The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.
Steal This Comic [XKCD]
xkcd.com — I spent more time trying to get an audible.com audio book playing than it took to listen to the book. I have lost every other piece of DRM-locked music I have paid for.
Rekzai- 6552 diggs
- digg it
- diggerman32, on 10/13/2008, -12/+1025***** The RIAA
- JoeDiggsIt, on 10/13/2008, -2/+83I'm writing my junior year research paper on the ills of the RIAA. It is seriously mind blowing to know all the dirty doings they are involved in. Believe me from the research I've been doing, they won't be here in 5 years. (Ok, fine I'm sure you already knew that)
- cfuse, on 10/13/2008, -0/+16People don't get punished for being vile in politics, they get elected. Being scum is actually an advantage in politics - they are a political lobby group.
- mikeon, on 10/13/2008, -0/+27I'd look forward to reading your research paper on RIAA. When can we expect your paper posted to the web? Summer 2009?
- JoeDiggsIt, on 10/13/2008, -0/+14By the end of this year probably. I'll be sure to submit it to Digg. ;-)
I really picked one of the best times possible to have picked that topic, within the past three weeks:
The settlement on the Jammie Thomas case, Muxtape's normal service goes under due to the RIAA whining, and most importantly, although not many know the details, they again increased royalty fees for online radio and as many of you know, will probably kill Pandora. - thscientist1, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2IB Junior Research?
- SystematicChaos, on 10/13/2008, -0/+5I'm friending you so I can see this paper later this year.
- arah91, on 10/13/2008, -0/+1Ya ill be doing the same thing as SystematicChaos.
- JoeDiggsIt, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2K, I'll be sure to shout it to you guys when it's done.
- ClockworksNine, on 10/13/2008, -0/+144***** anything DRM. Period.
I'm sick of this *****, all it does is stall progress, entertainment, work, and creativity. You listening, EA, Sony, Ubisoft, Apple, Microsoft, and everyone else?- WoollyMittens, on 10/13/2008, -0/+25They don't care if it stalls anything. In fact, stifling innovation and re-re-selling us our purchases works out as the most profitable for them.
- Galaxylander, on 10/13/2008, -0/+5Less Apple, less Microsoft, Less all of the companies that sell the music, it's *all* the production companies.
- temujin2012, on 10/13/2008, -0/+6They spend quite a bit of money keeping up with DRM, whereas if they were to invest in trying to find a different distribution method, perhaps they'd be making even a better profit?
- KirbyMeister, on 10/13/2008, -0/+5*coughsteamcough*
- pHreaksYcle, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2Steam is awesome! They have GOOD DRM which actually allows your ***** to be used where you want it to be, when you want it to be. Steam is as close to perfect as it gets right now.
Also, notice how nothing open source is on his list :) - PHi11Y, on 10/13/2008, -0/+1I actually don't see Microsoft & Apple being as big players as they are now in 10 years time. With the more "friendly" linux releases, and exponentially more people choosing "tech-savvy" hobbies, and with Firefox etc, and Steam possibly being ported to Linux (thus solving most of the cross-platform games problem), I see OSS being a big thing soon, even bigger than ever imagined.
And before anyone says that wouldn't happen because Microsoft etc pay their developers, who develop Linux in their spare time; most distros are actually designed for profit, with free alternatives. See Novell's SUSE for that.
And the advent of that will mean DRM will be nigh-on impossible, and simply not financially viable. Soon they'll have to work WITH the customers, not use them as they have been doing; after all, the customer's always right?
The future's bright... - MikeSD34, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3DRM isn't entirely without purpose, it allows innovative systems like streamed video rentals and all you can eat subscription based services. Is it the right answer for purchased content which you're then supposed to own forever? Of course not! The idea of DRM itself isn't evil, just the current implementations there of.
The industry and the lobbying is where the bulk of your attention should be focused. The DMCA and the RIAA/MPAAs treatment of their customers is abysmal at best, as well as their enforcement of the requirement that the music they sell through services like iTunes be protected with DRM.
- SuperIntendent, on 10/13/2008, -1/+15Amen!
- lex0nyc, on 10/13/2008, -1/+9... in the rear with a steel claw.
- DocOBackbush, on 10/13/2008, -30/+2So, because we want to "stick it to the man", we're now encouraging stealing? Copyright violations? BREAKING THE LAW?
It's not YOUR music. Seriously. You can't use that music any way you want -- you're under an agreement to use it for certain purposes. Sure, it's a bit silly the restrictions they have -- and really greedy too. If you don't like it, don't buy it. No one says you gotta get it.
Damn americans and their sense of entitlement.- Fordi, on 10/13/2008, -2/+20"If you don't like it, don't buy it."
Fine, if there's DRM on it, I won't.
(and this is where the piracy comes in)
I'll pirate it instead.
You don't like it? Well, sorry. There's several million people who feel a similar way. No amount of legal gerrymandering will change their minds. You might be able to convince me, but I'm easy. Can you convince them?
As more people are burned with DRM, sales of DRM infected material will diminish. Sell it unrestricted, and if I like it, I'll happily buy a copy from you. To this end, I have; I've paid for every Jack Conte and Jonathan Coulton (to name a couple) song put out to date. In the case of Coulton, I paid him my guess as to the value of the downloads *after* pirating them (and overshot by about thirty bucks, so he tells me).
But I won't pay one red cent for a song that is infested with digital restrictions management. - SpeedSteamBoat, on 10/13/2008, -1/+24"So, because we want to "stick it to the man", we're now encouraging stealing? Copyright violations? BREAKING THE LAW?"
Yes. Bad laws are meant to be broken.
It has naught to do with entitlement. - DocOBackbush, on 10/13/2008, -18/+3To Fordi...
So because you don't like the terms of the contract/TOS you could enter with the copyright holder, that gives you the right to steal from them? You're a ***** bastard who deserves to get caught. If you don't like their business practices, then sure -- don't spend your money. But stealing makes you even MORE WRONG than them.
To SpeedSteamBoat...
Copyright law protects those who create work. It's absolutely no different if you stole gas because you didn't like the price of gas. (and don't start with the whole "not stealing *****" because at the very root of it, you're taking something you didn't pay for. That's wrong). - mouthymadness, on 10/13/2008, -1/+12Breakin' the law, breakin' the law........
- cyrix, on 10/13/2008, -0/+11Why the hell do you think it's just Americans that do this? You realize this is a worldwide thing right? Eesh.... Sounds like you just wanted a reason to take a stab at Americans.
- temugen, on 10/13/2008, -3/+4If you don't want people taking it from you, don't make it in the first place.
- Lunarsight, on 10/13/2008, -1/+5Doc - When the colonists felt they were being unfairly taxed, they took a whole shipment of tea and dumped it into Boston Harbor.
That's stealing, and it was illegal, and those "bastards deserved to get caught". (See where I'm going with this?)
Off the record, I'm personally not big on piracy - however, if I already purchased a piece of music, I'm not going to turn around and repurchase it if the provider of the DRM-file goes belly up or discontinues the service. (Walmart is a classic example of the latter.)
Nor am I going to repurchase the same piece of music to use it in a different place and/or format. (The record labels that push for this are delusional, IMHO.) - Fordi, on 10/13/2008, -0/+5@Doc:
I've had this argument with idiots like you before. The issue is not whether I have the right, or whether I deserve caught. The issue is whether rights can be enforced when a content producer takes action to encourage violation of his own rights (adding transient DRM 'protection').
Yes. Use of DRM is encouragement to pirate. Why?
The way the situation plays out way too often: I buy an album using DRM. A year later, I buy a new computer. Oh look, the DRM'ed content won't reactivate on my new computer (or, insert random and common DRM failure here). Suddenly, I'm not getting what I paid for. I feel ripped off. Well, ***** that*. I paid for it, I'm going to get what I paid for. I download a pirate copy.
But it's not done, now. Apparently, if I want use of something I've paid to use, I have to become a criminal. Well, hell. Why not skip the middle man here (as the comic illustrates). Now I've joined the legions of people who, disenfranchised by the bad business decisions of companies that are supposed to be protecting their artists, have gone to piracy to get their music fix.
At this point, it's gotten to where there are *far* too many people to go after, and to where they're not afraid of the chance of a lawsuit. Even the RIAA's heavy-handed legal persecution of their own creation has only served to produce animosity toward their component businesses.
DRM, for them, is a losing game. Every effort they make to close the floodgates results in bad press and lost sales.
Make it open. Make it easy. Make it quality. Then I'll pay money for your product - if I like it.
* Too few businesses appear to take into account the '***** that' factor. Succinctly defined, it's what happens when, for the consumer, the cost in time, money and frustration of dealing with your business exceeds the value of the business' product. For music, all this value has to exceed is the product of the perceived risk factor and cost of a lawsuit - and let me tell you: that is a very low number indeed (around $0.46, or $3500 for Fast settlement * 750 lawsuits / 5.7M potential targets). Once the cost of frustration - or loss due to DRM failure - exceeds 46 cents per song, the business has lost a user. - DocOBackbush, on 10/13/2008, -5/+4@Lunarsight- The Boston Tea party was to contest unfair taxes that colonists had no choice to pay. Last time I checked, you have options on where to buy this luxury item. Yes, music is a luxury item. If you don't like the terms of sale, it doesn't make it right to steal from the copyright holders.
@Fordi- I agree with you! Yes! Vote with your wallet! Make quality and I'll buy it too! And there damn sure is a cost of frustration. I'm not even going to debate with you that the *IAA is a bunch of greedy bastards who have no concept of the current business model. I find their actions despicable.
But guess what? You *knew* when buying DRM, you're willingly giving up certain "fair use" rights -- even if that concept of fair use is more social than legal.
You entered into a license agreement where you are restricted. You paid money for that, willingly. No one has a gun to your head. You won't starve to death without that music. But you also need to realize, no business lasts forever. I'm sure in the fine print, there was a clause to that DRM you agreed to. It varies for each major distributor. You knew that you bought wouldn't last forever, yet you spent your money anyways.
