TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

Artists Share 50,000 Free Music Albums on BitTorrent

With more than 300,000 tracks and 50,000 albums published since its inception, the music publishing website Jamendo holds one the greatest libraries of free music online. A great success story that is in part powered by BitTorrent. From the start the site embraced P2P downloads to save resources and because artists and fans appreciated it.

jamendoWhen we first discovered Jamendo more than 5 years ago the site was hosting 500 albums, mostly from French artists.

Fast forward to today and Jamendo features work from 38,000 artists from all around the world, who together have published 315,000 tracks across 50,000 albums spanning a wide range of genres. Impressive statistics that easily beat some established record labels.

Jamendo is also one of the early advocates of using BitTorrent to share free music. According to Jamendo’s co-founder Pierre Gérard, one of the main reasons to support P2P technology was because the artists thought that it was a good platform to promote their work.

“We were one of the first platforms to provide legal music torrents because the artists on Jamendo wanted to use the P2P networks to share their music and have it discovered. At the beginning it was also a very good solution, very reliable and economical,” Pierre Gérard told TorrentFreak

Even today where bandwidth is relatively cheap Jamendo continues to support BitTorrent downloads, in both OGG and MP3 format for most artists. However, the seeding is no longer taken care of by Jamando, but by artists and fans.


Download directly of via BitTorrent

jamendo

Initiatives like Jamendo offer some much-needed counterbalance to critics who say that there’s virtually no ‘legal’ content on BitTorrent. Jamendo’s artists happily publish their work on all major BitTorrent sites and 315,000 tracks doesn’t appear to be an insignificant amount to us.

Jamendo doesn’t see itself as direct competition to the major record labels, but rather a proponent of a new music industry that empowers artists who share their music freely under a Creative Commons license.

“We are a new opportunity for a new generation of artists, we provide new tools and a new legal framework. Every day, new artists are joining Jamendo. We want to be part of a new organisation of the music distribution where the artists have the choice and can decide how they want to be diffused,” Pierre Gérard said.

Besides from offering a publishing platform, Jamendo also allows users to review albums and to donate directly to the artists if they like what they hear. For some of the popular artists this is a nice tip, but the real value of Jamendo comes from the exposure to thousands of potential fans.

“Jamendo is not American Idol, the promise is not to become a star with Jamendo, we prefer to have thousands of artists who can get new fans, share their music and sometimes make some money. The most popular artists on Jamendo have millions of listens, this is the best rewards they can get.”

Unlike many major labels, Jamendo puts the interests of the artists first, helping them to escape obscurity and be heard by a community of more than 1,000,000 avid music fans. So next time you hear the RIAA or IFPI complaining how BitTorrent ruins the lives of artists, remember that there are tens of thousands of musicians who disagree.

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

  • http://randumbness.blog.com Elisa ? Knockout™

    Jamnedo really is cool it’s great for artist who hate labels:)

    • http://tinyurl.com/ANoiXioNA-personal-info ANoiXioNA

      Free music – More horrid than piracy

      The big labels worst nightmare……

      • Elisa ? Knockout™

        Riaa=’s They’re too involved in suing and creating more enemies then customers/consumers and fans!Those poor labels losing out on ripping people off and blaming file sharers.(Total sarcasm!!) Hopefully there will no longer be an industry and everyone will go indie. Making money for themselves.

    • Anonymous

      It is good to see TF promoting lawful free media.

      Beyond the common fight over copyright laws then Creative Commons provides artists and producers with a good example of the benefits of a world resource of freely shared media for public enjoyment, artist promotion or a resource of ideas.

      In this copyright war we can either win though law changes or through the creation of a market that is by default free. Since we lack the resources to lobby and bribe politicians than the second and not the first method seems a more likely path to victory.

      As I often say then these days artists should focus on selling an experience and not their music, and to let people encounter and enjoy their creations for free, but that does not mean you still cannot make money from selling music.

      People would often still buy what they enjoy. So why should they be forced to pay for what they did not enjoy? Just see Lady Gaga fans as an example when she does not mind them sharing her music. All part of the experience.

      • Elisa ? Knockout™

        lol my brothers a musician I’m his groupie haha.But really music is a part of life it’s what keeps us going. I would pick music before I would pick films. I also play some guitar myself and dancing. But it’s the artist who should decide for themselves what they’d like to do. Not the labels that’s what sucks about labels.

        See creating your own label deciding how you want to distribute is your individual freedom. The problem is most people don’t know how or what to do in marketing. When were and how to market themselves.

        So a great alternative as we know it is on-line. Which corporate people can’t seem to grasp for the life of them. I like lady gaga don’t get me wrong i just hate her persona i like her as Stephanie Germanotta not gaga she creeps me out.

      • Elisa ? Knockout™

        lol my brothers a musician I’m his groupie haha.But really music is a part of life it’s what keeps us going. I would pick music before I would pick films. I also play some guitar myself and dancing. But it’s the artist who should decide for themselves what they’d like to do. Not the labels that’s what sucks about labels.

        See creating your own label deciding how you want to distribute is your individual freedom. The problem is most people don’t know how or what to do in marketing. When were and how to market themselves.

        So a great alternative as we know it is on-line. Which corporate people can’t seem to grasp for the life of them. I like lady gaga don’t get me wrong i just hate her persona i like her as Stephanie Germanotta not gaga she creeps me out.

      • Josh C

        While I dropped Gaga because she is, literally, turning into a monster, I’m pretty sure file-sharing will continue to get her fans (and I’m sure her 520489924892 record labels will try to whip to view out of her :D)

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

        There’s others out there.

        Dmusic.com
        Magnatune.com
        Turntable.fm
        Spotify.com

        Just to name a few. ANYTHING is better than what the major labels are doing. Now, off to listen to Kendra Springer.

    • Ugly American

      OMG, think of all of those “lost sales” – the end of the world is near! Gasp!

      Heh, where are the Mafiaa trolls with their bullshit “arguments” now?

