I'm seriously going to cry.

i would cry if i used oink. but i don't. so i will just laugh.

Yeah... this is pretty much the worst news for the music industry in a long, long time...

What these stupid record labels fail to understand is that nobody is going to buy most of these shit albums anyway... half of the stuff they put out is terrible, but sites like Oink gave smaller bands exposure that they had no idea was even being given to them!

The fact is, nobody is going to buy your independent label band's album, regardless of how great it might be, because no one has ever heard of them. Oink gave you a way to listen to so many different albums I'd never heard before, and if I liked the album, I could go ahead and buy it or go see the band live.

Now, 180,000 users won't be able to spread those great new bands to their friends, and people will stop buying CDs and the record industry will die just like it was going to all along.

Thanks a lot, you fucking pigs.

So fellas, which site do we go to now?

errr. iono sam. something tells me the closing of a huge bit torrent site is going to be the last nail in the music industry coffin.

WORST

NEWS

EVER

ha, that is bullshit, sam. You know you want those albums but you just dont want to pay for them. If youre just a casual listener you dont go to sites like Oink. Keep small labels and independet artists alive, buy their albums!

The message on the site now is pretty fucking nasty.
"A criminal investigation continues into the identities and activities of the site's
users".
Yeah, Fuck YOU.
180,000 users and probably millions of IP addresses. There's no investigation of users, you bastards. So stop trying to scare people.

total monstrous pile of shit.

i don't know if sam is right on all points, but i have to say i'm not going to buy indie music and i tend to be the one to get my friends to listen to new things.

Oinks was a huge way for me to find smaller artists and albums to buy, so this is sad news.
I only wish I had some warning so I could abused my ratio and leeched away...

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!
WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?!?!?!?!

Huh. I have somehow managed to find new bands for many years without stealing anything...

the entitlement that a lot of people seem to have is really alarming. because you can't get it for free, you will never buy anything? think about what you are saying. people get SO upset at record companies for trying to protect their music. it's really quite insane. every company tries to protect it's products. Apple goes after every little infringement of it's intellectual property, no one seems to mind that. it's vital to our economy that people pay for products that they enjoy. it's a very simple economic principle that piracy is bad for a capitalist economy.

so what if you can't listen to every new release? you can surely find promotional mp3s or streams just about every new album. why are entitled to listen to whole thing online. go to your record store and listen to the record.

shutting down a torrent is the end of the music industry? again, just think about what you are saying. it's ridiculous.

the music industry is the one industry everyone thinks they know everything about. which again, is insane.

Sam's comment is indicative of the sense of entitlement MUSIC PIRATES have...this aura of unsolicited Publicist to the masses. Boo-hoo so now you can't steal music anymore from Oink! Cry me a river.

Honor among thieves eh?

Rationalizing a shut down Oink to be "bad" for the music industry points out your delusions.

seriously, doesn't the music industry have something better to do than play cops? you know, like "make good music".

i never used oink or bittorrent...god only knows what ill do if they close my baby down.

i agree with sam though. i was always buying used cds anyway...they never made money off me. if i liked a band, id see them on tour or buy their next album.

with dl'ing, i do the same thing. actually, i dl a new album, wait 3-5 years and then if im still into it, i buy the actual cd.

the rise in popularity of all these 'indie' bands is directly due to the fact that people are stealing their albums online.

Ok anon10:56.

Tons of people criticize Apple for their childish abuse of patent law. There are lots of things broken about our intellectual property model, and if you ask those who deal with it every day, you might learn a thing or to about expert opinion regarding the state of the system.

Go back to iTunes and don't speak outside your sphere again.

Speaking as someone who has no frame of reference for this sort of thing- what are the chances they actually go after any users of the site? Or are the claims they're going to just bluster on their part?

I actually purchased a shitload of records and cds as a result of hearing stuff from OiNK.

"Huh. I have somehow managed to find new bands for many years without stealing anything..."

"the entitlement that a lot of people seem to have is really alarming"

I agree with you both. If you truly want to sample music, there are so many options. There is no reason to STEAL music via oink. Any band with even a semi-professional recording will have a website or at least a myspace/purevolume page with sample songs. They might not be good enough for repeated listens, but they will give you a sense if you should buy the album of not.

oink = theft. Get over it.

There should be a healthy debate about our intellectual property laws in the United States, but anyone who feels entitled to free music is a fucking brat. Those of who decry such sentiments as 'capitalistic' should understand that it was the alienation of the worker from the fruits and benefit of his/her labor that necessitated a new (communist) model. Guess who is alienating musicians from those fruits and benefits of their labor today (just like the bourgeois)? You guessed it: FILE SHARERS.

Yes, buying albums directly from the artists is the best way to support them but a very close second is going to see them live. I downloaded a ton of stuff off Oink, mostly bands I have never heard of that popped up on the "new" list, and when I found a band I liked I was very happy to go pay $10-25 to see them play live. They took home more of that money from me going to see them than they do from any CD sale through a label>music store. Oink had a commitment to quality (bit rate, tagging, etc) that bands definitely benefited from so I have to agree that this is a bad thing for the bands themselves. They will not make more money or get their music to more people with sites like Oink being shut down. For the individual listeners, who had access to a great database of music with strict quality standards in every format, this is really really sad.

Oh, and I gladly paid 5 pounds for the Radiohead album so I would be more than happy to let go of the Oinks of the world if every band allowed you to pay whatever you wanted.

no, pete, seeing the band live is THE best way to support them

Um you sing on stage every night. Guess what, you have the best job in the world, you don't deserve to get paid a lot of money. Plenty of people do it just for fun, if you make enough to eat, shut up. All that "I worked hard to get here" is bullshit. You worked hard to be on a bigger stage, and you worked hard at having a good time playing music. If it's such hard work, stop doing it. Plenty of people do it just for fun, let them become famous.

If you do anything that benefits society (teachers, human rights workers, firemen, political activists) for your money, you deserve to keep it. Let the bankers and concert goers pay for sufjan steven's new costume or the arcade fire's newest americana instrument player.

from 11:01 -

"the rise in popularity of all these 'indie' bands is directly due to the fact that people are stealing their albums online."

this statement is exactly correct.

i heard daft punk goes on at 8:30. can anyone confirm?

Anonymous Wrote:

"The message on the site now is pretty fucking nasty. 'A criminal investigation continues into the identities and activities of the site's
users'. Yeah, Fuck YOU. 180,000 users and probably millions of IP addresses. There's no investigation of users, you bastards. So stop trying to scare people."

My Reply:

I shit you not when I say I just joined Oink only
two days ago. Thus far I've only downloaded 1.44GB, but I did donate, and my client is open and connected to the tracker as I sit here at work, and away from my computer. I know the fear is an irrational one, but it would just figure that I would get busted after only belonging to the stupid tracker for basically a day.

"the entitlement that a lot of people seem to have is really alarming. because you can't get it for free, you will never buy anything? think about what you are saying. people get SO upset at record companies for trying to protect their music. it's really quite insane. every company tries to protect it's products. Apple goes after every little infringement of it's intellectual property, no one seems to mind that. it's vital to our economy that people pay for products that they enjoy. it's a very simple economic principle that piracy is bad for a capitalist economy.

so what if you can't listen to every new release? you can surely find promotional mp3s or streams just about every new album. why are entitled to listen to whole thing online. go to your record store and listen to the record.

shutting down a torrent is the end of the music industry? again, just think about what you are saying. it's ridiculous.

the music industry is the one industry everyone thinks they know everything about. which again, is insane."

Hello Mr. Record Producer Sir. }}}}waving{{{{

if they had something like Netflix but for albums, then people would have no excuse. I never stole an album btw but do I like indie music. Sometimes I even buy albums. I dont need to hear every album, you can listen to plenty of that stuff on the radio, i mean come on NYU radio right there. and Fordham. thats good enough.

Notice how the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) helped out in the investigation. The name is perfect - an accurate representation of the antiquated practices and technological alarmist mindset of the industry. I hear they've also got a line on the Victrola bandit.

Someday everyone will realize that free exposure to music brings in dollars, and that file sharing isn't going away.

"If you do anything that benefits society (teachers, human rights workers, firemen, political activists) for your money, you deserve to keep it."

LOLZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

re anon 12:02 - Daft @ 9:30, Mozart at 10:30

the thing is this. record labels need only exist to license music to video games, tv shows, commercials, movies, etc. Theres no longer a need for a huge mechanical company to print booklets and burn cds, cassettes or records. theres no more need for record stores to exist out there selling the cds. THE OLD MODEL IS DEAD.

Oink allowed people to sidestep the middleman. there is no artist that was receiving more than a few cents per disc (or even download) sold. radiohead just broke it down even more and most likely made more money per disc than any artist in history...because people don't want to sidestep the artist and not reward them for their talent and hard work...they want to sidestep the crowd of greaseballs that were once necessary to the process. the industry is notoriously vicious and vampirical and it is crashing and burning because it is IRRELEVANT now.

OINK exposed people to music that they'd have never ever heard of...and for the most part those are the people that end up in the audience of their concerts.

The "60 major pre-releases" that they are blaming oink for are like 50 cent and maroon 5. and they were only put through oink so people can boost their ratio. Its not like now...those people who have access to the records are gonna scratch their head like theres nowhere to put the music. that shitll be on demonoid or torrentleech or mininova or whatever the fuck just as fast now.

it is dead. even T-Pain is losing the label...madonna, NIN. its only the beginning. and this is just naive of the music industry to think today's 'victory' will have any place in saving itself from the innevitable.

"If you do anything that benefits society (teachers, human rights workers, firemen, political activists) for your money, you deserve to keep it."

So what you are basically saying is that Karl Rove deserves to keep the money he makes.

"Theres no longer a need for a huge mechanical company to print booklets and burn cds, cassettes or records. theres no more need for record stores to exist out there selling the cds. THE OLD MODEL IS DEAD."

I will never purchase a download. It's either a CD or vinyl for me.

Well said, 12:32.

These fuckers would have arrested Radiohead if they could. I only downloaded a couple of GB, but every single recording I downloaded from OiNK I ended up buying on CD--Ted Leo, National, Fiery Furnaces, etc. Oh wait, I did download the the Carpenters, but I didn't buy that because Richard let his sister die.

i am not a record producer. but i do know something about making records. never-mind that.

people don't understand the music business, yet they comment on it incessantly.

record labels actually do more than:

"record labels need only exist to license music to video games, tv shows, commercials, movies, etc. Theres no longer a need for a huge mechanical company to print booklets and burn cds, cassettes or records. theres no more need for record stores to exist out there selling the cds. THE OLD MODEL IS DEAD."

again, you feel the need to comment on an industry you know nothing about. there's marketing, promotion, tour support, etc. etc. etc. but that's not even the biggest help a label provides new and small artists.

record labels make RECORDS. they pay for artists to make them. they give advances, labels are like a bank for artists. the label takes a financial risk up front so the bands and artists can make records. this process has gone on for a long time and it has helped in the creation of countless amazing albums. probably many of which you listen to daily.

there is an old model and it's changing, you are right about that but not in the way that you think. there are certain services that every artist needs who makes new music and who tours. it can come from management, labels, friends, live nation, whoever. but the work and expertise is there somewhere.

and yes, there should be a discussion of intellectual property in the country. it's where a lot of industries are moving and it needs to be protected.

Anon 12:53...... In the age of bedroom studios, if you need a record company advance to make good music you're seriously lacking in some talent.

I wish there were a "netflix" for albums. I try to listen to stuff before I buy it, because I've gotten burned too many times in the past buying a CD for a few great singles and then finding out the rest was utter garbage. 30 second clips don't do it for me, so I prefer to hear the whole thing first.

The great thing about Oink was the old obscure stuff that was posted. The stuff I have on vinyl from the 70's/80's that's out of print. That's the thing I'll miss the most. I suppose I could go out and buy one of those turntables that connects to my computer to rip those albums I have sitting around, but it was a lot easier to just grab them from somewhere else.

The model is dead. Organizations like the IFPI are standing in the way of progress. Why not shift the business model? Why not produce more limited edition prints? Why not include special artwork/posters/interesting covers with releases? Why not press more 180g vinyl? This is the future of physical media!
And why not sell some actually worthwhile mp3s? Try downloading a song of iTunes and blasting it on your beautiful, expensive home stereo. Sounds like absolute shit if you have any sense of hearing whatsoever. Why are they not selling us 320s and FLACs? DRM the shit out of it for all I care as long as it's not lossy as fuck and sounds like ass.
I have friends that are scared shitless of the RIAA who just buy CDs and rip them to the computer, then throw away the physical copy because they would never use it. And the disgusting format you get through iTunes (m4a) is fucking laughable.
Not to mention the fact that the music industry is a FUCKING CARTEL! It's worse than OPEC. artificially inflated prices do not help artists sell their music! But once again, in the interest of big business and not the consumer, governments of the world have decided to override the free market.
The intellectual property model and the recording industry business model are both broken. Why are we not fixing them? VESTED FUCKING INTEREST.
Well fuck that. I will not comply.
This is bad news not only for pirates, but for all audiophiles and for all who value sound business practices.

"record labels make RECORDS. they pay for artists to make them. they give advances, labels are like a bank for artists. the label takes a financial risk up front so the bands and artists can make records. this process has gone on for a long time and it has helped in the creation of countless amazing albums. probably many of which you listen to daily."

i am in a band. we offer digital downloads and cds/vinyl via paypal on our myspace page. i can buy a 500 pack of cd-r's for $20, and i own a cd burner. we get press from our show reviews and blogs like brooklyn vegan. i work a day job, and am financially stable.

why does my band need a record company to be successful?

The model is dead. Organizations like the IFPI are standing in the way of progress. Why not shift the business model? Why not produce more limited edition prints? Why not include special artwork/posters/interesting covers with releases? Why not press more 180g vinyl? This is the future of physical media!
And why not sell some actually worthwhile mp3s? Try downloading a song of iTunes and blasting it on your beautiful, expensive home stereo. Sounds like absolute shit if you have any sense of hearing whatsoever. Why are they not selling us 320s and FLACs? DRM the shit out of it for all I care as long as it's not lossy as fuck and sounds like ass.
I have friends that are scared shitless of the RIAA who just buy CDs and rip them to the computer, then throw away the physical copy because they would never use it. And the disgusting format you get through iTunes (m4a) is fucking laughable.
Not to mention the fact that the music industry is a FUCKING CARTEL! It's worse than OPEC. artificially inflated prices do not help artists sell their music! But once again, in the interest of big business and not the consumer, governments of the world have decided to override the free market.
The intellectual property model and the recording industry business model are both broken. Why are we not fixing them? VESTED FUCKING INTEREST.
Well fuck that. I will not comply.
This is bad news not only for pirates, but for all audiophiles and for all who value sound business practices.

Anonymous-11:15

Get the fuck out of here with your so-far-right-it's-up-your-ass bullshit you probably just learned in your highschool world history class.

I had an OiNK account and I loved it. The sad thing is, though, that no shows ever come near me. It was because of OiNK, however, that a group of us shelled out the $50/head for a The Fray concert just to see OK Go. And it was because of OiNK that we ran out to our record store and demanded them to order more indie labels.

Not all of us can afford the $20-$25/CD for all the music we want to listen to. But I'd gladly pay $30 for a show, knowing that the band that I like is getting -more- money from the show than from the CD.

sigh, bedroom recordings? every album? yes, some people don't need studios.

this is pointless actually if you think that all albums can be recorded home. what about the money to get the equipment?

"i am in a band. we offer digital downloads and cds/vinyl via paypal on our myspace page. i can buy a 500 pack of cd-r's for $20, and i own a cd burner. we get press from our show reviews and blogs like brooklyn vegan. i work a day job, and am financially stable.

why does my band need a record company to be successful?"

that's my point, you don't NEED a 'label'. but you sure could use some HELP. what's wrong with that? some people can do everything on their own, sure. but not everyone can, nor does everyone want to.

clap you hands... signed a deal directly with a distro without a label. but guess whatk their management did all the things a label would have done for them. press, promo, marketing, etc. it is still important. maybe not for your band. but a lot of bands do care about that.

a macintosh, an m-audio mixer, and a couple hundred dollars worth of microphones can produce an incredibly well recorded track.

anon 1:07.

total agree with you on the future of physical product. and i hate iTunes AAC files, it's a HUGE rip off. I am in quality, i like bands that go to studios. i like good sounding records, not bedroom recordings. what's wrong with that?

in the next few years i am sure the quality will go up, iTunes is already moving towards 256 MP3s. but there has to be demand for quality. most people listen to music on crappy headphones and speakers. which is fine, but it's not going to drive the industry to sell high quality downloads if no one cares.