If you were wronged and you're seeking to pirate to make it right for that specific track, then I can understand that. There's a balance to things, and that makes it more or less right. But using THAT as the excuse for unchecked theft... "just because they *can* screw me" is wrong. Plainly wrong. That's like saying "Because FORD sells POS cars that are lemons, that means I can steal any car I want since I don't want to get ripped off buying *any* car." Sure, IP isn't a tangible good, but taking something without paying is wrong -- one song or one car, it's still wrong.
There are other legal options to purchase this luxury product, ranging from physical media to online downloads that won't impede on socially accepted "fair use" rights. - DarkFoxDK, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3When i pay for something, I want to decide for myself, where, when and with what i want to use it.
To (ab)use one of their usual analogies:
If you buy a car, you can drive it where ever the hell you want within the traffic laws, but what if all the car companies decided that you could only use your car on the highway? and if you wanted to drive on the smaller roads, you'd have to buy your car again in a model licensed for smaller roads?
I know cars and music is not the same, but RIAA doesn't, so there. - Tanktunker, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2Actually the Boston Tea party was to contest the stranglehold that the British East India Company had on tea in America because they had to pay no taxes or customs.
In effect, their goal was that either everybody paid taxes, or nobody did. - Lunarsight, on 10/13/2008, -0/+5Doc - Steal from the copyright holders? They already got my money once.
I'm totally okay with that, but I draw the line when they try and double-dip me, charging me more than once for the same thing.
If that makes me a criminal and a thief, then so be it. - Lunarsight, on 10/13/2008, -0/+1@Tank - You're actually right. I did some reading on the Boston Tea Party, and the people protesting probably weren't any better than the British government.
Basically, the British government gave the BEIC the okay to sell tea directly to the US sans a tax, undercutting wealthy American tea smugglers in the process. The smugglers were pissed, since this gave the BEIC a competitive edge, and that's what began the protest.
So, Doc - your assessment wasn't correct here, but neither was mine.
My basic point was if the rules are not reasonable, there's nothing wrong with a little civil disobedience. (Although, again - I acknowledge the Boston Tea Party is probably not the best example I could have used.) - DocOBackbush, on 10/13/2008, -3/+2DarkFoxDK-- I understand where you're coming from. I truly do. But when you purchase music, movies, or any other media, you buy the media and a license for it. Legally, you must abide by that license -- and most of the time, it's fair. For example, you can't buy Goonies II on DVD and replay it on a big screen in public, charging everyone $2 admission. You simply didn't buy those replay rights with the DVD meant for Home/Private use.
A better example with cars is car rentals. You abide by certain rules -- milage, speed, locations. If you don't like those rules, either break them and risk getting caught -- or simply find another business.
Lunarsight-I can also understand your hatred of companies trying to double-dip you. But, that's part of doing business with media. You agreed to those terms and those limits.
Say I buy a photographic print that's 8x10. Several years down the road, the artist releases a larger size -- 60" (much like the fidelity increase between cassette and CD). You bought it 8x10, does that mean it's ok to steal it at the 60" size? Download a pirated high-res scan, take it to a Kinkos/Costcos/Whatever and make a print there. I mean, the artist got your money once, and it's just a REPRINT of the same thing...so in a way, it's not unlike digital media. No, it's wrong to do that.
It really does come down to this: if you don't like the contract, don't sign it. Even if it's totally unfair and potentially illegal. Do business with someone else. There are plenty of competitors out there who *do* cater to your desires. If you choose to steal, regardless of the reasons, it's wrong. - kirado4, on 10/13/2008, -0/+5@ Doc you are wrong. Buying something does not mean you are legally bound to the licensing agreement if the agreement is illegal and infringes on your rights of ownership and privacy and many other issues. It doesn't matter what info is in a UELA.. it doesn't automatically make it legally binding despite what companies may tell you. Even if you agreed to it.
Also buying something is not the same as signing a contract. .even signing a contract if there are clauses that are unenforceable it is illegal. It doesn't matter.. checking a tick box means nothing.
It's also illegal to sell crippled products that will self destruct.. that's exactly what DRM is. It protects no-one.. and infringes on your rights as a customer.
Installing software unbeknownst to a user on a their pc is illegal and can result in jail time for any one other than a company who does that and gets found out about it.
You have the right to run uncrippled products on your hardware.
Infact companies are the ones who have devalued their own products by putting ridiculous restrictions on them. If you can't resell a product it has no value to you as a consumer.. and if it has no value then there is no there is no point in investing in it.
If you want to make money.. you have to fist value your product yourself.. then the consumer has to want to actually buy it from you.. if the consumer doesn't want to pay then there is no demand and no market.. and you go out of business.. it's reall simple.. even if you spent a lot of money making your product.. it doesn't automatically mean it has any money value to someone else..
No one has gone out of business because of piracy.. not to mention how much the media companies rampantly pirate and get away with it.. with the usual slap on the wrist. People just want equal rules.. we are the market.. we are the demand.. supply us with what we want or be punished. - jehan60188, on 10/13/2008, -0/+4when you purchase a potato, are you only allowed to make french fries out of it? if you want it au gratin, there's an extra fee?
and don't even THINK about making mashed! - Fordi, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2@Doc:
I'm not arguing that I have the right to pirate. It wouldn't be called piracy if I did.
I'm arguing that DRM itself is incentive to piracy. - thelizardreborn, on 10/13/2008, -3/+1@Fordi:
And stupid people are incentive to murder. That doesn't make it right. People need to stop rationalizing and learn some self-control.
I know I'm gonna get buried by any digger that happens to get this far through this thread, but wrong is wrong, no matter how angry you are.
I do agree with the civil disobedience argument. I have no problem with anyone who is willing to pirate and accept the punishment to make a point about what rights they believe they should have. So which of you is going to send your name to the RIAA first? - Demener, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2Do these CDs have a clear "Warning, you may only rip the music from this CD once." warning on the cover? If not it's false advertising.
When they were installing viruses into the kernel of computers with every CD these companies got into a ton of trouble and bad pr really fast.
Also last I checked tea is a luxury item, we just still happened to have that whole British tea fetish over here back then. - coyote1284, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2"You can't use that music any way you want"
But if the way I want to use it is the way it's meant to be used, LISTENING TO IT, what sense does it make that I be punished for doing such any way I want? I'm not reselling it, I'm not presenting it as my own work, I just want to be able to listen to it on my computer, or my mp3 player, or whatever, without being considered a criminal for changing its data type. It's no different from a mix tape. Perhaps if I borrowed a CD from a friend, just listened to it once and didn't rip it, but never bought a copy for myself, we'd still both be criminals because he allowed me to hear it freely and I didn't pay to listen to it? Isn't that "lost revenue" for the record company?
"It's absolutely no different if you stole gas because you didn't like the price of gas."
Sure, but no law says I can't take the gas that I've put in one container than pour it into another container. - coyote1284, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2How is it that it's perfectly legal to take my CDs to a record store, they give me money, and then turn around and re-sell it? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think FEI got a cent from the money I paid for the previously owned copy of Poe's "Hello" album I bought in a pawn shop. I might as well have downloaded the tracks for all the fuss RIAA makes about "lost revenue" from pirated music.
- DocOBackbush, on 10/13/2008, -1/+0I think trying to reason with people in this mindset is useless. You deep down truly believe that you are entitled to something for nothing. You have a lot of really well thought out reasons to justify your actions, and honestly, some of them really make sense and I'd even agree with them -- if there were no other choices. But there are plenty of other choices.
But when it comes down to it, you'd rather steal than pay. You're nothing but petty thugs who hide behind the internet as cowards --- and that's coming from someone with the anonymous name of Doc O. Backbush.
You're a thief. Crook. You demand the highest value, but you provide none of your own when obtaining that value -- you want want want want want, but pay? huh, what's that?.
You disgust me, and it's that sense of entitlement that will truly be the downfall of the worldwide economy. - Lunarsight, on 10/14/2008, -0/+1When all else fails, there's always the ad hominem rant to fall back on. (grin)
- coyote1284, on 10/14/2008, -0/+3So, Doc, how is selling a CD to a friend or pawnshop or buying a CD second-hand, where the record company and the artist see none of the profit, legal? That's what the RIAA is concerned about, not getting their money. Here, you can have this copy-protected Creed CD I don't want any more and no one has an issue with it, but god forbid I rip it to my computer under different audio formats for different devices, then I'm a thief!?
- Lunarsight, on 10/14/2008, -0/+2@thelizardreborn: While you're right there are possible legal ramifications for civil disobedience, it doesn't mean you have to go and turn yourself into the authorities either.
To a degree, it's a chess match. Pirates see how much they can get away with, and realistically? The record labels do the same. Both sides are angling for position to shift the paradigm in their favor, and neither side has any qualms about breaking the rules to get there.
That's one thing that has always driven me crazy - there's a lot of focus on the illegality of pirating music, but has anybody been paying attention to the antics of record labels lately? Sony trying to smuggle a DRM-focused rootkit onto its audio discs in 2005? The major record labels turning the entire judicial system into a kangaroo court? Not to mention all sorts of questionable/shady tactics in their war against to P2P networks.
In terms of following the law, the four major record labels aren't behaving any better than the pirates are. - DocOBackbush, on 10/14/2008, -1/+0Please, for the love of all that is good in the world, get off your high horses. I'm there with you...I agree completely with each of you when you say the Record Companies/Copyright Holders/etc have been trying to screw us.
-They're looking out for their bottom line.
-They really don't care how we get trampled in that ratrace for profit.
-They'll break laws, get a slap on the wrist. We break them, it's endgame essentially.
But let's face it...they make the rules over their content. If you don't like those rules, then don't buy it. Put them out of business. Oh wait, they're turning record profits -- so there are people who buy their goods. And they *know* there's a demand for their goods -- because people pirate it. Which makes it into a nice little excuse should they want more laws, more profits, more control...especially if sales are less than projected.
Pirating their stuff only gives them fuel for their fire. And I feel that it's a mistake to give the evil-doers any more reason to take up arms. But seriously...stealing their stuff coldly doesn't make you right even if you've been wronged. - Lunarsight, on 10/14/2008, -0/+2Doc - I agree with you to a degree. I do believe that the major four record labels should be boycotted outright rather than pirated.
