Shaizari
Acrobat
links to convoy and achtung mike, hope the links are still live
Shaizari said:I t u n e s s u c k s s t e v e j o b s i s a s t i n g y s c r o o g e
jmelrose said:
Hey, guess what? Steve Jobs has no more to say about this than the manager of the local Virgin Megastore.
Some of you people seem like you would expect to go into a Best Buy or whatever and say, "Hey, I have all the CDs from the box set except THIS one. Can I just buy it by itself?" And then when you are told no, the manager is a "stingy scrooge" or whatever juvenille rant you want to have.
The bottom line is, U2 offered a box set. The offered a box set of 446 tracks, which would be next-to impossible to distribute via CDs, as it would be a THIRTY CD set. Because they offered track you haven't been able to steal via p2p already, some people are calling the store names. Guess what? Blame Bono. Blame Paul. Blame Principal Management. THEY chose the tracks, they said how they want to sell it, and THEY are the ones making most of the money off the deal. U2 are the ones who chose the digital-only format, they chose lossy compression, and they chose a store only available in certain parts of the world. I'm not some Apple employee or anything, but I do use their machines, and listening to such ignorance is just so grating. Apple offers a service. U2 chose to take advantage of it, endorsed it on stage, and decided how it would be used to distribute their product. Apple is (likely) not even to blame for some of the mislabelled downloads and such that are in the set, as they are most likely being passed on exactly as U2's management gave them to Apple. Not the best care for the fans, I'd say, seeing as some of the track have glaring errors with them.
I am glad the band offered the stuff, and if I didn't want to spend the money on it, but I sure wouldn't be stealing it. Because this isn't like the tracks aren't available commercially now. It's not like trading recordings that haven't been released. They are there to buy and for whatever excuse has made in the thief's head as to why it's ok to rip the songs off, you're stealing from the band. It's a pretty backhanded compliment to the band to say you love their music so much that you'll steal it from them to get it. Great fans...
I don't think $40 is reasonable for a long-sleeve shirt from the merch stand when I see them on tour. I'm sure Bono won't mind if I walk off with it. After all, I've already bought lots of T-shirts from them and way overpaid for them. They owe me one. (Maybe I shouldn't have let them twist my arm so badly into getting all the stuff before.)
And finally, the people saying, "Well, I WOULD buy it if they'd released a rarities disc." Great. Congrats. But guess what? U2 DIDN'T. They said "All or nothing." They're well aware that they could make $40 instead of $150. And they'd be making a lot more per track. Paul M's a pretty bright guy, after all. I'm sure there's going to be further releases of this stuff, probably in a lossless format. There may be a "covers" release, since the band didn't include almost any in the box aside from Rattle/Hum stuff. But whether you agree with the decision or not, if you take the music from them without paying, you're a theif. And I sure can't imagine claiming to be a huge fan of a band, and state how much the music means to you, and then go on to steal it from them. "I value what you create so much I'll take it for free." Pretty crap, IMO.
Bono, Edge, Larry, Adam, and Paul: On behalf of those of us who really do respect you and the work you put into these uplifting songs, thanks. I hope you don't get too discouraged by all this and decide to cancel your plans for concert downloads (although I guess if you did after seeing how people trade this stuff like it wouldn't shock me if you did). Thanks for the great stuff.
Sorry for the rant. I've got strong feelings on the topic of stealing from artists. I kinda wish more people did too, though. Without artists, life would be pretty flat.
chrissybaby said:
having paid £120 for this set for those few songs i do feel quite strongly about this also, but the bigger issue for me is that im worried for this site. I think we are pushing our luck a little bit with all this sharing talk. Ok with the album because we all went out a purchased at least one copy, however with this the situation is different because those that get the tracks wont purchase them afterwards. If principle management discovered these threads then they could probably just injuct the site?! Bono and the band may well be kind hearted people and we all have a nice cosy view of them, but i get the impression that the people in charge of business matters aren't quite as nice!!! I'm not knocking people for downloading, hell i do it too, but im wondering where the site stands on this matter???
If the blue crack went then we'd all be in a mess!!!
Maybe this will answer some of your questions, maybe it won't.chrissybaby said:
having paid £120 for this set for those few songs i do feel quite strongly about this also, but the bigger issue for me is that im worried for this site. I think we are pushing our luck a little bit with all this sharing talk. Ok with the album because we all went out a purchased at least one copy, however with this the situation is different because those that get the tracks wont purchase them afterwards. If principle management discovered these threads then they could probably just injuct the site?! Bono and the band may well be kind hearted people and we all have a nice cosy view of them, but i get the impression that the people in charge of business matters aren't quite as nice!!! I'm not knocking people for downloading, hell i do it too, but im wondering where the site stands on this matter???
neutral said:
Maybe this will answer some of your questions, maybe it won't.
http://forum.interference.com/t103843.html
jmelrose said:
So it sounds to me like people using the forum to trade commerically available recordings are in violation of forum policy and potentially put this group at risk from the faceless corportation which represent's u2's legal/publishing interests? Is that accurate, Neutral?