph, Prime Minister Cameron is understood to be “disappointed” with the music industry’s response.

Universal Music UK chairman and CEO David Joseph told Music Week last month: "I think David Cameron has a point in raising the issue - but it's about what we do with it once it's been raised. I would welcome a move towards voluntary measures, but I 100% do not welcome a move towards classification boards."

http://www.musicweek.com/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=1049100&c=1

[Yak_Louis]

Madonna Scores Biggest Drop In Chart History

Schadenfreude alert! Madonna’s unfortunate new club-pop album MDNA, which has been marketed about as hard as an album could possibly be marketed, has now scored the biggest second-week drop in sales in all of Soundscan history. Last week, the album sold about 359,000 copies — a healthy number, and good enough to land it as #1. As it turns out, though, those numbers were greatly inflated because many of those sales came as giveaways with a live-ticket package. This week, the album sold 46,000 copes, an 88% drop. And if Madonna hadn’t inflated her sales with those concert-ticket packages, it turns out that she would’ve lost the number #1 last week to Lionel Richie’s Tuskegee, of all things. Check out the Forbes report.

http://stereogum.com/997702/madonna-scores-biggest-drop-in-chart-history/news/

[Yak_Louis]

Pissing Off Artists With The Truth

I realize most of you don’t want to hear what you have to do as artists to succeed. Many of you want to be told what you are doing is right. But would you prefer to fail? Because most of you will.

Somewhere, somehow, you got the idea that this is a free industry and someone will come along and discover you, and put you on! Well, if that IS the case, they won’t ‘discover you and put you on,’ they will sign you to their company and take 88% of the money. That’s called a production deal or a “middle man deal.” They rarely work out well, for obvious reasons.

If you balk, and have enough leverage (which you don’t, because all you’ve done to build your name and career is sit at your computer and send out links or mp3s of your music), the person ‘putting you on’ might sign you to a 50/50 deal–but they still collect 100% of the money because they have the leverage. IF you make any money, after paying back 100% of your expenses from your half (and you won’t) THEN you get a check. In 20 years, I can count those artists on both hands–and none of them ‘got on’ by sending out music to industry folks. I’m still waiting for a successful artist who got signed from a demo or from sending out music for “feedback” to step forward and say “this is how I did it.” They can’t. There aren’t any. But I see tons of artists signed to nobodies or bullshit labels/companies/middlemen impossibly trying to break their 7-10 year contracts….daily.

If you’re going to send out music, send it to fans–ya know, the people who might like it and spend 99 cents to download more of your songs from iTunes (which you get onto through companies like TuneCore). The fact that it’s 2012 and I’m still saying this same sh*t (for 20 years now) over and over, tells me most artists aren’t looking to succeed.

It makes me sad that in 5 or 10 years from now, you’re gonna think you failed because your music wasn’t good enough. No, you failed because you didn’t take the time to learn how the music industry works AND because you were too stupid or arrogant to look at the top 20 selling artists in your genre and figure out what they did to succeed.

Furthermore, you’re an idiot if you think a good co-sign ‘put them on.’ The successful artists were signed because they had something going on in their region and the bigger artist noticed and signed them (yes, they signed their friends too, but they were rarely successful and besides, that’s not you–you are not Lil Wayne’s or Ricky Rozay’s lifetime buddy, try as you might). When you look closely, you will see this is the case: Lil Wayne didn’t put Drake or Nicki Minaj on….they were signed because their respective buzz was through the roof!! Hopefully you will realize this before you turn 30, which is really too late!!

You didn’t notice because you’re either too ignorant to learn how this industry works or you were too busy sending me your music to notice what’s REALLY going on… Regardless, good luck to you! I want you to win! I really hope one of you proves me wrong. I’ve been waiting 20 years for that!!

Yeah, I realize this post pisses you off. You really just want me to listen to your music and tell you that you’ll be the next hot thing in music, that you’re better than Jay Z and that you’ll sell way more than he ever did. LMFAO!!!! But I’m not willing to lie to you!! And I’m not willing to waste my time listening to your music when I know that all that matters is the buzz you build. When I hear the buzz, I’ll listen to your music.

By the way, building a buzz with fans IS how Jay Z ‘got on’…

http://wendyday.wordpress.com/2012/04/08/pissing-off-artists-with-the-truth/

[Platinum50]

Wendy Day knows her stuff still