      • Elisa ? Knockout™

        lmao, I know right those poor labels losing out!!! They argue even when we have alternatives like Vulture looking for pray. Actually they are vultures!
        I think i just found a new term for mafiaa :P

  • http://twitter.com/K1rkpad Dylan Kirkpatrick

    I haven’t heard about this site in while. Thanks for bringing it back to public light!

  • http://twitter.com/K1rkpad Dylan Kirkpatrick

    I haven’t heard about this site in while. Thanks for bringing it back to public light!

  • http://twitter.com/K1rkpad Dylan Kirkpatrick

    I haven’t heard about this site in while. Thanks for bringing it back to public light!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000345113163 Neal Bhalodia

    Seems like a nice site and its a win-win for both the fan and the artist as one gets free content and the other gets there work exposed.

  • puddipuddi

    Thank you Jamendo. Because of legal services like you, they will never be able to bring bittorent down :):):)

    • Anon

      Digital software, used lawfully, rocks. It’s the pirates using bittorrent illegally who have smeared its good name.

      • http://tinyurl.com/ANoiXioNA-personal-info ANoiXioNA

        No…. the antipirates like yourself have smeared bittorrent’s name……..
        Just like you are smearing filesharers now……..

        You support laws for the rich few….. And everyone else are criminals for sharing..

        The antipirates are the true criminals…. Lying , limiting access , limiting development , limiting freedom of speech , limiting freedom of expression , buying laws for the rich at the expense of the poor…..
        Need I go on…?

        Well all i can say to finish is……..

        The next time someone dies because a copyrighted drug was restricted……..
        due to that person being poor…….
        I hope your… sad ass… trolling…greedy…selfish.. conscience eats a hole in brain

        • Ven

          I would just like to point out that Jamendo is attempting to support distribution rights:

          “We want to be part of a new organisation of the music distribution where the artists have the choice and can decide how they want to be diffused.”

          They aren’t fighting a good fight against copyright law, or even the RIAA.

        • Guest123

          “The next time someone dies because a copyrighted drug was restricted……..
          due to that person being poor…….
          I hope your… sad ass… trolling…greedy…selfish.. conscience eats a hole in brain”

          Better to have few people dying due to lack of money than many dying due to lack of medicine.

          To put the question bluntly, who’s going to pony up the massive amounts of cash needed for medicine development if not companies? The government runs nothing efficiently, so that’s pretty far out of the question. If we do need companies to make the medicines, as it seems we do, what is their motivation if they don’t have a guaranteed chance to make a profit? It takes tens of millions of dollars and decades of testing in order to make just one medicine (and that’s assuming that it’s accepted by the FDA).

          What solution do you know of that’s better than the current one? I’ll take some time to research any answer you give me, but I haven’t ever heard of a good solution.

        • ForFreedom

          Piracy is like cheating your slave master, it may be morally justified but you’re still a slave … if we want sustainable solution and to break free from the copyright moguls we need to stop giving them money and give it to libre music/movies instead … how come Lady Gaga makes millions of dollars while artists on jamendo with millions of listens get few dollars? Until we pirates give money where our mouth is, all of this tough talk is worthless … Pioneer One is struggling to get $60,000 while 3,000,000 have seen it … wtf is that? Until we change this, the copyright thugs saying that pirates are just cheap to pay the artists might have a point …

        • zenithmaster

          I would like to point out that this is a bad analogy, which only confuses the issue. Medicines are patented, not copyrighted. Of course, there are similarities in that they are both exclusive rights, but a patent is not the same as copyright.

        • zenithmaster

          I would like to point out that this is a bad analogy, which only confuses the issue. Medicines are patented, not copyrighted. Of course, there are similarities in that they are both exclusive rights, but a patent is not the same as copyright.

        • http://twitter.com/icanhazsake Ninja

          Well said anoix.

          @Guest123: once ppl realize it’s not about plain endless profit then we can talk. We need a change of mentality before we can find alternatives to the current system.

          And the analogy with medicine is flawed simply because making music invloves much less testing, analyzing components and organic interactions and so on. You can’t even begin to compare the scale of complexity. And yet there are examples of State funded researches at universities (here in Brazil at least) that are developing and working wonders. And there are failed examples but c’est la vie.

          Music can be made in the bar with your friends while you get yourself drunk to a complete brain halt. It can be done to express your emotions. It can be done for the pleasure of being done (not that drug research can’t be done this way but you need loads of money to sustain the thing). So you’ve made a good song and someone goes “DUDE, LET’S RECORD THIS AWESOME SHIT!” then MAYBE you have to put some money if you want to do fully professional recording (and believe me, it’s not that much because I’ve hired professional video edition and it’s not that expensive). So yes, music can be made for free, just for the passion.

          The solution is simple. Pioneer One. Zenith. Fan funded stuff. Shows. Ppl will throw money your way if you do it right and with love. You might not earn gazillions as the top artists earn today but you can surely make a living.

        • http://tinyurl.com/ANoiXioNA-personal-info ANoiXioNA

          @ Guest123 /

          Better to have few people dying due to lack of money than many dying due to lack of medicine.
          …….
          who’s going to pony up the massive amounts of cash needed for medicine development if not companies?
          ……
          What solution do you know of that’s better than the current one? I’ll take some time to research any answer you give me, but I haven’t ever heard of a good solution.

          That argument is weak at best… and is the same as … without copyright … no one would ever make anything…

          Take some time to read the link I posted………………
          from the link :

          Absent patents, there would be even more innovation.
          As Robert Weissman from Public Citizen, quoted by Masnick, notes:

          “ Of course there are no competing suppliers — why would any firm try to enter a market it believed closed by a patent monopoly?”
          Companies avoid engaging in R&D in patented markets. Of course, this is one reason patents distort the market and R&D, as explained by Rothbard and others.

          @ zenithmaster /

          patent / copyright…. more or less the EXACT same thing…
          The limitation of the right to copy…manufacture…

          “distribution right” does not apply to patents…. but thats the only difference…
          and they are usually added to “patented drug supplies” anyway…..

