bodymassindicator

seems hard to believe that a lot of people who steal the music end up donating money. try getting a loan with this business plan.

retired_heidus17

oink was very much a community of live/rare recordings fans, of course there was lots of people who just wanted the latest albums for free, but they probably werent the ones donating.

retired_nashfine

I honestly think if they continue to crack down on piracy within the music industry well see a rapid decline in decent music.

Not to mention the increase of complete crap. They might not be getting in the same amount of money from cd sales as once was but they are charging more for gigs than ever before.

retired_sherrijacobson

There was a lot of rare music on there that couldn't be found anywehre else

bodymassindicator

ok, a small percentage of users may have donated, but

A few percent out of thousands donating a couple of bucks here and there can hardly be called "extremely lucrative". That's just spinning at its worst. And the BBC just cites that uncommented, and even uses that phrase as a sub header in the article.

I'd be surprised if they made any profit; it's not cheap to provide these servers.

retired_heidus17

oh i agree, i'd be surprised if they made much of a profit at all, it probably cost them if anything, i was just responding to the 'people stealing music unlikely to donate' thing

bodymassindicator

Sounds good but is utter nonsense. There's always been decent music and people won't stop making it either. all this does is making it harder to get to it. I've been listening to decent music since way before I had internet access, and it never was a chore.

I agree that the music industry is misguided if they really believe the nonsense they're spouting out. Back in the day people didn't pay for all the music they were listening to either. You taped it off a friend, from the radio, at live shows, from records borrowed at the library, etc. With all the stuff you've been exposed to that way, you end up buying other music you really want that you would not even have heard of otherwise. So I can only assume that this is all designed to limit people's exposure to music that we don't already get pushed down our throats.

retired_nashfine

Sounds good but is utter nonsense. There's always been decent music and people won't stop making it either. all this does is making it harder to get to it. I've been listening to decent music since way before I had internet access, and it never was a chore.

I agree that the music industry is misguided if they really believe the nonsense they're spouting out. Back in the day people didn't pay for all the music they were listening to either. You taped it off a friend, from the radio, at live shows, from records borrowed at the library, etc. With all the stuff you've been exposed to that way, you end up buying other music you really want that you would not even have heard of otherwise. So I can only assume that this is all designed to limit people's exposure to music that we don't already get pushed down our throats. </BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly what I meant perhaps my wording was slightly wrong. Piracy is always going to happen its the add-ons like concerts they should be looking to make the money on. In no way am I condoneing piracy but Radiohead had the right idea with their album.

retired_jshendel

It ****es me off when the music industry say downloading illegal music is killing the industry. Thats just one factor but not the main reason. The fact songs are played on the radio 4-6 weeks before release, and the fact was have about 15 music channel on sky (not countng the radio stations), people are fed up of hearing the song before it even gets released

retired_therob

How would they know to buy it if they can't hear it first?