Limp Bizkit in Digidesign ads?

[Lee Blaske]

I must say that given his ties to Napster, I was a bit surprised to see Limp Bizkit show up in recent Digidesign ads.

Certainly, Digidesign derives a lot of profit from hardware sales, but they also sell a lot of software, too. They should understand the struggle for protecting intellectual property.

Considering that most of the professionals that frequent this users conference respect Digidesign's intellectual property by not using pirated versions of Digi software, shouldn't Digidesign be exhibiting solidarity with the musicians and engineers who buy and use their products by not supporting and promoting someone like Limp Bizkit who exhibits blatant disregard for our intellectual property?

Lee Blaske

[Compression Records]

Conversely, Limp Bizkit (or any artist) may distribute their own intellectual property whichever way they deem suitable, even if for free, even on Napster or Gnutella. They (Limp Bizkit) are not responsible for pirates' actions. I'd be careful passing such harsh judgements: the parties at guilt are not those who embrace technology with an open mind and use it as a tool to develop alternative channels and ways of propagation of THEIR OWN property. This is true respect of copyright. It is possible that the Napster phenomenon will bring a redefinition of the industry's dynamics, much in the fashion that radio or videocassettes did. Does it suck so bad that the artist may now have more control over his property?

In an amicable manner, of course, Lee...

------------------
Marco Marinangeli
Magelic Productions, Inc.
Compression Records
http://www.compressionrecords.com

[bluemt]

Rather than charging people at all or giving it away on-line, the Limp Bisket Corporation should be paying people to listen to their material.

Personally I don't consider a Limp Bisket endorsement a positive selling point for Digidesign products.

[shaggy]

Do yourself a favor. Don't go see a show with Limp Biskit. Free or otherwise.

Anyone at the '99 BFD Shoreline show? Six weeks later a Woodstock riot (hello!)

Threatening the monitor mixer. Get yourselves some earmolds fella!

Reading the posts at 4evereal {God Bless him} tells you more about a Pro Tools user than any marketing survey would.

addendum after the fact:

It seems Limp & the boys are actually taking some steps to reduce injuries at their shows.

Cudos from shag on this one. Maybe I will see em again...


[This message has been edited by shaggy (edited July 29, 2000).]

[Compression Records]

For those who are interested in this kind of stuff, may I suggest:
http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/14/love/

------------------
Marco Marinangeli
Magelic Productions, Inc.
Compression Records
http://www.compressionrecords.com

[editor]

Hey Shaggy,

On the bright side, people forget the transient/disposable nature of fame and stardom.

I am sure the guy with the limp one will move into the same run down apartment bldg., with the mega star nilla' ice, in the not too distant future.

And digi... well, if you guys are trying to demonstrate PT audio quality by using the limpsters records as an example, try Peter Gabriel's or Brian Eno's records as an eample of PT quality instead....or even Steely Dan...Dare I get Roger involved again.

Regards

e

[Lee Blaske]

Marco wrote:

>>Conversely, Limp Bizkit (or any artist) may distribute their own intellectual property whichever way they deem suitable, even if for free, even on Napster or Gnutella.>>

Marco,

Many artists (especially the ones with commercial potential) who have material being distributed on Napster or Gnutella never made a conscious decision to have their material in those distribution systems. The decision was made for them.

In the midst of a riot, some folks will embrace the concept of looting, rather than legitimately purchasing property. Should that phenomenon cause the retail industry to redefine its dynamics? If shoplifting were legal, maybe the looters wouldn't break the store windows. That would save the retailers a lot of money.

>>Does it suck so bad that the artist may now have more control over his property?<<

If an artist's material is being distributed through Napster with absolutely no payment to the artist, how is the artist "controlling" his/her property? It would be hard for things to be any more out of control. I can't see how paid, web based distribution can possibly function if consumers can just as easily obtain the same thing for free.

>>For those who are interested in this kind of stuff, may I suggest: http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/14/love/<<

That's a nice, bold, defiant, anarchistic ramble that makes for good reading, but I don't think she has any answers. She's a bit confused, and hasn't really though the issues. Courtney will not be a happy camper if her fans bypass her paid website to get her material free from Napster.

Limp Bizkit, Digidesign's endorsee, isn't getting the same treatment from Napster that most other artists get (i.e. being totally ripped off). Napster is sponsoring Limp Bizkit's tour.

Lee Blaske

[Lee Blaske]

NuBus wrote:

>>I remember all this TALK when Cassettes came out! The same Type people CRYING about how they will loose money from taping off Radio or record sales dropping from Multiple copies being made from a single record. It's Y2K get out of the Seventies already, and the record companies are still around. Next thing you know metalica will start suing Copy bands for playing their songs Friday nights at local Bars!<<

NuBus,

You might wish to consider the added dimension of proportion when pondering issues such as this. You will find in life that not all things are equally bad, and conversely, not all things are equally good. For instance, having an ingrown toenail is bad, but having terminal cancer of the liver is much worse.

Likewise, cassette copying of intellectual property was a problem, but distribution via the internet (along with the ease of CD burning to extremely inexpensive media) is much, much worse.

Cassette copying of LPs and CDs had built in limitations. It was a time consuming PITA, so you either had to be really good friends with the person who had the original to either get them to do the work, or trust you enough to let you borrow the LP or CD. So, you were limited to what your circle of friends had. Additionally, if you were in a circle of friends who actively traded stuff, you had to actually buy some stuff once in awhile so that you had something to trade. Nobody wants to be known as a cheapskate. Furthermore, copied material didn't travel all that well. Not many people wanted copies of copies of copies of cassettes. It didn't take too long for things to sound awful.

Using Napster and/or cloning CDs is quite a different animal. Bandwidth is rapidly increasing, and it won't be long before attaching a CD's worth of music to an email will be as easy as sending a joke today. The same will eventually be true for video. Certainly, even if there is *no* money in it, people will continue to make music, but it seems to me that the breadth and scope of projects will diminish. If the record and movie companies put up their own free sites, I doubt they'll be able to finance things by simply running an advertising banner at the top of their homepage. Perhaps the music business will become more like public radio and TV with constant appeals for support, and pledge drives. Perhaps Limp Bizkit will become a non-profit, tax deductible charity.

BTW, regarding Metallica charging bands for playing their songs at local bars, it may come as a surprise to you, but they already do. It's called ASCAP and BMI. Some club owners aren't particulary happy about these payments. I recall playing at a bar where the owner pasted up ASCAP bumper stickers in the urinals.

In the final analysis, NuBus, just think about where you'd be if all the illegal piracy wasn't going on. With the extra revenue, you might be able to buy yourself a new computer, and you'd have to change your name to PCI.

Lee Blaske

[macguy]

I can't help but wonder if one of the reasons the cost of cd's keeps going up is because of sites like Napster and Mp3. It really is unfair to the consumer for the prices of cd's going up as fast as there are. How will it be before we are paying $20.00 for one cd? End of 2000?

Yes...I know it all boils down to money but I would rather download only the songs I like
that pay $15.00 for a cd with only one decent song on it.

Just some thoughts.

[Eric.D]

I still don`t understand why the record
companies will not end this by drastically,
and i mean "drastically" reduce cd prices..
Greed not napster in the end will be the
reason they fall...

Eric

www.peaksound.com