Parker: The High-Tech Hitler?
Moses Avalon
With Limewire Gone is Spotify the New Napster? I Don’t Know. Is Sean Parker the New High-Tech Hitler?
Is there no limit to this guy’s narcissism? The old saying goes, when three people tell you you’re drunk, maybe you should sit down. When, the US Supreme court says, you are a thief who stole from millions of artists, and when the Attorney General investigates you for 400 million counts of computer trespass, and then finally, when Hollywood casts you as the villain in the hottest movie of the season, maybe it’s time you take a look at your values.
With Limewire now due for permanent shutdown, the blogs are lit up with opinions on the fall out. Parker thinks all this will do is create more heads of the Hydra– in other words, more P2P will spawn from the death of Limewire, thus validating his 2001 position that the labels are fighting a losing battle against piracy and should just give up. Cleary the tech heads agree with their icon, even if the statistics tell a different story: piracy is passé, the lawsuits worked and the “free-music” generation is growing up and opting in.
The Universe has given Parker a gift of amazing proportions, super high IQ and a sophisticated knack for lateral thinking that approaches Da Vinci. One has to wonder why some people, with such clear and obvious aptitude for creating great things, would devote their efforts to ripping off, of all people, musicians; the most vulnerable and underpaid artist-group on the planet. If anyone deserves to rot in a cell, it’s the executives and board of places like Limewire: three people didn’t tell them they were drunk. Several separate courts did. How can anyone have any sympathy for these fools?
Yet, Parker seems to think they are victims of ignorant times. I can understand why. Like many on the tech side of the argument, he’s dug in. He is well invested in his opinion with no way to save face by reversing his stance. He’s not alone. Even some on the content side of the fence were seduced by Limewire’s vigilance. CD Baby as well as TuneCore, who should have rejected Limewire in support of artists, were sucked (or suckered) into desperate deals with them.
But, Parker has a super charged self spin cycle that always seems to put his morality in the hero role. “I beat the record labels,” his character (played by Justin Timberlake in an Oscar worthy performance) says, in the Social Network. “But the labels won,” replies another character. “Yeah,” says Parker, “[but only] in court.”
Is his avatar implying that he won in the eyes of the public? Is his ego over fictionalized? Not really.
“I’ve helped change the world three times,” he’s quoted on the Death and Taxes site as well as his Vanity Fair puff piece, that actually intimates that he’s working on a cure for Cancer. (I want his publicist.)
Okay, Sean, but did you change it for the better?
Napster: millions in lost revenue to artists and labels, and the creation of false hope to companies like Limewire, foolishly believing your hype about what is “fair use.” Hundreds of millions in legal fees, and wasting public resources to stifle Kazzaa, and others.
Facebook: presently the number one priority of the Attorney General as well as other government entities, for computer trespass, invasion of privacy and fraud.
And now his involvement in Spotify, a company that once again is warming up for a war by pointing the “greed” finger at labels because they will not lower licensing fees, thus blocking the service from entering the states. Spotify is losing money, according to reports, and I’m sure Parker will not see this as his failure, or a retribution by the industry he took a dump on, but the fault of his arch nemesis– section 102 of the US Copyright Act.
Dude, have you seen The Social Network? You’re the frigging bad guy. Pay attention.
A guy this smart, this young, this privileged, this motivated, but this craggy, needs to be watched as carefully as we watch some third-world dictators building a “harmless” nuclear power plant to heat small villages.
I have to wonder what kind of up-bringing he had. Are his parents proud? Parker’s family gave him a first-rate education and he used it to become a high-tech mob boss. And who did he shake down? Musicians. When Spotify fails in the US, where to next will Parker turn to “change the world” for a fourth time?
Maybe he should pioneer a program that steals money from the Federal Reserve and redistributes it to those who lost their homes—after all, if music should be free, then certainly homes should too. Let’s see how he likes spreading his twisted morality against the power of the US Treasury. Think they will be more understanding than the RIAA, or the AG?
Maybe if you actually cure Cancer instead of just showing up for a fundraiser.
Takers?
Mo Out.
25 responses to “Parker: The High-Tech Hitler?”
Leave a Reply
Hear Hear. How come some 20 year old decided that music should be free? Maybe I should send him an invoice for all my costs of producing my music over 10 years. That might help.
Excellent piece, Moses!
Spot on, Moses!
This “free-for-all” mantra must stop and all his “consumer generated” content must stop as it is all simply fattening the beasts of burden and adding to this crazy noting that time is no longer money.