However, as far as DRM goes, I have absolutely no qualm breaking the DRM in situations where the music I purchased would be unusable otherwise.
If iTunes were to suddenly go belly up and put me in a predicament where the music I did purchase was going to become unavailable, would I do what I could to preserve it in some other format? Absolutely. I wouldn't have an ounce of guilt, since they already got my money.
Do you have to like that? No. And I'm sure you'll go on ad nauseum about how you disagree, and how I'm an villainous evil-doer who sacrifices babies and chuckles gleefully while doing so.
- Fordi, on 10/13/2008, -2/+20"If you don't like it, don't buy it."
- IgnoranceSucks, on 10/13/2008, -8/+1So much greed from both sides... it makes me sick.
Wake up and think about what you are saying. - temugen, on 10/13/2008, -0/+26***** The MPAA
- lmf49, on 10/13/2008, -0/+5Well Said Old Chap
- dmrick, on 10/13/2008, -1/+4***** the NCAA!
- seraph582, on 10/13/2008, -1/+6***** the NAACP!
- pHreaksYcle, on 10/13/2008, -1/+1I can't help myself. Nugg.
Scratch that. DUGG!
- pHreaksYcle, on 10/13/2008, -1/+1I can't help myself. Nugg.
- mcsenget, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2***** them in their stupid asses.
- blackace007, on 10/14/2008, -0/+1***** the UIAA
- pHreaksYcle, on 10/14/2008, -0/+1Who in the ***** is that?
- JoeDiggsIt, on 10/13/2008, -2/+83I'm writing my junior year research paper on the ills of the RIAA. It is seriously mind blowing to know all the dirty doings they are involved in. Believe me from the research I've been doing, they won't be here in 5 years. (Ok, fine I'm sure you already knew that)
- ani625, on 10/13/2008, -50/+3True Mr.Munroe.
but could be in for some trouble.- WickEd101, on 10/13/2008, -0/+12Pretty sure this is 99% of websites' stance on piracy so there's no reason why he'd be singled out for being controversial. We all agree with him. Have you ever heard a positive-DRM article? No, because I don't think they exist. every single article on every single website agrees with him.
The only website that would be different is www.riaa.com. And their website is an ugly, ad-infested site that looks like it might push spyware onto you.
- WickEd101, on 10/13/2008, -0/+12Pretty sure this is 99% of websites' stance on piracy so there's no reason why he'd be singled out for being controversial. We all agree with him. Have you ever heard a positive-DRM article? No, because I don't think they exist. every single article on every single website agrees with him.
- TubbyCat, on 10/13/2008, -4/+340This message needs to be heard. Spread the word.
- livewire1337, on 10/13/2008, -27/+15have you heard? BIRD is the word!
- diggerman32, on 10/13/2008, -17/+8Indeed I've heard that the bird is the word!
Has he heard that the bird is the word?
(Burry me I don't care... it just means that you haven't heard the word) - chumpbender, on 10/13/2008, -2/+7Your doing it wrong.
- MicrosoftBob, on 10/13/2008, -0/+6I actually had a dream last night about "The Bird."
Damn you Peter Griffin and your new minions.
- diggerman32, on 10/13/2008, -17/+8Indeed I've heard that the bird is the word!
- lex0nyc, on 10/13/2008, -22/+3*fart noise*
- farfromhere, on 10/13/2008, -3/+7As soon as I read TubbyCat's comment, I saw that there was a reply buried beneath it. I knew what it was even before I clicked "Show."
Oh dear.
=/- lukedamonkey, on 10/14/2008, -0/+1Holy *****, It's farfromhere!
- walkea1, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3holy crap I hope steve jobs reads xkcd.
- petethepanda, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2This "message" being heard won't make a difference.
No matter how many DRM-free options there are (such as Amazon mp3), people will continue to pirate anyway. - Raptor007, on 10/13/2008, -0/+1Absolutely!! I don't usually digg the "every Mon/Wed/Fri" XKCD submissions, but this one has such an important message.
- Trael, on 10/14/2008, -1/+0Have you heard? The bird is the word!
- livewire1337, on 10/13/2008, -27/+15have you heard? BIRD is the word!
- pavelmah, on 10/13/2008, -55/+13Frontpage is 3...2...1
- andregriffin, on 10/13/2008, -0/+6Blastoff!
...wait, what were we counting to again? - whyufail, on 10/13/2008, -0/+4To be honest, that was the first thing I thought when I saw the comic for today...
- andregriffin, on 10/13/2008, -0/+6Blastoff!
- cbabraham, on 10/13/2008, -5/+634A message so important XKCD basically skipped out on a comic to bring it to you.
Dugg- ignisatra, on 10/13/2008, -40/+14Some people might argue of late that XKCD skipping a comic isn't such a bad thing...
- DocOBackbush, on 10/13/2008, -63/+8I'm so ***** sick and tired of seeing this stupid gay ass comic on Digg. Seriously, people...get a ***** life.
- wutimatang, on 10/13/2008, -1/+17Yeah!!!!! Rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble...!!!!!
- rotundo, on 10/13/2008, -1/+35"Get a ***** life" says the man reading digg and complaining that he doesn't like some of the stories. Oh the irony.
- Lokomis, on 10/13/2008, -0/+24People who string together adjectives the likes of "stupid gay ass" should be forcibly sent back to school to improve upon their remedial education.
- IllBeBack, on 10/13/2008, -0/+15And you need to click on it ... why?
- macweirdo42, on 10/13/2008, -0/+10Leave him alone, he has a medical condition. It is absolutely imperative for him to click on every story that makes the front page. We shouldn't be harassing him, we should work to make his digg experience a better one.
- skywake, on 10/13/2008, -0/+5stupid gay ass-comic?
- bales2552, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3Shouldn't you be complaining about pirating in that other thread?
- ki85squared, on 10/13/2008, -17/+4Indeed. And I believe http://*****.com/ is ***** today.
- tehWhisp, on 10/13/2008, -3/+13Wtf. It says yes for every single day.
- GeorgeStone2, on 10/13/2008, -2/+1Haahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahha
- WickEd101, on 10/13/2008, -0/+5Much funnier when it was http://hasthelargehadroncolliderdestroyedtheworldy ...
- benotago, on 10/13/2008, -9/+1The message is striking. But it's not important.....
- drunkenkite, on 10/13/2008, -8/+3Smells like a cop-out to me.
- Vektuz, on 10/13/2008, -0/+6Just remember that some places (like amazon) sell DRM-free MP3's at high quality, and some places specialize in DRM free music from artists that don't get in bed with the recording industries. You should still buy your music when there are no strings attached.
- austin63, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2Notice they said audible.com, those are audio books and sold by Amazon (with DRM only). I'm a big fan of the Amazon MP3 store but the audio book limitations are getting ridiculous.
- xB4R7x, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3@austin
not to mention you need their software to play it... and there is no portability whatsoever.
When you bring a service (a book) to a new medium, the idea is to make it easier or more convenient to use... not the case with audible. :-/
- metaliq, on 10/13/2008, -0/+1Fan service? Yeah, you know I'm sayin. Mmhmm.
- andrewcod, on 10/13/2008, -5/+810A ***** The RIAA in an XKCD? Oh yeah, this is going frontpage.
- p1eiades, on 10/13/2008, -1/+66Behold.... the Oracle!
- convergent, on 10/13/2008, -5/+64An XKCD will make front page no matter what it has on it.
- cynicalcheeto, on 10/13/2008, -1/+14Not quite as quickly as this one did.
- Hoogs, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3Correct sir!
- kilt42, on 10/14/2008, -0/+1its like frontpage squared
- iCanHasUsername, on 10/13/2008, -45/+16[obligatory XKCD submission complaint]
- Vich, on 10/13/2008, -2/+5Yeah, submission!
- Demener, on 10/13/2008, -1/+2[obligatory XKCD submission complaint complaint]
- odie5533, on 10/13/2008, -18/+7If you burn the Audible (.aa) files using Nero to Nero's image burner (.nrg) you can mount the image (daemon-tools) and rip it with EAC. This is a horrible method, but it should be just as good as TuneBite or any other software out there unless the other software is capable of actually removing the DRM.
Anyone know of software to REMOVE the DRM from the Audible files without having to reencode?- OrdinaryPanda, on 10/13/2008, -0/+51Why the ***** should I bother with all that ***** for something I paid for? A lot of times you can get higher fidelity from torrent than from the "retail" digital version. If they want big money they would sell flac region-free.
- leamanc, on 10/13/2008, -15/+2Or just by Audible content via iTunes, burn to CD, re-rip burned CD and enjoy your new DRM-free audiobook.
- tomi, on 10/13/2008, -0/+17That's the same thing odie said without having to waste a CD
- gradivus, on 10/13/2008, -2/+4Or you could download a program that saves the audio you are currently playing(it records your "line out" of your sound card). I rip streams all the time. Just look up recording streaming audio.
- tehphoberer, on 10/13/2008, -0/+9And your audio quality will be so ***** you'll want to stab yourself in the ear.
- Valyn, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2for an audio book, who cares about the quality. With a mediocre quality book, i can fit the entire thing on my 2GB Zen.
- andrewa, on 10/13/2008, -2/+1Ah, hell, here are the instructions:
http://hijinksensue.com/2008/10/03/technobillies/ - xaeon, on 10/13/2008, -0/+8That still counts as illegally circumventing DRM, and is just as bad (in the eyes of the law) as pirating.
- gandhii, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3If you're going to spend the money... you certainly shouldn't have to spend all that time and effort. Otherwise why did you spend the money? Provided you have the money, buying is suppose to be easier than stealing. It is when talking about anything else.
- WoollyMittens, on 10/13/2008, -2/+13Yeah, go to piratebay and get your lawful purchase in a format that isn't a designed to ***** you at the used car-lot.
- twertyto, on 10/13/2008, -1/+1I think that most people buying DRM-laced media would have no idea what you are talking about.
