Official Ares Free Download

p2pnet news view Music | Advertising:- There’s Big 4 ‘product’. Then there’s music.

The latter has been around since at least since the ice-age (but almost certainly before that) and is free to enjoy.

How much of Big 4 ‘product’ can actually be called music is questionable, but one thing is solid gold, cast iron, carved-in-rock certain.

It certainly ain’t free. Not only that, if you dare to share online and Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony Music find out, you could find yourself on the wrong end of a subpoena.

Given that literally hundreds of millions of people share music with each other online every minute of every day everywhere, the chances of that happening to any one person are so tiny as to be zero. But such is the power of the Mighty Corporate Music PR Bullshit Machine and the unquestioning obedience of the lamescream media, who repeat Big Music puff pieces as though they’re genuine news, many people around the world believe it could easily happen.

Now an Australian ad guy has “is expected to announce a licensing deal this morning with Universal Music Group” with “at least one thing going for it that SpiralFrog didn’t and Qtrax has yet to demonstrate:,” says the Los Angeles Times — “a model that’s friendly not just to consumers, but also to advertisers”.

Called Guvera, it won’t launch in the US “until early next year,” says the story.

But the owner, Claes Loberg, figures he’s found a way to scoop up mega-loads of personal user data well before then.

According to the web site, it’ll be the greatest thing since sliced eggs. Or is that bread?

Anyhow, digital entertainment is about to be changed forever, it promises, informing us “an exclusive limited audience and get invited to the Guvera beta 2009 (100% free music).”

Wowee!

And all  interested parties have to do when they register is provide the usual details such as location, age, gender.

Oh, and …

Favorite Holidays:
Select options below.
CITY HOLIDAYS
ISLAND HOLIDAYS
JUNGLE TREKKING
BEACHES
ROAD TRIPS
5 STAR WITH ALL THE BLING
HEALTH SPA & PAMPERING
CAMPING IN THE WILD
MOUNTAIN CLIMBING
SURFING WEEKEND
GOLF WEEKEND
DIVING
CONCERT TRIP
PARTY TOWN
EXPLORING AND EDUCATION

Favorite Sports:
Select options below.
SURFING
SKATE BOARDING
URBAN PARKOUR
HIGH ADRENALINE/EXTREME SPORTS
FOOTBALL/SOCCER
RUGBY LEAGUE
RUGBY UNION
AUSTRALIAN FOOTBALL
AMERICAN FOOTBALL
BASEBALL
YOGA
GOLF
SWIMMING
TENNIS
CRICKET
XBOX OR PS3
CYCLING
JOGGING
BODY BUILDING

Favorite Music:
Select options below.
ROCK
HARD ROCK OR METAL
POP / CURRENT CHARTS
BLUES
RAP & HIPHOP
REGGAE
COUNTRY
INDIE
LATIN
CLASSICAL
DJ / DANCE / CLUB
ACID JAZZ
JAZZ
FUNK
CAPPELLA
NEW AGE
WORLD MUSIC

Favorite Things and Gadgets:
Select options below.
GUITAR
IPOD
XBOX OR PS
SATELLITE NAVIGATOR
COMPUTER
MOBILE PHONE
BLACKBERRY
WATCH
CAMERA
CIGAR CUTTER
AEROPLANE OR HELICOPTER
BINOCULARS
TV
BIKE
MOTORBIKE
SPORTSGEAR
INTERNET
CHAT MESSENGERS

Favorite Countries:
Select options below.
AFRICA
AUSTRALIA
CARIBBEAN
CHINA
EASTERN EUROPE
INDIA
INDONESIA
MEDITERRANEAN
MIDDLE EAST
PACIFIC ISLANDS
SCANDINAVIA
SOUTH AMERICA
RUSSIA
UK & EUROPE
UNITED STATES

Favorite Books:
Select options below.
PICTURES NO WORDS
COMIC BOOKS
CLASSICS
BIOGRAPHIES
ROMANCE
SCI-FI
FICTION
NON-FICTION
EDUCATION
ART & DESIGN
MAGAZINES
ARCHITECTURE
BUSINESS
ENCYCLOPEDIA
DICTIONARY

Favorite Films
Select options below.
SCI-FI
ROMANTIC COMEDY
COMEDY
ACTION
THRILLER
HORROR
SPORTS
CHILDRENS
CARTOONS
ADVENTURES
DOCUMENTARIES
DRAMA

Favorite Food:
Select options below.
EXOTIC FRUITS
MEAT AND VEGETABLES
SANDWICHES
HAMBURGERS & FASTFOOD
ICE CREAM AND SWEETS
VEGETARIAN
PIZZA
SEAFOOD
HEALTH FOOD
EVERYTHING
ITALIAN
INDIAN
MIDDLE EASTERN
ASIAN