Creeps like this should be “outed” – as you have done- and publications like Vanity Fair writing about them does no good- even if they’re trying to do bad by them?
Know what I mean?
Cheers.
How come some “brilliant mind” out there cannot develop a CROSS PLATFORM format to substitute the Apple and Microsoft DRMs, that would allow control and accounting of digital music sales on the net, without being tied to these tech giants and their gadgets. And could include performing credits as well (something that we miss on the MP3’s). It’s pathetic that we have to depend on Steve Jobs or Bill Gates to sell music with some kind of “control/sales accounting”. Am I missing something?
mo, you the nails with an axe, not nice but dirty jobs, well someones gotta do it. hold the line
mo, you hit the nails with an axe, not nice but dirty jobs, well someones gotta do it. hold the line
Hi Mo, not sure I am with you on this one, this was from a student’I personally see no crime in the free music downloads. There is more of a crime to charge what the consumer is charged to attend a concert or other type of event. I mean, who is really taken advantage of then? I think there is more of a risk to my computer with exposure to viruses with the free music downloads than to the musician or group. I also feel that the artists will always gain from the songs I may download for free’.
It is a cultural shift amongst young people and you are just walking the major record company line again, no doubt as you still work for them as a producer? But the general vibe amongst the youth is that the net gives them freebies including music and this ethos Parker has is the same that any teenager has, so wake up and smell the coffee dewd. I wish it was as simple as vilifying Parker but its not, the film you mentioned again is agenda setting by major corporates but who is buying that crap anyway? No teenager I know? I run my onw label and give our artists music away free so what if 400 million teenagers send it over P2P? promotes the hell out of our products? Cheers PC
PC
@Paul I haven’t worked for a major lable as a producer in over 12 years. I do support the major lable system for two reasons:
1) all my clients that are living in big house have deals on majors. All my clients who are indie are struggling. It’s really that simple.
Does that mean I don’t support indie music? No, Im a big fan of staying indie. But let’s not kid ourselves, the ones who do survive the major lable system have worked every bit as hard for their “success.”. It’s reverse snobbery to feel that they are rich enough and therefore deserve to have their work stolen from them.
2) without the majors we’d have no real viable indie “industry”. Major lable money is the finantial boot strap for the indie community.
I haven’t seen the movie yet, but after reading this, I guess I will. This guy obviously bought into the geek mantra that “information wants to be free.” Which seems to be true, but what kind of “information,” (or data or content, whichever)will it BE if it’s free? More crappy fluff.
If you scour a site like myspace or any of the others, it’s astonishing how little talent there really is out there. I mean people who can really write a great song and deliver it. A LOT of the reason for that is many of the people who had the dedication to sacrifice everything for a music career had to finally walk away from it. It’s cause and effect, if there’s no money in it, why would someone do it?
Maybe this guy wanted to be cool and be a musician and didn’t have the talent, so he got his revenge this way.
Moses, you’re right, it IS an outrage that he’d target musicians to rip off…only it’s not even really a rip-off in the traditional sense, it’s the attitude of, “Hey, make sure you never pay these guys again.” Musicians don’t deserve money. Hmmm.
Hi Mo,
I think you were a bit rough on Sean Parker. Mostly because the movie was a sensationalized or a highly exaggerated version of what happened in real life. Thats what ”Hollywood” is all about. No one would have gone to see the movie if it wasn’t sensationalized. Now, I am in no way endorsing Sean or the Napster guy for stealing artist and or songwriter copyrights, but to call him the new Hitler is like the Tea Party making statements like ” We want our country back”. Where the hell did the country go? We’re still here, working and breathing and taking advantage of the wonderful opportunities this country offers us.
>
> Sean Parker is an opportunist- yes, arrogant-yes but he was just a Harvard educated privileged guy who saw an opportunity and took advantage of it. Sean P. Diddy steals parts of people’s songs and unless he is sued for it doesn’t answer for it. Record Companies made millions and probably billions off of artist for so many years no one really checked them. Wall Street executives made and continue to make so much money and they never really have had to answer for it. My point is, he should never be compared in any way to a monster like Hitler. Its not fair. He was young, he was naive but all the inner circle of people he took advantage of were compensated and he has most recently used some of his earnings to help out the children in Newark, NJ. I am sure he will do other good, charitable works as well.
