GEN
Active topics
  1. I doubt it will ever happen.
  2. Originally posted by rmann83If you handed that petition to me, I wouldn't sign it and I'd be pretty tempted to tear it apart.

    I mean, wow. For people who don't pay for taking other's work, its amazing how defensive some people can get.

    End of the day: McGuinness did the right thing. It's not like he's doing this behind U2's back. They support their manager completely and he wouldn't be doing what he's doing if they didn't agree with it. Basically, your topic title says 'F**k you U2'

    Which I, politely, disagree with.

    No one anywhere has a 'right' to work that doesn't belong to them. People steal music and the act like the victims. I don't get it. Its the 21st century, and in a first world country, anyone can get anything from anywhere. The only way they don't is cause their lazy, impatient or don't want to spend the money. If you can't afford it, you save up like everyone else.

    Artists get 3% profit? If you're a musician with contacts in the business, then you ended up with a bad deal, my friend. If you aren't a musician and don't know what you're talking about, you shouldn't be talking in the first place. I hate that the music industry has this bad reputation associated with it. Fair enough, a lot of the corporations abused their positions and took advantage of the public. But a lot of them today are VERY fair minded people who are happy to see artists get what they deserve to preserve a long and trusting relationship. People hear one side of the story in an article and they build stereotypes and biases that aren't true. Yeah there are a lot of bad seeds out there but there's a lot of situations where the artist is an asshole and the industry's an honest guy.


    But let's say its true for the sake of argument. 3% of something is still better than 100% of nothing. Period. If this was happening to any other business but the entertainment business, the government or maybe even the world wouldn't stand for it. But music has this way of being personal, based in sound and so people think they should have a right to it. They don't; someone built it, some one made it, someone dedicated a portion of their life to this and they are the only master of it deciding what can be done with it and what can't.

    True the ideal 'perfect' market would have the artists making the most profit and royalties off their work but saying that p2p file sharing is ideal to a perfect market is like saying torture is a great way to communicate.


    You're stealing music. That's it. That's all there is to it. You're not a victim and you're not doing the right thing in any way. Ateast have the honesty to NOT try and justify yourself and convince yourself you're doing something that's okay. It's not. You don't have any right to anything that doesn't belong to you. If you don't agree with them, don't buy their music. If its music you can't get any other way, then you just don't get it. Period. It's a shame it has to be that way if it does but its ultimately the artist/industry's decision to release their work where they like, how they like.

    They want to charge $4000 per song? Then that's what you pay or you don't get that song. You have no right to build an argument saying 'no, i HAD to steal it or I wouldn't get it any other way'. If you were downloading music to save someone's life, I could understand as I'm sure they would as well, but I have a tiny tinkly feeling in my tummy that that's not the case. Nor has it ever been.


    Finally (yes, this book has an ending!) to say that downloading music without paying for it has anything to do with 'freedom of speech' is absolutely absurd. Sorry mate, I like you, I really do buit I don't agree with anything you said and quite frankly, I'm surprised you said it. U2 has always been very good and gracious to their fans so I assumed U2 fans were better then this.


    Amazing post!!
    I tottally agree with you!!!
    I could never sign such a stupid petition!! I really find it offensive for someone saying, stealing is my right!!! dude what the f#$%k are you thinking about????
    grow up!!
  3. What I meant when I agreed is not necessarily agreeing to this, BUT agreeing to that you need to defend your rights in other circles that companies are working on today. Stealing is stealing, and it can't be put in any other light because you're taking someone's hard work. Burning a backup is fine for yourself (as defined in copyright law), ripping to your portable player is fine but taking it in the first place - come off it.

    I don't steal the music, A) because I like higher-quality lossless quality and B) I can tell everyone that I've got the CD. Even iTunes makes me feel I stole the music.

    Originally posted by rmann83Artists get 3% profit? If you're a musician with contacts in the business, then you ended up with a bad deal, my friend. If you aren't a musician and don't know what you're talking about, you shouldn't be talking in the first place


    The situation may well have changed by now. That might be indie artists, though. Some of them get up to 50% which is a lot fairer.
  4. Originally posted by drewhiggins Even iTunes makes me feel I stole the music.



    Yes, but what to do when you were given an iTunes gift card for Christmas?!
  5. Originally posted by haytrain[..]

    Yes, but what to do when you were given an iTunes gift card for Christmas?!


    Then I feel it's a gift of music, and me not stealing. Because of the whole fact of not having a physical product - though you can burn them to disc to backup in iTunes.

    I've never been given an iTunes gift card either.
  6. I respect that Mr McGuinnes is a business man, and he is doing what he know best, I would like to ask him: - "Just how many millions of Dollars did you want to make?"

    As Bono would say, "The God I believe aint short of cash Mr.!"
  7. I agree that downloading is stealing, but I have a problem with this coming from the manager of a band that continues to fleece its biggest fans. The continual adding one or two new or unreleased tracks to the Greatest Hits albums is total crap. How many times do you expect me to buy Sunday Bloody Sunday and Mysterious Ways to hear a new U2 song? To me the worst example of this was the iTunes Complete U2. So you're telling me to get all of those great live and unreleased tracks I have to buy EVERYTHNG all over again. Again I don't disagree with what he says, but it strikes me as pretty hypocritical.
  8. Originally posted by notcomingdownI agree that downloading is stealing, but I have a problem with this coming from the manager of a band that continues to fleece its biggest fans. The continual adding one or two new or unreleased tracks to the Greatest Hits albums is total crap. How many times do you expect me to buy Sunday Bloody Sunday and Mysterious Ways to hear a new U2 song? To me the worst example of this was the iTunes Complete U2. So you're telling me to get all of those great live and unreleased tracks I have to buy EVERYTHNG all over again. Again I don't disagree with what he says, but it strikes me as pretty hypocritical.


