×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Finnish Record Labels Want To Block Pirate Bay

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the you-scratcha-my-back dept.

Music 144

jones_supa writes "International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, the national trade association representing record companies in Finland, has filed for a court injunction ordering the Internet service provider Elisa to block access to the Pirate Bay website. 'The development of a legal online market is impossible in Finland if illegal services like The Pirate Bay are freely allowed to continue their operations,' said Lauri Rechardt, a spokesman for Finland's branch of IFPI."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

144 comments

yawn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36253038)

Proxy in the short term. Fuckup International Federation of the Phonographic Industry later. Blah blah blah.

Re:yawn (1)

mlts (1038732) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253732)

Bingo, the more there are bans against sites, the more companies will be stepping up to offer VPN services.

The sad thing is that once people are forced to VPN services, there is nothing countries can do to see traffic, unless try to ban the services. Then a cat and mouse game will ensue.

Re:yawn (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253906)

and it does not matter, once the tracker get's out you are fubar. so I cant get the tracker at Pirate bay, but dave can and he can paste that magnet link on another site and BOOM I now can enjoy the 39,000,000 seeder swarm that will be this artist's album and a bootleg recording of their shower singing recorded by someone to prove a point.

Bzzzt! Bullshit. (4, Informative)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253042)

If that was true in any way, shape, form, or sexual position then Apple, Amazon, and a multitude of other legitimate services would have failed.

Lo and behold, they have not. Instead they have grown.

Re:Bzzzt! Bullshit. (1)

dsavi (1540343) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253460)

Not to mention Spotify. Spotify was absolutely huge in Finland- It was replacing TPB before they made the free version lame.

Re:Bzzzt! Bullshit. (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#36254366)

Spotify was absolutely huge in Finland- It was replacing TPB before they made the free version lame.

So, sales were great when the price was $0?

Re:Bzzzt! Bullshit. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36254456)

Yeah, oddly enough the $0 price was the thing that got people into actually paying for it eventually. Pity the labels had to ruin the whole idea; now it's near death.

Re:Bzzzt! Bullshit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36253476)

>Lo and behold, they have not. Instead they have grown.

In Finland?

Maybe the culture of pirating is more pervasive in Finland? Maybe there is a point to the lamentation.

Fuck the fucking record labels either way. Finland has good social security. Artist don't need to starve even if they can't get by with gigs and t-shirts.

Re:Bzzzt! Bullshit. (4, Interesting)

billcopc (196330) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253782)

If they can't get by with gigs and t-shirts, they're doing it wrong and deserve to fail.

My own business didn't take off overnight, just because I showed up with a screwdriver and gaudy business card. It took off because I busted my ass for years to build it up. Music for profit is a business, and must be built from the ground up, just the same. You write good tunes, you put on good concerts, you identify your market, you establish relationships with other bands, promoters, producers, etc. You keep working at it until all that investment starts paying off, and if it doesn't, you either fucked up, or you're offering a product for which no one wants to pay.

I sure as shit would not buy someone's shirt or pay to see them, if all they played were Limp Bizkit covers, but that's what a lot of kids today are doing. Playing absolute shit to disaffected hormonal preteens, and wondering why, five years in, they're still not globe-trotting bazillionaires. I should know, because I'm operating a label :) I actually encourage my acts to give free tunes online, because it generates a ton of buzz and goodwill that pays off in spades down the road. Just look at Die Antwoord, as a prime example. They're a niche act from South Africa that has toured worldwide to great success, and yet their first album was posted on their web site, in its entirety, free to all visitors. I bought the commercial re-release, I bought the merch, I've seen them live. They've made about $60 from me, just by posting free music online, because it was GOOD music. Multiply that by the 2300 people who showed up to that one concert, and that's a pretty nice chunk of coin for a relatively unknown act. Now multiply that by the hundreds of shows they're played, and I'd call that a thundering success.

How much money has Rihanna made from me ? ZERO. I wouldn't even download her shit for free. So what's the difference ? I actually WANT Die Antwoord to succeed, I'm interested in their offerings, I appreciate what they're doing, and the entertainment they're providing me is worth every penny. I've played that free album more times than I can remember, it gets stuck in my head. Rihanna, she just makes me reach for the mute button. The more I hear her crap on the radio, the more I feel compelled to strangle puppies. Puppies with Rihanna's album cover taped to their cute little faces.

I don't know who Finland's most popular musical franchise might be, but it's a safe bet that if they need lobbyists to write up laws to secure their income, chances are they suck. Chances are I wouldn't ever sign them to my humble little label. Chances are I'd cheer if they got run over by a drunk driver. You're not allowed to call it art, if you're not investing your entire being into the work.