"if they had something like Netflix but for albums, then people would have no excuse"

Actually, there has been for a while already. Yahoo, Rhapsody, Napster and Zune all offer cheap subscriptions that allow you to listen to the great bulk of what comes out (yes, even plenty of obscure indie labels). I've been using Yahoo for 2 years and I hear at least 30 albums a week, frequently the week they're released.

The idea that record labels "HELP" artists is laughably naive. Record labels USE artists, and then throw them away when its expedient.

"a macintosh, an m-audio mixer, and a couple hundred dollars worth of microphones can produce an incredibly well recorded track."

yes, it can in the right hands. but it can also make shit records. being a good engineer is a skill! you can't learn it overnight, people spend their entire lives learning microphone combinations, pre-amps settings, room acoustics, etc, etc. i guess i am old fashion. wait, no i am not. i like good sounding records.

name one standout record recorded with an M-audio mixer and only a few hundred bucks worth of mics?

Record labels promote bands yes, but I feel word of mouth gets better bands. I don't want to be told whats good.

I think some kind of label is useful, not needed, i mean Radiohead, Madonna, NIN can say fuck you to them because they're already popular.

But GOOD bands can get popular without all that.

Dispatch for example, no commercial advertisement, can sell out MSG three nights in a row.

So just think about that. Lack of record labels could mean more "quality" in music. The elimination of "mainstream" etc.

p.s. Don't argue with me if Dispatch is good or not, I don't care.

there are always exceptions to the rule. dispatch being one of them. how many more success stories on that level are there? i am guessing they have a very competent manager doing many of things a label does.

record labels are more hated than oil companies it seems like. shouldn't be that way, at least for most indie labels.

of course word of mouth is good, and organic popularity. but again, a label does more than try to artificially build bands up. i don't see Merge or Sub Pop ramming bands down people's throat. they work hard at putting out good records and helping artists achieve modest goals. why is that so bad?

a record label is like a service to the artist, not the other way around. at least that's that it works for a lot of good indie labels.

I do think that independent record labels are useful for a lot of reasons. But it's a different wold than the major ones

I do think that independent record labels are useful for a lot of reasons. But it's a different wold than the major ones

anonymous 1:24 - the record industry shits all over engineers. talk to every aspiring sound engineer whos still making $25K after 5 years of hoping their 70 hour work week will give them a viable career.

fuckin toolbox

RIP

i am not saying being a sound engineer is an amazing job. but the industry is what gives them the job. if everyone records at home, they won't have a job at all. record labels still pay a lot to make records, but if no one BUYS them they can't afford to make ANY records. it's all very simple.

you're a towel.

"a macintosh, an m-audio mixer, and a couple hundred dollars worth of microphones can produce an incredibly well recorded track."

You clearly know nothing about recording, so please stop posting about it.

yea man, he never said that engineers make a lot of money. chill out dawg.

can't they just shift their job search to going out to clubs and offering their services directly to bands?

if the equipment is attainable...can't they just do this independently??!?!? then:

1. less shit recording
2. actual income for talented engineers
3. everyone actually evolves and escapes the stubborn born stagnancy that is causing all this crying

"if i liked a band, id see them on tour"

"Oink gave you a way to listen to so many different albums I'd never heard before, and if I liked the album, I could go ahead and buy it or go see the band live."

"no, pete, seeing the band live is THE best way to support them"

Almost everyone that steals music for oink say that they support artists by seeing their live shows. But one of the big complaints on BV are whiners that complain about high ticket prices! You can't have it both ways. Just yesterday people were complaining about Cake tickets (with six bands performing) costing $35. I bet you these are the same people that steal albums.

"I downloaded a ton of stuff off Oink, ... when I found a band I liked I was very happy to go pay $10-25 to see them play live."

Wow, $10, you are an extremely generous person.

"name one standout record recorded with an M-audio mixer and only a few hundred bucks worth of mics?"

The Headphone Masterpiece, by Cody Chesnutt was recorded in his bedroom on a 4track..... as the title states, it's a masterpiece of an album.

Hey fuckwad, I've spent close to $3000 on concert tickets this year. Is that enough for you?

anybody who would pay anything to see cake is a fucking douchebag

yes, four track recordings are charming. do we want every record to sound like a four track recording? or a bedroom recording. studios and good engineers give you flexibility and diversity in sounds. can i ask you what your favorite records? and no cheating to skew home recordings.

Not doubting the pluses of a full studio sound at all but my point is they are not needed to create amazing music in anyway shape or form, just like a record label is no longer needed to make and distribute amazing music anymore. The more CDs/LPs/MP3s and concert tix you sell the more opportunity you have to invest in that old vintage keyboard you've always lusted after, or that sound engineer you've always wanted to work with to expand your sound. These things are not dependent on money given/taken from a record label.

ugh this is so bad

oh, and yes seeing a band live is a great way to support them. but don't fool yourself. you're also putting a lot of money in the pockets of the clubs, promoters and depending on the case ticket master and other huge corporate douchebags.

so is going to a show better for the artist than buying their record? tough call. labels also give tour support to artists so they CAN tour.

Funny that everyone I know in the industry has access to Oink. Not really for your "casual listener." Too bad, RIP fun.

ticketmaster just adds their money

i could care less what anyone on this board says, because they think that posting anonymous messages on websites actually constitutes having an opinion that makes a difference when in fact it accomplishes nothing.

go see some live music people. support your local bands by seeing them perform. and then start your own band instead of wasting your time posting.

Bye bye Oink. i shall miss you so very much. if it were up to the bands whose music i dnloaded, i would not be prosecuted for doing so, because i've seen every one of them live.

suck it.

"i am in a band. we offer digital downloads and cds/vinyl via paypal on our myspace page. i can buy a 500 pack of cd-r's for $20, and i own a cd burner. we get press from our show reviews and blogs like brooklyn vegan. i work a day job, and am financially stable.

why does my band need a record company to be successful?"

You might want to tour, no? How about quitting that day job? Might not be possible without some sort of support.

Major labels are surely not right for MOST artists, but many of the blockbusters will not work without the huge advances that only a major company can provide.

We will surely see a continued shrinking of the major labels, but their subsidiaries, and other indies will probably continue to thrive for a long time. If you want to stay at your desk job and play locally for the rest of your days, feel free.

Illegal file sharing is going to occur no matter how many crackdowns go on. Perhaps the music industry should instead focus on compromising with the listeners by making it easier to get music, making it cheaper, etc. I don't really have clear cut suggestions, but I think going after a few select users and websites doesn't effectively stop sharing music illegally.
Also, bands are somehow surviving and thriving now as much as they were before Napster and all that. True, artists may be robbed of hundreds/thousands/millions of dollars, and, yes that sucks if that's how you make your money, but I have never heard of a group disbanding because of lack of money (I'm sure it's happened, don't yell at me for it, but obviously it doesn't happen so much that the quality of music has gone down or that those who have a strong passion for their music have stopped making more).. usually, money isn't the deciding factor when bands form in the first place anyway, and they are only glad to have people listen to their stuff.

I read somewhere several years ago (probably back when Napster was being shut down) that file sharing actually increased CD sales for lesser-known bands. True, when it comes down to it, it is stealing, but I don't see it as such a rampant problem.

I'm lucky enough to live in NYC, where on any given night there is decent live music to be found. As a result I see between 50 and 150 live acts a year.

How do I know which band to gave my money to? OINK, and all the other sites like it. There's no way I would be going to as many shows if I were unable to preview their music in this manner. Stealing? Really?

PS Not all of us our so tight with our cash. Tickets bought this month ranged in price from $8 to $75 a head.

>If you want to stay at your desk job and play >locally for the rest of your days, feel free.