>
> By the way, the music industry needed a shake-up and I believe it is turning out to be the best thing that could have happened. Artists are taking control of their careers, finding innovative ways to promote, market and distribute themselves. Record company’s are forced to find additional revenue streams instead of just relying on the sale of a CD or box set. But most of all, I am loving the many, many music entrepreneurs who are creating new infrastructures (internet based and otherwise) and music companies to get the music to the ultimate consumer of music and who, by the way, is financially supporting the artist as well- (Indiegogo, Kickstarter, Rockethub) .
>
> Even in our program we have seen many of these new companies started by the students from our program who are relatively successful like “Rightsflow”, “Audible Treats”, to name a few. We also have a student whose band (Shinobi Ninja) developed a video game app to promote themselves. So Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Education are alive and well and will help generate the additional revenue for the music business as we know it today. And finally, it will go to the individuals who deserve it- The performing artist, songwriter, musician and investor.
>
> Regards,
Definitely will not argue that there is no “Tech” versus “Major” Musician cyber-war. However, I shall also not pretend that I am on either side of this argument.
I see and understand the views of either side in this debate so I honestly shall say it is simply wonderful that you decided to cover such a controversial piece Moses. =3
Having lived on both sides at one time or another [within the realms of the “tech crowd” as well as within the realm of the “modern business” crowd–born the year the Macintosh and the title of a certain book made famous by George Orwell – 1984 ^_^] I simply will say that things simply happen as they do for good reason.
I would like to bring about though that I can understand why Tunecore and CD Baby would back Limewire. I can also see why “The Big 3” would be against it.
As I am certain many of you are aware, the first 100,000 to 1 million records [no joke after production costs] for many major artists are simply “given away” as promo in one form or another.
Mailing costs to radio stations, publicists, magazine publishers, reviews and “first listens.”
Typical major campaign.
Before the estimation is shot down, please allow me to say that I humbly think that services that allow any artist–independent, major label or otherwise to literally receive “Free Publicity” — should certainly not be taken for granted.
I think what bothers “The Big Three” more than so-said “stolen music” is actually the idea that people may now finally “choose what’s popular” instead of believing what is hip is what loops on the radio 300 times a week [literal number for some songs]
In essence… I agree that music is in fact–free–and always has been. As a musician, businessman and artist–I do not transcend to the heavens or some alternative universe to pay “The Gods of Sound & Ideas” a “royalty” for an idea or a “Licensing Fee” just before connecting with people through music… pure inspiration, the passion and drive to share that inspiration and people willing to listen [at the cost of time, money or both] is what music honestly is: a universal language.
I chose to pay for it.
Not everyone can.
No one used to.
How many dollars do you think celebrations in villages with songs sang praising creation or drums beaten in Africa or Brazil 2000 years ago received for their “Astounding sound” and “Amazing Rhythms.” The answer really is quite simple: nada. The musicians were praised and that was enough for them.
The dollar bill as we know it didn’t even exist in the form we currently praise it to be.
Only very recently–literally within the last 200 years or so has “Music Become an industry.”
Moses makes a wonderful statement in his book “Confessions of A Record Producer” which I am very certain many of you have read–that suggests that if an artist wants to be in the “Music Business” then that should be that. If an artist wants to make “Art Music” then she or he should not expect compensation past admiration. [not the exact words, but the general gist is that.]
Now. We are getting to the point I think where people are beginning to think that if anything is received–it should be paid for otherwise it has no value… even natural water and air [at least one gas station seriously does sells “purified canned air” believe it or not =3]
Gilli Moon I think makes a wonderful point in explaining that some musicians do spend a great deal of money in order to create and share music. However, I shall say also that from Bob Back Ally to Brittney Spears–from “Ono” to “Bono”–from “DJ Who Cares” to “Tiesto”–music simply is a form of communication.
In brief–some of us are paid for our advice while others simply want their advice to be heard.
Some of us get the “free phone” while others pay sometimes thousands for the latest gadget.
It is no secret that major and independent musicians alike simply “communicate” with music. $100 in sales at $1.00 each simply means that a modern performer and/or musician has 100 people or more who will at least consider paying to see that person live or buy some other form of merchandise.
The “Music Industry” like the “Entertainment Industry” as a whole… is not about “Music Sales…” it’s about “the Person Who’s Music Sales” in whatever format.
This goes for T-Shirts, cups, tickets to live shows, yes–CDs… but the music itself simply is a communication’s device and unless a person is paying for a specific person or item–in my opinion–music always will be free in one form or another.