        • Guest123

          @Ninja

          Anoinoixa was the one who brought up medical drugs, not me. I’m not going to judge them by the same standards. I don’t even thing we should judge different types of culture (music and videogames) by the same standards. What works for one won’t necessarily work for the others

          @anoinoixa

          Well, I have taken the time to read the link (I apologize for not reading it in the first place. The nature of the internet has made me treat all links with suspicion. Goatse only needs to happen once), and I still find problems with their arguments. I’ll address a few things that they say that have notable problems

          “wouldn’t a simpler and more direct solution be to remove the costs already imposed on them by the state–taxes, regulations, FDA process”

          This is a nice idea, but the blog doesn’t address how you would reduce these things. Taxes could feasibly be removed, but regulations and FDA processes can’t be without problems arising. The regulations are meant to keep a standard of ethics in medical research, and the FDA processes are meant to test whether or not the drugs A. do what the companies claim they do; and B. work better than any gold standard already present in the market. I don’t see them making any argument about how costs on these could be reduced. Even more importantly, these don’t address the main cost in pharmaceutical research; the long process of discovery, development and synthesis.

          “of near-simultaneous invention occurring, but the first to file (or invent, depending on the jurisdiction) gets the monopoly. Absent patents, they would all be able to take products to market.”

          That’s not the main problem that medical companies are concerned with. The concern isn’t of rival companies developing similar medicines; the concern is with companies that will take the designs created by other companies, impose small changes and market them much closer to manufacturing cost (the same way generic drugs are marketed after current patents expire).

          I’ll put this as simply as possible; the big problem in pharmaceutical development isn’t improvement on current designs, which does happen, but creation of entirely new drugs that have different mechanisms than current ones. This is a problem to the tune of tens of millions of dollars and over a decade of research per drug (and that’s assuming it works like you want it to and it’s approved by the FDA). The problem isn’t R&D in patented markets; it’s the massive cost of expansion into uncovered markets.

          The article you provided spends more time talking about the use of compulsory licenses over the use of injunction. That’s an entirely different issue, and one that deserves serious consideration. I’d have to do more research to really understand what the benefits would be, but from their discussion, it seems like that would be a wonderful way of handling the shortage of medicine problem. Even with that though, the issue isn’t creation of new drugs, it’s the use of current drugs by organizations other than the creating company.

        • Guest123

          @Ninja

          Also, it would be nice if people worked for something other than money, but we’re trying to make real world solutions, so we have to obey the way things work in the real world. It’s harsh, and I do wish people had different motivations, but if we make laws and changes expecting those motivations, we’ll achieve disappointing results.

        • http://tinyurl.com/ANoiXioNA-personal-info ANoiXioNA

          @ Guest123

          American Red Cross 2008 : Total Income $3,204,146,000
          ( that’s just one (of the hundreds) American charity )

          The money for drug development is there ….. if the patents are not….

          It will still cost 1 billion approx , and take 15 years to TEST …..
          ( i haven’t even mentioned government grants )

          I think you might over estimate the difficulty , of the process … that is …making drugs……
          It is pot-luck…..
          The “”research”" is not on the creation of a drug….but in the testing of it’s effects..

          It is an interesting subject…. which can be seen partly in a documentary…

          Watch a clip : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TofWiovftMY

          or search. google…….
          BBC.Horizon.2010.Pill.Poppers.

          extract:
          Drug discovery often owes as much to serendipity as to science, and that means much is learnt about how medicines work, or even what they do, when they’re taken. By investigating some of the most popular pills people pop, Horizon asks, how much can they be trusted to do what they are supposed to?

        • Ven

          “I think you might over estimate the difficulty , of the process … that is …making drugs……”

          He is factoring in the risk vs. reward that a company will look at before spending a billion dollars waiting for it to come back a decade from now. The higher the initial investment, the longer the fruition period, the higher projected profits need to be. Otherwise, people would go invest elsewhere.

          I think Guest123 is right on in this case.

        • Guest123

          @anonionixa

          It seems as if we’re both reaching the end of this debate/argument, so I’ll end with a few final things.

          “The “”research”" is not on the creation of a drug….but in the testing of it’s effects..”

          I’m afraid there is a little more to it then that. There are a few steps to creating drugs. The first is discovering the compound, and depending on what they have to begin with (oftentimes they dissect the materials in plants or animal toxins with odd effects), this can be moderately costly. The next step, which usually costs a lot more, is finding a reliable method of mass synthesis. Finding a drug that cured cancer would be useless if we couldn’t mass-produce it. This step is less prone to spontaneous innovation than the first one, and can often accumulate massive costs. You are correct that testing is a massive factor in the cost, but changing patent laws won’t change that reality.

          And here’s the thing about that Red Cross money; all that’s already going into the medical research system. There will be no additional gain in money from them if patent laws are changed or revoked, but there will be a loss in money from companies who won’t see the investments as worthwhile without guarantee of the chance to make a profit. There will always be medical research; I’m not saying research will stop, but it’s growth will be slowed. The benefits of lower costs will be outweighed by the penalties of reduced initial development. The solution proposed in that blog you linked to, forcing companies to accept money and let someone else produce the medicine if they are unable to meet needs themselves, seems more reasonable then an upturn of the patent system.

        • Guest123

          @anonionixa

          It seems as if we’re both reaching the end of this debate/argument, so I’ll end with a few final things.

          “The “”research”" is not on the creation of a drug….but in the testing of it’s effects..”

          I’m afraid there is a little more to it then that. There are a few steps to creating drugs. The first is discovering the compound, and depending on what they have to begin with (oftentimes they dissect the materials in plants or animal toxins with odd effects), this can be moderately costly. The next step, which usually costs a lot more, is finding a reliable method of mass synthesis. Finding a drug that cured cancer would be useless if we couldn’t mass-produce it. This step is less prone to spontaneous innovation than the first one, and can often accumulate massive costs. You are correct that testing is a massive factor in the cost, but changing patent laws won’t change that reality.

          And here’s the thing about that Red Cross money; all that’s already going into the medical research system. There will be no additional gain in money from them if patent laws are changed or revoked, but there will be a loss in money from companies who won’t see the investments as worthwhile without guarantee of the chance to make a profit. There will always be medical research; I’m not saying research will stop, but it’s growth will be slowed. The benefits of lower costs will be outweighed by the penalties of reduced initial development. The solution proposed in that blog you linked to, forcing companies to accept money and let someone else produce the medicine if they are unable to meet needs themselves, seems more reasonable then an upturn of the patent system.