Re:Bzzzt! Bullshit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36254008)

I don't know who Finland's most popular musical franchise might be

Worry not, it's those same Idols-winner crapholes that every country has, except for this year, since Finland won the Ice Hockey gold, it's going to be the songs related to ice hockey.

Re:Bzzzt! Bullshit. (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 2 years ago | (#36255000)

How much money has Rihanna made from me ? ZERO. I wouldn't even download her shit for free. I actually WANT Die Antwoord to succeed, I'm interested in their offerings, I appreciate what they're doing, and the entertainment they're providing me is worth every penny.

You lost my remaining mod point when you went negative here, since I am not afraid to admit I like Rihanna, both her songs and what little I know about her personal life. Furthermore, what are you implying? That's one mainstream act you don't like, fine. If you're saying that -no- mainstream acts that sell music rather than giving it away meet your approval, well, we should just agree to disagree. And I'll jokingly call you a hipster.

The larger point is this: not wanting to give away your work does not make you evil, a bad artist, or a bad musician. It's all well and good that some acts can follow your model of "making it by concerts and shirt sales" while giving their music away free. I see no reason to suggest that could work with all or even most acts. I see no reason why your standard of "if they do that, it's good music" is better than my standard of "if it's good music, it's good music." I see no reason to fault acts that don't choose to go with your model, just as I see no fault with software developers that choose to charge money for their products rather than simply asking for donations.

Re:Bzzzt! Bullshit. (1)

nospam007 (722110) | more than 2 years ago | (#36254658)

"Maybe the culture of pirating is more pervasive in Finland?"

Yes, billions of people downloading Leningrad Cowboys.

Re:Bzzzt! Bullshit. (1)

Kamiza Ikioi (893310) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253948)

Maybe it's a typo. "The development of a legal online market is impossible in Finland," said Lauri Rechardt, a spokesman for Finland's branch of IFPI. "If illegal services like The Pirate Bay are freely allowed to continue their operations..." to which the rest of the quote continued, "...at least we can see that there are some people out there who are interested in Finnish artists, whom we should probably be promoting on the international market rather than just within our own small country, where we still think we're a 'Phonographic' Industry."

I mean, I'm just trying to read into it and draw out the best possible alternative for Lauri.

Re:Bzzzt! Bullshit. (1)

lordholm (649770) | more than 2 years ago | (#36254268)

I know for a fact that iTunes music store is available in Finland. Not sure you can get anything else, but the FIFPI has apparently no clue. The development of online markets in the EU is a complete stone age thanks to the likes of the FIFPI who continuously oppose the establishment of the digital single market. Usually the arguments is that it is bad for diversity, something that I don't understand... how is it diverse if it is impossible for me to download French or Italian music just because the record companies refuse to sign a EU wide license.

As soon as the Commission manages to set up the rules for the digital single market, that they have promised to establish within the current term, the European digital market will bloom.

Re:Bzzzt! Bullshit. (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 2 years ago | (#36254314)

Amazon killed Borders Books.

So your argument may be built on a cantilevered floor of lahvosh.

Re:Bzzzt! Bullshit. (1)

brit74 (831798) | more than 2 years ago | (#36255520)

> "If that was true in any way, shape, form, or sexual position then Apple, Amazon, and a multitude of other legitimate services would have failed."
Indeed, because if there's one thing propping up Apple, Amazon, and other legitimate services, it's sales to Finland.

whoa (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253050)

Record labels want to stop an organization which makes money from their copyrighted work without compensating them for that? That is just shocking.

Re:whoa (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36253186)

Record labels want to stop an organization which makes money from the copyrighted work that their cartel basically extorts from artists without compensating them for that? That is just shocking.

FTFY

Re:whoa (2)

DJRumpy (1345787) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253338)

The artists are partially to blame for that. They continue to perpetuate the control the record labels extend by signing those shitty contracts. The sad thing here is that if they managed to block that site, and records sales still don't improve, who are they going to after next? Recorded music, as a technology, hasn't decreased in price as the technology became cheaper. People can buy spools of a hundred CDR's for pennies, meaning the only real value is the music itself, and when you compare a 3 minute song to the value of a matinee movie for 5 bucks, the difference is a bit startling. 5 Bucks for a few hours of entertainment vs. a $1.00 or more for 3 minutes, it's just not a good value in most people's eyes.

Re:whoa (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253434)

Traditionally artists had little choice. I agree that that is no longer the case, but what do you do if you're a band who signed your distribution and publishing contracts even ten or fifteen years ago? Yes, new artists will probably more and more find alternative means that avoid the traditional recording companies and publishing houses, but the issue for older artists is still there.