Favorite Web Activities:
Select options below.
GAMES MESSENGER & CHATTING
MUSIC
MOVIES
NEWS UPDATES
SPORTS UPDATES
WEATHER UPDATES
WORKING
RESEARCH
MEETING FRIENDS
SOCIAL NETWORKS (FACEBOOK ETC)
COMEDY & ENTERTAINMENT
BOOKS
SHOPPING
COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES

AND —- Favorite Charities:

Then, says the LA Times, they  “enter the name of a band, song or genre to search for, and Guvera returns a list of advertiser-sponsored channels that provide the matching tracks. Once they pick a channel, they can stream or download other music paid for by that brand.”

Oh.

Pass.

Follow p2pnet on Twitter.

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win ~ Mahatma Gandhi

since the ice-age – Toot on a flute – an ice-age one, June 25, 2009
Los Angeles Times – Guvera, a place for advertisers to give away music, November 18, 2009

 Enjoyed this? Subscribe to the feed.

p2pnet news view P2P | Politics:- “Legal framework for tackling copyright infringement via education and technical measure.”

This innocuous looking sentence is the lead item in the BBC’s summation of UK government plans to gain control of the Internet on behalf of  Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony Music, with trumped up allegations against P2P file sharers as the linchpin, and the Queen’s speech as the excuse.

“Plans for tackling pirates will be a two-stage process, according to the Bill,” says the Telegraph. “Initially the Government will aim to educate and those identified as downloading unlawfully, will be sent letters. If this proves insufficient, technical measures will be introduced – including the powers to disconnect pirates.”

Spelled out, that means Gordon Brown’s Labour  government intends to install entertainment industry business plans aimed at gaining total control of product distribution online, as law in Britain.

And it’ll drive a huge wedge between online music lovers and the coterie of music makers who belong to the Featured Artists’ Coalition and  who recently, and unanimously, came out in support of the scheme.

Predictably, “The music industry, who has lobbied the Government hard to tackle illegal downloading, has welcomed the Bill,” says the Telegraph.

However, “internet service providers have been critical of the proposals, and BT claims that forcing ISPs to police piracy could cost the industry £1m a day,” it says, and, “Consumer organisations have warned that plan to cut off subscribers infringes the rights of internet users.”

‘Serial copyright infringers’

‘Education’ means UK politicians will be parroting Big Music mis- and disinformation as though it’s reliable and accurate material emanating from credible sources.

And it’s already begun. “It is good news for fans of British music,” the story has BPI boss Geoff Taylor stating.

It is, of course, the exact opposite. The only ones to benefit will be the Big 4 labels. Everyone else, including the musicians who wrong-headedly voted to penalise their own fans, will be  left out in the cold.

Says Computing.co.uk, “Downing Street made it clear the proposal to disconnect serial copyright infringers from the internet are ‘reserve powers’ which will only be used ‘if needed’.

“The main plank in its two-stage approach to copyright is to make legal action more effective and educate consumers about copyright online.”

The assertion is, of course, completely worthless. The entertainment cartels, not the politicians, are calling the shots and Big Music in particular is noted for favouring the sledgehammer approach when it comes to ‘negotiating’ with members of the online P2P constituencies, and file sharers.

“The Open Rights Group is urging people to contact their MP to oppose the plans,” says the BBC, quoting it as stating:

“This plan won’t stop copyright infringement and with a simple accusation could see you and your family disconnected from the internet – unable to engage in everyday activities like shopping and socialising.”

‘Offline, no-one can hear you whine’

In a Reader’s Write to the open letter to the FAC, “It is important to recognise that 3-strikes is fundamentally unjust/unethical given that no evidence is required,” said Digital Productions‘ Crosbie Fitch summed it up, going on »»»

The victim is simply given two warnings (tipped-off as to what’s about to happen without any way of preventing it) before they are disconnected.

He adds »»»

Your evidence of innocence has to wait until after your ISP has disconnected you, after your PC has been confiscated, after your assets have been seized, after you have located a lawyer willing to take on your case, after you have paid your lawyer to demonstrate at a tribunal that you have grounds to plead for an appeal against your disconnection, and then at your appeal your evidence can be presented (if you still have it).

Maybe, you will then be reconnected … until the next time.

There is NO SANCTION for 3 strikes, even for suspected terrorists, let alone suspected file-sharers. Read The Crucible to get a vague clue as to why incrimination upon suspicion/accusation is such an abomination.

If you thought being sued for copyright infringement in court was an injustice, wait until you suffer disconnection at the whim of the MAFIAA.