It is the artist(s) or performers who are paid for their pressence.
This is important to keep in mind.
People simply download music they like. Limewire simply provided a service that allowed users to receive what was liked.
I can understand why companies that are used to previous ways of doing things would be upset.
I also can understand why some may view the creator of Limewire as a “villain” and on the other end a “hero.”
Should I remind everyone that public opinion about an individual is not often understood sometimes for hundreds of years.
I take neither side, but I will say that from Socrates to Christ Jesus to Joan of Arc… the “Big Company [majors and government in this case]” is not ever going to smile about changes “The Little Person” is making to society–not at first.
I find it interesting that more and more Major Labels are opening Vevo and YouTube accounts and listing their music free to stream–many list their artists FULL CATALOGS–while nitpicking at people who gave them the idea in the first place.
Vice versa, I find it quite unique that major companies crying over spilled milk are being told to “suck it up” because it is true that regardless of how big or how small–success is indeed success.
But that is simply the tale of time. =)
The big eats off the little and then the little eats off the big in a continued cycle…
Forever In Love With All That Which Exists
(That Which Is Seen & Unseen, Known & Unknown),
-TIGER M [Saturday]
6:20 PM (10/30/2010) [Eastern Standard Time, U.S.A.]
Who Is TIGER M? O.O
http://www.tigerm.net
Angel Arc & Company
Hi Moses,
Love the tough talk… someone must do it as we (musicians, etc) are terrible at sticking up for ourselves even when we are being robbed.
To Paul Cooke, free music downloads are OK, when authorized by the musicians who created the music! That’s NOT what Limewire was doing.
Paul, if you are giving away your artist’s music without their permission or any compensation to them, then dewd, you are exploiting them for the personal gain of your company. I hope they read this blog so that they know how you value their contribution to your compamy.
BTW, concert revenue is separate from recording revenue. People who work in the studio do not necessarily tour and many people who tour do not generate any income from recordings or merch, etc.
Mo, thank you for the article. For the most part I agree with what you say with one exception. Parker may have cost musicians and others millions of dollars in revenues, but I don’t think you can really compare that to murdering 12 million people. Sure, Paker is a brilliant bad guy, but let’s keep things in perspective. He may have killed some careers, but he hasn’t killed any people.
At least as far as we know.
Let me address this “H” word thing. It’s an offensive comparison that always has one or several people saying something like “you cant compare ______ to a mass murderer.” Well you can’t really compare anything to mass murder. Can you? There are very few mass murders and if we’re only allowed to use the “H” word for that comparison then we’re sort of suck from a literary point of view. Right?
The good news, it was a metaphor for “serious and heinous acts against humanity.” No one is actually comparing Parker to a mass murderer. Yet.
BUT… think about this:
If you know your history, at 19 (the age Parker facilitated the theft of millions of copyrights via Napster) Hitler had not killed anyone. At 30, (the approximate age Parker today) Hitler was still a struggling art student with little more than misdemeanor to his record for disorderly conduct. (Parker already has several Felonies and is worth many millions).
People are not born mass-murders. They often start off an angry, misunderstood, anti-social genius. Through luck or circumstance, attain some power and then they fall victim to the basic principal that absolute power corrupts absolutely. Rejected by the art world Hitler turned his anger towards those that didn’t “get him.” or more precisely, get his “important work.”
Sound familiar? Does Parker fit this profile? To a f–ing “T”.
So, all I meant by this piece is that he needs to be watched. He has the potential to be very dangerous. Goolge, and various other ISPs collectively have been the attempted mass murderer of copyrights. Given all that, calling Parker a potential “Hi-Tech Hitler,” meaning that his efforts are killing copyright on a mass scale though technology, was not out of line.
Hey Mo, awesome article as always! Let’s be blunt… I’m an indie filmmaker, a musician, and an advanced computer user (read geek). At the moment, filmmaking and music are, at present, only money pits — I love making them, but I only spend money to make them. As much as I think information should flow — I do believe in the concept of EXCHANGE… imagine that, paying for what you get! It’s only the criminals who take something and give nothing.
I think indie filmmakers are running into a similar problem as musicians in terms of the audience’s perception of the value of their work… people are used to free music and are used to free youtube films… and making films costs a lot more than making a record.
For those of us starting out, making short films – no one pays for those. And to get into a Theatre costs us a lot of money and we have no guarantee people will come to see it to just cover our costs of even renting the place.