Re:whoa (1)

DJRumpy (1345787) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253524)

I wonder how long a typical contract is that they sign? I know a lot of younger artists are using the net for distribution, and doing so with great success. Surely those contracts don't last a lifetime. I would think even older artists, once they get past that 'new' stage and get some name recognition, probably have more bargaining power.

Re:whoa (2)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253640)

I think a lot of it depends on ownership of publishing rights and to the masters. A lot of older artists, to put it bluntly, were royally screwed as far as ownership goes, or, to put it more bluntly, bamboozled. The recording industry left behind a lot of victims, which is why I find the current "woe is us, TPB is killing us" rather ironic. The problem is that, no matter how you do it, the fall of the record companies, whether it happens now or later, will have a lot of victims who weren't in on the scam.

Re:whoa (1)

SilentStaid (1474575) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253638)

I would like to point out that 5 dollars for a movie gets you to that show. 99c for a song from apple and you could listen to it until your harddrive gives out.

Re:whoa (1)

Maxo-Texas (864189) | more than 2 years ago | (#36254440)

I bought Moulin Rouge for $9.99.

I've watched it 20 times. I can continue to watch it.

That movie took hundreds of people to make. The typical record takes a couple dozen (some involved for only a few hours).

Prices for records reflect the tiny market of the 1950's- not today's market of millions of listeners.

If you sell your self-produced song to 7 million people for a dime, you just pulled in $700k for 5 to 10 people. Not bad for a month's worth of work.

Prices will trend downwards- there is an enormous glut of entertainment. I fall more behind every week. One way I choose is based on price. By watching cheaper now- the price on the other stuff drops and it becomes cheaper to watch in 3-5 months. I have one friend who is now 3 years behind and his entertainment is very inexpensive.

The last "bootleg" disk I got (Blue October) resulted in my spendng about $130 so far on their concerts and T-Shirts.

Re:whoa (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253798)

Fewer musicians are doing that. I know a fellow personally who's been offered a label contract. He told them to fuck off, he'd rather play in bars than give his work away to the record companies.

Re:whoa (1)

iceaxe (18903) | more than 2 years ago | (#36254286)

Does your friend have a website where I can purchase something from him? I'd like to support that attitude.

Re:whoa (1)

Coren22 (1625475) | more than 2 years ago | (#36255136)

What is the band name? In Baltimore, they actually have a venue that does weekly shows on Monday night, and the most popular band each night makes it onto the local radio station (www.98online.com) and they even run contests where the outcome is a recording deal (not distribution deal), but I am unsure how often that happens.

Re:whoa (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253466)

Extorts? So the labels threaten to break their kneecaps if the artists don't sign over rights to their songs for absolutely no compensation?

Re:whoa (2, Insightful)

Moryath (553296) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253768)

No, but the IFPI/RIAA/MAFIAA "either you sign the contract with us or we'll have you blacklisted from most live venues and you won't be eating by next week" negotiation model is pretty damn close.

Re:whoa (2)

Maxo-Texas (864189) | more than 2 years ago | (#36254560)

A huge, already successful band tried to bypass the concert system a few years ago.
Failed.

The only way you can bypass the labels is if you find a new path- the existing ones are all wholly owned top to bottom (distribution channels, record stores, radio stations).

I think it's breaking apart and hopefully the radio stations will not be able to lock up online distribution.

Re:whoa (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36253238)

...an organization which makes money from their copyrighted work without compensating them for that...

I see you're drinking that Kool-Aid.

Re:whoa (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253430)

Dear Nomadic:

I would feel sorry for the record industries decreasing profits (from 2 to 1.9 trillion since 2000 --- oh so sad!), if they didn't SCREW THE ARTISTS AND REFUSE TO PAY BILLIONS IN BACK WAGES (link below). It's like trying to feel sorry for Al Capone because someone stole his bootleg liquor..... or Sony because judges won't let them jail customers who buy used games instead of new. My sympathy is non-existent for these bastards.

http://www.futureofmusicbook.com/2011/03/music-managers-and-artists-could-collect-over-2-billion-in-unpaid-royalties/ [futureofmusicbook.com]

Re:whoa (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253526)

In other words, the problem is the record labels screwing over artists, so the remedy is for the Pirate Bay to make money by offering the work and screwing over the artists even more? As bad as the labels are, they at least compensate the artists SLIGHTLY. The Pirate Bay just screws them over completely.

Re:whoa (3, Insightful)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253970)

Actually most musicians will tell you they don't make shit from record sales, all the money comes from concerts and merch. hell even those of us that played in regional bands can tell you that, you sell the CD for a little over cost, just to cover production, and where you make your profits are the T-shirts, hats, mugs, keyrings, etc.

Why? simple: the music is advertising that gets you to the show. The more CDs you have out there, the more people you have potentially listening and hopefully playing it for their friends. this advertising then gets said friends to go to the show, where you as the artist then sell them the merch.