The sad thing is, no-one will notice your anguish because you’ll be disconnected, and as they’ll say “Offline, no-one can hear you whine”.

What’ll happen? Nothing.

The only people who haven’t been consulted and who haven’t had a say in any of this are the fans and the electorate, the millions of citizens who keep the politicians, the labels and musicians — contracting and independent, both — alive.

What’s going to happen?

To all intents and purposes, nothing.

The music is out there, and has been since last century. Nothing can change that. File sharers will continue to share files, the labels  will continue to haemorrhage customers, and online music distribution will ultimately be in the hands of cooperating and independent providers and labels who are inexorably  replacing corporate music industry.

The online communities will continue to grow and as they do, their powers of persuasion will expand exponentially while the waning influence of Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony Music will continue to be reduced proportionally, as will their consumer bases.

The cookie-cutter, formulaic ‘product’ is in 2009 being steadily supplanted by exciting, innovative works from independent musicians, and, “what was previously known as promotion becomes known as discovery,” said Fitch in a comment to a post to The sky isn’t falling! on a2f2a.com, launched under the premise that musicians need to be paid, and fans want to pay them.

“Instead of record labels pushing their music into the remote corners of the world so it meets the widest possible audience, the widespread audience instead sucks the music they like to them from the farthest reaches of the Internet so their desires find the greatest number of artists possible,” said Fitch, adding »»»

Instead of artists having promotion agencies, audiences have discovery agencies (bloggers, etc.). Pandora is an example of a discovery agent.

Artists liberate the public to share their music, and so make themselves as easy to discover as possible. The audiences then have the task of finding the music they like, and the respective artists they would commission to produce more.

Audience=potential fans, auditioning and seeking music.
Fan=someone who’s discovered some music they like, and the artist thereof.

Audiences pay artists with their attention.
Fans pay artists with their money.

Stay tuned.

Follow p2pnet on Twitter.

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win ~ Mahatma Gandhi

BBC – Government lays out digital plans, November 18, 2009
came out in support – Open letter to Featured Artists’ Coalition, November 16, 2009
Telegraph – Powers to disconnect pirates in Digital Economy Bill, November 18, 2009
Computing.co.uk – Queen’s speech highlights digital priorities, November 18, 2009

 Enjoyed this? Subscribe to the feed.

p2pnet news view P2P | Advertising:- p2pnet complains about Google largely because of company’s constant cynical disregard for the people who use its many and various products, all of which are in one way or another linked to its core advertising business.

Google started out with Do No Evil as its motto. But that soon fell by the wayside and five years ago, p2pnet reported on the censorship of Google news sources inside China, something it tried to spin as ‘omitting’ or ‘not including’.

“Dynamic Internet Technology (DIT) ceo Bill Xia told us that on September 15, a volunteer working with DIT’s DynaWeb noticed Google’s Chinese news returned different results depending whether the search was conducted in China or in the US,” we stated, going on, “He also said, ‘We were able to confirm this report through proxies in China. Search results inside China do not contain news from blocked sites such as www.epochtimes.com.au’. We spoke with Google spokeswoman Debbie Frost, who denied claims that its Chinese service was censoring news, saying, among other things, “to create the best possible news search experience for our users, we sometimes decide not to include some sites, for a variety of reasons’.”

But that doesn’t mean everything Google does is reprehensible and some of its products are not only genuinely useful, but truly innovative, and one such is its translation service.

Google is by no means the only company whose software offers surfers the abililty to see what something in German, say, might read in English. The translations — its or someone else’s — often leave a lot to be desired, but that’s just carping because they do give you an idea and what’s being said in the original text.

And now Google has launched an interesting upgrade to its existing product, giving it a “new look and feel to the automatic text and Web page translation tool” offering “51 language options and instant translations,” says PC World.

We thought we’d give it a try with the first two sentences of this post. So, below are the results in German, French, panish — and Chinese.

If you speak any of these languages, how do the translations (and they were indeed ‘instant’)  look to you?

French »»»

p2pnet se plaint à propos de Google en raison principalement de mépris constant cynique entreprise pour les personnes qui utilisent ses nombreux et divers produits, qui sont tous d’une manière ou d’une autre liés à son activité de publicité de base.

Google a commencé avec Do No Evil comme sa devise. Mais que bientôt tombé à l’eau et il ya cinq ans, p2pnet rapport sur la censure des sources nouvelles de Google en Chine, ce qu’il a tenté de filer comme des «omettant» ou «non compris».

German »»»

p2pnet beschwert sich über Google vor allem wegen der ständigen zynischen Gesellschaft Missachtung der Menschen, die ihre zahlreichen und unterschiedlichen Produkten, die alle in der einen oder anderen Weise auf seine Kern-Werbegeschäft Form genutzt werden.