        • Mike

          That pretty much wraps it up – but the guy is a paid for troll and they are so dumb they think posting here will help them. He thinks he is educating people on here by letting them know there is laws. Like people don’t know already.

          I have watched all these anons on here there is many more of late being paid to stir things up. The site may wish to begin deleting these ridiculous one liner posts. They are not debate they just say there is laws follow them or else. How does that help?

          It may be a wise policy to simply place under these posts TROLL from now on.

        • Mike

          That pretty much wraps it up – but the guy is a paid for troll and they are so dumb they think posting here will help them. He thinks he is educating people on here by letting them know there is laws. Like people don’t know already.

          I have watched all these anons on here there is many more of late being paid to stir things up. The site may wish to begin deleting these ridiculous one liner posts. They are not debate they just say there is laws follow them or else. How does that help?

          It may be a wise policy to simply place under these posts TROLL from now on.

        • Pride

          Congratulations Mike, you missed the entire point of debate. How are we supposed to improve our ideas without someone attacking them? More importantly, how can we call ourselves an open and intelligent community when we attack anyone who could possibly pose a challenge to our arguments?

          Why is the first response to everyone who disagrees with us “the opposition is paying them to post here”? That doesn’t make any sense. They don’t have any signs of being paid trolls except for disagreeing with us. I mean, really think about it. If I were paying people to post on sites to try and convince people, I’d have them cite research studies, talk about statistics, and do stuff to make them look intelligent, at least in the eyes of the people they might convince. Honestly, this has to be our most escapist argument.

          Have you ever considered that maybe someone just doesn’t like the pirate solution to the problem? It is really so inconceivable that someone could look at the situation and disagree with us, maybe not about everything, but about our basic solution to the problem? It’s not like this website is hidden from everyone who disagrees with us. It shows up on the Digg front page every other week or so. Anyone could see it and come here.

          In short Mike, shut the hell up until you have something even moderately productive to say.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

          @Ven the ridiculous problem with our copyright law makes Jamendos distribution rights necessary. We wouldn’t need Creative Commons at all if copyright wasn’t as stringent as it is now.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

          @Guest123 Medicine is not as expensive as you seem to believe. The fact is, patent law makes it MORE expensive because it holds back the people that would compete to make it cheaper. BTW, I’m criticizing your POV that the rich somehow deserve more preferential treatment than those suffering because of inane laws that are truly anticompetitive.

          Should the debate continue, I’ll post links that describe how the pharmaceutical industry flubs the numbers in order to keep their monopoly. If not, know that your reasoning is quite flawed.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

          @Guest123 Medicine is not as expensive as you seem to believe. The fact is, patent law makes it MORE expensive because it holds back the people that would compete to make it cheaper. BTW, I’m criticizing your POV that the rich somehow deserve more preferential treatment than those suffering because of inane laws that are truly anticompetitive.

          Should the debate continue, I’ll post links that describe how the pharmaceutical industry flubs the numbers in order to keep their monopoly. If not, know that your reasoning is quite flawed.

        • Guest123

          Ok Jay, I’ll bite. How does copyright reduce innovation to a greater degree than it rewards innovation? Remember, most therapeutic innovations come about as a result of the creation of new molecular entities, or NMEs, not improvement on current molecular designs. These NMEs are also the most costly form of research, costing up to $800 million per successful drug, and I can give a link to a study to prove that claim.

          http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/76xx/doc7615/10-02-DrugR-D.pdf
          (First section and third section.)

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

          @Guest123 “How does copyright reduce innovation to a greater degree than it rewards innovation? ”

          Copyright is an a term used to settle distribution rights. Nowadays, with cheap technology, the costs of putting up a webcam, making videos, or distributing a work is pennies on the dollar in reaching an audience. In terms of funding, there are newer ways to do so. Kickstarter has shown a great amount of success along with Rockethub in funding money without the shady deals of the entertainment industry. Rick Falkvinge’s main point about there being more “copyrighted works” being created than enforcement can punish is still spot on however.

          This is mainly an aside, since I’m sure you’re talking about patent law, given everything that we’re discussing in terms of medicine.

          “Remember, most therapeutic innovations come about as a result of the creation of new molecular entities, or NMEs, not improvement on current molecular designs. ”

          I’m not sure how that’s necessarily relevant to the entire medicine industry, but ok…

          Let’s find out what happens when a patent is given. We’ll take one that is fairly recent. Makena is used for birth control. Thing is, not a lot of people understand what a patent does. It’s effectively anti-free market. Once you give a company a patent, they will jack up the price to all kinds of retarded. Which is exactly what happened with Makena. I mean, you had a drug that was on the market for YEARS for $10 shoot up to $1500 overnight!

          The people that would make the drug went from competitors to pirates. Same thing that happens in other industries.

          Now, let’s get into copyright for about 5 seconds. Let’s think about all of the collateral damage that BREIN, the RIAA/MPAA do in order to protect their copyrights.

          They have destroyed the lives of Whitney Harper, Joel Tenenbaum, and Jammie Thomass-Rasset in the US. The lives of Richard O Dwyer is being split apart on the extradition charges for breaking *US* copyright law from the UK.

          The sue em all strategy netted them $390K when they spent $3 million in suing in 2008. The lobbying that they do for the DMCA, the NET Act, PIPA, and the Six Strikes legislation is upwards of $10 million in the past decade. The DMCA is used and abused to take down competitors, silence free speech, look into people’s private lives, and show us all of the chilling effects. People can’t use music on Youtube because X label has an issue.

          And just so you know, the inflated numbers of big pharma R&D are greatly exaggerated – http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110626/17115214866/priced-out-your-medication-must-be-all-that-expensive-big-pharma-rd.shtml

          I could go on, but I believe that’s enough for now.

        • Guest123

          @Jay

          Your aside about the entertainment industry was interesting, but as you guessed, I meant to say patent. My mistake there.

