Comments on: U2's turn for Internet thrashing

One of the world's most popular bands comes under fire from bloggers angered by antipiracy comments made by group's manager.

[Crow120]

U2's Manager is Digging Them a Fine Grave.

Seriously, this guy is alienating most of the people who buy U2's music. Maybe he forgot the special edition U2 iPod Apple sold for awhile. Or that in general most of the people who buy iPods to be hip and trendy are the same bunch that actually listen to U2 in the first place.

[rocketjam--2008]

standing up for copyright?

Standing up for copyright is one thing. His speech was another
thing.

[Travis Ernst]

Digging his own pit

We have to remember, in support of U2, Bono as the one who
spoke publicly, in conjunction with Apple Inc. released limited
series players. So this does not sound to be the direction the band
is going. This PR guy needs to talk with the band before putting his
head on the cutting block.

[ewelch]

Bite the hand

Apple saved the music world from total domination by music labels
by making online downloading legal and reasonable for everyone.
And now that bozo wants to spit on them and pretend that they
don't already make more money than anyone at those tech
companies? What a dope.

[pol;0987]

Can we address the real issue?

the real issue is that people are using their isp's to steal music,
and movies, etc via p2p sites, bit torrent, and newsgroups.
Maybe if some of these bloggers actually created something
worth selling that cost them money to produce they would
understand the issue. The vastness of the information available
has created a false sense of entitlement. Yes people post music,
movies, etc., and stop supporting the original art forms cause
well, why should they pay for it when they can get it for free
online.

Being anti drm is just another way of saying i endorse theft.

[galacticgufus]

[jo.ke]

home taping

did Paul McGuinness not say in the eighties when asked about tape
cassettes that "home taping was sharing music" rather than the
then industry maxim that "home taping was killing music" ?

[jo.ke]

home taping

my mistake, Paul Mcguinness said that "home taping was
spreading music" (even better)

[sj22]

Why the big hoo haa?

I can understand recording artists being frustrated with how their work is pass around the world for free but I am not convinced that the ISPs policing is the answer. DRM clearly cannot stop this issue. Being a long time u2 supporter and an anti piracy advocate I am not sure I have the answers but I also do not see the reason for the backlash. Paul McGuinness may not have the answer but it can be food for thought. Just because U2 have sold millions of records does not mean they should not be allowed to safeguard their assets.
If ISPs were to police all users or heavy downloaders... this could also affect the BW utilization of people who download music legally.

I may not support the speech but I think the intention is to get the ball rolling on how to limit online piracy because yes he will be looking out for his clients' interests. Thrashing u2 makes no sense. We all look after our work, why shouldn't musicians no matter how rich they may be. Also, this particular solution suggested may not be the answer but at least its food for thought.

[sismoc]

Greedy, Greedy, Greedy, Greedy

In the history of mankind, there has never been a more greedy group of people than today's musical artists. Not a single one ever says "I just love making music and am glad that I can bring a little happiness to others."

May they all rot in h*ll.

[maverick_nick]

ISPs can't do anything!

Seriously, how do you expect ISPs to monitor data transfer? Or perhaps they just want ISPs to ban those convicted of piracy from gaining access to the net - ludicrous! It's illegal, and if the US government is coming under fire for evesdropping you think anybody gives a damn about the RIAA.

If something like that happened, all one would have to do is use a wrapper to transfer files and ISPs "monitoring software" would be non the wiser.

Anyway I hate it when people whom have little or no knowledge of the tech industry talk as though they know what they're talking about.

[protagonistic]

RE: ISPs can't do anything!

"all one would have to do is use a wrapper to transfer files "

As I mentioned previously all one would have to do is to use
PGP/GPG and the ISP would have no way of checking what is being
transferred. If the RIAA wants to ensure they will no longer be able
to ID illegal downloads they couldn't come up with a better way of
doing it. :-)

[danihro]

Wrong approach

There was a time without recording technlogies. Mozart had to perform live to earn his money. Probabil this will be the true again. And it is ok for me. If you are a band or a singer and want to earn money, go on stage and perform. Don't just go in a studio, say two "oh" and three "yeah" and expect to win millions. Recorded singles are good for marketing, they can make people come to your concert. But records should not be the main source of revenues. And they will not be in the future. How can someone stop me from giving a computer file to a friend? This will never be possible as soon as music files exists. Probably some time in the future the music will follow the business model of movies which will be rented and streamed from servers. Probably when one will want to hear music will just conect his home sound device to a site and make a playlist (after paying a subscription of course). I think it is the only way to make music out of recordings. Music fies does not have a business future, neither a physical object (like a CD) containing music files.