- ani625, on 10/13/2008, -2/+41Join the movement!
- FurtThePirate, on 10/13/2008, -4/+81I keep telling people this but they wont listen... ***** DRM.
- omjeremy, on 10/13/2008, -0/+14Ever heard of Amazon and Rhapsody? DRM free baby.
- Valyn, on 10/13/2008, -3/+3Only MP3's Ive bought were on Amazon. To be honest it was only cause they were off the wall and i could not find a torrent... haha.
- MicrosoftBob, on 10/13/2008, -0/+9Damn straight. If everyone purchased only from DRM-free sources the market would work it out.
- Thuktun, on 10/13/2008, -1/+15@omjeremy
Yet another example of why punctuation is necessary.
I think you meant "DRM-free, baby."
What you wrote could be interpreted as an infant without DRM or a command for DRM to release the child. - LiebeMachtFrei, on 10/13/2008, -0/+1I have the copyright on most birthing techniques, please buy my DRM doctor.
- AzureRise, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2@Thuktun
It's obvious he meant we want DRM to release the DRM-less baby. Free the child!
- tk0680, on 10/13/2008, -0/+4I agree with your sentiment whole-heartedly, but do you think we could possibly post something more insightful than "***** (insert uppity business/activity du jour here)"?
- omjeremy, on 10/13/2008, -0/+14Ever heard of Amazon and Rhapsody? DRM free baby.
- forthex, on 10/13/2008, -5/+321If xkcd and Munroe can alter 4chan (the introduction of the /r9k/ board where no string can be posted twice) AND youtube (the "audio preview" in comment posting which reads your comment back to you before it gets posted) he can change the rest of the internet.
I say, Go get em'.- Sornos, on 10/13/2008, -3/+73They have long rumored the coming of the One. Now we know it to be true. The Prophecy is coming to pass!
- Anthonym1987, on 10/13/2008, -1/+3He is truly the 'Neo' of the internet.
- AManWithNoName, on 10/13/2008, -59/+6Wahahahahaaa....Hey wait, that wasn't funny.
- LoveAndSeagulls, on 10/13/2008, -0/+22it was not ha-ha funny. but it was still funny.
it's also an important message. - Chubbly, on 10/13/2008, -0/+18Why the ***** does every comic you read have to be funny?
- MicrosoftBob, on 10/13/2008, -3/+3He said it wasn't funny. Cut the guy some slack.
- millertime588, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2The word comic implies funny.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 10/13/2008, -0/+12You know, a lot of comic books aren't funny either, but I don't see a bunch of people crying about it.
- AriaStar, on 10/13/2008, -0/+8Funny-ha-ha wasn't the point.
- keozen, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3Neither was your comment, so?
- LoveAndSeagulls, on 10/13/2008, -0/+22it was not ha-ha funny. but it was still funny.
- Disko, on 10/13/2008, -10/+81For the record: I only buy iTunes Plus songs from iTunes. They're DRM free for the same price.
It's the record labels who are forcing distributors (ie: Apple, etc) to use DRM.- RafiParrr, on 10/13/2008, -3/+56Or you can buy the same music for less money at a higher bitrate on the Amazon mp3 store. Like, the stuff that's still under DRM on Apple's store.
- Galaxylander, on 10/13/2008, -4/+10Apple wants all the record labels to provide DRM free music, but they aren't doing it. I think the only one that is is EMI.
- gekkoeye, on 10/13/2008, -1/+34No I cannot. And neither can most of the world. Amazon MP3=US-only. So iTunes it is.
- kinseyincanada, on 10/13/2008, -1/+11Amazon mp3s are only available in the States iTunes plus is worldwide.
- sceptic101, on 10/13/2008, -5/+2all this AND it costs money
- Jektal, on 10/13/2008, -1/+6@Galaxylander: You're right. Additionally, the labels are intentionally not giving Apple DRM-free music ,while giving Amazon and other services DRM-free copies in the hope of knocking iTunes down a few pegs since they have a huge amount of power (case in point: their refusal to "play nice" with NBC when NBC wanted to increase the costs of their episodes.)
The labels are afraid that if iTunes has too much power, Apple will be able to dictate song prices, not the labels. So they're intentionally castrating their songs there, hoping people will go to alternative sellers (most notable Amazon), who don't have enough individual buying power to strong-arm the labels.
So to recap:
Buy from iTunes = get an inferior quality file which is likely to be loaded with DRM
Buy from iTunes = give more of the RIAA's power to Apple
Buy from Amazon = get a better quality and DRM-free file
Buy from Amazon = play into the RIAA's plan to regain total control over the industry
Choose your poison.
- LucasVB, on 10/13/2008, -2/+22I say ditch iTunes altogether. Don't support the store if it sells music with DRM. Switch to Amazon and support the proper business model.
- JoeDiggsIt, on 10/13/2008, -4/+13That's all great and wonderful, but I won't switch until they have the convenience and presentation of the iTunes store. I like AmazonMP3 and I have purchased about 3 songs from there (mostly indie stuff that isn't found elsewhere), but it doesn't feel nearly as comfortable as iTunes.
- hackiavelli, on 10/13/2008, -0/+10Amazon's MP3 service is what people have been asking for for a long time now: high-bitrate, DRM-free music at a good price.
I've switched because I feel it would be hypocritical for me not to but I doubt most others will. We can complain about DRM and the RIAA all day but for a lot of people it's simply a matter of getting something for nothing. - tyashki, on 10/13/2008, -1/+2If Amazon will support the rest of the world, I will support them. I suspect this will take a while.
- Jektal, on 10/13/2008, -2/+4[Repost of one of my comments from an earlier response above:]
The labels are intentionally not giving Apple DRM-free music ,while giving Amazon and other services DRM-free copies in the hope of knocking iTunes down a few pegs since they have a huge amount of power (case in point: their refusal to "play nice" with NBC when NBC wanted to increase the costs of their episodes.)
The labels are afraid that if iTunes has too much power, Apple will be able to dictate song prices, not the labels. So they're intentionally castrating their songs there, hoping people will go to alternative sellers (most notable Amazon), who don't have enough individual buying power to strong-arm the labels.
So to recap:
Buy from iTunes = get an inferior quality file which is likely to be loaded with DRM
Buy from iTunes = give more of the RIAA's power to Apple
Buy from Amazon = get a better quality and DRM-free file
Buy from Amazon = play into the RIAA's plan to regain total control over the industry
Choose your poison
- vdog, on 10/13/2008, -1/+8And buy games from sites like Good Old Games http://www.gog.com
We need to show businesses that DRM-free stuff sells. - Cyrus042, on 10/13/2008, -5/+2Not necessarily. All the DRM-Free MP3s sold under Amazon.com or other places still deal with these record labels. It was just a choice for Apple to do so until it became more wildly unpopular. You think it's a good idea for Apple as a seller to have non-DRM enforced songs? Last thing Jobs would want is for Apple buyers to share iTunes tracks amongst themselves.
- Dymphna, on 10/13/2008, -1/+8Not true actually. The same record labels that offer DRM-free music to Amazon refuse to do it to Apple. EMI Is the one record label that allows both to have DRM-free (and as such, I like them a fair bit more than most record labels).
It's simple really, Apple has been a thorn in the record industry's side for ages. They want to break up Apple's hold on the digital media market so they can come back in and make profit again.
I continue to buy music and other media from iTunes, I try to buy DRM free where I can (Higher bitrate and DRM free. I don't care what people say, I can't tell a difference in quality past 256 which is the iTunes Plus format, and nobody I've tested has been able to either.) If it's not available in that format, sometimes I check the Amazon store, but otherwise I will buy it on iTunes and strip the DRM off, it takes maybe 20 seconds top per song. I have an applescript I run that will handle that for me, I just launch it at the end of every day to scrub the DRM off my songs.
So yeah, the convenience of the iTunes store and the very easy DRM it has still makes it worth using for me over Amazon. When Amazon can provide an everything-in-one front-end like iTunes, then I'll switch. But having my music player, tv shows, movies all in the same place I buy my music (and nevermind how much money I've spent because of Genius) is just too good to give up. I'm glad Apple continues to push for DRM-free, and hope they manage to convince the record labels like they got NBC back, but I'm skeptical it will happen anytime soon. - SuperHyperKid, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2Any chance I can get that apple script?
- Memnochxx, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3You're breaking the law stripping drm, why not download high quality music for free to begin with? It's just as illegal.
- Dymphna, on 10/14/2008, -0/+1@SuperHyperKid
Yeah sure, do you have iMove HD, that's the best way to do it without using a CD or losing quality. If not, I can give you my old script.
@Memnochxx
By doing what Apple legally allows in their ToS? Burning a CD I own strips the DRM and is well within Apple's TOS. There you go, DRM legally stripped. - SuperHyperKid, on 10/16/2008, -0/+1I do have iMovie HD. Thank you very much for the script. :)
- Dymphna, on 10/13/2008, -1/+8Not true actually. The same record labels that offer DRM-free music to Amazon refuse to do it to Apple. EMI Is the one record label that allows both to have DRM-free (and as such, I like them a fair bit more than most record labels).
- kbcool, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3Apple isn't exactly doing much to push back on the record labels to say people want DRM free music. It's just not worth their while. There's no money to be made in standing up for consumer rights.
- Klink258, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2They're not for the same price last I checked.
- oppokaze, on 10/13/2008, -1/+2Disko = fanboy.
Apple is not exempt from this, despite their trendy sweaters. They sell DRM'ed tracks, they are supporting the system of greed and consumer exploitation that the record labels established.
Fight back. Don't pay for music unless it's straight from the artist (concerts, websites).
- RafiParrr, on 10/13/2008, -3/+56Or you can buy the same music for less money at a higher bitrate on the Amazon mp3 store. Like, the stuff that's still under DRM on Apple's store.
- siobhankeogh, on 10/13/2008, -8/+170Oh *****, Munroe is talking about an issue Diggers actually care about. This is probably the best XKCD in ages.