Anon 3:24, you are an arrogant fuckwad. Hopefully, the record company you work for will fire your sorry ass.

i've got a great idea!! maybe i'll post something on brooklynvegan because people care what i think, AND i have this uncanny ability to convince insanely, miniacally stubborn people that they should change their opinion to match my own. people who argue about important issues in forums are always capable of resolving complex issues maturely and within reason, and doing so has nothing to do with sheer unadulterated narcissism. its so much better than actually doing something "real." posting my ideas on a website like brooklynvegan is going to make a difference. it will cause everyone to come together and unite under my worldview. i think i'll go post something right now!!!!

everyone's an expert.

The comment section on BV used to be great, didn't it? At least that's how I remember it. Now it seems to consist of people calling each other fuckwads and douchebags and making Daft Punk jokes. Bummer.

Guess I will finally comb through those 300 gigs of albums OiNK gave me while I wait for the next source.

The comment section of BV didn't used to be loaded with corporate shills calling all the people who actually care about music "thieves".

The model for music distribution has changed drastically, and the music industry has resisted this all the way. Shutting down oiNK is pretty much the equivalent of the RIAA having sued some single mother from Minnesota. These are small pyrrhic victories that do little but convince anyone with any common sense about the future of the music industry that the powers that be just don't get it, and have absolutely no idea about how to adapt for the future. This has been their downfall thus far (take a look at CD sales lately?), and will ultimately mean their demise.

For someone so self-righteous, Doink and dumdum, it's weird that you're okay with the hypocrisy of criticizing the act of posting a comment in a comment you post.

why do I continue to read the comments on this blog? whiny bitches.....

let's go over some of these arguments:

1. "oink helps me find new music": legitimate sites serve the same function without posting entire albums for free, from webzines to label sites to band sites. most of them offer free downloads of entire songs. you hate pitchfork? fine, find a site that is more in line with your taste, or start your own and get free music sent to you by labels! do a little work for chrissakes. how do you think people found out about all of the legendary bands you wish you had been old enough to see back in the day?

2. "this is the end of music" and related arguments: talk of the music industry being in trouble usually relates to major labels, for a variety of reasons, mostly due to the stream of crap they release as well as their business practices. independent labels seem to be doing just fine. i think that gross sales of music are not that far down if at all. all of the talk of music sales being off mostly has to do with the major labels.

3. "screw the labels, go see the band live as they get most of the money": oh yeah, there are no scumbags among promoters, clubs and the people that handle ticket sales, they are all upstanding people who do it for the love of music. yes, touring for a band with some success is far more profitable than releasing an album, but the album hype generally comes before that live date in your town.

4. "record labels suck, have no morals, are ripoff artists, the band doesn't get paid for sales, blah blah blah.": these are just rationalizations for stealing. and again, you must separate major labels from most independent ones. i have worked for a few independent labels and i can guess a lot of the others are not much different. they are run by people who are passionate about what they do, and who work long hours for less money than they could make elsewhere. they are very open with their financial dealings with the artists they work with and give them a much better cut of album sales than larger labels. the artist has in essence hired the label to work for them, agreeing to sacrifice a cut of the profits in return for that work. if the artist thinks the deal they are being offered is crap, no one is forcing them to do it. they want a label to help them out, and sometimes are so desperate to do so they sign their lives away to a major.

5. "the old model is dead. everyone can promote their own releases via myspace and the like.": of all the albums you have downloaded, how many came from labels releasing them and promoting them? ALL OF THEM. the only reason a band gets hype is because someone is pushing it. when was the last time pitchfork or any other webzine reviewed an album they stumbled across on myspace or virb? when was the last time you downloaded an album that fits that description? never, and never. so a lot of people are doing a lot of work to get you to pay attention. but i guess they should work for free too. the model may be constantly changing, but it is far from dead.

6. "the band wants us to have this music for free!" or "we are helping the band!" and related arguments: bullshit. if they wanted you to have it for free then they would post high quality files on their website for download at no cost.

7. downloading is theft: yes it is. how about i come to your job on payday and snatch your paycheck right as it is being handed to you? i see no difference. if the artist is not paid for his work, where is the incentive to disseminate more of it? the artist is working, he should be paid for his work if you want it. "music should be free!" yes, and so should candy and flowers and flying cars.

i could go on, but that's enough for now. the biggest threat that i see to music is the idea that it should be free and you do not have to pay for someone's hard work. eventually, if no one is paying then no one is playing. except for that guy you can't stand at the coffeehouse on weekends playing for tips.

signed,

old man

touche old man, touche!

i find most of the defense of file sharing and piracy are attempts to rationalize the practice. don't get me wrong. i download music from time to time, but i also buy a lot of new and used music.

my complaint isn't towards those who still buy records and still go to shows. it's the people who do neither, or do neither VERY rarely. and there are A LOT of these people out there and it's really scary for a number of reasons. a good friend of mine is willing to buy drugs, dvds, etc etc from the black market, but would NEVER consider paying for the days worth of music he has downloaded. now THAT is fucked up.

************
old man:
"when was the last time pitchfork or any other webzine reviewed an album they stumbled across on myspace or virb? when was the last time you downloaded an album that fits that description? never, and never."
************

The "last time", I'm not sure. But here is one from
October 5, 2007:
http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/record_review/46095-wizard-of-ahhhs-ep

alot of us have very little money and the cost of cds and what not adds up. I want to listen and help out all my favourite artists but i simply can't afford it. record labels are a good thing but only when they are genuine. Small bands and artists who have general talent have to get the message out somehow and oink provided the means. i in no way want to promote stealing but as an artist myself all i want is for my music to reach people and i try and make money on shows and such. it's a lose, lose situation. i have a vast collection of music now and i am so well educated in music now and it's made me who i am. i believe oink was fantastic and that if you want to stop crime go find the person raping someone in an alley or the person beating up their wife. the world is full of shit people and everyone just needs to hope that one day this gets fixed.

nice try, but Black Kids has the same management as Bjork and Arcade Fire. they may be unsigned, but this just proves my point: people are working to make sure the artist is heard. without this work, pitchfork would not be covering it and the artist would not have been playing CMJ numerous times last weekend. try again...

old man

I'm broke, I download music for free because I simply can't afford to buy it, w/e. and I know the music industry sucks, every industry sucks. I hate them all. Get over it.

The most ridiculous thing about this whole situation to me is the extents law enforcement and government officials are willing to go to to stop music/tv/movie downloads. I mean, what happens if you steal a physical CD from a physical store? Nothing too bad. But I'm seeing people being sued for hundred of thousands of dollars for downloading far less than that much digital music. Should I just take the initiative to get off my ass, walk over to the mall, go into FYE and start shoving CDs in my pants? Should I just start printing out fake tickets to shows?

to: "i'm broke"

that's too bad, i used to be broke too and i understand being there. but having little money does not excuse theft, unless you are starving and it is life and death. when you have no money you do less things that cost money. you don't see as many movies, you don't eat out as much, you don't buy as much music. that's life. part of the problem with illegal filesharing is that there is little threat of getting caught, and thus people feel free to do it. once they have been doing it a while, then they feel righteous about it. if there was little threat in robbing banks there would be a lot more bank robbery.

i like the comment of a previous poster who said "Guess I will finally comb through those 300 gigs of albums OiNK gave me while I wait for the next source.". you have 300 gigs of music you have not listened too? you are not a music fan, you just collect shit. it may as well be baseball cards or pogs.

old man

Old Man, you said "how many came from labels releasing them and promoting them? ALL OF THEM".

I gave you a band WITHOUT a label, using MySpace to give away their songs to promote themselves, and that they were reviewed by Pitchfork.

Artists need promotion, whether from MySpace, blog buzz, live performances, press, flyers, oiNK, or even management that promotes them.

What they don't need is a fickle record company giving them pennies on the dollar from CD sales, and that drops them when they cease to become the latest thing.

Feel free to continue to grasp on to the bow of the sinking ship. But please, give that "its my ball and I'm going home" nonsense. As long as electricity exists, musicians will push the envelope to make better music. They just won't be bending over to some dweeb in a suit with an MBA anymore.

the best social site there was...

oh dear *rolleyes*

old man, black kids only got signed to this booking agency AFTER the "release" of their demo, pitchfork-review and so on.