Google startete mit Do No Evil als Motto. Aber das ist auch bald auf der Strecke und vor fünf Jahren, berichtete p2pnet auf die Zensur von Google News-Quellen in China, etwas, das sie versucht, als “Spin Weglassen” oder “ohne”.

Spanish »»»

p2pnet queja de Google en gran parte por desprecio cínico compañía constante para las personas que utilizan sus productos numerosos y diversos, todos ellos de un modo u otro vinculados a su negocio de publicidad básicos.

Google comenzó con “no hacer el mal como su lema. Pero pronto cayeron en el camino y hace cinco años, p2pnet informó sobre la censura de las fuentes de noticias de Google en China, algo que trató de hilar como “la omisión” o “no incluido”.

Chinese (simplified – and hopefully, you’ll be able to see the Chinese characters) »»»

p2pnet????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

??????????????????????????????5??????p2pnet????????????????????????’??’?’???’?

And for the hell of it, we submited the French version to be translated back to Engish, with the result »»»

p2pnet complains about Google’s mainly due to constant cynical contempt for business people who use its many different products, all in one way or another related to its advertising activity basis.

Google started with Do No Evil as its currency. But that soon fell into the water five years ago, p2pnet report on censorship of the news sources of Google in China, which he tried to spin as “failing” or “excluding”.

Stay tuned.

Follow p2pnet on Twitter.

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win ~ Mahatma Gandhi

censorship of Google news sources – Google on China censorship, October 1, 2004
PC World – Google Translate Tool Offers Instant Results, November 17, 2009

 Enjoyed this? Subscribe to the feed.

p2pnet news view P2P:- Entertainment lawyer Fred Wilhelms (right), of whom CounterPunch’s Dave Marsh once said “If the corporate music industry had any ethics, Wilhelms would be its ‘ethicist-in-chief’,” has for two years been pressing SoundExchange board member Dick Huey for questions he (Huey) had promised to answer.

Yesterday, Huey finally delivered. Below are Fred’s responses »»»

I’ll deal with the substantive portion of your contribution below, but there is one part of your preface that requires comment:

You said “I’m not interested in being a SoundExchange conduit for every question you’d like answered – SoundExchange has official communication outlets, which you should engage directly with to answer your questions.”

I have, and they don’t answer me. Probably because they don’t have to.

Take this example:

Over two years ago, I attempted to engage John Simson in a discussion of why SoundExchange does not acknowledge it requires sampling to allocate royalties to artists. I was puzzled because the website didn’t mention sampling, and even said “if you get played, you get paid.” Mr. Simson’s initial response was to tell me that SoundExchange had explained its reliance on sampling in filings with the Copyright Royalty Board, and that artists could read the filings if they wanted to know more. He made no justification for the discrepancy between the website and the actual practice. When I asked him for more information on how SoundExchange actually did the sampling, he promised me an answer multiple times for nearly two months, always telling me I would hear from him “soon.” Finally he referred my inquiries to Neeta Ragoowansi, who picked up where Simson left off and promised me multiple times that I would get my answers “soon.” After six more months of that, I got an email from Simson saying that I WASN’T going to get an answer, but that the subject would be addressed on the website. When would that happen? You guessed it, he said “soon.” And here we are, a year and a half after that promise, and there’s still no answer, and nothing on the website but that inaccurate claim.

Since then, repeated inquiries to various “official communications outlets” have been met with dead silence.

Maybe you can explain why.

Now to what you said in the body of the response.

Artist Reps and RIAA control of the process –

With the exception of the two performer union representatives, everyone on the Board owes their presence in the room to the RIAA. Your suggestion about any artist putting his or her name up for board membership seems to overlook the fact that the only way they’ll get on the board is if the RIAA approves of them. You completely ignore the fact that if someone campaigns and gets on the board, my fundamental problem with the system remains; that director is not accountable to artists. Accountability goes further than just “insularity and contact info,” it means having to explain to your constituency what you are doing, and demonstrating to them that you are standing up for them, and them having the right to replace you if you fall down on the job.