[buzztime]

key fact in this

As U2's popularity is, long-term, arguably the largest in the world, their revenues from touring are going to be high. As they stated, $355 million. But this is the one avenue of music entertainment that cannot be truly pirated: the live experience. I have owned "live" Cd's and DVD's, and I think you'll agree it's not the same thing. U2 have always put on an amazing live show. I don't think that McGuiness is complaining entirely about his client. Those that are just starting out, those that can't just put together a stadium tour, those that open for someone else in a 1,000 seat hall somewhere, those are the people this is looking at. Having worked in radio and behind the counter at the "local record store", I see how the illegal reproduction killed off a lot of business. I-tunes dealt the "Finish Him" blow that ended all the damage that Napster, et al, did to the record industry. I may be old school when it comes to this (I'm 38), but I miss the day of perusing through the new artists on Tuesday. It was an organic experience to open up that new product, and put it on the speakers. When Tower Records can't make it in this world, it's the end of the era of putting on your CD.

[brodie657]

No

The reality is that the music labels bear the brunt of loss in pirating. Bands make very little money off of album sales - I believe its only about $1 per album. They also have to pay back the record label for producing the album, promoting..etc.

They make all their money on the tour. And unless you've lived under a rock you know U2 is one of the hottest touring bands ever. A couple off-cuff comments arent going to stop people from going to see them live or listening to them.

[DevTop]

Should All Music Be Free?

A debate is raging on the 'net these days as to whether all software, music and digital content should be free.

http://www.devtopics.com/should-all-software-be-free/

[pablo Dante]

Live shows aren't free

as well IT services aren't free.

[GoodnightJulia]

Misinterpreting Trent Reznor... again.

Quote: "Either way, like Prince, Nine Inch Nails' Trent Reznor and (the granddaddy of all musicians who spoke out against file sharing) Metallica's Lars Ulrich before them, Bono & Co. are getting worked over."

In all fairness, let's remember that at least part of the "working over" that happened after your Trent Reznor interview, was because you (or your editors) picked a headline that implied he was definitively endorsing a $5 ISP tax, when it's clear from his actual words that he wasn't doing anything of the sort. Of course, some of the blame also goes to people who are too lazy to read past headlines.

Trent Reznor has actually been much more sensible than most about the ways the music industry is changing. You certainly can't put him on the "wrong side" of the piracy debate, and lumping him in with Lars Ulrich is just ridiculous.

Not to beat a dead horse; but you did bring it back up.

[GoodnightJulia]

And, re: Lars Ulrich

Apparently even he had "some regrets" about the whole Napster thing, according to Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lars_Ulrich#Napster_controversy

Just to be fair. Though they did react in completely the wrong way, it's nice to know they eventually realized it.

[biko1971]

Did Paul forget all about the dangers of losing Net Neutrality

As a music industry professional I understand him looking/driving
for a solution, but g legitimizing the ISP's drive for the laws to help
them police the internet is not healthy.

[biko1971]

McGuinness clearly ignored the dangers of losing Net Neutrality

The negative impacts of giving ISP's policing power goes far beyond
the music industry. As a music industry professional I understand
him looking/driving for a solution, but legitimizing the ISP's drive
for laws to help them police the internet in any way shape or from
is a big mistake, and certainly NOT a solution. I do agree however
with his position of taxing IPS's digital hardware creators who have
built their entire business on artists content.

[cube3]

"The struggle for economic control of music is looking more and more like war between corporations and consumers"

this is a nonsence quote.

the fake battle is with old corporations who invested in the IP, and new VC funded. corporations who want to make money off it.

the consumer is nowhere in VIacoms or YOUTUBES/ex. boardroom/invenstors interests.