I had a nice thing going with my band where in each city we played I'd go hit the pawn shops and pick up a "pawn shop special" guitar or bass, which we would all sign and either myself (if it was a bass) or one of our guitarists would play it for a few (or several if they liked the sound) songs and then we would raffle it off. Every CD,T-shirt, etc got you another slot in the drawing. made out like bandits with that one we did. Oh and if any other musicians want to use the idea I offer it under the GPL. As long as you give me credit have fun! And enjoy the money, as we'd make close to a thousand a night with that trick.

So you see Nomadic the CDs are adverts nothing more, and it is the middle men leeches, that royally fuck EVERYBODY that are trying to make them profit centers. and why not? they steal the rights from the artists, don't pay them shit (last I checked even top draws only get a lousy 80c on a $20 CD) and own the rights to do with as they like for eternity.

Oh and as for why anyone would sign? We were told flat footed that NO radio stations in any of the markets would be allowed to play us, NO TV other than local would be allowed to touch us, and you know what? They were right. We had DJs tell us "Man we just love your stuff and listen to it in our cars, but we'll get fired if your name isn't on the list". You see this is what in the past would be labeled payola or antitrust, but since our corporate masters were able to get those pesky laws ignored with sack fulls of bribes they are allowed to pull that shit. We never signed but we got to see first hand what happened when you did, as one of the bands opening for us did. They ended up breaking up and never being able to work together just to get out of their contract, and now they can't play those two albums worth of songs, since the record company completely owns them for eternity.

So I can tell you that you aren't hurting any artists by going PTB, in fact the more people that listen to them the better. They will be lucky if they get a few pennies from the record leeches, more likely they will be like our friends and get hit with a $60,000 bill for "advertising expenses" for a record THEY promoted THEY recorded for less than $10k and THEY hustled to sell. The record management set up a grand total of TWO radio interviews, then new management came in and decided they were "going in a new direction" and basically left them in the street. so fuck the record companies and the horses they rode in on, you ain't doing no favors to artists by buying from them!

Legislative, executive, judiciary, and now media (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#36255004)

Why? simple: the music is advertising that gets you to the show.

So how do fans get into the show if they're not 21 years old yet? And are all musical genres amenable to live performance?

Every CD,T-shirt, etc got you another slot in the drawing.

Did you make sure that this drawing was in compliance with local sweepstakes regulations, which often stipulate no purchase necessary?

We had DJs tell us "Man we just love your stuff and listen to it in our cars, but we'll get fired if your name isn't on the list".

"So how do I get on the list?" If you collect enough replies that a local band can't get on the list, try reporting about these replies to the local newspaper, to newspapers of nearby cities, and then to the major news media. The media have in effect become a fourth branch of government.

Re:whoa (1)

Moryath (553296) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253972)

The Pirate Bay just screws them over completely.

O RLY?

Interestingly, the heyday of the RIAA, the point at which they were making the most money, was the period when Napster was also in its heyday. New artists were coming out all the time, getting a ton of exposure through Napster that they'd never get over the radio.

MafiAA revenue declines match well with four factors, none of which have anything to do with "piracy":
#1 - The rise in other forms of entertainment. Video games, in the past decade, have ballooned. In a system where people only have a finite amount of recreational funding, people are less likely to buy music CDs. Youtube videos, Hulu... people have a ton of access to other time-wasters. About the only thing CDs are good for is car listening.

#2 - The re-rise of the single over services like iTunes. Why buy an entire album when you can just buy the 1-2 songs that are any good off of it and leave the rest of the crap songs behind?

#3 - Economic decline in general. Face it, when 15-20% of your target market is unemployed, you should EXPECT revenues to decline.

#4 - Lack of investment in new acts and production of new material. Instead of anything innovative, or anything GOOD, we get overproduced, cookie-cutter garbage 99% of the time these days. Miley Cyrus, the Jonas Brothers, and don't forget the newest gay disney boyband "BBMak." Britney Spears sounds like Mcdonna sounds like Lady Gaga sounds like Who The Fuck Cares I'm Done. Rap, "Hip-hop", and the bastardized "R&B" that has ceased to mean "Rhythm and Blues" and instead now means "Retarded and Black"? Yeah. I don't care if you talksing like William Shatner about shooting cops or fucking hoes, I really don't, because your "music" is pure crap.

Between two recent recessions (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#36255078)

#3 - Economic decline in general.

There have been two recent recessions: one starting in 2001 caused by the collapse of the dot-com bubble and the attack on the World Trade Center, and another starting in 2008 caused by the collapse of the housing bubble. Where were the labels between those?