It is my belief that SoundExchange’s poor performance in finding and paying artists can be directly attributed to the fact that the “Artist Rep” Directors don’t have to explain that performance to anyone, because there is no penalty if they don’t. All the suggestions about seeking a seat on the Board doesn’t change that in the slightest. If someone actually “wins” a seat that way, there’s still no obligation for that Director to be any more responsive to artists than the current crew. I think it is time to drop the foolishness of anyone successfully campaigning for a seat at the table and to just admit that the Artist Reps will never be accountable to artists, so artists had better learn to live with it. It isn’t going to change, and it isn’t going to get any better.

musicFIRST -

If you go back and read my initial response, I correctly identified it as a 501 (c) (6). We are going to have to disagree on what SoundExchange’s “tax exempt mission” is. You, and the lawyers you’re quoting, appear comfortable with the idea that SoundExchange’s mission is broader than the one granted by the Copyright Act, and, I presume those corporate documents you’re quoting are going to be considered “proprietary,” so we’ll never really know for sure. I can only base my opinion on what I see, and I see SoundExchange overreaching the statute and the Tax Code. Maybe someday someone will force you to show the cards you’re holding, but the fact that you’re hiding them doesn’t say a great deal about a desire for transparency if I have to trust you when you say you’re holding high trumps.

You are going to have to explain if that thing about “members” paying the cost of musicFIRST includes artists as “members” and/or if it includes forfeited money, because what you quoted is doublespeak, and it certainly doesn’t address what I asked about SoundExchange financing musicFIRST..

The unpaid “pool” –

It is a good thing that SoundExchange wants to pay artists what they are entitled to, but that’s exactly what the organization promised to do when it got the job. And it is a good thing that SoundExchange has retained that money rather than absorb it, even if I think that the real reason why is that SoundExchange is not now, and never has been, in compliance with the regulation that that money be held in segregated accounts for three years before being forfeited, and the organization can’t risk someone actually challenging you to prove you comply. (This is another one of those areas where your “official communications outlets” have been strangely silent. I simply asked, several times, where those segregated accounts were being held, and where they were identified on the 990. There’s never been an answer to either part. I think you can start to understand why waiting for a response from a SoundExchange “official communications outlet” is a study in futility.)

You say the reserve is there to pay every artist in full. It pains me to be this blunt, but you can’t point to a nine-figure reserve and tell me you have to have it to pay artists, when the only reason you have it is that you haven’t paid the artists. I warned you not to play me stupid, but this comes awfully close to testing my limit on that warning. $101 million as of the end of 2007, an estimated $186 million as of the end of 2008. That’s a terrible record, and it’s heading in the wrong direction. The size of that fund is not a good thing, and don’t try to make a virtue out of it.

Communications –

If I am wrong about the number of artists who have been removed from the unregistered list, what is the RIGHT number? I don’t need names (although I would love to have them, as I have been tracking that list for nearly three years). Just give me the number so I know how SoundExchange has done in finding people since we ended the last grassroots campaign in July, 2008. You see, Mr. Huey, this is a microcosm of the problems a lot of people have with SoundExchange; we can see one thing (a list with few deletions in the last year), and SoundExchange tells us another (there are a lot of artists who have been taken off the list.) This is the sum and substance of SoundExchange’s image.

Mr. Huey, that list represents SoundExchange’s ONLY public effort to find those artists, and even more embarrassing than the few names taken off is the realization that not one name has been added in nearly three years (January, 2007 was the date of the last supplemental listing). You and I know that SoundExchange hasn’t found everyone who has been played on Internet radio since then, so I know that if you actually updated the list today, you would be adding tens of thousands of new names, and adding legitimate fuel to the argument that I’ve been making about SoundExchange’s failure to do the job it promised to do. I wish to Hell you could prove me wrong about this. I want SoundExchange to do a great job, but there’s no evidence they even want to.

And Mr. Huey, if you have four in house, and four outside people working on the list and can only point to a handful of names coming off, it is a waste of manpower. Take that from someone who volunteered several dozen hours of his time to teach (at the personal request of John Simson and Neeta Ragoowansi) one of your “consultants” how to look for, find, contact and register people, and even gave him a list of over three hundred artist contacts. Sadly, I followed up a number of them six months later (when I noticed the names still on the list) to find that few of them had been contacted by SoundExchange or the consultant, who seemed oddly more excited about finding some of his own musical heroes than reducing the list. And take that from someone who, as part of a grass roots effort without SoundExchange’s resources, or even acknowledgement, consistently have found more people on the list, and found them faster, than the eight people you’ve named.

Small webcasters –

My comment was directed to your suggestion that Pandora’s charging for high-volume users was part of their business plan. I noted that it was established to discourage high-volume use and restrict their exposure to deadly royalty rate increases, not to increase revenue. The fundamental problem I have with the royalty rate structure is that SoundExchange has decided that maximizing royalty revenue now is the appropriate thing to do for all Entertainment lawyer Fred Wilhelms, of whom CounterPunch’s Dave Marsh once said “If the corporate music industry had any ethics, Wilhelms would be its ‘ethicist-in-chief’,” has for two years been pressing SoundExchange board member Dick Huey for questions he (Huey) said he’d answer.

