Like the artists mentioned in this article, we have just released my debut album as a FREE HQ Mp3 download.

It was a tough decision for us to make because of the vast amounts spent on the album. We had two of the biggest record producers in the world work on it…. at Peter Gabriel’s Realworld studio and at Abbey Road studio in london.

Despite all that, we recognise the massive potential the internet and free albums in particular offers. We launched last friday and have already had 1000′s of DL’s all over the world.

We are hoping that people like the album enough to come to a show, which is where hopefully my bread and butter will come from.

Come over and download for free.. it takes 2 minutes to DL because we have a dedicated server.

http://www.jackrubinacci.com
Thanks
Jack

If only 38% support it, than the story is that the majority of Swedish artists do NOT want to legalize filesharing. I suspect that artists in other countries are even less happy with it.

[/quote]

They say “Swedish artists” like it’s the artists as a whole, or majority.

If they wanted to say that it was just a few, they should have said “some Swedish artists”.[/quote]

But saying “some Sweedish artists” makes for a clumsy sounding headline. Headlines gotta conserve space, so they don’t go into that much detail. The headline “Sweedish artists” lets you know that some group of Swedish artists of considerable size and influence support filesharing, and then you are supposed to read the article to find out how much.

[/quote]

They say “swedish artists” like it’s the artists as a whole, or majority.

If they wanted to say that it was just a few, they should have said “some swedish artists”.

http://pluking.blogspot.com

Do you mean “don’t want to”? The majority don’t.[/quote]

No where does it say “MOST” artists, just ‘artists’ meaning more then one.

I’m just shocked at the fact that more then half admit to downloading copyrighted material.[/quote]
why? its just downloading who cares. so its illegal, noone cares and they shouldnt.

Do you mean “don’t want to”? The majority don’t.[/quote]

No where does it say “MOST” artists, just ‘artists’ meaning more then one.

I’m just shocked at the fact that more then half admit to downloading copyrighted material.

I do.[/quote]

Ditto.

A recent survey among Swedish musicians has found that 38% of the artists want filesharing to be be legalized. The artists argue that sharing their files on p2p-networks could promote their work, especially in the early stages of their career….

Do you mean “don’t want to”? The majority don’t.

producers and DIRECTORS are the ones who deserve the credit – years after an artist records a song, its the producers, directors, and distributors who are out there in the field defending that music from copyright infringement!!!

So have a heart; give the artist his six weeks pay, and move on; give the rest of your money to the people who really matter: record executives; they always need more money – sometimes even everything else in the world isn’t enough to keep them from getting bored.

Speaking of which, I was watching the news the other day:
Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both vehemently swore they would do an emergency pull-out of Iraq as soon as they took office;
McCain showed off the correspondence-diploma he just got in economics, but bowed out of the race saying “I just love everybody so much – I could never be comfortable knowing the power to invade a country lay within my hands!”
Ron Paul, blipping the radar, has been discovered hosting a Roast Beef cooking show on the Food Network.

I do.

Its out there, so go grab it! its like a penny on the street, if you want it its yours! and if you want to sprinkle pennys all over you can, because their your pennys that you worked for and got darnit!

A product is the property of the consumer when he has bought it:
Media companies are the ONLY ones left in the world who believe they should control what the consumer does with his product he bought, its illigal in some countries to do that tbh but thanks to: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY! Corperations are still allowed to control the consumers. When products are sold, intellectual property should not apply, you cannot sell things and own them at the same time after they have been sold.

Some argue record labels dont sell the intellectual property (the songs/music/movie) to consumers, but the plastic disc and the pictures. well thats illigal aswell to sell something and give away another.. Thats also missleading consumers, again a bad thing.

If they want intellectual property to exist, they cant sell intellectual property and still retain ownership and full control over it!

If i buy a banana from chequita or whatever, and leave it on a road and someone picks it up and eats it, will chequita sue the one who left it on the road or the one who ate it for lost sales? Chequita bananas wouldnt *bleeeeebidybleepbleep*!!!!

What’s in it for me, Jack?

Let everybody get money!

http://www.hack5.blogspot.com

Thanks…