- Desurivative, on 10/13/2008, -26/+8Pity it's submitted by that serial xkcd spammer Rekzai, who has gotten the front page xkcd submission I don't know how many times as of late. Damn assholes gaming the system. What a joke. You guys know the site already.
- rossiohead, on 10/13/2008, -1/+27I know, they're hogging all the fame and fortune that comes from getting an article to the Digg frontpage...
- sexybobo, on 10/13/2008, -0/+40who the ***** cares who submitted the story ?
- JoeDiggsIt, on 10/13/2008, -0/+29Ya know I didn't notice or care until you brought it up. But know, I notice and don't care.
- Desurivative, on 10/13/2008, -26/+8Pity it's submitted by that serial xkcd spammer Rekzai, who has gotten the front page xkcd submission I don't know how many times as of late. Damn assholes gaming the system. What a joke. You guys know the site already.
- Sephr, on 10/13/2008, -5/+43You could always just buy DRM-free stuff instead of pirating or buying DRM-protected files.
- mithrasinvictus, on 10/13/2008, -1/+20You can now. But if it weren't for piracy we'd still be stuck with having to buy crappy album CD's (most of which were released in order to fulfill contractual obligations and therefore suck)
- Hoogs, on 10/13/2008, -1/+3I still enjoy buying CD's because I like the experience of looking through the little booklet that comes with it and having a physical backup copy of the music.
- lukedamonkey, on 10/13/2008, -2/+7If there wasn't piracy, companies would see no need for DRM.
lol...- michaelrsa, on 10/13/2008, -4/+5An excellent point, people seem to have this love of blaming companies for inconveniencing them for trying to protect their products, completely forgetting the point that its people who are forcing companies to do this. I really can't place all the blame on recording companies. They have thousands of people who work for them who need to get paid, ad on top of that still need to turn a profit.
- Slade605, on 10/13/2008, -1/+4if a high quality CD cost $20 for 20 songs, and I could split the cost between 2 friends of mine and SHARE it between us, what is the problem with that? it doesn't require DRM, it requires high quality music.
- rahulkolasseri, on 10/13/2008, -2/+3if there was no DRM, we wouldn't pirate
- ArtificialAnus, on 10/13/2008, -0/+4>"If there wasn't piracy, companies would see no need for DRM."
*****.
DRM has other uses - like keep customers locked-in to a piece of technology that a company sells instead of allowing them to switch to a competing product.
The classic example would be GSM cell phones: In theory, they are able to work with any carrier, but even if I buy a phone at full price, the carrier will often refuse to unlock it even though I've paid full retail. Is the carrier protecting it's investment? No - I've already paid in full. The carrier is attempting to prevent me from moving to another carrier.
DRM is as much a tool to promote consumer lock-in as it is anything else.
- mithrasinvictus, on 10/13/2008, -1/+20You can now. But if it weren't for piracy we'd still be stuck with having to buy crappy album CD's (most of which were released in order to fulfill contractual obligations and therefore suck)
- rawheadrex, on 10/13/2008, -6/+33I agree with ***** the RIAA and ***** DRM.
However, even if you will end up being a criminal either way, there is one big difference between the two paths; the longer path to becoming a criminal, albeit in a very small way it is laughable, actually contributes to the artist that made the music. The shorter path does not. That is why I will actually buy music from iTMS when it's an artist that I truly love and want to support.
With that said, like Disko above me, I will ONLY buy said music if it's PLUS; not so much for the DRM-free nature of it, but for its quality. I will not pay money to DL 128kbps tracks when I know that I can get FLAC or 320kbps @ What.- OrdinaryPanda, on 10/13/2008, -0/+39If all you care about is supporting the artist, download that flac 320kbps and buy merchandise from their website. They get nearly all the money directly on merchandise (unlike the albums) or go see them live to support them there.
- Llanowar, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3Really?
It seems doubtful to me they get nearly all the money on merchandise.
- Llanowar, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3Really?
- theblacknight, on 10/13/2008, -0/+9There are lots of ways to get artists money:
buy their audio without DRM (most of these groups still sell CDs you know),
buy their non-audio merchandise as above poster said,
go to concerts,
or mail them a check.
I'm sure someone can think of more.- CaptainMidnight, on 10/13/2008, -9/+4This type of "charity" does not work in the long term, and is idealistic at best.
How many concerts do you have to go in order to support all the artists on your iPod? What if you do not live near a concert venue?
How much merchandise do you have to spend to support all the artists you listen to? What about the people who love the artist but will still not pay them a dime?
By buying from iTunes and Amazon the artist will be 100% sure they will receive at least 5% of profit from the sale, rather then hoping you can earn enough from printed-on wristbands.
I'm for artists selling high quality works independently, and I support it when they license it under Creative Commons, but I do not support just buying a T-shirt as an excuse for piracy. - SpeedSteamBoat, on 10/13/2008, -2/+11@CaptainMidnight: You know, I see a lot of art that I like and never pay the artist anything for having looked at it. Sometimes I even set it as my desktop background so I can see it every day for possibly months at a time. Even then I don't pay that artist anything.
What have I stolen, and how is music different from this? Why is it piracy when it's Weezer and art appreciation when it's Stanley Donwood?
"Music Piracy" is a myth. I'm not making a dime of profit from the music I download. I am not a pirate. - Dymphna, on 10/13/2008, -1/+8Because the art in say, a museum is paid for by the museum. Much like say...a club pays for the music that they have. The art is paid for. If an artist offers their work free on the internet, then yes it's free for anyone to look at, but musicians can do the same if they so choose. Do you think Stanley Donwood doesn't get paid for the album artwork he does for Radiohead? I wonder how he gets paid, maybe from the money they make from SELLING ALBUMS? You paid to look at his work when you bought the CD.
If you want to pirate music, then pirate music. But don't try to say you aren't stealing. The ideal solution is to buy DRM-free stuff, which there are conveniently options for you to do just that. If you want to steal your music instead, that's fine, more power to you. But don't try to rationalize it away. - cheeseplease, on 10/13/2008, -0/+5@Dymphna: I completely agree with you! Where the hell do some people get the idea that art should be free? If you buy a band's record, you pay the artists, extra studio artists, the cover designer, the sound engineers, the studio equipment, the webdesigners, advertisement designers, etc, etc, etc. There's just nothing good done by pirating music. If artists could make their music for free and didn't want you to pay for it, they would publish it for free! But they want to be backed by a record company so respect their decision.
- m4csrgh3yk3v, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2google "ransom model"
- CaptainMidnight, on 10/13/2008, -9/+4This type of "charity" does not work in the long term, and is idealistic at best.
- unitedatheism, on 10/13/2008, -0/+21When you buy 10 dollars of music from itunes, all from the same artist, you're not paying even a single dollar to the artist itself.
So download the music on bittorrent, send to all your friends and if one of them buys a 15 USD t-shirt on the artist's website he already paid for your download and all your friends! (and the price of a blank t-shirt, silking and so on)
So support the artist, don't buy music from people who wants them to be enslaved forever!- Dymphna, on 10/13/2008, -7/+3I'm not exactly sure I follow your logic here, because artists DO make money from every sale of their song on the iTunes store. Which seems to nullify the rest of your argument.
- Rhydeble, on 10/13/2008, -1/+14@dymphna
except that for every Dollar you spent, the artist only see's 0.05$ - Llanowar, on 10/13/2008, -2/+3see's?
- Dymphna, on 10/14/2008, -0/+1Oh, you literally meant a dollar, I thought you meant any money at all.
Yeah, that's about right, which in some cases is actually more per song than they make from other sources. Depending largely on their record deals, of course. Record industries rip the artist off no matter the media of sale. Even t-shirt sales, the artist isn't getting a huge % of the profit. Probably a higher % than they do from the music sadly.
- StabbySmurf, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2Contributing to the artist may assuage your conscience, but it won't be good for much when the gangsters at the RIAA come a knockin'. Protect yourself above all. There's a term for when the upper classes seek to delegitimize normal ethical people by making the laws so stringent that it becomes difficult NOT to be guilty of some crime or another, and thus subject to arbitrary prosecution and imprisonment/enslavement. That term is "class war."
They have declared war on you. On us. How long until we wake up and return the favor? - Artemis3, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2You can still purchase a CD and be free of DRM for now, but that doesn't mean you are supporting the artist at all. The contracts they make with the labels are modern forms of institutionalized slavery, if you send him/her an anonymous letter with 10$ he/she is getting from you more money than if you had purchased his/her entire discography, unless one of these discs was produced outside a major label.
Artists should seriously think in adopting the "tip jar" method. Offer songs in a lossless format and put a paypal button or any other form of voluntary payment. Of course they can only do this if they are independent, not having signed a draconian contract with a label already.
Please think of this carefully. When you purchase CDs/songs, you are not supporting the artists, only the system that keeps them enslaved. The entire system built by the labels (commercial radio, mtv, etc) must break apart so they can be freed. Internet is a great tool that lets you bypass this middleman. - Alphi1, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2Not that I'm advocating illegal activity (of course), but what about purchasing the DRM-crippled song (paying your "dues" as it were), and then finding (and downloading) the same song (non-DRM) from a less-legal method? Sure, it adds a few steps to the process, but everybody wins, right?
Especially the RIAA when they can come along and sue your butt anyways.
:) - Vektuz, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3The whole "the longer path doesn't contribute to artist" is debunked.
Case in point, my brother publishes music in the DRM-FREE format. He's not famous, not signed by any record company, is just a guy off the street. Hardly anyone knows him, but the fact is, anyone can now put music up there. He just made the concious choice like many other artists not to get in bed with the recording industries.
(Proof: http://www.amazon.com/Gravity-EP/dp/B0010S8HNI )
This trend is growing. Artists now have a choice, and the ones that decide to go the RIAA-free route need to be rewarded, while the ones that sign up with them need to be ... dissuaded. - xFied, on 10/13/2008, -0/+1ppl like these make me happy...at least someone is buying from artiste we love that means i can safely download....hail piracy
- utahnkid, on 10/13/2008, -1/+2Shut the ***** up and just burn your music to a disk and import it back in.. Good god look how easy we have it, and people continue to bitch. You can jump on your computer and have access to just about any song in the world within SECONDS but you focus on the store it's coming from? I mean really, is it THAT bad?
