Stevie IS against File Sharing. - Page 2

KateTheCursed · #16 01-26-2005, 03:43 PM

Not that my opinion matters much, but I have to say I agree with Susie. Whether or not I agree with the rational behind artists and musicians trying to put a hault to illegal sharing. (For the record I think you make a very interesting and compelling argument, LilyRose, regarding the benefits that a mature artists could reap from file sharing.) I cannot argue with their right to pursue legal action. It is their art. It is their craft. It is their labor of love and if they want to make a legal stand in an effor to protect that it is their right. And frankly whether she garners 90% of her income from sales or 1/100th of a % of her income from sales is irrelevant. Taking is taking.

Serrart · #17 01-26-2005, 04:17 PM

I imagined she was against it, but the people who adore her are so cruel... no seriously, file-sharing has been helping me to know much more about her music, besides the records and the videos that I bought in normal stores. I know she wouldn't be pleased but I don't feel really guilty doing it.

Romy

Livia · #18 01-26-2005, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seeker007nmss

I am curious if that is her - personally- or the record management. I had a chance to ask her in person many years ago about bootlegs, and her only quam was that the songs weren't complete, but once they were out they were out. She didn't seem to care too much about it at the time.

It's definitely her - 'cause "She writes the songs that make the whooooole woooooorld siiiiiing." Illegal file sharing prevents the writers from earning royalties.

Did you ask Stevie about the bootlegs on one of those Rockline radio shows? I seem to remember that....

Oh, and remember - some of those people on the bandwagon w/ her (Tom Petty, Sheryl Crow) did that Concert for Artists Rights w/ Don Henley, back in 2001?

paleshadow · #19 01-26-2005, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seeker007nmss

I am curious if that is her - personally- or the record management. I had a chance to ask her in person many years ago about bootlegs, and her only quam was that the songs weren't complete, but once they were out they were out. She didn't seem to care too much about it at the time.

This is one more example of Stevie saying different things about the same subject. If you look at question #6 in the Ask Stevie section of the Nicks Fix she said that it "Greatly upsets me that people came into my life and stole my tapes". The answer was even a hand written note and "stole my tapes" was underlined, so you know she meant it!
Now, I can see how the older stuff got out because during much of the time during those years she was still on coke, but recent demos and unreleased songs are still surfacing. I wonder what the real source of this stuff is. If it upset her so much you'd think she would be more careful about it?

Livia · #20 01-26-2005, 05:20 PM

Here's another article:

Top 40

LilyRose · #21 01-26-2005, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KateTheCursed

Not that my opinion matters much, but I have to say I agree with Susie. Whether or not I agree with the rational behind artists and musicians trying to put a hault to illegal sharing. (For the record I think you make a very interesting and compelling argument, LilyRose, regarding the benefits that a mature artists could reap from file sharing.) I cannot argue with their right to pursue legal action. It is their art. It is their craft. It is their labor of love and if they want to make a legal stand in an effor to protect that it is their right. And frankly whether she garners 90% of her income from sales or 1/100th of a % of her income from sales is irrelevant. Taking is taking.

Thank you. This was all I was trying to say.

Susie

Johnny Stew · #22 01-26-2005, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dissention

As for Stevie joining into this hoopla, whatever. I'm sure there's just a gigantic market for pirated copies of Running Through the Garden and Too Far From Texas that none of us know about.

Wiseass.

But if you check Peer2Peer services like WinMX and KaZaA, thousands of people have "Landslide," "Rhiannon," "Dreams," "Gold Dust Woman," "Silver Springs," "Edge Of Seventeen," "Stand Back," and quite a number of her others.
So even though there's not a massive market for her newer songs, a good chunk of the royalties she'd still be making on the older songs IS probably being damaged.

Quite honestly, I have mixed emotions about file sharing. I love it when it comes to hard-to-find and/or unreleased stuff, like live concerts, remixes, etc. But when it comes to album tracks, I'm not so fond of the idea.
I have to admit though that I have downloaded album tracks by artists whose material I was only slightly familiar with, in order to see if I'd want to own an entire album... so having that abillity is a welcome thing.
It's just a shame that it gets abused (ie: people downloading entire albums and never owning a commercially released copy).

Also, a great deal of Stevie's material is available to download LEGALLY now, through services like Rhapsody, iTunes, Walmart's Music Downloads, etc.
For less than a dollar.
So it's not like she's completely turned a blind-eye to the idea of online song downloading... she's simply balking at the illegal side of it.

amber · #23 01-26-2005, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

Wiseass.

But if you check Peer2Peer services like WinMX and KaZaA, thousands of people have "Landslide," "Rhiannon," "Dreams," "Gold Dust Woman," "Silver Springs," "Edge Of Seventeen," "Stand Back," and quite a number of her others.
So even though there's not a massive market for her newer songs, a good chunk of the royalties she'd still be making on the older songs IS probably being damaged.

