adamslim;158592 Wrote: 
> I think the difference here is that you are looking at this from a legal
> perspective, while I am coming at it from an ethical angle.
If you're going to argue from an ethical perspective, you ought to
examine how ethical (or not) is the typical recording contract offered
to artists by the big labels.

Here's what usually happens:

1. The label advances the artist some money, which is used to record
the album.
2. The label owns the recording.
3. The advance, plus all costs incurred by the label in manufacturing,
distributing and marketing the album are recouped from the artist's
royalties. Such costs include the expensive lunches and parties thrown
by the label's executives.
4. If by some miracle the album is successful enough that it generates
more royalties than the label's costs, then the artist starts getting
paid (provided there hasn't been some creative accounting at the record
label).
5. Meanwhile, the recording, which the artist has paid for out of their
royalties, belongs to the label.

Is that ethical? Seems more like legalised theft to me. AllOfMP3 was
just a different kind of legalised theft.

You might argue that signing such a contract would be insane. But most
wannabe pop stars will sign pretty much anything if they think this
will be their "big break".

Anyway, history is overtaking us. I read today that the Russian
government has agreed to shut down AllOfMP3 in order to progress its
application to join the WTO.


-- 
cliveb

Performers -> dozens of mixers and effects -> clipped/hypercompressed
mastering -> you think a few extra ps of jitter matters?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=28858

_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss

Reply via email to