I'll take a DRM'd piece of music way before I'll drive down to a store and buy a CD thats full of other songs I don't want.
And if you REALLY don't like it then get in the position to change something. I'm not sure if you've noticed but Digg comments don't really amount to *****.
P.S. I've NEVER lost access to a SINGLE DRM protected file. I've never even been hindered by it. Then again, I'm not a dumbass.
- OrdinaryPanda, on 10/13/2008, -0/+39If all you care about is supporting the artist, download that flac 320kbps and buy merchandise from their website. They get nearly all the money directly on merchandise (unlike the albums) or go see them live to support them there.
- chrisbeh1, on 10/13/2008, -5/+12I feel so just now for my years of antics on torrent websites =]
It's going to be a good day. - Yookji, on 10/13/2008, -35/+10USAIN BOLT 9.69 NEW WORLD RECORD!
- tomg025, on 10/13/2008, -0/+6stop doing that
- ajbl, on 10/13/2008, -0/+10It only works once. Like any other random thing, it only works once.
Or later when it's appropriate.
- VictoriaMaria, on 10/13/2008, -16/+37Artists used to be for the art, with things like this limiting what you own... it's letting companies take your music and wrap it up so tight that no one's going to bother listening to it. It's hurting fans, it kills the music, it makes the whole process a pain.
Let's start a pirate revolution. Artists out there- pirate your work. Give it away for nothing. If this is your source of income- give your fans a chance to pay if they wish, but don't make them. If they're proper fans they won't let you starve.
Let your music, let your writing, let your art speak for itself. Companies are taking what should have a voice of it's own and strangling it, putting it in shackles and locking it away.
Set the art free.
And this isn't just empty talk from me. In the steps of Coelho, I'll be putting my books online. Free if you so please.
Who's with me?
http://digg.com/arts_culture/I_m_A_Writer_Turned_P ...- SpeedSteamBoat, on 10/13/2008, -3/+9I have no idea who is digging you down, but ***** them.
- VictoriaMaria, on 10/13/2008, -2/+5Thanks for the back-up.
I assume they dislike the general self-promotion that's attached. But how are people going to to know if you don't say anything? And the idea is valid, free art is wonderful and should speak for itself.
Again, thanks. - Lunarsight, on 10/13/2008, -0/+4I only have one minor disagreement with Victoria on this.
Technically, what she's describing would not be piracy.
If the artist is freely choosing to give the music away, they wouldn't be 'pirating' their work,
(I did thumb her up, incidentally. A lot of musicians are already doing what she proposes. You see it on sites like Jamendo, Last FM and Alone Tone.)
- VictoriaMaria, on 10/13/2008, -2/+5Thanks for the back-up.
- theHman, on 10/13/2008, -4/+7I don't think you actually know any artists.
Artist is a profession. It's something people do for money. They do it because they love it, but it wouldn't be their JOB unless they did it for money. You don't see lawyers going around giving people the "opportunity to pay" for their services. Why should the people who entertain you be treated with any less respect? Is their profession less valid?
Do you think that art should just be a hobby for everyone who does it?- VictoriaMaria, on 10/13/2008, -2/+3Of course it isn't merely a hobby. Writing is my profession and craft. But art is interesting in that is brings pleasure and joy, it's something that's valued due to the amount of happiness it can bring a person.
I plan to write for a living. But I'm going to give my work away. One will be able to pay for a physical paper copy of my book, but they can torrent a file if they so desire. I don't believe I'll starve if my work is good enough to deserve pay.
Harry Potter fans were looked at like criminals for translating Deathly Hallows and putting it online. I didn't understand why. They wanted to read the book- they no doubt would buy the book the second it came out in their language. But they wanted to know the story.
Stories have characters, paintings have subjects, music has a melody and lyrics. Art is alive. - Lunarsight, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3theHman - I see where you're coming from, but you're assuming money can't be made if an artist gives his work away.
Many artists are realizing that they have better luck using the album as a promotional tool rather than the chief money-maker.
If you get your album into more people's hands, that means a larger buzz which can create potentially create other avenues for profit (increased attendance at shows, with the merchandising possibilities that that brings in).
Another variation of this theme is giving a base version of the album away for free, and then having 'enhanced' versions with additional content at a price. NIN has been toying with this. - theHman, on 10/13/2008, -1/+2Lunarsight,
It's not a question of who is making how much money from what, it's a question of respect. By refusing to pay for someone's professional work, you are doing them a huge disservice and essentially naming its worth at zero.
If people are giving their work away for promotional reasons or because they feel that the message is SO powerful and important that it can't wait to be heard, then they have that option. That doesn't mean people who are actually trying to make a living off of it shouldn't be allowed to.
If your "donation" philosophy worked, then people who downloaded music would be sending checks to musicians if they liked what they stole. That's not really what it's about- people don't steal because they feel that stealing perpetuates the purity of art. They steal because they are lazy and don't want to pay for something that they can easily get for free. - Lunarsight, on 10/14/2008, -0/+1The Hman - Dude, you're crossing the threads here.
Victoria was discussing artists who choose to give their music away. I was merely saying that there is the potential to make money from this. You use the music as the promotional vehicle, and use something else as the cash cow (live shows, for example).
To address your other points:
1) I never endorsed freely stealing music from artists. The one area I'm willing to even consider this are situations where there is overly restrictive DRM that prevents the music from being accessed/used. Even in these situations, I'd make the initial purchase. Otherwise, I do believe in paying for music. There are plenty of independent artists I go to great lengths to pay for their music.
2) I never mention donating money to artists whom you steal music from. I never mentioned donations at all. I'm not sure where you got that from.
**Addendum - Okay, I see where the latter point originated. Victoria had mentioned it. I personally don't think it would make you much money either, but again - that's not to say there aren't ways of making money when giving music away for free (see above). Leave the innovators to innovate, and someday the record labels will play catch up, and then try and rewrite history, saying it was their ingenius idea in the first place.
- VictoriaMaria, on 10/13/2008, -2/+3Of course it isn't merely a hobby. Writing is my profession and craft. But art is interesting in that is brings pleasure and joy, it's something that's valued due to the amount of happiness it can bring a person.
- Dymphna, on 10/13/2008, -1/+4It'd be lovely if this would work, but very few artists can make a living by just asking their fans for contributions.
Yes Radiohead can do it. Yes Nine Inch Nails can do it. But they are already established HUGE names, and they hardly even need the money anymore anyway.
I know people who are artists, writers, or musicians for a living. They don't get contributions from their fans, even if they ask. Hell, they are even lucky when they have a few people stop to listen or look at their work, and they are very talented people. So yes, they sell their work. They sell their work to support themselves, pay rent, and eat food. I have a lot of respect for them, because they are extremely talented and continue to pursue their dreams.
Maybe someday they can live well and still share their work to people for free. Maybe you can, and that's great. But most people can't, and never will be able to. Even selling their work, they barely make ends meet.- VictoriaMaria, on 10/13/2008, -2/+4I understand that. I'm not condemning artists who sell their work- I plan to sell my work alongside giving it away. I'm merely stating that people shouldn't be afraid of piracy, they can use it as a tool. If enough artists, especially good young artist, start to use piracy the companies that want them will have to rethink.
Yeah, artists are poor... we can be geniuses, but no one'll give us the time of day. It's an interesting profession and we suffer for it.
I hope it can get to the point where art is appreciated for being art. Where a no-name artist can be brilliant and known for it, sell because he's good. And we might be able to get to that, but we have to start somewhere.
Best of luck to your artist friends. I hope they make it big in their field.
- VictoriaMaria, on 10/13/2008, -2/+4I understand that. I'm not condemning artists who sell their work- I plan to sell my work alongside giving it away. I'm merely stating that people shouldn't be afraid of piracy, they can use it as a tool. If enough artists, especially good young artist, start to use piracy the companies that want them will have to rethink.
- cheeseplease, on 10/13/2008, -1/+5I don't want to be an ass, but if you're not very known yet it would be very stupid of you to not give away your literature for free. Everybody gives their art away for free except for the very top notch artists who can ask money for it and still be read/watched/listened. So to me this isn't really that much of a revolution you're starting.
- Lunarsight, on 10/13/2008, -2/+3Cheese - I disagree.
In fact, I would argue that new artists have the MOST incentive to give their work away for free. You need to encourage trial and generate exposure, or you won't even likely get past first base.
Many unknown artists post their music on sites like Jamendo. They'll put up whole albums for free download. They want to get their work into people's hands. - cheeseplease, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3No Lunar, you're saying the exact same thing as I am. Read my comment again. "it would be very stupid of you to NOT give away your literature for free"
- Lunarsight, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2Cheese - Okay, fair enough. I must have missed the negative.
- Lunarsight, on 10/13/2008, -2/+3Cheese - I disagree.
- cersad, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2Artists have never been "for the art" unless they were already independently wealthy. Possibly the only exception that most people would recognize is Beethoven, who got a free ticket from the local noblemen to write as he pleased while they paid his expenses. Another great musician from the generation before Beethoven, Haydn, was also well-supported but was essentially a servant to the noble family he composed for--and so he put out a large number of symphonies during his tenure there that I would argue are inferior to the ones he produced after he was released from service.
So this art versus business deal has existed since the Renaissance. It's nothing new.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 10/13/2008, -3/+9I have no idea who is digging you down, but ***** them.
- dvsbastard, on 10/13/2008, -5/+238For the first time I am digging a comic for NOT being funny...
- DocOBackbush, on 10/13/2008, -40/+2Good for you, want a ***** cookie or a chest to pin it on?
- helenkupo, on 10/13/2008, -0/+4That's because its a public service announcement.
- coyote1284, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3I'd like a chest to pin a cookie on, so that I could understand what the hell that means. Would you like a *medal* for worst botched cut-down?
- AsianChopsticks, on 10/13/2008, -4/+134I'm sure even the XKCD haters will digg this for the cause.