Internet radio -

The danger of exceeding revenue/listener caps, with the virtual death sentence of retroactive rate increases, greatly inhibits experimentation with business models by penalizing success. Even if SoundExchange would just do away with that retroactive death penalty would be a lot better for webcasters to innovate. If you really want to address the idea that the discussion is not equally balanced for all artists, you have to acknowledge that SoundExchange’s “one hammer clobbers all” approach doesn’t work either.

Metadata –

My primary concern about metadata is that labels will find it a free alternative to the marketing information and analysis they currently spend millions of dollars a year on (can you say “Big Champagne?”), and that artists would be paying half the bill for building it. Normally, there are restrictions placed on the use of this kind of collected data when it comes from a non-profit source, and I would expect a Director of a non-profit entity to know that (or be told that by your counsel). You’ll forgive me if I find it dubious that there will be any effective Chinese wall built between the airplay data and the labels. So, what I see is that SoundExchange creates a very valuable resource it’s labels get for free when the artists have paid half the bill for it and most of them can’t get access themselves. SoundExchange will be providing something of commercial value to others in violation of its tax exemption. If you’re comfortable with that, there’s nothing anyone except the IRS can do about it.

The issue of artists not getting access to the play data is only part of the problem of them not being members. Their general rights in regard to getting information from SoundExchange are extremely limited. Access to play data is only part of it.

My suggestions for artist outreach – I think you’re going to find that I’ve given them all to SoundExchange at one time or another, starting back in 2004 when John Simson first asked for my help in finding artists, then jerked me around for two and a half years every time I contacted him to follow up on his request before SoundExchange finally published the unregistered list.

The website – I’ll believe the improvements when I see them. I’ve been told “soon” for too long to simply believe it anymore. Permit my simple skepticism here, but I don’t think letting SoundExchange have a column on the unregistered list where they can say “we’ve already found this guy, so it’s his fault he’s on the list” is really going to help matters. You’ll have to explain why this will be an improvement in service, and not just an excuse.

You see, Mr. Huey, when we get down to it, that’s really a perfect example of the core problem I have with SoundExchange, and I think it is one you can address without having to give away state secrets:

No one from SoundExchange will ever admit there’s ever a problem. You didn’t even do it in your response, carefully avoiding addressing things (like the one-third of the 2006 royalties still undistributed in March 2009) that defy excuse. SX doesn’t come off as credible when it denies what everyone else can see.

“The first step to recovery is admitting there is a problem, according to every twelve-step program I’ve ever heard of,” says Fred adding:

“It’s time for SoundExchange to admit it has problems.”

Stay tuned.

Follow p2pnet on Twitter.

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win ~ Mahatma Gandhi

November, 2009

 Enjoyed this? Subscribe to the feed.

p2pnet news view Music:- Artists contracted to EMI, or one of its multitudinous subsidiaries, will no doubt be extremely unhappy, today.

They’ll include Lily Allen, the famed chanteuse of doom whose online pronunciations prompted the members of the Featured Artists Coalition to unwisely back-track on their support of file-sharers; Elton John; Elvis Costello; George Michael; Kylie Minogue; Robbie Williams; and so on.

Citigroup Inc has already turned down Terra Firma Capital Partners’ bid to have EMI Group debt by slashed by 40% in return for a 1 billion-pound ($1.7 billion) cash injection, p2pnet reported yesterday, quoting ,” says Bloomberg News.

Now, “Terra Firma, the private equity house run by Guy Hands, has written its investment in EMI down by 90 per cent as it offers to put another £1bn into the struggling music group to restructure its debt,” says the Financial Times.

“Mr Hands’ offer to inject more equity into the company in return for Citigroup writing off £1bn of its £2.6bn loan has been rejected by the American bank, leaving negotiations between them deadlocked,” it says, going on:

“The size of the writedown on Terra Firma’s £2.3bn investment in EMI illustrates that Mr Hands has already accepted his stake in the heavily indebted music company has little more than option value.”

Not only but also, “The UK-based private equity firm is withdrawing about 10 Terra Firma executives that run EMI on a day-to-day basis after concluding that it has little chance of making back most of its money on the investment without the restructuring, and that they may be able to generate more value at other portfolio companies, a source close to the buyout firm said,” says the Wall Street Journal.

So what does all this mean to EMI employees such as Allen and Williams?

“According to sources inside and outside EMI, musicians are concerned that the company doesn’t have the money to properly market their material — most of the cash flow EMI generates is being used to service $4 billion in debt held by Citigroup,” says the New York Post, continuing:

“They have to rebuild credibility with the artist and management community about how well financed they are,” said one source at the label. “To the extent that they can’t put money behind records, that makes new signings all the more difficult.”