    Agreed 110% on having to buy the songs and albums again. I won't say any more on the issue though. Did you end up getting Unreleased and Rare?

    18 Singles was a great example, again. As was Best of 1990-2000, too.
  9. Originally posted by drewhiggins[..]

    Agreed 110% on having to buy the songs and albums again. I won't say any more on the issue though. Did you end up getting Unreleased and Rare?

    18 Singles was a great example, again. As was Best of 1990-2000, too.


    I might be wrong, but I never noticed that people are forced to buy the releases. I agree that it sucks that you'll have to buy the Complete U2 to get the stuff you want or the Best of or 18 Singles. Still that's no reason to steal the music.
    If you don't wanna buy it - fine. But don't download it illegally then.
  10. I got Unreleased and Rare in a way Mr. McGuiness would not approve of. This may render my previous statement to be equally hypocritical, but here is my reasoning. I feel that I have paid my dues with respect to U2. I have legally bought every album and dvd that was released. I have paid good money to see them 3 times. I even bought a second copy of 1990-2000, after I lost my first because I wanted to have Electrical Storm that badly. I passed on 18 singles because I don't particularly like the 2 new songs. With the Unreleased and Rare, I really wanted to hear that, and I don't have $150 to waste on duplicate songs, so I illegally downloaded it.
  11. Originally posted by notcomingdownI got Unreleased and Rare in a way Mr. McGuiness would not approve of. This may render my previous statement to be equally hypocritical, but here is my reasoning. I feel that I have paid my dues with respect to U2. I have legally bought every album and dvd that was released. I have paid good money to see them 3 times. I even bought a second copy of 1990-2000, after I lost my first because I wanted to have Electrical Storm that badly. I passed on 18 singles because I don't particularly like the 2 new songs. With the Unreleased and Rare, I really wanted to hear that, and I don't have $150 to waste on duplicate songs, so I illegally downloaded it.


    As did I - and it's good to hear someone come right out and admit it, rather than beating around the bush.
  12. Originally posted by yeah[..]

    I might be wrong, but I never noticed that people are forced to buy the releases. I agree that it sucks that you'll have to buy the Complete U2 to get the stuff you want or the Best of or 18 Singles. Still that's no reason to steal the music.
    If you don't wanna buy it - fine. But don't download it illegally then.


    Couldn't have said it better myself. I wasn't too impressed with what U2 has decided to do with U218 but they did it to make money, pure and simple. Which is something they wouldn't need to do if they were still making money on royalties. This is the same band who threw on some 'extra songs' to a soundtrack album because they didn't want to cheat their fans (which turned into the extraordinary rattle&hum album). The music industries caught in a catch 22, and we started it.

    But I still don't get the reasoning behind some arguments here. As far as I'm concerned, its all come down to the whole 'protest without sacrifice' that is sadly affecting our generation. You want to protest that you weren't happy with U218, don't buy it. But everybody wants to have and eat their cake.

    (And for the record, I didn't buy U218 the album but the album and videos collection since it was more worth the money to me. And yes, I purchased the U2 complete collection)

    And I know I've rambled quite a bit in this thread and I apologize for that but its something that just really scares me. Not only does nobody seem to understand the destructive long term impact p2p is having on the music industry but nobody seems to care either. We're not only killing music as a business, we're killing the motivation that drives it.

    I'm an aspiring musician and I want to make money from my music. I don't believe in the 'righteous starving artist' image. I want to be able make a living making music so I can dedicate myself to it completely. I want to buy expensive equipment, book more studio time and work with producers and engineers I would never have had the opportunity to work with otherwise. And most of all, I don't want to sign off the rights away to songs I have spent over a decade building. Which leaves me and my producers shaking our heads. Here is a product we believe in but we don't want to spoil it in this market. This might be our only chance at getting some sort of lift off.
    You look at LiveNation and new MTV bands and you think 'Wow, myspace has made it so good for music' but that's not true. U2 and Rolling Stones make enourmous money on live shows but for bands still working their way up, live shows and merchandising isn't remotely enough. Its the scraps left on the table. Record labels have been crippling musical development and taking out all the encouragement to explore and rebuild themselves with the new 'singles only' mentality, dropping artists after one failed album (which, after October, should have happened to U2 as well). With stealing music, we send artists the same message. People say they don't want their rights taken from them because they 'love' music. If you loved music, you support it and encourage it. You blow on the embers to start a fire. I understand a lot of artists treat money as excess but a lot of artist rely on it for funding and in that environment, this is poison.

    But I digress. 2008 is going to be a big year for big names in music. I hope Paul McGuinness and U2 achieve what their fighting for and I hope this year finds as many new innovations as the new U2 album.

    And yeah, I promise I wont write any more in this thread
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.