- Alphi1, on 10/13/2008, -0/+5I'm not an XKCD hater (a fan of the comic, actually), but I don't agree every day's comic should wind up front-page digg.
That said, I *HAD* to digg this one for the message more than the humor - shadowspawn, on 10/13/2008, -1/+2Yea, I did. I now like a total of 3 of the comics.
- Hoogs, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2They got this one.
- Alphi1, on 10/13/2008, -0/+5I'm not an XKCD hater (a fan of the comic, actually), but I don't agree every day's comic should wind up front-page digg.
- Lula87, on 10/13/2008, -2/+9Not to mention how hard it is to make mixes to give to friends.....
- mcm297, on 10/13/2008, -14/+4It's Monday, 12:54 AM, and that means that the latest XKCD comic will be dugg within seconds after its creation.
- xDynaBlade, on 10/13/2008, -1/+4They're released exactly at 12:00 AM.
- doom777, on 10/13/2008, -1/+2Not everyone lives at eastern time.
- xDynaBlade, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2Still doesn't mean his comment makes any sense.
- xDynaBlade, on 10/13/2008, -1/+4They're released exactly at 12:00 AM.
- Shokker04, on 10/13/2008, -5/+121When I was a kid I used to record songs off the radio with a child's tape recorder. ARREST ME.
- jiggywitit, on 10/13/2008, -62/+4LOST PUNCHLINE FOUND!
WHICHEVER COMIC IS MISSING IT'S PUNCHLINE, I FOUND A PUNCHLINE, IT'S NOT VERY FUNNY OR GOOD SO IT PROBABLY BELONGS TO SOME DOUCHEBAG THAT'S TOO LAZY TO DRAW SO THEY JUST SKETCH STICK FIGURES AND WRITE THEIR ***** MESSAGE
CALL 707-486-5865- Sakumi, on 10/13/2008, -2/+11It wasn't meant to be funny. A bit thick are we?
- WoollyMittens, on 10/13/2008, -2/+8You are made of ignorance. On the bright side, I'll never read anything from you again, thanks to Digg.
- darlingt, on 10/13/2008, -2/+3Hey, how's your daddy Garth doing?
- WickEd101, on 10/13/2008, -2/+2I thought what jiggywitit said was pretty funny.
I also thought the xkcd comic was funny too, though. But you can't knock xkcd and expect anyone to agree with you- Leviathan433, on 10/13/2008, -0/+4There is no need to shout.
- hmphargh, on 10/13/2008, -8/+16Usually I don't like political statements like this, but this is a grass roots effort I'm glad to see people supporting.
- Farmer77, on 10/13/2008, -13/+5DIGG
- svensko, on 10/13/2008, -10/+14Or you can be like me and enjoy non-pirated DRM-free media.
- WoollyMittens, on 10/13/2008, -4/+17If I was like you I'd be sitting in front of a mirror, crying all day and clutching my face.
- spammishking, on 10/13/2008, -0/+9Amazon FTW
- tourettes1992, on 10/13/2008, -15/+93Or just buy the god damn cd....hard copies ftw
- FurtThePirate, on 10/13/2008, -0/+21I think he is just talking about the digital medium for the sake of argument.
- fuzzynyanko, on 10/13/2008, -0/+7At least you don't hear horror stories anymore about CDs. I remember the days of rootkits and 'sploding Macintoshes. I actually trust Amazon the most, for now.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 10/13/2008, -0/+12What store within 100 miles of my town is going to sell the music I listen to?
That's the problem right there. Not to mention downloading is a hell of lot easier than driving to God knows where to HOPEFULLY find what I am looking for.
Maybe your solution is more practical if you live close to a city, but for a lot of people that just won't work.- Hoogs, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2Amazon...eBay...
- StabbySmurf, on 10/13/2008, -0/+4Yeah. And get stuck listening to crap corporate music because there don't happen to be any cool boutique shops near my house? Screw that. More pirating = less Britney Spears and mindless corporate pop. That slone is worth the market reorganization.
- joegibes, on 10/13/2008, -0/+12Occasionally CDs will have DRM as well (See: Sony BMG).
- alias747, on 10/13/2008, -0/+5Yeah, and a 15 track CD with 2 good songs FTL...
- TnTBass, on 10/13/2008, -0/+5Thats why I bought all of my music on 8 tracks. ;)
- SurfingMonkey, on 10/13/2008, -25/+17I know this will get buried, but Steam is also too restrictive. DRM = FAIL
- aethere, on 10/13/2008, -0/+37I actually don't find steam that restrictive. I enjoy being able to install and play all my games on as many of my pcs as I want.
- bwdd, on 10/13/2008, -1/+17Yeah, steam's different.
My computer got ***** over, but I went to a different computer and logged in.
Simple as that. - paranoiabacon, on 10/13/2008, -4/+8I can't get steam over my network = i don't get any of the ***** i paid for
- Chubbly, on 10/13/2008, -0/+13People should be digging you down because you provided no justification for your statement. Making such a statement as that with no reasoning behind it deserves a digg down. Steam is probably the best model we are ever going to get with DRM, and bitching about it without offering an alternative is contributing more to the problem than just shouting out stupid slogans from the rooftops.
- maesterxen, on 10/13/2008, -0/+5Its not even DRM in the traditional sense, sure you have to have steam running, but just log into your account on another computer and install all your games again, as many times as you want, and the steam program isnt even that bad, I have no problem running it on my computer
- SurfingMonkey, on 10/13/2008, -1/+2The reason is. I bought The Witcher on it, because the advert said it came with a multilingual disk. I had supposed it meant I would be getting a burnable full offline install disk. I misinterpreted that. I want to lend the game to a friend, for real, I cannot play at the moment. And I cant. I regretted spending money this way. And remember, that if they chose to, the service will stop working. It is not the equivalent of purchasing a copy.
- jzuska, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3I like steam. Never had a problem.
- algaeturd, on 10/13/2008, -41/+4XKCD is the WORST plague of Digg. Everybody diggs it but nobody knows why. It's like a curse.
- xDynaBlade, on 10/13/2008, -0/+18I digg it because I found XKCD before I found Digg. Also, I like it.
- unitedatheism, on 10/13/2008, -0/+11How can you read digg.com and still don't know what the DRM fuss is all about?
I don't want to be rude, but that's kinda stupid. - FelixDeluxe, on 10/13/2008, -0/+14If you don't appreciate it, move on.
Just sayin, you spent a few clicks, a bunch of keystrokes and a bit of SHIFT to tell us how you feel about something you're not even interested in.
You could use that time in a more positive and productive fashion and we'd all be better off.
- BoonTobias, on 10/13/2008, -12/+4i like how he's telling me to steal this comic
- SilverBlade2k, on 10/13/2008, -7/+6So funny...so true.
- Hoogs, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2Not funny, but still true.
- coldzero, on 10/13/2008, -11/+12I'm sorry if i was an artist and people pirated my music i would be proud that some actually care and like my music. IF your a true artist you don't play and record for money you do it for the love of music (no *****.)
- Galaxylander, on 10/13/2008, -10/+9***** you, that's like saying I should only work at best buy for the love of electronics and not expect to get paid. You're retarded.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 10/13/2008, -1/+10Actually, it's NOTHING like that.
- mrmacky, on 10/13/2008, -2/+5Even if it was like that, I'd ***** work ... well, not at BestBuy because they're ***** evil... but if it was something I truly loved to do, I'd work for free.
It's called open ***** source. It's not like they demand you click on their donation button.
- coldzero, on 10/13/2008, -1/+7ok dude ive work at best buy's geek squad and i assure you i didn't work there for no love, its for the money. Musicians are different though a lot of them play and create music to be heard. Honestly dude i would never buy from icraptunes, i buy all my music on cd's.
- Dystisis, on 10/13/2008, -2/+9That is true, I am a musician and I agree. There is no future in the musicbusiness, only music as an art.
- Dymphna, on 10/13/2008, -5/+11Yeah because you know, those musicians don't need to eat. How dare they want money to buy food with, pay rent, and send their children to school. I mean, the nerve of them, don't they know that their music should be free for everyone. Those bums should get real jobs if they want money, right? They are obviously not true artists
Really, do you hate musicians that much you want to see them all starve? As a man with friends who are poorly paid musicians (and I happily buy all their cds) I would like to extend a solid 'screw you' for them.- samgamgee, on 10/13/2008, -1/+3would digg this up more if i could - good point, dymphna..
- coyote1284, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2Indeed, the artist needs income, but if he's just doing it for the money instead of purely love of music, that's not an artist I want to support. *cough*Metellica*cough* (Excuse me.) I'm more willing to buy a CD "directly" from an artist because I know that money for the CD I buy in the store produced by a label goes mostly to all the people in between me and the artist. The money should go to the artist first, then he can decide if it goes to studio rental, CD production, promotional material, guitar strings, living expenses, or booze; whatever he wants to use it for. Kill the music business, support the music.
- samgamgee, on 10/13/2008, -1/+3would digg this up more if i could - good point, dymphna..
- opticwind, on 10/13/2008, -1/+7I see what you're saying, but consider this: An artist NEEDS income. There's no way around this. Without income, they can't focus on their art. Of course many artists do it for the art. But those precious few won't be able to if they can't support themselves at the very least.
- Alphi1, on 10/13/2008, -1/+3The thing you have to realize, though, is how little of the money you spent to buy a song/album actually goes to the artist, and how much goes to the label.
I heard somewhere that even/especially for popular musicians/bands they make their money through concerts and merchandising, not album/song sales. - coyote1284, on 10/13/2008, -1/+2Agreed, but if we could cut out all the money-grubbing middle-men and allow me to buy CD directly from the artist to give direct support, everyone (except those corporate *****) would be much happier.
- Alphi1, on 10/13/2008, -1/+3The thing you have to realize, though, is how little of the money you spent to buy a song/album actually goes to the artist, and how much goes to the label.
- letdowntourist, on 10/13/2008, -1/+4I quit my full time career job and work freelance in order to be a full time musician. I did it without any expectations, and I did it knowing I'd have to work my ass off freelancing between tours in order to pay rent. The money my bands make go back into the band: maintaining equipment, buying new recording gear and merch to sell, cds and vinyl to press, and fuel for the van to get us to gigs and back.