Re:whoa (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36253974)

It's not a matter of supporting the piratebay or their users, or even about making sure we're allowed to use p2p protocols, it's a matter of ill deserved sympathy for the "MAFIAA" should be allowed to be used as a stepping stone to turning our tubes into cable-tv 2.0 (now with more adds - and we also spy on you!) complete with censoring (see Australia, only blocking sites with objectionable content.. and sites listing content that is blocked but shouldn't).

Re:whoa (3, Insightful)

iceaxe (18903) | more than 2 years ago | (#36254592)

The problem is supply and demand and changing technology leaving behind a formerly profitable business model that is slowly but surely going extinct, and not going quietly into that good night. The recording industry would do well to spend their efforts on figuring out a business plan that fits tomorrow instead of yesterday. Some will make the transition, some won't.

As for TPB, they merely supply a place to discover what other people are offering - whether illegal or legal. They profit from the traffic to their website creating ad revenue. One might successfully claim that they encourage illegal acts, and that they facilitate illegal acts, but they aren't selling anything but ads and TPB paraphernalia.

As for the artists, they are getting publicity and growing fan base at the low low cost of $0.00, which is one heck of a lot less than what the big labels charge them. (Give up your artistic freedom, give up your publishing rights, give up nearly all of the profit from selling recordings, etc. etc.)

The fact is, for most artists the labels provide a valuable service for a steep price. However, the value of that service is decreasing, but some labels still see more profit in fighting change than in revising their way of doing things. The future is bright for labels that offer good service with equitable terms to artists, and fair prices for desired products to consumers. Fact is, though, the value of a commodity is how much someone is willing to pay for it, not how much it costs to produce. And bits are cheaply and easily obtained - unlike in the past.

Insightful (1)

fuzznutz (789413) | more than 2 years ago | (#36255446)

Fact is, though, the value of a commodity is how much someone is willing to pay for it, not how much it costs to produce.

This has to be the most insightful comment I have ever read here. Throw in a bit about artificial scarcity, and I will vote for you for Emperor of Slashdot.

Re:whoa (2)

d3ac0n (715594) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253504)

At issue is not that the organization wants to protect it's copyright. That is certainly a logical desire. At issue is the argument that they make in an attempt to protect said copyright. The argument is clearly and obviously flawed and frankly, just plain silly on the face of it, as evidenced by the success of iTunes alone.

Re:whoa (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253996)

No they don't like the competition for robbing the artist. And they are frightened that the artists will discover they don't need the label at all. Honestly, if you are good and you recorded everything and threw it all to the internet for free, you will be a success. People will go to your shows, people will BOOK YOU for shows, they will want the tshirt, etc.... There are a couple of bands here that have done this and they all now do music stuff and no longer need day jobs. Do they make $40,000,000,000 in record sales? no but that 's not realistic.

Really? (1)

Robadob (1800074) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253070)

What about iTunes and amazon music etc, don't these count as legal online markets to purchase music? (Or are these unavailable in Finland?)

Re:Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36253222)

They probably aren't seeing that the same retarded regioning/zoning/whatever the hell you want to label them are still in play even though the Internet should have destroyed them long ago. It's fucking ridiculous.

Re:Really? (3, Interesting)

dsavi (1540343) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253356)

Most of the regular services are available in Finland, with the exception of Pandora (However "regular" Pandora is, I don't know). Finland also has Spotify. Given Finland's stance on free speech (We top the Reporters Without Borders press freedom index along with a few other countries, last I checked), I doubt that this kind of censorship will go through. I know, press freedom isn't entirely related to this. But Finland is a lot more liberal about such things than, say, the US.

Pretty much everyone I know here in Finland had moved to Spotify from illegal downloading, until Spotify watered down the free version. Restoring Spotify to its previous state would be far, far more effective than blacklisting TPB.

Re:Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36253554)

I always thought that spotify being free was to lure in customers before forcing them to pay for it because they can't have made much money from those adverts. It could also be of use to them if somehow they can highlight some increase in piracy related to some other event which coincides with the spotify removal of unlimited free. (Although correlation != causation)

Re:Really? (1)

Aggrajag (716041) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253704)

TTVK (IFPI representative in Finland) is blaming piracy when the real reason is that most Finnish online record stores are not very good and the music is full of DRM.

Re:Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36255064)

Gladly the only site worth visiting and buying from does not enforce its users to crappy drm. http://www.digital-tunes.net/ is The Place.

Re:Really? (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#36254402)

Restoring Spotify to its previous state would be far, far more effective than blacklisting TPB.

Yeah, if only they would give it away for free, we wouldn't have to steal it.

Re:Really? (1)

uvajed_ekil (914487) | more than 2 years ago | (#36254568)

This isn't about fair trade or free speech, unfortunately. Record companies around the world developed a sense of entitlement because their business model worked very well for a few decades. Now that consumers and artists alike have grown tired of the record companies only serving their own interests while screwing everyone else, no one wants to support the old business model. Force legislation down our throats to protect a bad, dying model is not the way to go.