I used to be on soulseek constantly & didn't even really have time to properly digest all the shit I'd downloaded. Then I moved & my rent went up & one of the costs I cut back on was internet at home. I'm on it all day at work anyway so my home computer was mainly just used to download stuff. I thought it was gonna suck but I don't really miss it that much at all. I obviously hear a lot less stuff and I figure there's probably 2 or 3 bands that I'd really like that I'm missing out on right now but I didn't realize how much I was listening to stuff just to be part of the overall conversation. Like, I'm reading BV today & I'd like to know what Yeasayer sound like & previously I'd go home & DL it and now I don't. So now I don't know what people are talking about today & oh well. And I'm not planning on going out & buying their record cuz I'm not THAT curious yet (a fact that, as far as I'm concerned, greatly deflates the idea that I've been stealing since the ONLY way I'm gonna hear it is if I download it).

I think a lot of people (me included) bristle at the word "entitled" when it gets used in this discussion because I think a lot of us enjoy buying a new record from a band we really like & want to support & we don't feel like all music should be free. But we also want to hear whatever is being talked about & there's a ton of bands being talked about. A lot of what I downloaded was basically the audio equivalent of Britany's boobs falling out or something. It was news for a minute & then I didn't care. It certainly wasn't an experience that was worth what a CD costs these days. But by that same token, it's also not an experience that's all that necessary to my happiness.

So basically if you think that Oink shutting down is the worst news ever, at least think about what it would be like to not download a ton of shit. Personally I found it kind of awesome. Like music wasn't just some cheap thing pouring out of my computer.

re: "black kids only got signed to this booking agency AFTER the "release" of their demo, pitchfork-review and so on."

do you really think that their album was reviewed on 10.05.07 on pitchfork, they got management, and then got cmj gigs all in the space of two weeks? i have a bridge for sale in brooklyn you might be interested in...

oh and guess what the Black Kids do next? sign to a label, who will use the "old model" to promote them.

old man

re: "What they don't need is a fickle record company giving them pennies on the dollar from CD sales, and that drops them when they cease to become the latest thing. They just won't be bending over to some dweeb in a suit with an MBA anymore."

christ, don't you people post with names (you know, a pseudonym. look the word up) so others can respond?

who is talking about labels that dump low-selling artists and wear suits? all of my posts have dismissed the major label approach, i don't see independent labels doing the things you describe.

and don't cry when the Black Kids sign a contract with a good sized independent label in the near future, because that will be what happens. whether you like it or not, the label serves a useful purpose, and even this band will see the truth in that.

old man

You are under the mistaken impression that "indie labels" are somehow immune from screwing bands.

Leave it to this place to turn the topic of OiNK getting shut down into some bullshit PC debate. Fuck all you people. This is a sad day in the history of the free man.

Old man = my hero. A rare breath of fresh air amid a sea of under informed hotheads.

Old man, 8:46. Let me bend over and I'll give you a whiff of my own fresh air.

"yes, four track recordings are charming. do we want every record to sound like a four track recording? or a bedroom recording. studios and good engineers give you flexibility and diversity in sounds."

-----

You do know that the majority of Motown's releases in the 60's were recorded on 3-track? Not 4, but THREE track, and they sound damn fine. That's one of the problems today, people are too concerned with "sound" when the "song" is what should matter.

Some amazing albums NOT recorded in a proper studio with a proper engineer (i.e. 4/8-track, bedroom recordings):
Guided by Voices - Bee Thousand
Neutral Milk Hotel - In The Aeroplane...
Olivia Tremor Control - Dusk @ Cubist Castle
Lenola - My Invisible Name
and countless, countless others...

If Dusk At Cubist Castle can be done without a proper studio....anything can be done without a proper studio.

I was a frequent Oink user and although it is a terrible loss, I have to admit that people were abusing it. I believe that album leaks should never have been included on the site, just released music. I also noticed people selling invites online, these abuses ruined it for everybody.

What the ef? Not everyone is a songwriter/musician/engineer/producer. All those people serve a purpose. Even in the previously listed examples of recordings "not in a proper studio" there was someone there who filled each of those roles. sometimes it's all or mostly one person. sometimes someone is better at one job than another and let's someone else do the work they don't want to do. My roomates are recording engineers and trust me, over half the bands they record have no fucking clue how to make themselves sound good on a recording whether using a 4 track or their computer in their bedroom. And I'm not saying these bands are stupid, the kind of person that can do everything --and make it sound good-- is in a class of their own.

I'll only pay for a CD that goes directly to the artist. Artists need to start selling their own. Just like MC hammer, out of his trunk.

oh, and about the actual post...

I'm all for protecting your intellectual property and everything but copyright laws in the country are inherently unbalanced. Do the consumers have anything to do with the creation of copyright law in US? No, they don't. All the copyright law is created, maintained and enforced by a small group of organized media corporations. The millions of disorganized consumers who use the media had nothing to do with the law's creation. So when the general consumer's idea of fair use shifts over time are they all lawbreakers? this is what we need to be thinking about.

my god, is Ignorance a required subject in public schools now? if only half of you knew even half of what you think you know this could be an interesting discussion. why does being slapped with the truth make people so mad? all of this b.s. about how labels are obsolete and the music industry is changing so fast they will be left in the dust. here is the fact: all of your favorite bands are on a label! but don't let that stop you from making a pointless argument.

but as one commenter rightly noted, this was supposed to be about oink being shut down. well i say good riddance, and i hope the rest of these sites get shut down as soon as possible. they exist for one reason and one reason only; to disseminate copyrighted material which everyone knows is against the law. you can argue the validity of these laws and work to change them if you choose. but bitching that the music industry is vile and using that as some vague argument as justification for your actions when downloading music illegally is absurd and juvenile. the laws in this country are not a buffet you get to pick and choose from, leaving behind the ones you find distasteful. and the copyright laws that pertain to music protect the artist as much if not more than anyone involved in the music "industry". these laws are why Tom Waits was able to successfully sue Frito-Lay for reproducing one of his songs when he refused to license it to them for commercial usage. and if you were an artist with a modicum of talent, you would be happy to know they are there.

your head can explode now.

old man

30 Million people download on the web worldwide, and all you can talk about is antiquated copyright law. And actually, no, most of my favorite bands are not on labels, including you know, Radiohead.

oh jesus. i wrote about Radiohead in my last post but figured it was not really part of the discussion and i deleted that part. so you brought it up for me! haven't you heard? they are shopping for a label to release their new album in the new year. i think they will be asking for a really good deal, as well they should. but they will be associated with a label.

and most of your favorite bands are not on labels? so unique you are! please list all of these brave artists who are boldly breaking new ground in the industry so that we can discuss!

old man

Sgt Peppers was recorded on a 4 track. I dont know how Basinksi recorded Disitegration loops but I think it was just him a piano, and reel to reel in his room and thats it. You can hear noise from the street on it. Or listen to some of the best recent no fun fest releases. The new Pain Jerk/ Incapacitants Live at No Fun Fest sounds pristine. Another point is we dont want superstar groups like you had back in the 70s, we dont want asshole rockstars and all the garbage that was associated with that, that goes for commeriacial radio and mtv. All of those are terrible evil bad things and I would be so happy when they all go away.

Also if you dont think anyone reads the comments here or it all just doesnt matter, just read the NY Times music section or this weeks New Yorker (Animal Collective article), this site comments get quoted /mentioned all the time.

"...Do the consumers have anything to do with the creation of copyright law in US? No, they don't..."

Hey, if you consumers don't like the restrictions that copyright laws place on you, don't buy the product!

"Hey, if you consumers don't like the restrictions that copyright laws place on you, don't buy the product!"

We are alienated from the product. Our labor is no longer our property.

"they may be unsigned, but this just proves my point: people are working to make sure the artist is heard."

you are not acknowledging the dichotomy between independent promotion companies, which accept a fee from artists in exchange for promotion, and record labels, which stipulate a whole bunch of other things (including, sometimes, that mr. waits would have no say in whether or not his songs sell potato chips). the former are rapidly succeeding the latter, and music will be better off and more "independent"-minded for it. clap your hands say yeah were still mailing out CDs themselves after the pfork review.

Why can't you people see that Pepsi and Coke are the same thing?

Old Man,

Instead of being a righteous know-it-all, why don't you email Black Kids to find how they landed the Pitchfork review, got their management, and booked their CMJ gigs? You'd be surprised, maybe even humbled.