Another “red flag for artists is the high executive turnover rate at EMI, says the story, adding:

“Guy Hands, the CEO of Terra Firma, has replaced 80 of EMI’s top 100 executives since taking over the label in 2007. Terra Firma itself at one point had as many as 40 executives at EMI, though that number is now down to 10.

“Indeed, as music industry outsiders, Hands and EMI boss Elio Leoni-Sceti are seen as liabilities themselves. Leoni-Sceti was most recently a marketing executive with consumer giant Reckitt Benckiser.

” ‘They have no leverage with artists because they aren’t investing in artists and repertoire, they have no management to develop artists, and [Guy and Elio] have no relationships in the music community to build off of,’ said one source close to EMI.”

Meanwhile, Warner Music boss Edgar Bronfman jr Edgar is moving to London, said p2pnet in June.

“Is he perhaps seeking a peerage as did another Canadian, Conrad Black? Sir Edgar Bronfman?” – we wondered, continuing:

“Stranger things have happened — but No. It’s  in all likelihood something far more prosaic. Bidnes.

Warner and EMI dropped efforts to merge in 2000, ‘after regulators opposed the plan,’ said Bloomberg News, in 2007, going on, “EMI again failed to combine with Warner in 2003, when a group led by Bronfman won the bidding for Time Warner Inc.’s music unit.”

But now … ?

Stay tuned.

Follow p2pnet on Twitter.

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win ~ Mahatma Gandhi

chanteuse of doom – ‘Offline, no-one can hear you whine’, November 17, 2009
p2pnet – Is EMI coming unglued (Part II)?, November 17, 2009
Bloomberg News – Hands’s Bid to Cut EMI’s Debt Said to Be Rejected by Citigroup, November 16, 2009
Financial Times – Terra Firma writes down EMI value, November 17, 2009
Wall Street Journal – Terra Firma Pulls Back At EMI, November 16, 2009
New York Post – EMI on shaky ground, November 18, 2009
p2pnet – Is Warner Music eyeing EMI? Again?, June 24, 2009
Bloomberg News – EMI Says Company Has Received Takeover Approaches, May 4, 2007

 Enjoyed this? Subscribe to the feed.

p2pnet news view | P2P | Music:- p2pnet has always maintained music lovers would happily pay for downloads if the price was right.

But a dollar and up, the de facto corporate standard charged by the likes of iTunes, is definitely not right.

Bluebeat, offering music downloads at 25 cents each, was unceremoniously taken down when EMI secured a temporary restraining order effective until November 20. On that date, court arguments as to why it should be allowed to start selling downloads again, or should it be be kept offline permanently, will be heard.

While we wait to see how that works out, TunesPro.com has gone online, brashly touting digital music files for six cents less than Bluebeat — ie, at 19 cents per, a price most  online music lovers will probably agree is pretty much what it should have been from the beginning.

Not only but also, there’s a further 10% discount for album buys)

And speaking of iTunes, it’s been “repeatedly criticised for raising the prices of music downloads”, TunesPro.com says in a statement interestingly entitled iTunes & Napster Blasted By Music Download Watchdogs, and going on:

“Single track downloads recently rose from 99c to $1.29 on iTunes which prompted competing music sites Amazon, Napster, & CDUniverse to also raise prices.”

Of course, with prices as low as 19 cents, or $2.39 for a compete album, plus a 10% discount, certain questions are raised, such as how is the company able to offer “individual songs for as little as 19c, with additional 10% discounts given to consumers who purchase full albums”?

And »»»

• Is that the price across the board?
• Can buyers share their purchases?
• Does it have arrangements with the major labels? If so, which ones?
• And last but by no means least, Do the artists get any part of this and if so, how much and how are they paid?

So we asked.

PS – Did we mention TunesPro.com is registered in the Palestinian Territories?

Stay tuned.

(Cheers, Monkey)

Follow p2pnet on Twitter.

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win ~ Mahatma Gandhi

taken down – EMI boots Bluebeat off the net, November 6, 2009
statement – iTunes & Napster Blasted By Music Download Watchdogs, November 19, 2009

 Enjoyed this? Subscribe to the feed.