Don't allow the big corporations to tell you what you must buy and how much, and they will be forced to adapt if they want to survive.Take Apple: they went through some very tough times (because there were no laws designed specifically to protect them), so they innovated, adapted, gave people what they wanted, and now they are thriving. The case with Ford in the US is somewhat similar - they were bailed out, yes, but their competitors were not banned or handcuffed; Ford is once again producing quality products that people want and can afford, and they are doing remarkably well as a company. I'm considering buying a new Ford for the first time in my life, though I see little reason to spend $18 on crappy CDs using 1980 technology, which I can not return or test drive. I also never buy movies anymore, since $20-30 for new releases I will only watch once or twice more, and am legally (though not technologically) unable to back-up. Ford didn't screw me or push restrictive laws to force all cars look and perform like a 1989 Ford Taurus forever, they went back to the drawing board (after borrowing a few bucks, which they have repaid, of course).

I'm a couple of generations removed from Finland, but I doubt this will go over well there, arguably the most "free" country in the world. Besides, iTunes is proof that a legal market can exist and thrive amidst piracy. And you'll never eliminate piracy entirely - they just keep making it more inconvenient, and some one else keeps finding ways to make it easier. Folks will revert to analog copies if digital-digital copies are ever somehow made impossible.

Re:Really? (1)

indeterminator (1829904) | more than 2 years ago | (#36255048)

Actually, a lot of previously free Spotify users I know are now either paying for it, or considering paying for it. The big reason: Spotify mobile (which never was free).

10€/month is close enough to free for a lot of people.

(also most people I know wouldn't know what a 'torrent' is)

Not going to happen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36253076)

It's not going to happen.

And The Pirate Bay is not an illegal site.

Re:Not going to happen (1)

denis-The-menace (471988) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253502)

it doesn't matter.
Any website that angers or annoy rich people will be taken down by hook or by crook (e.g.by bought politicians)

Nope, that's not how it works. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36253102)

First you provide multiple working alternatives that don't screw over the consumer, whilst the government regulates the industry to ensure customer safety.

If I have to, I'll go and off each of these idiots. I have a car, guns ain't that hard to find and I'm already in the country.

Translation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36253250)

We're unable to provide a similar service for a reasonable price, and are unwilling to give customers access to music without burdensome restrictions. Therefore, we want to destroy any competition so people are forced to turn to us.

Re:Translation (1)

i_ate_god (899684) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253532)

well, reasonable price? TPB is free, it doesn't get much more reasonable than that in the eyes of a consumer.

Re:Translation (1)

d3ac0n (715594) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253892)

Actually, if the success of iTunes is any indication, You actually CAN get more reasonable than "free".

I know that I don't mind paying a moderate price for the cost of an "album" because I get a sense that I am supporting the artist. Particularly if I am buying it from either the artist's website or from an independent artist not affiliated with a major record label.

That feeling alone is a form of value. It is the intangible value that you do NOT get when you simply download it. I think the success of online music sales has proven that even without a physical object, legal ownership of data does carry intrinsic value all on it's own.

They're not alone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36253258)

They're amongst the many companies that have no place on the internet. Can't handle the heat of the competition? Then get out of the kitchen (unless you're making me a sandwich, then be quick about it)

legal online market is impossible w/ piratebay (1)

commodore6502 (1981532) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253266)

Funny.
iTunes seems to be doing just fine, even though piratebay and other illegal sites exist. The record companies should stop being wimps, man-up, and create a legal site for purchasing $1 singles. Stop the whining,

Re:legal online market is impossible w/ piratebay (1)

shentino (1139071) | more than 2 years ago | (#36254536)

Singles aren't as profitable when you can force consumers to buy the whole CD and pay for every song on it.

Re:legal online market is impossible w/ piratebay (1)

brit74 (831798) | more than 2 years ago | (#36255602)

> "iTunes seems to be doing just fine, even though piratebay and other illegal sites exist."
That's because many people refuse to accept piracy as a legitimate means to get entertainment. It's also worth noting that music sales in the US, when adjusted for inflation and population growth, are roughly 1/3rd what they were 10 years ago.

International Federation of the Phonographic Ind.. (1)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253270)

Remember kids! Don't download your Long Plays and Singles illegally,

Re:International Federation of the Phonographic In (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36253628)

Download? What's that? Don't make up words!

Not always infringment (2)

McGiraf (196030) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253298)

What if someone is using the pirate bay to distribute his own content?

Blocking it for the record company is just using the government and laws to prevent competition.

They are losing control of the music business and they are getting scared.