Also, "THE OLD MODEL IS DEAD" post was about how record labels, both big and small, do not dictate the marketplace like they used to and NOT about how relevant they still are in the music industry. Of course they're still relevant but you make it sound like their resources are available to musicians and/or bands as a gift, rather than what it really is, a loan, and YOU know damn well that labels - again, both big and small - wants their loans PAID IN FULL with profit also.

Plus, Tom Waits sued Frito-Lay for "False Endorsement" and "Misappropiation of his voice" because people would recognize he voice and associated it with the commerical and product. The publishing firm and Elektra that owns the copyrights to the song DIDN'T sue.

listening to a new album streamed on an artist's website is also stealing imho. face it, 95% of all new albums suck ass (that's imho, but probably not far from the truth). when you hear it you've determined for certain that you'll never buy it, it's in your mind at that point, and you wont take a chance on a record at the store like you used to. it's really apples and oranges to me. i'll probably get flamed, but that's how it is for me.

anonymous 8:59 - forgot to take your medication?

no, it's a valid opinion. sure there's the thing about downloading a copy from oink as opposed to just hearing a streamed album. apples and oranges. i deleted most of what i downloaded there right after hearing it - equivalent to the album ending and you going on your merry way after streaming it on an artist's site.

take a site like oink, change the model from outright 'theft' to streaming then purchasing, and the record industry is back in business. let users stream anything they want once, then make them buy it. i'd for for it in a heartbeat, i just really liked that i could trust the oink community for new and good music. usually, the user generated comments and top 10 lists determine the state of music for that day/week.

hey 9:18, your snide comment didn't exactly include a counter argument. you won't get any cred in a discussion like this without one.

I meant to imply that the comments 8:59 made are crazy. streaming an album off artist web site is like stealing comments. It's just so crazy I didnt think I needed to elaborate.

"We are alienated from the product. Our labor is no longer our property."

If you are recording artists signed to labels, then yes. I addressed consumers.

ok let's reword stealing then. you've got the official preview, and the unofficial preview. either way you might buy the album if it's good, but if it sucks no one is going to take a chance by wasting $18.

The artist gains nothing by streaming their own album. So OK, 9:18, forget the word stealing, just try hypocrisy. There's no forum for discussion, no room for people to say, "hey guys, you need to listen to this 10 times before you get it."

Used to be we'd take a chance on an album by buying it. now we don't.

i probably wasn't very clear on what i meant by stealing. what i really meant was, no one is going buy an album they havent heard already, ever again. i meant that it's stealing in the since that we've stolen the first few listens for free - the first few listens that determine whether or not we'll buy it. before album previews, we took our chances by buying it. now we don't. that's money the artists will never again see. call it whatever you want.

9:18 - you still don't have an argument.

regardless of what is happening today with file sharing and the baloney that major labels are dishing out, think about the shift from vinyl (which was worth it) to CD (which is a total joke), and the fact that record companies charged $20 for CDs for many many years. that's right, they were raping the public. today the industry is a bloated fat pig of greed and excess.

please take a minute to read this, that means you too OLD MAN, this industry is filled with SCUM BAGS:

http://www.arancidamoeba.com/mrr/problemwithmusic.html

"These figures are representative of amounts that appear in record contracts daily. There's no need to skew the figures to make the scenario look bad, since real-life examples more than abound. Income is underlined, expenses are not."

Advance: $250,000

----

The Balance Sheet: This is how much each player got paid at the end of the game.

Record company: $710,000
Producer: $90,000
Manager: $51,000
Studio: $52,500
Previous label: $50,000
Agent: $7,500
Lawyer: $12,000
Band member net income each: $4,031.25

10:46 brings up an important point. Labels controlled means of production and distribution. So they had the artist by the balls. Now you can advertize on myspace, and press your own cds, and distribute by mail. So, sounds good enough for me.

also to that other dude, come on so now by same token you are stealing when listen to some artist album on radio or your friends copy? Most people dont go buying albums blind, its either because they heard tracks on it, or they like the artist, or someone recommended it. I dont have the desire to hear every album ever put out.

Does anybody here get their music from libraries? I do. Its free. Is that considered stealing?

christ sylvia, i'm the same age as albini. it's the younger, less informed people here who are acting like know-it-alls. i am more than willing to acknowledge that the older i get, the less i seemingly know about anything, something i bet no other person posting here will admit to. oh to be young again, when i knew everything...

and once again, i have not or will not defend the major label model. that is what albini was addressing in his essay. do you think the essay is germane to his relationship with touch&go? of course not. he used to run a label, now he chooses not to. read into that what you will.

and for all of you people dissing the importance of a label backing an artist, let me finish with this: every musical artist working in a vaguely alternative (whatever that word means anymore) fashion would sell their soul to be signed to Matador, Merge or Domino.

old man

ok so how do we fix this -

what torrent site can we use, whats the next best???

"every musical artist working in a vaguely alternative (whatever that word means anymore) fashion would sell their soul to be signed to Matador, Merge or Domino.

old man"

WRONG!!! blanket statements get you nowhere, exceptions are everywhere and growing. regardless, Matador is owned by BEggars Group (can you say major?). who owns the other labels you mention??

oinks biggest strength, and why it will take awhile to be replaced, was it's extensive collection of hard to find records and those by obscure/up and coming artists.. albums that were practically impossible to get anywhere else, even through legit means.

it was easy to read to a bio or blog post about a say a new band from sweden, do a quick oink search, and then give said artist a spin. it really did make going out in a city like new york easier, where we have hundreds of acts playing every month. yeah there's always myspace, but myspace isnt portable.

if you looked at what people were downloading the most, it was more than likely these artists. oink was a community made by and for audiophiles, and will surely be missed.

most of the other torrent sites just have the popular artists. nothing you really couldnt get off a public tracker.

there's always indietorrents, but because of their strict non-riaa label policy, which includes any indie label that even affiliates with a major, there are only a handful of labels allowed on the site.

we're likely gonna have to wait a couple of weeks before the next oink starts, and even that site will take months to reach the extensiveness of oink.

Yes, the major labels generally suck. Having said that, it's amazing to me how many people think it is their right to hear everything they want to hear for absolutely nothing. There's a cheap (but not free solution) that I still can't believe hasn't taken off: music subscription services. You pay at most $15 a month, sometimes as little as $6, to hear most major label albums, let alone a huge amount of indie (even obscure) releases. I've been doing this for close to 3 years already, and it's completely legal. I'd have to make an effort to get burned buying an album.

Old Man is completely correct. You people who think you're entitled to own music that is clearly not being given away -- don't you know any musicians?

If the major labels will cut me a check for the excess money I paid for their cd's all through the 80's and 90's then I promise I won't download music. During those 20 years of music buying, I suspect that for every $20 I spent on a cd, I overpayed by about $15. So I'll write up my catalog and send out an invoice, I can CC you on it too, RL, since you were probably interning at a major sometime in the 90s I would guess (unless you're so young you interned in the 2000s).

Thanks for reminding me, I forgot the golden rule: If I'm going to be held to a standard where I shouldn't expect something for nothing then neither should major labels.

syliva,

i didn't say Matador is or is not a major, that wasn't the point. i was using the three labels i mentioned as examples of those that are well established and can make things happen for an artist. and what i said is correct, that most every artist in this country would jump at the chance to sign with a respected, well established label, such as those i mentioned.

and isn't "WRONG"!!!" a blanket statement, something you accuse me of using? contradicting yourself is a poor debate technique.

old man

old man,

there are plenty of bands and artists in this country who would not "jump" at the chance to sign with Matador, Merge, and Domino.

On the one hand, Old Man sounds like a half-Luddite like me, and seems not to grasp the hard reality that the music industry MUST adapt, IS adapting (e.g., streaming records) and that their greed IS to blame, in large part, for their downfall. Indy label owners that have thrived and outlasted the competition (Lombardi, Poneman)were made filthy rich by their cents-on-the-dollar hand-downs to the indy bands members who can now be seen around town bartending without health insurance. As for the major label honchos, well...I don't really buy the notion that hard work in a Capitalist country made them rich either; unfair royalty rates had a real hand in that. So, I think the broke youngns out there who are stealing music on Oink are partially justified in their greed and law-breaking.