          “”Remember, most therapeutic innovations come about as a result of the creation of new molecular entities, or NMEs, not improvement on current molecular designs. ”

          I’m not sure how that’s necessarily relevant to the entire medicine industry, but ok…”

          This is important because it’s the heart of pharmaceutical research. This is how they make new drugs. They need to make new molecular designs, not just improve on old ones. It’s the most beneficial aspect of pharmaceutical research. Read section one of that CBO report I linked to. They explain it quite well.

          About the Makena issue, there is a quote from a Washington Post article that I want you to read.

          “The Food and Drug Administration took the unusual step Wednesday of announcing that it would not stop pharmacies from continuing to produce less expensive versions of the drug, which had long been available for $10 to $20 a dose.”

          There are mechanisms in place to deal with abuse of the patent system. One anecdote does not damn a system. That’s not to mention that Makena is not an example of the typical path a medicine through development. In addition the article that you linked to doesn’t have all the information it needs to be complete. It talks about how often researchers in academia publish papers in comparison to researchers in industries and then takes that as a marker for what production of drugs must be as well.

          You seem more interested in talking about how copyright law relates to music then you do talking about the connection between patents and pharmaceutical research. That’s not really what this discussion was about, and you can’t take examples from one and use them as markers for the other. If you really want to talk about medical research, do that. If not, talk to someone else, because I’m not here to talk about music right now.

        • Guest123

          One thing I forgot to put in; it’s true that there is abuse in the current system. That’s no secret, and I’m not going to argue that abuse and corruption does not exist. However, I see no evidence that your proposed system (whatever your proposed system may be) will be any better.

          In fact, that’s what I’d like. State what changes you think there should be, and then say what you think the effects of these changes will be. Let’s see your better system and compare it to the current one. It’s a thought experiment.

      • Elisa ? Knockout™

        Without pirates you wouldn’t have an industry stop whining!!

      • Anonymous

        It’s not illegal everywhere jj.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FCNK7C55CBUYFVSC5LNWKB322E Buglord

    hmm.. I gotta finish making my music, get it up there, maybe get some feedback on what I could do improve..

  • Guest

    300,000 tracks / 50,000 albums = 6-track albums o,o

    • Anonymous

      Not everyone makes an album. :-)

      I would even start to wonder if these days producing an album is an outdated concept.

    • Ven

      It’s all EPs that bands put out trying to get a contract. Or people who just don’t want to punch out 10-12 songs at a time.

      There is quite a bit of philosophy about releasing EPs instead of full-length albums.

      • http://twitter.com/icanhazsake Ninja

        I call them singles. It’s fairly common in Japan to have albums (singles) with 2-4 songs (half of them are often karaoke versions lmao). Some ppl may call those things albums, who knows.

        • Ven

          It’s common to see them happen still. Usually they are done by up and coming bands that can’t afford the cost of a full 12 songs in a studio. So instead they record their strongest, and release it.

          Recently however we have seen several cases of established artists releasing short albums at full album price.

  • Superfrique

    Jamendo is a great service. Not everything there is good music or suits my tastes, but it helps musicians gain exposure and the general public discover new music they would otherwise have missed. Sounds like a win/win to me!

    • Razza

      Agreed. The only real problem I have with it is that there isn’t any filter between the good and the bad. As with most endeavor, the majority of the music is crap, and finding the good stuff can be frustrating.

      • http://twitter.com/icanhazsake Ninja

        I might second that. But isn’t it the same with MAFIAA music these days?

  • Superfrique

    Jamendo is a great service. Not everything there is good music or suits my tastes, but it helps musicians gain exposure and the general public discover new music they would otherwise have missed. Sounds like a win/win to me!

  • http://tinyurl.com/niceskirt-srsly w3ts1ut

    Hey don’t forget Libre.FM – http://alpha.libre.fm/

    I no longer draw lines between legal and illegal with respect to art, good art that deserves to be shared with others regardless of 3rd party limitations. /me goes off to download more.

  • http://tinyurl.com/niceskirt-srsly w3ts1ut

    Hey don’t forget Libre.FM – http://alpha.libre.fm/

    I no longer draw lines between legal and illegal with respect to art, good art that deserves to be shared with others regardless of 3rd party limitations. /me goes off to download more.

  • Pingback: P2PTalk » Artists Share 50,000 Free Music Albums on BitTorrent

  • Robttwo

    OK – I make my living making music. I love people to hear my original stuff, and love people to see me perform. But at some point, I need to get paid. This IS my job. I have put in 20+ years of education, training, practicing, and working hard. No one expects you to come to my house and fix my plumbing for free, or repair my car, or setup my computer. Yes, the record companies are, for the most part, incompetent thieves. But please do me a favor – if you listen to someone, and dig their stuff – then buy it, go to their concerts, and share them with your friends. If you don’t, you are basically just a selfish asshole who thinks they deserve something for nothing.
    As far as copyrights, patents, etc. It’s completely ridiculous to think people who invent or create something aren’t entitled to own their idea. When did ideas become less “ownable” than a car or a house? Is this abused? Of course it is. But for the most part it’s the only protection creative people have AGAINST corporations. You really need to see it that way.
    By the way – if you think “art” is easy, or should just be “free” – trying making some sometime.

    • Razza

      Yeah, I don’t think so. There are very, very VERY few pieces of music that preform far enough above the norm as to be actually worth paying for on its own merits. I don’t really care if you “need” to be paid. It’s your responsibility to come up with a business model that actually gives people a reason to pay. We’re not just going to give you charity; there will be no donations from us. You have to give us some service in order to earn any payment.

      Culture should be free. If you need money, either get a real job or monetize your stuff by offering a service. If doing all that is too much for you to handle, you probably weren’t capable of working hard enough to make good music anyway.

      In short, don’t come here begging for money. All it says it that you aren’t good enough to earn it on your own.

      • Anon

        Ignorance like this is what fuels the artists to seek their own control of distribution. It’s what fuels government to pass laws against you, it’s what inspires law enforcement to overwhelm you and the courts to punish you so severely it permanently changes your life and this kind of deeply fucked up ignorance is the BEST PublicRelations the industry could ever hope or want or pray for. With Razza puking up entitled trash like this in a public forum, the industry will always have what they need to compel legislative support with the vast majority sensing in their gut as long as Razza walks this earth, the laws are absolutely right.