You do it cause you love it, and no other reason than that. As soon as music becomes a job, I'll go back to full time art direction.
- Galaxylander, on 10/13/2008, -10/+9***** you, that's like saying I should only work at best buy for the love of electronics and not expect to get paid. You're retarded.
- Br3ach, on 10/13/2008, -3/+17So true
The philosophy seems to be
"You want this legally? Great! But you might pirate it, so it will come protected!"
If I am a criminal I might as well do it right and head to TPB- DocOBackbush, on 10/13/2008, -1/+8That...made sense! Too bad those in charge don't....see logic.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 10/13/2008, -0/+8And if I'm going to be treated like a criminal either way I might as well act like one.
- coyote1284, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3I'd like to see you apply that in an airport. XD
/***** the FAA!
- coyote1284, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3I'd like to see you apply that in an airport. XD
- jmpeagle, on 10/13/2008, -17/+3I don't get it. How is that supposed to be funny?
- coldzero, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3well not really funny but showing the pathetic way music gets treated in its digital form. People just buy CD's you keep em forever and can always rip them into your library.
- jmpeagle, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2until computers no longer have cd drives
- coldzero, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2yea you have a point there but hopefully not in my lifetime.
- xDynaBlade, on 10/13/2008, -0/+6It's meant to be serious. Did you really have to be told that?
- coyote1284, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2I can't be bothered with social commentary when I'm looking at stick figures! I don't understand sarcasm, biting wit, or subtlety. Where are the dick and fart jokes? Now that's funny!
/sarcasm
- coldzero, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3well not really funny but showing the pathetic way music gets treated in its digital form. People just buy CD's you keep em forever and can always rip them into your library.
- To0pak, on 10/13/2008, -1/+66It's a lot better to pirate music and just go to concerts
you're free of the RIAA and you can still support the artists- theHman, on 10/13/2008, -5/+5You know what's better than that?
Buying CDs, supporting local business and going to concerts.- djchester, on 10/13/2008, -1/+9What do you use those things you call CDs for?
seriously CDs are NOT future proof. - To0pak, on 10/13/2008, -0/+4yeah my car doesn't have a cassette player in it
so yeah in a couple years i wouldn't be surprised if there was just an mp3 jack and nothing else - kirado4, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2yeah cool.. we can pollute the planet with all those cd's.. brilliant.. or they could just sell us mp3's for cheap with no drm..? oh my god they would make millions..
- gnalakalaciath5, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2in a few years I wouldn't be surprised if the same cable that charges your electric car also transfers your digital music library to your car's harddrive.
- djchester, on 10/13/2008, -1/+9What do you use those things you call CDs for?
- dannyboy3020, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3Don't forget to buy tickets directly from the venue and not from assholes like TicketMaster.
- theHman, on 10/13/2008, -5/+5You know what's better than that?
- FriedTurkey, on 10/13/2008, -12/+6Amazon is DRM free. Love Amazon. I guess I am weird for actually wanting to support music artists. You pirates should at least thank us for supporting them and leeching off us.
Blah blah I buy T-shirts go to concerts.... Really?- RedS0x, on 10/13/2008, -2/+9"Blah blah I buy T-shirts go to concerts.... Really?"
Yes, really...that's where artists really see the profit.- FriedTurkey, on 10/13/2008, -9/+4Then I assume you have bought stuff in equality to the artists on your iPod. I assume you have 200+ T-shirts and have attended 200+ shows?
- RedS0x, on 10/13/2008, -0/+4I buy my music from amazon, but the artist doesn't see any of that anyway.
Why not buy some shirts for as many artists as you can so they see some of the money for their hard work? - aethere, on 10/13/2008, -0/+6Turkey, that statement is based on the assumption that the artists get an equal percentage of the profit from their albums as they do from concerts. Which isn't exactly true. Or even remotely true.
- tehphoberer, on 10/13/2008, -0/+4No, but I've bought enough t-shirts to pay for what I would have bought if I had to pay for everything. I wouldn't have 70gb of music if I had to pay for it all - it's not an opportunity cost to the artist if I wouldn't have bought their music anyway.
- theHman, on 10/13/2008, -1/+4RedS0x,
Actually, the artist gets direct income from every download of their song. I know several people who have distributed through Amazon. For every download they get a certain (pretty large) percentage of the sale price. It's done through PayPal.
- Protoss, on 10/13/2008, -1/+5Yes, I do buy shirts and go to concerts.
Most people I know that pirate music do the same. Hell a vast majority of people on OiNK, and now Waffles and What talk about what concert they're going to next, what band merch they just bough, etc. - unitedatheism, on 10/13/2008, -1/+5No, it's just that 7 cents of yours and the 92 cents gone to other people not the artist that make the artist's living, no ***** dude!
You have to sell like 1000 copies of a track to earn the incredible amount of SEVENTY US DOLLARS, that's gangsta!- theHman, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3Yeah, so we should take every action possible to prevent them from even seeing THAT money, right?
Look, I'm involved in music scenes in both the Pittsburgh and Providence areas. I know a variety of musicians, both with bigger names and local upstarts. You don't distribute on amazon unless you are have a large audience secured and are going to be selling lots of copies for sure. If you only have a local audience, you make far more money selling by consignment at local record stores or by selling CDs at shows or on the street.
You know what doesn't make you money? People stealing your music.
- theHman, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3Yeah, so we should take every action possible to prevent them from even seeing THAT money, right?
- SheaGK, on 10/13/2008, -2/+2As Denis Leary says in the pirated copy of No Cure for Cancer that I have, "Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And f*** you."
- RedS0x, on 10/13/2008, -2/+9"Blah blah I buy T-shirts go to concerts.... Really?"
- Commonwealth, on 10/13/2008, -3/+7I download off of emusic. No DRM and cheap, but you won't find any big label stuff there.
- stealthspc, on 10/13/2008, -3/+85This comment has been removed due to a copyright claim from the RIAA.
- mouthymadness, on 10/13/2008, -9/+4WTF?
- tim710, on 10/13/2008, -0/+10[This comment was funny a couple of months back when we were all hating on Scientology...]
[Not that it shouldn't be hated on.]
- tim710, on 10/13/2008, -0/+10[This comment was funny a couple of months back when we were all hating on Scientology...]
- mouthymadness, on 10/13/2008, -9/+4WTF?
- flgood, on 10/13/2008, -6/+13I would digg this 10 times if I could.
- forzaferrara, on 10/14/2008, -1/+1I would digg it 11
- Mahoney07, on 10/13/2008, -19/+5Is this idiot comic creator not aware of amazon mp3?
- paranoiabacon, on 10/13/2008, -2/+9Congratulations, you just had your propaganda cherry popped.
- Jesse, on 10/13/2008, -14/+5Seriously, people found this funny? Like they actually laughed audibly?
- hilo4321, on 10/13/2008, -0/+5no, it's not supposed to be funny
- Jesse, on 10/13/2008, -2/+2Ok, that makes sense as I've never laughed at the comic.
- hilo4321, on 10/13/2008, -0/+5no, it's not supposed to be funny
- lazydrumhead, on 10/13/2008, -14/+5I actually disagree with Randall on this one, I really enjoy owning this old-fashioned thing called a CD. I store the music, I keep the CD. I have a much lower possibility of losing this music than even DRM-free music (if the file gets deleted, I have a backup that takes 0 time to transfer to my PC).
And honestly, as an artist, I don't have much to say against DRM, except in the case of backup.
Bury away... - Xihix, on 10/13/2008, -4/+9***** THE MPAA
- AmICoolNow, on 10/14/2008, -0/+1***** THE NAMBLA!
- M1YGRNDN, on 10/13/2008, -13/+3Is it just me? Has anyone noticed how VH1 and MTV has the randomest ideas for making reality shows. first they just setup a bunch of ppl to go to some dumb show. eventually to make shows out of them. Its so frieken weird. I knew ***** like this was gonna happen. im pretty sure its been metioned before like 3 years ago or somethin. How like britney spears was only really fukin acting crazy and ***** just so she could make a nice little reality show. Pull some cash, you know. Anyhow they all connect and ***** too like this whole charm school ***** connects with like britney changing all of a sudden. Its all like a big ***** wrestling season. without wrestling.
Holler.- 0260, on 10/13/2008, -0/+7Did you get lost and stumble here by accident?
- rogueyak, on 10/13/2008, -0/+6What the ***** just happened?
- KillerKellerjr, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3ummmm....ok......this comment has nothing to do with the story....you must be lost. Go back to the MTV/VH1 website tab and submit your comment there.....PAY ATTENTION!!!!!!
- madfrogurt, on 10/13/2008, -4/+11***** THE LMIA
- Rocketbird, on 10/17/2008, -0/+1YEAH ***** LIMA BEANS
- omjeremy, on 10/13/2008, -11/+3XKCD seems to be really manipulating Digg users. It could be that they ran out of material and just decided to post a generic anti-DRM message that everyone knows. I'm not falling for it. Buried.
Besides, I think this is a non-issue now. Amazon and Rhapsody are now DRM free. I also like that every now and then they have deals for full records for only 2 or 3 dollars. A lot of the time it's really good stuff too.- vvvpqsw, on 10/13/2008, -1/+1They?
- GeyserShitdick, on 10/13/2008, -1/+2That guy's an idiot but you are also terrible for suggesting that "they" is not perfectly acceptable as a singular, gender-neutral pronoun.
- hilo4321, on 10/13/2008, -1/+2dude, randall munroe doesnt care about digg
in one of the comics he mentioned a bunch of sites, but didnt mention digg
you know why? because he probably has a digg account and sees the absurd amount of hate for his comic and says '***** digg'
- vvvpqsw, on 10/13/2008, -1/+1They?
- MilesyMiles, on 10/13/2008, -11/+2Looks like they drew a comic for Digg users too..
http://xkcd.com/331/ - SillyRabbits, on 10/13/2008, -9/+7Audible.com shouldn't b