As for his objection to picking and choosing which laws to follow, Old Man would probably surrender his argument if forced to surrender his bong to the Feds if they selectively raided his apartment. Some laws make no sense, and many need to be updated and changed. Not every MJ smoker has the wherewithal to fight the federal gov't. Large, culturally sanctioned trends have always had a hand in that. File sharing is one of those trends.

On the other hand, Old Man's wisdom should be heeded by the Young. Stealing bit torrents will doubtlessly land many an artist in bartending jobs with no health insurance. File-sharing IS a form of greed, regardless of laws, and all of us hungry, compulsive Oink users knew it, and greedily loved it. And the line is pretty clearly drawn, as argued by Old Man: if a band wants to give away its music, it will; go to their webpage. If it does not want to and/or you can't afford to buy it, sorry to say it, but that's your hard luck. Will you starve if you don't have that record? Can't you and a few friends kick in for the CD and rip copies? (Also copyright infringement, but no worse than what Old Man and I did as kids: tape our friend's records. Which was also illegal, technically, but nary an artist objected.)

The Radiohead and Prince free record moves (afforded to them, yes, by years of major label success, and owing to their talent)will years from now be looked back on as historical indicators of large cracks in the wall of a system that collapsed under its own weight. The system wont go away, but fuck knows it has to change. The form that change will take is hard to predict, as the process is so young.

Three parts of me will miss Oink: the greedy thief who felt justified in his actions by the legally sanctioned greed of the labels; the music lover who got ripped vinyl classics that may never make it to CD; and the guy who was just following a permanent wave of the present and future, for better or for worse.

OLD MODEL:
"Bruce Springsteen's "Magic" returns to the summit of The Billboard 200 despite a 42% sales decline. The Columbia effort moved 77,000 copies in the U.S".
"Album sales are down 4.9% from last week at 7.93 million units and 19.6% from the same week in 2006"
http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/content_display/industry/e3i88231bfdc0a2a593666ee21e7c39b40a

NEW MODEL:
"The Seminal estimates that Radiohead sold about $10 million-worth of albums as of 10/12, assuming that their source was correct that approximately 1.2 million people downloaded the album from the site, and that the average price paid per album was $8"
http://blog.wired.com/music/2007/10/estimates-radio.html

In the period I've been downloading music (file sharing, mp3 blogs, bootleg sites) I've also attended more concerts (mostly club shows by young bands, where I've purchased the CD) than during any 5-year period in my 30+ years of concert going.

Also, in my 25+ years of living in NYC, the current scene for rock bands and rock clubs has never been more vibrant.

I have to put this all down to the availability of music and music info on the Internet. And I think this is ultimately a good thing.

What I don't understand is the difference between downloading an album and streaming that album from their website. I buy music (no, really. I actually do. I buy a lot of music.), but I only buy albums I really like. It has to be worth the $15 record stores are asking for, so it has to have staying power. If I take a chance on an album and then end up disappointed, what recourse do I have? I'm just trying to limit the gamble I'm taking with my music and my money.

This same principal applies to shows: how many people here honestly go to shows where they haven't heard of anyone on the bill? Maybe a few of you, but the vast majority of you won't. Why? Because you have little incentive to take a risk with your $10-$25. I've found a lot of good music just by seeing opening bands, but I would have never seen them if I didn't have a more substantial investment at the end of the night.

My point is, we have a smarter set of consumers. I know I'm not the only one who has been tricked into buying an album because I liked the single, and that sucks. There is no return policy on music anymore. I can be fickle about music and 90% of music released isn't worth $15.

phili fred,

ah, a person with a brain who actually uses it, how unusual to find here.

and thanks for the compliment, but i am as full a luddite as one can be these days.

i have never argued that the music business model won't change. i am a firm believer in the concept that the only thing that is constant is change. my argument is that i strongly object to people who claim that stealing music is defensible, especially when those arguments are inane and contradictory. the majority of them see to amount to "i love this band so much i steal their music, and it's all the fault of the major labels.", or "the music is crap anyway, so why should i pay for it?" good god that is pathetic.

and the person claiming his downloading is a refund for all of the bad music he bought is over the top. what happened to free will? the labels made you buy that crappy music? you made bad consumer choices, everyone does, admit it.

have unscrupulous people running labels made lots of money exploiting artists? yes. but a large percentage of the arguments here imply that this is unique to the music industry. most every type of business is rife with the exploitation of labor and is guilty of selling a poor product today. it is frighteningly common now for businesses of all types to be involved in what amounts to a con; trying to get people to buy something they don't need, and not backing the product when it does not perform as advertised. stealing music does not change that equation.

old man

old man, keep flailing. your straw man arguments are a redundant joke.

Oldman,

I believe that by downloading the album first and then, if you like it, buying it is a way to protect the consumer. Just because it is common for businesses to do that, doesn't mean anything. We all have individual tastes and, for me, I'd rather limit trust in another person's opinion when it comes to my money. The opportunity cost of buying an album I end up not liking is far too great seeing as how much music is already out there.

I'd like to reiterate that I do buy music. Most of my friends do not, but I do.

Another topic: If I own the vinyl to an album, do I have any sort of claim to the digital version of my album? I own a record player and an iPod and they do not work sell together. As much as I love to see bands including free downloads with their vinyl, some do not, and ripping vinyl to a digital format comes with a loss of quality (something I care about).

you all download music, end of fucking story. if its there u will get it for free. and if u like the band you will go see them. then u might purchase there album at a show to get it signed. and if u like it and want to help the band you will just buy it anyway. if you dont like it, you won't buy it. :)

here, here. well put!

re: "old man, keep flailing. your straw man arguments are a redundant joke."

a perfect example of someone who has no argument. a statement that contains words but says nothing. very reminiscent of all of the blather from the bush administration.

your head can explode now.

old man

11:33,

Would you buy a paiting without seeing it, why should we be forced to pay for an album without listening to it. I agree with a comment made earlier, 85% of these bands would have a lesser or no fan base, if it was not for sites like Oink and downloading, in general. No person can pay $15-$20 a pop for every album, especially audiophiles. This comes down to the majors not spending there money wisely and them not having the same income to cover up their poor spending habits. The money used to flow to a central location (i.e. the majors), now it is spread out to more people, companies, etc.

"No person can pay $15-$20 a pop for every album..."

why do you feel the need to have every album?

75% of all music sold is done through big box retailers who sell it at a loss to get people into stores. many of these places are even removing all but the top acts. smart independent chains are adapting and remaining at least partially lucrative. however the indie labels are almost all connected to the majors who are losing their cash crops. therefore the industry is changing and everyone must adapt or die.

75% of all music sold is done through big box retailers who sell it at a loss to get people into stores. many of these places are even removing all but the top acts. smart independent chains are adapting and remaining at least partially lucrative. however the indie labels are almost all connected to the majors who are losing their cash crops. therefore the industry is changing and everyone must adapt or die.

Because I like music and different kinds of it. And before you say it, I listen to everything that I get and if I download and don't like, I delete it. If I like it, I do try to buy it, but again I cannot afford to buy everything that I like. But, I say again, most of these bands would not have a fan base at all, if every person had to go to their indie record store and pick it out. There is just too much music out there and would be difficult for them to get selected out of the bunch, if it was not for someone downloading it and posting on a blog about it for someone else to see.

why shouldn't we have every album? do artists really want to make music just for the money? i'm gonna go see everything that i possibly like on cd at least once - so they're making their money there from my attendance.....if i didn't have all the cd's i've downloaded - there's no way i'd be at half the shows i go to - and who loses out then? The artist. And it's their fault. I have more money to spend - i just won't spend it blindly.

"the indie labels are almost all connected to the majors"

a gross exaggeration that cannot be supported by facts

indie torrents is gone or down

All of the albums that I've purchased this year, I downloaded from Oink first.
The ones that were shit, I deleted.