Re:Not always infringment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36255034)

This is exactly what the entire MPAA, RIAA, or insert whatever countries version has been doing regardless of what artist gets distributed. They've encountered a disruptive technology that is/will/has killed their "sell the same thing to the same person every time a new standard takes off" business and they've been trying to legislate it back to the mid 80s. Do people pirate still? sure. Is it as big as it was when napster, limewire, or bittorrent were the only way to easily get digital music besides ripping CDs yourself? No, probably not. They had no barriers to doing their own Itunes, Amazon MP3, spotify, or mp3.com type service except their own greed and they got themselves left behind while they were busy suing their customers for making music easier to get and more convenient to enjoy.

Re:Not always infringment (1)

brit74 (831798) | more than 2 years ago | (#36255642)

> "What if someone is using the pirate bay to distribute his own content?"
Use a different method. There's lots of them available on the internet. Here's a few: setup a website and put your music on there, put your music on MySpace, put your music on Facebook, put your music on Megaupload, put your music on dropbox.

> "Blocking it for the record company is just using the government and laws to prevent competition. They are losing control of the music business and they are getting scared."
No, it's blocking illegitimate competition.

Of course (1)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253302)

The development of a legal online market is impossible in Finland if illegal services like The Pirate Bay are freely allowed to continue their operations.

Well, duh. I mean, it totally turned out that way in the US and various other countries with unfettered access to TPB. Nobody ever buys music online from iTunes or Amazon.

Re:Of course (1)

brit74 (831798) | more than 2 years ago | (#36255682)

> "Well, duh. I mean, it totally turned out that way in the US and various other countries with unfettered access to TPB. Nobody ever buys music online from iTunes or Amazon."
If you look at the numbers, you'd see that music sales in the US, when adjusted for inflation and population growth, have declined to 1/3rd of what they were 10 years ago.

What about the levy fees? (3, Informative)

Fizzl (209397) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253492)

We pay ungodly amounts for our blank media so we can legally copy. Fuck you Teosto and Gramex.

Re:What about the levy fees? (1)

Lemming Mark (849014) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253854)

In *some ways* I like the idea of being able to legally copy, even though I'm against imposing a stupid tax on blank media. To what extent can you "legally copy", though? Can you really just copy any physical media you can get your hands on and it's OK? e.g. rent all the films you want once, then share your copies of those disks with friends?

This case basically sounds like the same people who'd be in favour of the "free market" if the boot was on the other foot, now whinging because nobody is enforcing their business model.

Re:What about the levy fees? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36254120)

I'm no expert on copyright laws, but i think it basically goes like this: You can copy things from original media for your own use and for your family. Not sure about copying rental stuff, but copying cds/dvds/whatever borrowed from library is perfectly ok. Sharing copies with friends is not allowed as far as i know. Not that anyone could prevent it...

Re:What about the levy fees? (2)

grimJester (890090) | more than 2 years ago | (#36254170)

We're allowed to copy, iirc, "a few copies for oneself, family and close friends" provided that the original source was legally acquired. I assume a p2p system where you only download from / upload to people you know irl would be legal.

Anyway, these claims about the Finnish market being somehow special is complete junk. The actual companies behind Teosto and Gramex are the same old RIAA, any realistic online market for music is international anyway and Finnish consumers have the same devices, habits and preferences as people listening to music anywhere.

Hungary (2)

sourcerror (1718066) | more than 2 years ago | (#36254442)

Hungary has a similar law and tax (and quite a few other European countries as well). The tax is currently only distributed among musicians, moviemakers don't get a share, and the distribution ratio is based on popularity ( radio playlists and number of records sold). Downloading copyrighted work is legal*, uploading is illegal. So bittorrent is illegal in theory, as people upload as well, but users aren't prosecuted. (Although, you can't use it in university networks.) Sometimes trackers are shut down. Pay-for-ftp warez servers are quite often the target. And there's BSA. But they only harass corporations.

* Rationale is that users can't know what content is legal and what isn't, but they won't prosecute you even if you're using a pay-for-ftp warez site.

At first glance... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36253570)

I read "International Federation of the Pornographic Industry" and wondered how I got a job in that organization!

Pricing (1)

archer, the (887288) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253620)

The development of an *overpriced* legal online market is impossible. Make a fairly priced legal online market, and I'll be there, as I am with Amazon's MP3 store.

Re:Pricing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36253786)

This includes the sleazy tactic of pricing goods for sale in euros for the same amount in US dollars. I don't mean the same value, I mean pricing something for sale in the US for $0.99 and pricing the same product in the EU for 0.99€. Bzzt.. wrong! There is something called a currency market, the US dollar vs. euro is not 1:1 and has not been close to equal for some time. Currently, one euro is worth approximately $1.41. US companies take advantage of this all the time and rape their EU customers. Yes, I am aware of the VAT vs. sales tax difference, but it still makes for a large price gap and EU citizens pay more for the same goods.