        And getting righter. Razza kudos for a sheer and stunning stupidity we couldn’t make up.

      • Anon

        Ignorance like this is what fuels the artists to seek their own control of distribution. It’s what fuels government to pass laws against you, it’s what inspires law enforcement to overwhelm you and the courts to punish you so severely it permanently changes your life and this kind of deeply fucked up ignorance is the BEST PublicRelations the industry could ever hope or want or pray for. With Razza puking up entitled trash like this in a public forum, the industry will always have what they need to compel legislative support with the vast majority sensing in their gut as long as Razza walks this earth, the laws are absolutely right.

        And getting righter. Razza kudos for a sheer and stunning stupidity we couldn’t make up.

        • Dudeguyperson

          @ Anon: you know i don’t find myself agreeing with you alot. i’m a pirate through and through. i like to get shit for free. but you are making more and more sense every time i read your posts. your not a troll or a shill, your just a dude siting on the other side of the fence with a different opinion. i respect that.

          now i’m not going to stop pirating anytime soon. i just wanted you to know that their are some of us that really do believe in free speech even if it means reading things that we don’t agree with. i hope you keep posting intelligent posts.

        • Razza

          Honestly, I don’t care about law enforcement. They arrest and prosecute a minuscule amount of people each year, and I’m using a good amount of security (not to mention that I have the means to put up a mean fight in court). In short, I won’t be caught, so it doesn’t matter to me. Laws mean nothing without a mode of enforcement. Read up on the social contract.

          And if anyone else does get caught, I have no pity for them (except for minors). It doesn’t take much to avoid detection.

          The entire point of filesharing is that we don’t have to pay artists for their entitled crap. Digital goods are, by definition, worthless because they can be infinitely replicated. He comes here asking for charity, I’m going to say no. My charity money will go to people in real need, like food kitchens or clothing programs, not some entitled artist who doesn’t know how to monetize his work enough to make it actually worth paying for.

          Finally, more people share my views than you think. Many more. People like me aren’t going to push people away from legalization, we’re going to drive it, because we can see how illogical the laws are.

        • Anon

          @Razza.

          “Digital goods are, by definition, worthless because they can be infinitely replicated.”

          You’ll need a citation for ignorance like that, Razza.

          Not only does it ignore the costs of nurturing talent and education, it also sets aside every element of creation, business, production, advertising and presentation and a host of other line items in the professional world of entertainment. When YOU can open a movie that brings in $300 million the first weekend then you’ll be paid commensurately to your talent and contributions, too. Until then, you don’t even appear to comprehend basic economics.

          If what you really want is amateur free stuff a kid knocks out on his laptop and puts up on YouTube, you are welcome to that and there is a place for all kinds of creation. Just leave the for-sale stuff alone and nobody loses their freedoms.

          But your pointless ignorance contrasts to Amazon, iTunes, an entire regatta of lawful PAID sources made insanely successful by thoughtful, honest, respectful people the world over. Making an unlawful copy may make you disrespect entertainment files as “worthless” but you’ll never eliminate the gut feeling of worth from the people who knock themselves out at work everyday making the movies and books, games and digital music from true professionals who live in a world of hard work, joyous creation, a true pride and a genuine mutual respect that a spoiled asshat like you will never comprehend.

          Keep it up Razza. Diminish the discussion to “they’ll never catch me.” That’s exactly what law enforcement is praying for and you, sir, are deeply fucked up and exactly why we are losing our online rights.

      • Robttwo

        What an ignorant, selfish bastard.

        • Anon

          lol truly. The poster boy of public pirate asswipe. lol

    • Elisa ? Knockout™

      I am in between liking and disliking your comment. You pose this general assumption that all pirates are all out there to just rip you off which, infact is not true at all.

      But first before i get to that point let me just say this, “when file sharer share it’s because we like that artist.” wouldn’t it be a better feeling to be liked then hated?
      I mean when i download. I listen to what i like, if i come across something later on in the future i might make a purchase.

      Secondly what if there were no computers this day and age and still music was only viewed on t.v. or the record store? It would be word of mouth because someone was sharing that name and then let you borrow that record cd etc!!

      How did Metallica handle the situation, when they turned against fans during the napster days as I’ve read? They lost a once great audience because they went against their fans. Always remember it’s your fans that made you. It’s your fans that support you etc.

      Back to pirates. We are your greatest supporters don’t forget that. We like something we tell others. Will share. so just saying that we’re stealing when infact listening to something or someone is generally able to speak. Shouldn’t have such a high price or ways of restricting, that poses a barrier of hate and regret something that just angers us all.

      Maybe ask the industry why they “claim” they’re losing money maybe if they shared what was originally supposed to be heard, is not something that should be restricted. So basically the industry should be considered the pirate not us the general public.

      • Ven

        “But first before i get to that point let me just say this, “when a file sharer shares, it’s because we like that artist.” wouldn’t it be a better feeling to be liked then hated?”

        Yes, hundreds of millions of people adore Rebecca Black. The reality is that people share for all kinds of reasons, from love to hate to needing seeds so they can leech.

        “Secondly what if there were no computers this day and age and still music was only viewed on t.v. or the record store? It would be word of mouth because someone was sharing that name and then let you borrow that record cd etc!!”

        How does computers change that? It is easier than ever to listen, research, buy, or steal music, but how does that change anything?

        “How did Metallica handle the situation, when they turned against fans during the napster days as I’ve read? They lost a once great audience because they went against their fans. Always remember it’s your fans that made you. It’s your fans that support you etc.”

        If my “fans” don’t support me enough to respect my distribution wishes on my works, then they aren’t fans worth keeping. Even if money is not the goal of creation, supporting fans wouldn’t do it.

        If you hate what business models do to music, don’t listen it. I am an artist, and until the laws change, I’m going to be working in music in an attempt to support my family. I’ve spent years studying, practicing, and investing in it. I’m sorry that I don’t share your values, but nobody is forcing you to be my fan. You have plenty of alternatives so you can pirate your brains out without infringing on my rights.