With such thugs furthering the idea of FREE entertainment, how can we expect to change people’s expectations that we, artists, need to eat and have money to make more art?
Right now I work 2 or 3 part-time jobs just to have enough money to pay bills and make my films.
I can’t do my art full-time because I wouldn’t make any money — I couldn’t earn a living.
Have these idiots ever considered the ramifications of what they’re saying? If artists don’t make money for their work, they’ll soon stop making art ‘cos they have to eat… then, when no one is creating any more art, what will they do? Be happy because all art is free? At the cost of not having any future art?
Yeah, I think Sean Parker has found a cure for cancer.. but he’s unwilling to kill himself or actually contribute to people around him.
Having had 100 Million downloads of my first classical symphony in 2003 (and featured in Billboard and Playboy for it.). I can assure you that giving away music does not make me rich at all no matter how impressive that number is.
For additional revenue as a classical artist, I cannot just “tour” or “perform” my work, because I can’t just bring 150 musicians with me on the road. And most artists aren’t even sure where to begin when setting up a tour that doesn’t have advances from venues. It’s not just hole in the wall bars and throw everything in a van and hit the road… unfortunately.
I see a distinct revenue difference between “Performing Artist” and “Recording Artist”. A film composer is a “Recording Artist”. Rappers, pop stars and rock stars are “Performing Artists” so they have additional forms of revenue, like touring… that film, classical and electronic artists don’t have available to them.
but “Recording Artists” thrive on licensing (tv, film, game, radio, etc.) and track SALES. If you steal from these “Recording Artists”, you certainly “flatter” them, but you also FLATTEN them.
Giving away music as a “loss leader” eventually catches up with greater loss. Even charging .99/song is stealing from the artist (it should cost more.). a song you can play over and over and over again, that took them weeks, months, years to write. So at-least pay the 99 cents.
I agree with Moses article and especially his comment “It’s reverse snobbery to feel that they are rich enough and therefore deserve to have their work stolen from them.”
Major label artists do work extremely hard. the Press, TV, Magazines make it seem like they are living glamorous lives, but trust me, I know first hand, the lives that these hard working HUMAN BEINGS lead. They have to do all the stuff that the rest of the world does. The industry isn’t as black and white as it seems on the outside… Rich doesn’t mean “no more problems.”
Why is food not free? why is art and music suppose to be free, but not food? is it because the farmers worked hard to grow it, package it up and distribute it, which gives it “value”? hmm… why can’t you just walk into a grocery store and take whatever food you want?
And linguistically speaking, I thought “Hitler” was a fine comparison. He was very opportunistic, the Reichstag fire incident is an example of that… some of those “free music hippie love people” that comment on this blog, just drive me nuts….*sigh*
Mad respect to you Moses. Keep it up.
Hi Moses. Sorry I got into this discussion so late. But the day I received your newsletter with this article I blogged on it and hopefully sent you some new readers. I have been in the music industry since I was a teenage musician (I saved and bought records by the way) and now as an entertainment attorney. I love my musician and songwriter clients as well as my label and publisher clients. I have seen them suffer and many literally go out of business because of illegal file sharing. And by the way — for the ignorant — many of my clients are not performers. The songwriters for example. The theft of recordings has destroyed many a writing career. Cheers to all who love and support the artists of the world, regardless of the art form.
Steve
http://musicrowlawyer.typepad.com
http://musicrowlawyer.com
Hi, Moses ~ It is obvious that the argument put forth by the likes of “DJ TIGERM” above cannot be settled in a single article such as you have written and to which he has responded: “How many dollars do you think celebrations in villages with songs sang praising creation or drums beaten in Africa or Brazil 2000 years ago received for their ‘Astounding sound’ and ‘Amazing Rhythms.’ The answer really is quite simple: nada. The musicians were praised and that was enough for them.”
This view represents an abridgment of thought that requires an extensive, forthright, antithetical examination of music history as it truly is, or more pointedly, a long look at the history of the music business itself, from ancient to modern times. For example, it is widely held that a great number, perhaps the majority, of priests and Levites in Solomon’s temple were musicians, and they were rewarded handsomely, not with “dollars,” but with the firstfruits that is the of the nation’s harvest (the best produce in the land), and with other media of exchange (cattle, clothing, even money). Native peoples all over the globe have honored their musicians as holy men and women, and a chief part of bestowing that honor was the physical act of offering food, clothing, and other media of exchange to provide for their livelihood. There is a need for someone to write a scholarly, encyclopedic textbook on the history of the music business, and what better writer than you for the job, Moses . . .
