Fuck these people, secondary line of argument

[Tossica]

Labels create rockstars. As long as musicians are fine with scraping by, touring 9 months out of the year and relying on t-shirt sales in order to live, there is no need for financial backing from major labels. If they want to be rockstars or drive Bentleys and do lines of coke off of $2000 an hour hookers ass cracks, they are SOL without the help of a major label.

[Evermore]

I still stand by my quote, they needed Elektra to make them a commercial hit, 20k is not commercial success although it IS very impressive to do on your own

they neede Elektra for the distribution. They didnt have the resources available at that time.

so what you're saying is that without a real label, they wouldn't have been nearly as successful

like it or not, artists need someone with big money to front the cost for them until they can become financially successful

then how do you expain Indie labels like Nuclear Blast

[Tikker]

what has an obscure indie label have to do with anything other than help prove the point?

artists need someone to front the upfront costs

which is what an indie label would do

I'm really not seeing what you're trying to say Evermore

[Tossica]

For the jackasses that STILL don't get how it works.

Does the band get a fair share of the profits from album sales from the major label? FUCK NO, they don't but then again, they were never promised a fair share to begin with and they signed the fucking papers didn't they?

A label finds a band that they think they can market successfully. It's ALWAYS a gamble because musicians are a bunch of alcoholic, suicidal, drug addicts, right? Well not really but you get the idea. The label scout sees something in the band that they think is worth the risk and they take a chance on the band, giving them an opportunity to become rock stars which is what everyone wants, right? If they didn't want that, they wouldn't sign on the dotted line, right? Anyhow, the band is given a sizable advance, allowing them their first taste of stardom. They are given access to world class studios, producers, engineers, etc to try to create a product that will not only make the band the rock stars they want to be but will make the record label a shit load of money in the process. Sometimes it works out for everyone, sometimes not but the bottom line is, the band would still be working the bar circuit, holding down their full time jobs at Best Buy, Perkins, etc if it wasn't for the label giving them the opportunity to fulfill their "dream".

In short, are record companies greedy, profit driven entities? Yep. But for every Eminem out there that makes them hundreds of millions of dollars, there are about 1000 other artists that they took risks on and never even recovered their initial up front costs on because the band imploded before the first record could ever be cut.

Stealing music DOES hurt the artist because eventually labels will not be willing to take risks anymore and all the great musicians out there will NEVER have the exposure they need to make it as professional musicians. They will still be great musicians but noone will have any idea who they are beyond the exposure they are able to drum up themselves.

[Tikker]

exactly

[Harrison]

Kill the major record labels and a suitable replacement controlled by musicians and not retarded suits will ensue.

No one becomes a musician thinking, "I want to be rich!"

If they do, they obviously never kept in touch with any real musicians.

[Tikker]

with no offense intended, that's a very naive way of thinking harrison

maybe they don't do it for the money, but lots of them definitely do it for the fame

[Harrison]

Famous != rich

Of course a lot of musicians want to be famous, that's how their creations get heard.

[Tikker]

i think you'd find more people who do it for fame and riches, than just fame alone

regardless of why they get into it, it's stupid for the artists to tell people to steal the album

if you're at the point in your career, where you can give at away (radiohead), then awesome

but to get paid up front for it, and tell people to just go and steal it now cause you're not going to get any more money from that album is just fucking retarded

[Arlos]

Oh, and what about those that ARE on Indy labels, where they DO get a cut per CD? How do you think stealing impacts their profits?

How about those that publish through their own personal label (basically self-publish). They're doing it all themselves, you damn well bet that they lose a significant chunk of income from album thefts, since their expected sell run is smaller, every 1 out of the expected run they don't sell is a big hit.

Not ALL bands out there are on big labels or are screwed as far as what their take is per CD. Still advocate stealing from THOSE bands?

-Arlos

[brinstar]

i've pissed off friends by refusing to let them borrow CDs of small-time indie groups for ripping purposes