        • Elisa ? Knockout™

          Why are you automatically assuming i pirate I’m a gypsy dammit lol. I come from a big family of entertainers.I am also a singer, dancer and musician I have no problem with the way music is distributed thank you very much!!!

          Secondly this day and age well atleast my generation shares by computers.etc.
          If you think people still go to the record store go back to that time.

          “Secondly what if there were no computers this day and age and still music was only viewed on t.v. or the record store? It would be word of mouth because someone was sharing that name and then let you borrow that record cd etc!!”

          How does computers change that? It is easier than ever to listen, research, buy, or steal music, but how does that change anything?

          It changes because back then, that’s how sharing went. This day and age
          computers make it way easier to find out about artist and possibly learn more about the artist etc. Dealing with the public you have to expect it.

          If my “fans” don’t support me enough to respect my distribution wishes on my works, then they aren’t fans worth keeping. Even if money is not the goal of creation, supporting fans wouldn’t do it.

          ARE YOU THERE JUST TO MAKE MONEY AND SAY “SCREW MY FANS?” How is file sharing not supporting you?

          Now you say,
          If you hate what business models do to music, don’t listen it. I am an artist, and until the laws change, I’m going to be working in music in an attempt to support my family. I’ve spent years studying, practicing, and investing in it. I’m sorry that I don’t share your values, but nobody is forcing you to be my fan. You have plenty of alternatives so you can pirate your brains out without infringing on my rights.

          That’s very insulting not even knowing who i am or what i do and what my family is. You make me and everyone in the file sharing world sound like crooks!!!
          We don’t steal we share and maybe your outdated business model NO LONGER WORKS. What happened to managers distributors reps etc, and also not relying on selling cd’s.

          Because no one buys cd’s anymore you can’t force people into the old ways of outdated business models.My generation is different we use computers!! we share, we explore, we listen and we buy. So thank you flat out accusing people of stealing your music.

    • Nemo

      I am going to be a university student starting in the fall semester. I’m not gonna have a significant amount of money to spare, but there is a fairly large metal venue nearby which is a popular address for artists visiting my country. Given that I won’t be swimming in extra cash I’m certainly not gonna shell out $30 to listen to the two albums a touring band has released to find out whether I like them and want to go see them: I’m gonna download their albums, and if I like what I hear I’m gonna go see them. If I don’t their music will fly right off my hard drive, it’s too full to keep shit on it. If I really like an artist and I NEED a new shirt I’ll also fork out the cash for a tour shirt, but asking me to pay to find out whether I even like a band is like asking you to pay a plumber/car mechanic upfront only to find out he didn’t actually fix your plumbing/car. No one expects you to do that, instead you pay on completion of a job well done. I expect to do the same.

      • Ven

        Name the band, and let us all find out how much music of theirs can be streamed legally from their site/Myspace/Youtube channels.

        I would wholeheartedly understand your logic if the band’s music was not already made available in multiple ways by the band.

    • http://twitter.com/icanhazsake Ninja

      Oh but many of us do buy, go to shows and spend with music and other forms of art.

      You know, a play is something where the artists perform real time some story that was written and rehearsed to be shown live to the public. And they are often recorded and uploaded into youtube.

      I’ve watched many of those either in youtube or other video sites. And many of those I watched on whatever streaming site were gladly attended again, in person, paying for the ticket. Reminds me of one time the guy said “I know you’ll are filming us. SO AT LEAST PUT THAT SHIT ON YOUTUBE AND INVITE YOUR FRIENDS TO COME AND SEE OUR SHOW!”

      I’m going to watch their show for the second time soon. And guess what, I”ve seen it on youtube already.

      Can you see that they are receiving my money?

      And Rob. You are not entitled to your idea. Ideas are public unless you keep them to yourself they’ll spread on the ppl minds. What gives value to one idea is how far, fast and deep they’ll spread. Ppl will want you to have more ideas if you give them good stuff. And that translate to donations, ppl going to your shows and so on.

      I’ve made art already. Sometimes I write some funny and/or insightful texts and I’ve been publishing them randomly in a blog. Never received a dime for that. I also contribute a lot with TF by commenting and giving my 2 cents. “oh but this is not art” oh rly? And you know how much it costs me? A few minutes/hours, some electricity and maybe a drink. Know what I get in exchange? The pleasure of writing/participating. And that’s enough for me.

    • Disgusted

      When a plumber comes to your house and figures out a way to fix your plumbing, do you then pay him every time you flush the toilet or get a drink of water?
      If a carpenter designs and builds a bookcase that you really like and purchase, do you then pay that carpenter every time you use the bookcase?
      Aren’t the carpenter and the plumber entitled to lifelong payments from your use of their work?

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

      “As far as copyrights, patents, etc. It’s completely ridiculous to think people who invent or create something aren’t entitled to own their idea”

      You aren’t. You’re not entitled to profit either. You’re entitled to try and if you fail, try it a different way. Neither copyright nor the people you’re advertising your wares to have a right to see you profit off your work. That’s all you.

      “When did ideas become less “ownable” than a car or a house?”

      When the fact that an idea and the expression of it were divorced from your brain. I’m not being facetious here. Once an idea is divulged, it’s no longer just yours. That’s what a lot of creative types need to understand. If you want to keep it locked away in your head, do so. If you want to profit from it, build something around it. But a song, once sang is gone in an instant. You can perform it again. Hell, a person can listen to a song in their head and you can’t change that. So no, it’s not just your song anymore. If you want people to express interest, build scarcities that people can do so. T-shirts, CDs at concerts, Tickets that change colors in moonlight. The sky is the limit so long as you find a way to have people love you.

      “But for the most part it’s the only protection creative people have AGAINST corporations.”

      False. Johnathan Couture, Trent Reznor, The Foo Fighters, The Black Eyed Peas, Radiohead, and every last artist on Jamendo have found better ways. Now I’m going to be mean. Quit whining and get to work.

      “By the way – if you think “art” is easy, or should just be “free” – trying making some sometime.”