If I buy a pair of shoes, I get to try them on first.
So it is with the music that I buy.

anonymous 6:02 ... i wouldn't say gross but many of the larger ones: subpop, matador, etc. are all underneath a larger company's umbrella. For national distribution there are only two companies who aren't associated with the big boys. sure there are smaller labels that are not associated... but i am talking about the ones who are capable of reaching a wide-audience. i saw the belly of the beast first hand and i did not necessarily like what was behind the curtain.

anonymous 6:02 ... "a gross exageration that cannot be supported by facts"? Look into it. If you're talking about the larger independent labels, I hate to break it to you but they are very much underneath the umbrella of the big boys ... and often run as the minor leagues. Check out WEA (warner/elektra/atlantic)'s page. You'll find ADA which contains Sub Pop, Matador, Epitaph, Domino, Fueled by Ramen, Comedy Central, Touch and Go, Beggars Music Group, Saddle Creek and Side One/Dummy. This is just one of the companies and every major has a few. Sure there are smaller record labels that are not but they don't really have the necessary manpower to do what the large ones are capable of. After a few consolidations, there are only a couple of national distribution companies that aren't connected to major labels/distribution companies but they are losing a lot of their acts to the majors. Indie acts and labels want to make great music and have people hear it but they also want to make a living doing it.

a change in the industry has to take place. my vote is for bands to boycott labels and hire a marketing company, a booking company, and go through an aggregator to sell their music on-line. ... but then they would have to some sense of how it works.

just my two cents.

Pitchfork...

OiNK Founder: "I Haven't Done Anything Wrong"

Tuesday, we reported that 24-year-old Middlesborough, England resident Alan Ellis-- founder and key operator of the recently terminated music torrent portal OiNK-- had been brought in for police questioning regarding his involvement in the site, which directed users to untold amounts of illegal and, in some cases, pre-release music files.

Ellis, out on two months' police bail following his arrest and detainment on suspicion of conspiracy to defraud and copyright infringement, spoke to Britain's The Daily Telegraph newspaper about the recent charges (via Idolator). Though Ellis declined to comment on the donations he accepted from OiNK users, he insisted, "I haven't done anything wrong. I don't believe my website breaks the law. They don't understand how it works." He added, "When I set up the site I didn't think I was doing anything illegal and I still don't," and that, since "there is no music sold on the site," it shouldn't be a target of investigation.

Ellis went on to mention that "people who download music also buy CDs as well. A lot of people download music on the internet to get a taste of it and then later buy the CD. But I don't sell music to people, I just direct them to it. If somebody wants to illegally download music they are going to do it whether my site is there or not." He went on to forecast that "if this goes to court it is going to set a huge precedent. It will change the internet as we know it."

On a roll, Ellis continued. "My site is no different to something like Google. If Google directed someone to a site [where] they can illegally download music, [Google is] doing the same as what I have been accused of. I am not making any OiNK users break the law. People don't pay to use the site."

As for any former OiNK users wondering whether to start sleeping with one eye open, well, perhaps. Sadly, Ellis' quote above indicates he may be suggesting that, yes, OiNK users are breaking the law but he himself is merely a middleman. A message on the OiNK homepage reads "A criminal investigation continues into the identities and activities of the site's users." Meanwhile, a spokesperson for the Cleveland (England) police-- who handled Ellis' case-- told the Telegraph that "it is too early to tell if we will go after individuals, it all depends on what we find."

Posted by Paul Thompson in legal on Thu: 10-25-07: 10:50 AM CDT | Digg this article | Add to del.icio.us | Permalink

i will never buy music from a store again. i will only buy music from good bands at live shows.

Old Man = works for "Indy" label, crybaby, probably overweight, argues tired points, will probably be losing his job in the next 5-10 years, is trying stop the inevitable, imagines somehow that he is a voice of reason, imagines somehow that labels need to pay out huge sums of money for artists to make good songs, cant grasp the fact that the music industry did this to themselves by switching to far inferior digital formats (CDs) long ago.

digital information is never safe and will be less and less safe as time passes. get a clue, music industry, you shot your own foot and offered up inferior product to the consumer while you were shooting it.

How about 5-10 months.

This sucks.

I am a member of the band Beirut. I am also a member of the OINK file sharing network. In reading this news story, it is so easy to see the way that the "Broadcast" is choosing to spin this story. On MTV, for example, they are already calling this an "Illegal-file sharing site".

If it is only being investigated at this point, then how is it already Illegal? It isn't Illegal, and don't let them tell you that. IT ISN'T ILLEGAL.

The only people that are breaking the law here are overzealous music critics. The new Beirut album, for example, leaked something like a month and a half before the record was released in stores. That had nothing to do with oink, and everything to do with that dude who publishes ARTHUR MAGAZINE. He leaked his watermarked copy of the record, and boom, it was up.

At that point, he leaked a promo (which is LABEL property). It wasn't like a private consumer who is sharing with his friends, it was a critic who leaked LABEL PROPERTY. Critics are breaking their trust with labels, they are the ones who are leaking records. Why? I haven't figured that out just yet.

However, Ben (at BaDaBing Records) and Zach decided that the album should be released on Itunes as soon as it was leaked. This allowed people the option to purchase if they wanted to.

Anyhow, I have gotten a little off the point here, and I may regret giving up my identity later when INTERPOL busts through my door in Sunset Park.

I can see it now, they will put an Uzi in my mouth because I wanted to download Scott Walker's OOP '70's solo records. Will I really have to go back to jail because of "Stretch"?

FUCK THE BROADCAST. Long live the new flesh. Watch Free Speach TV. Listen to Gene Youngblood. And on an on.

This sucks.

I am a member of the band Beirut. I am also a member of the OINK file sharing network. In reading this news story, it is so easy to see the way that the "Broadcast" is choosing to spin this story. On MTV, for example, they are already calling this an "Illegal-file sharing site".

If it is only being investigated at this point, then how is it already Illegal? It isn't Illegal, and don't let them tell you that. IT ISN'T ILLEGAL.

The only people that are breaking the law here are overzealous music critics. The new Beirut album, for example, leaked something like a month and a half before the record was released in stores. That had nothing to do with oink, and everything to do with that dude who publishes ARTHUR MAGAZINE. He leaked his watermarked copy of the record, and boom, it was up.

At that point, he leaked a promo (which is LABEL property). It wasn't like a private consumer who is sharing with his friends, it was a critic who leaked LABEL PROPERTY. Critics are breaking their trust with labels, they are the ones who are leaking records. Why? I haven't figured that out just yet.

However, Ben (at BaDaBing Records) and Zach decided that the album should be released on Itunes as soon as it was leaked. This allowed people the option to purchase if they wanted to.

Anyhow, I have gotten a little off the point here, and I may regret giving up my identity later when INTERPOL busts through my door in Sunset Park.

I can see it now, they will put an Uzi in my mouth because I wanted to download Scott Walker's OOP '70's solo records. Will I really have to go back to jail because of "Stretch"?

FUCK THE BROADCAST. Long live the new flesh. Watch Free Speach TV. Listen to Gene Youngblood. And on an on.

This sucks.

I am a member of the band Beirut. I am also a member of the OINK file sharing network. In reading this news story, it is so easy to see the way that the "Broadcast" is choosing to spin this story. On MTV, for example, they are already calling this an "Illegal-file sharing site".

If it is only being investigated at this point, then how is it already Illegal? It isn't Illegal, and don't let them tell you that. IT ISN'T ILLEGAL.

The only people that are breaking the law here are overzealous music critics. The new Beirut album, for example, leaked something like a month and a half before the record was released in stores. That had nothing to do with oink, and everything to do with that dude who publishes ARTHUR MAGAZINE. He leaked his watermarked copy of the record, and boom, it was up.

At that point, he leaked a promo (which is LABEL property). It wasn't like a private consumer who is sharing with his friends, it was a critic who leaked LABEL PROPERTY. Critics are breaking their trust with labels, they are the ones who are leaking records. Why? I haven't figured that out just yet.

However, Ben (at BaDaBing Records) and Zach decided that the album should be released on Itunes as soon as it was leaked. This allowed people the option to purchase if they wanted to.

Anyhow, I have gotten a little off the point here, and I may regret giving up my identity later when INTERPOL busts through my door in Sunset Park.

I can see it now, they will put an Uzi in my mouth because I wanted to download Scott Walker's OOP '70's solo records. Will I really have to go back to jail because of "Stretch"?

FUCK THE BROADCAST. Long live the new flesh. Watch Free Speech TV. Listen to Gene Youngblood. And on an on.