Don't even get me started on CD pricing... here in Finland we pay the equivalent of $31 for a new CD release, taking the above exchange rate into account. The music companies are greedy to the core, and I for one can't wait for them to run their business into the ground and let something new take its place. They are surely trying their hardest to do just this.

I'd have to say... (1)

Megane (129182) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253670)

I'd have to say that The Pirate Bay is... Finnished.
(removes sunglasses)
YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

erm, good luck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36253712)

Regardless of the right or wrong of this, Sony have suffered losses of (according to them) ~ 200 million USD due to the Anonymous hacker breach.

It's not clear to me why what must be a smallish industry organization in Finland of all places wants to single itself out for attacks like this?

So provide an equivalent service... (1)

SharpFang (651121) | more than 2 years ago | (#36253728)

I'd like then the record labels to provide a free search and tracker for Linux images, free games, public domain music and ebooks, alternative cinema and investigative journalism movies, and other legal material provided normally by the Pirate Bay.

The development of a legal online free culture is impossible in Finland if corrupt organizations like IFPI are allowed to shut down their operators.

OCILLA (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#36255264)

I'd like then the record labels to provide a free search and tracker for Linux images, free games, public domain music and ebooks, alternative cinema and investigative journalism movies, and other legal material provided normally by the Pirate Bay.

Mininova.

Here in the United States, we have a process called OCILLA [wikipedia.org] (17 USC 512) in which a copyright owner can tell a service provider to take an allegedly infringing copy of a work down, and then the subscriber can tell the service provider to put it back up two weeks later. In return, the service provider is immune to contributory or vicarious infringement liability (Viacom v. YouTube). The two week delay is intended to allow the copyright owner enough time to file a copyright suit against the subscriber. I imagine that other countries have analogous processes. But I seem to remember that The Pirate Bay has made a point of flouting such notices, unlike Mininova which stays in business by heeding them.

Re:So provide an equivalent service... (1)

brit74 (831798) | more than 2 years ago | (#36255752)

> "The development of a legal online free culture is impossible in Finland if corrupt organizations like IFPI are allowed to shut down their operators."
What silliness. All that stuff can still be put online. Here's a few places: YouTube, MySpace, MegaUpload, Wordpress, Download.cnet, or one of the trackers that actually respects copyright. What in the world would make you say that "legal online free culture" is impossible without the PirateBay?

Let them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36253752)

I'm sure thepiratebay don't really care if Finnish record labels access their site.

Give us our MONEY BACK (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36253790)

Maybe they should fu**iing lobby there government to give the UK back there money instead!

Ok. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36253846)

I'd like a pony, please. Pink. That farts rainbows.

Pirate Bay is Sweden, a local old rival of Finland (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 2 years ago | (#36254718)

nothing here to see except typical nationalistic ego tweaking, jealousies, and grudges. move along

Suppose, Just Suppose... (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 2 years ago | (#36254788)

Suppose, just suppose, that someone in Finland wishes to download something from TPB not owned or controlled by this trade association requesting this all-encompassing block? Something otherwise legal in Finland to download? Hasn't the trade association totally overstepped their charter by trying to deny that as well?

People listen to Finnish music? (1)

coronaride (222264) | more than 2 years ago | (#36255024)

Other than "How's it hangin', Grandma?", I thought that Fins don't even listen to their own music.

Re:People listen to Finnish music? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36255366)

I'd say about 1/3 of the music on our pop music stations is Finnish (and there is not, to my knowledge, any kind of regulation about playing home grown music like Canada has). Stations playing older stuff play an even higher percentage of Finnish music. My friends, ranging in age from early 20s to 60s are all interested in Finnish music as well as imported stuff.

Does anyone use Pirate Bay anymore? (1)

LordRobin (983231) | more than 2 years ago | (#36255032)

Okay, I'm being semi-facetious. But when I want a torrent of something, I never type in Pirate Bay's URL. I go to one of the many torrent search sites easily found by Google. Of the torrent files I download, many point to a Pirate Bay tracker, but just as many don't.

I guess what I'm saying is that I don't see what is accomplished by singling out the Pirate Bay at this point.

------RM

Other way around? (1)

Rozzin (9910) | more than 2 years ago | (#36255052)

'The development of a legal online market is impossible in Finland if illegal services like The Pirate Bay are freely allowed to continue their operations,' said Lauri Rechardt, a spokesman for Finland's branch of IFPI.

That sounds backward: isn't it difficult-to-impossible to get an illegal trade under control unless there are legal alternatives competing with it?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...