      I write and sell my own fiction. You’ve just been owned.

      • Anonymous

        Very well put sir. And might I ask, what kind of fiction is it you write? I too dabble in writing (poems, songs, short stories, guides, etc.) and am just asking out of curiosity.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

          It’s fantasy, my good sir. I have a particular interest in Tolkienesque lore, with my main plot point being a story told from an orc’s perspective in a world that constantly changes around him. It’s mainly for fun, but I’m getting more and more clamorings to continue so…

        • Anonymous

          Hmm. Very interesting. I only vaguely know the Tolkienesque lore. But it is amazing, the bits I know and have read about. I guess in a slight way, it’d be comparable to Star Wars perhaps? (Just thinking of it like that so I can kind of put it into perspective of something I do have a slightly better idea of.) Mainly for fun is the best kind of writing. I’ve found if I force it, my work suffers. It comes out sounding forced and tends to suck compared to my other works. That or I end up with writer’s block. Either way, it’s no fun. Stick with it good sir. If you sell it, self-published or otherwise or anything like that, let me know. I’d definitely love to check it out.

  • anoniii

    To Guest123, seeing as I cannot reply to your comment directly. The reason the gov’t doesn’t run much efficiently now is because of corporations and politicians making it so, but it doesn’t have to be that way, and indeed isn’t always so, for instance the Nazi’s ran a pretty efficient gov’t and indeed, they are the reason for a good number of the health services used today, and the medical knowledge today, that arguably wouldn’t exist without them. They put power over corps, the corps didn’t put power over them, as a side note. So no, gov’t can run efficiently if you remove corporate power from the equation. I’m not saying the means that they used to get that knowledge was ethical, because it wasn’t, but a future gov’t run efficiently could do it ethically.

    • Guest123

      Next time, just reply to the person above me and put an @guest123 symbol in. Easier to find.

      The Nazis didn’t run a very efficient research system (many people researched many things that didn’t pan out), they simply threw a nearly unlimited supply of money at it, and more importantly, removed the ethical laws on research. The removal of ethical limits made it much easier for research to get done. After all, it’s really hard to make a medicine when you have to extrapolate what it might do and then test it on animals. If you can just shove it into an unmentionable and look at the results, research becomes much easier.

      It’s true that the Nazis put power of government over corporations, but this can be even worse for research then corporations dictating research. In Germany, the Nazis got to dictate what anyone could choose to research. Saying that a modern day government wouldn’t exercise this power to dictate research doesn’t hold weight. Think of this; a disease comes along that effects a reasonable number of people, but doesn’t cause death or serious injury, just great discomfort. It would be very easy for a government to justify not paying for a cure by saying “it won’t kill anyone”.

      Just remember this; they didn’t work efficiently in the actual research departments, they just had all their limits removed. Programs like T4 and the final solution ran well, but those weren’t the domain of research. It’s not a program that can be emulated, especially not by a democracy (which as we all know is prone to inefficiency). To put this simply, corporations are our best answer. It may not sound good to say, but corporations aren’t inherently evil. Governments… well, that may be different.

  • Pingback: Morning Coffee with David Farrell, July 22

  • Pingback: Artists Share 50000 Free Music Albums on BitTorrent

  • http://www.howardwen.com Howard

    Seems like a great resource for music you could use if you’re an independent filmmaker, or even just someone who dabbles in making video shorts and needs some music for your work.

  • Anonymous

    OH wow, no way man, cool or what?
    http://www.net-privacy.us.tc

  • Needlez

    ok, so i guess this is a stupid pointless thing to some people, and to others it means fighting with all you’ve got. But my only point I’m going to make is that if you try to fight a war with more violence and ignorance then you’re really not making a difference. Its like you’re purposely attacking yourselves because you’re making yourselves look like ignorant little children. And the governments see this and are never going to give us a chance to make a stand or difference. I’m a pirate, but when I have money I go out to a good movie that I’ve pirated a week prior. The reason for this is that the movie theater is expensive, and I have little money, but what’s more is most movies coming out are regurgitated copies of other movies or sequals that are pointless. ( SAW VII ), seriously how many movies does a horror movie maker need to make to make a point? Second I also do understand that yes artists need to make money or they’ll kinda starve or just be poor. So that is why every now and then I’ll buy a CD, not for myself but for a friend or family member, or go to movies. But if you want me to pay for regurgitated “crap” then I’m really sorry, but I wouldn’t pay for it to begin with so you lost no money from me pirating the copy. What we really need to do is push for more artists to use jamendo or something like it, give donations to the artists on jamendo to help jamendo gain more support and more artists. Stop shilling all our hard earned money into things like Macintosh, and Windows. If you want a computer use Linux ubuntu or Mint. Seriously, I can do anything a mac/windows user can. So why not change the worlds thinking about free/ opensource information and programing. This is just my opinion, it may be wrong, but it is mine, and if you agree with it, then you have the right to, if not, then you don’t have to listen or respond. Thank you

  • Pingback: Artists Offer 50,000 Free Music Albums on BitTorrent : P2P ON!

  • Pingback: P2PTalk » Artists Offer 50,000 Free Music Albums on BitTorrent

  • Pingback: : neutek : Artists Offer 50,000 Free Music Albums on BitTorrent

  • Pingback: Artists Share 50,000 Free Music Albums on BitTorrent | Torrents & File Sharing News

  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • 404 Fail: Six Strikes’ Piracy Alternatives Go Missing

    After years of negotiating and planning the “six strikes” copyright alert system finally saw the light...

  • Google Doesn’t Believe Kim Dotcom is Real

    Those who enter Kim Dotcom into Google’s search box will get millions of results. Still, Google...

  • Nintendo’s Miyamoto: Piracy More Concerning Than Used Games Market

    In an interview with Computer and Video Games, Nintendo designer Shigeru Miyamoto says that his company...

  • Monitoring BitTorrent Activity on a Network Using WireShark

    As all readers should know by now, BitTorrent activity is public and can be easily logged...

  • The Pirate Bay Suffers Downtime

    The Pirate Bay is not responding at the moment and most proxies appear to be down...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.