@calendale. Me, write something scholarly? Hummm.
There’s always some guy who makes Callendale’s argument. Back in the days before the industrial revolution musicians lived like this, etc. LOL
NOW we are in the 21st Century and, well, banging on the drums only works at a pep rally AND when you go to the park (no villages around), after 9 pm, the police will not praise you at all. In fact, they will tell you to stop “praising creation” or you will be arrested for disturbing the peace. 🙁
Having said that, I would consider playing for food, but people only use dollars in the 21st Century (credit cards too). Sometimes I am offered free drinks… that’s always nice, but no fresh produce to speak of… DARN!
Quite frankly I think this brings to light the issue of “WHY are you making music?”
The industry is all well and good but everyone I know who’s been signed has corrupted the purity of their passion for music in the interests of trying to please a record label, an audience … and their art suffers and lacks the integrity of the HEART.
I am a talented and loving human being who happens to be a musician among other things. I have financed and given away thousands of my albums for free or by donation – because i believe in art as a means of healing the collective. And I believe that it is my job to share the gifts that were given to me.
Purity of intent. What is all this talk about business and art?
I can happily say that at the end of the day, while I may not be making a steady living with my music, I have touched and improved and inspired the lives of thousands of beautiful people around the world.
That, to me, is why we make music in the first place.
My music is not mine, it moves through me, and is a gift to me, and I share it as such.
There must be FIRE in the heart to channel music that can change the world, for nothing else is strong enough to serve as true medicine for the hearts of people trying to transform their lives!
Give me pure hearted inspiration and passion any day of the week, and I’ll find another way to feed myself.
If you do what you do because you believe in it with PASSIONATE FERVENCE, then the money grubbing element of intent becomes irrelevant.
The universe always supports. ALWAYS.
Big love to all of you, from the depths of my soul. HUGE love. I believe in YOU following the voice of your soul. And being lifted up as such.
May the bliss of musical union embrace any haters in his arms and nourish you as I am nourished every time i sing or play violin!
LOVE music!!! YES!
My point is that today’s musicians are to be paid in money, since that is toady’s medium of exchange.
No question, the dollar sign followed by a number … (umm, invisible conceptual “money”) is currently ruling people’s minds and hearts.
Let me ask you – How many of those “things” that are bought with the almighty dollar, enhance your life as much as the humbling experience of singing a song you wrote and having people sing along? Or having a person drive up to you blasting your album from their car?
Holy Humility, batman! That is a GIFT!
What i am saying that artists are blessed to have a medium through which to share their music with the world freely in such an open and accessible forum.
Anyone trying to share their message with the world APPRECIATES a distribution point for open sharing and equal opportunity.
Ask most artists and they’ll say they love Napster etc. It helps them get heard and recognized. And if they’re lucky, touch someone’s life.
Any real musician knows that is the whole point, (back to my original point – WHY are you making music?)
If everyone in the world could hear one of my songs, and some percentage of them really SAW and witnessed my heart and danced around their room feeling less alone in the world…. What a GIFT that would be to ME to be able to reach those faceless masses! To have that opportunity!!!!!
Seriously? You can’t see how awesome that is for artists?
The currency of the Elationary Joy of Music goes a lot further than a piece of paper. (I hear the Beatles echoing somewhere in the distance “Can’t buy me love”)
Interesting to see what exactly it is that you value, isn’t it…? As you give, so you receive. I’m saying that our rewards are multifaceted and incalculable.
I double dog dare you to look inside of your soul and challenge that undeniable Truth 🙂
@mayesn. Don’t be silly. Everyone knows that money can’t buy happeyness. How can money buy happiness? Money IS happiness. And true happiness, if you’re a song writer or performer, is getting paid for your talent. People who prevent that and make themselves richer in the process are truly the devil.
Depends on your perspective mister. Think about other countries. Here, where i live (anatolia) you can search for a loong long time to find and buy the single/album you want/need. So there is no choice but using music sharing programs. If they didnt exist people here would have no clue about whats going on in the music world and they would stay slightly stupid. This perspective is far from the ” music politics’ ” but if there is no other way there is still a way and people will keep using it. Sean Parker a high-tech “hitler”? A man who pledged $100,000 to the campaign to legalize marijuana? I dont think so..he is being Global. What most of you try but cant.