Quite honestly, I have mixed emotions about file sharing. I love it when it comes to hard-to-find and/or unreleased stuff, like live concerts, remixes, etc. But when it comes to album tracks, I'm not so fond of the idea.
I have to admit though that I have downloaded album tracks by artists whose material I was only slightly familiar with, in order to see if I'd want to own an entire album... so having that abillity is a welcome thing.
It's just a shame that it gets abused (ie: people downloading entire albums and never owning a commercially released copy).

Also, a great deal of Stevie's material is available to download LEGALLY now, through services like Rhapsody, iTunes, Walmart's Music Downloads, etc.
For less than a dollar.
So it's not like she's completely turned a blind-eye to the idea of online song downloading... she's simply balking at the illegal side of it.

Oh.My.God. Fav. Sig. Ever!!!! (along with trackie's "great odin's raven!! will farrell "cowbell" one)

markolas · #24 01-26-2005, 06:47 PM

I've never understood how "file sharing" is any different from those book clubs people used to organize, where one person would buy a book and circulate it among the group.

I think the idea of an actual recording being subject to copyright laws is ridiculous. Music and lyrics, yes...recordings, no.

flyfirefly · #25 01-26-2005, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tommer

file sharing is a brilliant alternative way to reach them, and have them pay those absurd tickets prices.

But don't you think she should get to decide?

In comparison to other artists' prices, the tickets for 2003-04 tour were hardly absurd. High, yes. Not substantially more than other artists of the same calibre.

seeker007nmss · #26 01-26-2005, 07:17 PM

I think they have learned NOTHING from the VHS - Cassette - history. They all screamed it would kill the industry , and now people own more movies than ever. Time to adapt and inovate. The fact of sharing is so popular is a reaction to the way they have been running the music industry into the ground. Take it away from the bean counters and give it back to the artists,

so there.....

77Rumours77 · #27 01-26-2005, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dissention

These people are still too stupid to acknowledge file sharing as helping a dying industry.

As for Stevie joining into this hoopla, whatever. I'm sure there's just a gigantic market for pirated copies of Running Through the Garden and Too Far From Texas that none of us know about.

ROTFLMAO!!!!

Well you know how popular those songs REALLY were

Johnny Stew · #28 01-26-2005, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by amber

Oh.My.God. Fav. Sig. Ever!!!! (along with trackie's "great odin's raven!! will farrell "cowbell" one)

Thanks, Amber! I saw it in the window and just couldn't resist.

catinthedark · #29 01-27-2005, 12:15 AM

First off, there IS a difference between sharing commercially released music and sharing demos, outtakes, concert boots, etc. The latter would not be earning the artist any money, so the sharing of songs between fans only serves only to share the love. As soon as someone makes a CD of those demos and tried to sell it on eBay, then it's a different story. THAT'S illegal. But my downloading someone's crummy boot of a SYW tour concert and playing it in my car is not going to take money out of FM's pocket.

As for the argument that downloading music is simply the new reality and these artists have to "get with it" - I don't buy it. Yes, downloading is incredibly easy and convenient. I downloaded three songs tonight myself - that I paid for and bought off of a legal site. I don't get why people think they are "entitled" to an artist's work for free. Do you think because it's hanging in a public museum that you can just go and "download" a Picasso off the wall? Not quite. It's stealing. Downloading an artist's creation, which is what music is, when it is commercially available, is stealing from them. The people who don't buy albums anymore are the ones who are killing the music industry - and driving up prices. I just don't get the whole entitlement thing. You are not entitled to anyone's music. It is their gift - you should be honoured that you get to experience it. Would you want to go to work everyday for 8 hours a day, but only get paid for 4? Didn't think so.

Think about it the next time you download a song for free. Then go find a legal site and splurge on the whole 99 cents it costs to download a tune legally.

Kelly · #30 01-27-2005, 07:22 AM

Stevie's stolen and leaked demos are a completely different issue than the topic at hand. It is very hard to understand how and why people feel entitled to download entire cds, such as Say You Will. Whether or not Stevie needs the money is not the point. Whether it draws people to concerts is not the point. The point is Stevie owns the rights to her songs. They are her art, her creation, her vision. It is stealing no matter how you try to justify it. I am guilty of downloading demos and having BN on cd but I have never downloaded an entire commercially available album. Nor have I asked someone to burn me a copy of one. Just because Stevie may not be the most mainstream of artists anymore does not mean she is not afforded the same legal protection as Usher or The Dixie Chicks. Perhaps this has nothing to do with money in Stevie's mind and everything to do with principal.