Carriage fees dominate CRTC hearing CBC
CRTC chair Konrad von Finckenstein is presiding over hearings on the future of Canadian conventional television broadcasting.CRTC chair Konrad von Finckenstein is presiding over hearings on the future of Canadian conventional television broadcasting. (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)A frustrated CRTC chair Konrad von Finckenstein criticized the “confrontational” and “antagonistic” atmosphere between TV networks and carriers Monday, as Canada’s broadcast regulator began a new hearing about the future of television, with an emphasis on the highly contentious fee-for-carriage debate. During a day-long hearing in Gatineau, Que., von Finckenstein repeatedly appealed for the two sides to come together to negotiate an industry-approved solution. The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission chair appeared visibly annoyed on several occasions with both CTVglobemedia, Canada’s largest conventional private broadcaster, and cable TV giant Rogers Communications. “You need each other and yet we have seen, for the last five months, a public battle never seen before and at the end of the day I can see nothing else than the consumer has to pay more,” von Finckenstein declared during CTV’s morning session, referring to the ubiquitous TV and print advertising campaigns run by the rival sides.

CISAC Backs Action Against YouTube Billboard
The International Council of Creators of Music (CIAM), part of the global authors’ rights body CISAC, has backed legal moves against YouTube/Google in Germany. Legal proceedings are due to take place at the district court of civil law in Hamburg, following a complaint of violations of copyright and master rights in relation to user-generated content on YouTube. German composer Frank Peterson filed the lawsuit in April 2009, claiming that his music videos and other audiovisual repertoire were used illegally on the site. In addition to this claim under German civil law, various authors, artists and independent publishers and labels have brought a charge before the public prosecutor’s office in Hamburg against the directors of Google, accusing them of continuing commercial infringements of authors’ rights, copyright, moral rights and performance and master rights.

Ludwig flags data privacy overhaul Australian IT
The Rudd government is planning to reform the federal Privacy Act to ensure businesses regularly assess the impact of new technology on their handling of personal data, Special Minister of State Joe Ludwig says. “Rapid technological changes have meant a vastly increased capacity to collect, retain and disseminate personal information,” Senator Ludwig told the Privacy Awards dinner in Sydney. “Under the new openness principle, government agencies and businesses will be required to express — in a privacy policy — how they handle personal information at each stage of the cycle, allowing people to make informed and confident decisions about how they engage with these organisations,” he told the audience. “As working documents, the policies will require organisations to regularly consider how new technologies and ways of working affect their handling of personal information.”

Senate to disclose findings in Web ‘mystery charge’ probe CNet News
Tuesday could turn out to be an embarrassing day for a score of online retailers, such as Continental Airlines, FTD, and Classmates.com. Expect Sen. John Rockefeller, chairman of the Senate committee looking into “deceptive practices” by companies operating online loyalty programs, to be highly critical of the retail stores that do business with them. The so-called mystery charges that have appeared on some of their customers’ credit card statements will come under scrutiny at a hearing held by the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. At the center of the federal probe are Webloyalty, Affinion, and Vertrue, companies that make “cash-back” and coupon offers to consumers and charge them monthly fees to enroll in their loyalty programs. The reason the government is involved is that for years, scores of online shoppers have asserted they were signed up for the programs without their consent.

Norway puts jail brakes on Swedish ’son of God’ motorist The Local
Swedish man who claimed he was the son of God has been sentenced to prison in Norway for unlawful driving. In a four month span in 2008, the 46-year-old Swede was picked up four times for driving without a licence by Norwegian police in various towns outside of the capital Oslo, the Norwegian newspaper Moss Avis reports reports. On one occasion, the man also attempted to hide his expired registration tabs by fashioning false plates out of cardboard, but Norwegian police saw through the ruse. The Swede defended his actions during questioning by police in the town of Moss, arguing he was Jesus, the son of God, and that he ruled the world.

Chinese censors block Obama’s call to free the Web Associated Press
President Barack Obama prodded China about Internet censorship and free speech, but the message was not widely heard in China where his words were blocked online and shown on only one regional television channel. China has more than 250 million Internet users and employs some of the world’s tightest controls over what they see. The country is often criticized for its so-called “Great Firewall of China” – technology designed to prevent unwanted traffic from entering or leaving a network. During his town hall meeting in Shanghai on Monday, Obama responded at length to a question about the firewall – remarks that were later played down in the Chinese media and scrubbed from some Chinese Web sites.

Google Translate Tool Offers Instant Results PC World
Google on Tuesday unveiled a revamped Translate service, giving a new look and feel to the automatic text and Web page translation tool. Google Translate now offers 51 language options and instant translations. Instant translation is one of the most notable features in the revamped Google Translate service. Once you type in text in the text box, the translation in your desired language will automatically appear underneath, no need to press the “Translate” button. Oddly, though, the “Translate” button is still present.

Twitter to scrap controversial Suggested Users List Mercury News
The Tempest in Twitterville may soon be over. Seeking to soothe the tweeting masses, Twitter co-founder Biz Stone said Monday that the micro-blogging darling of the Internet would soon jettison its hand-picked and widely scorned “Suggested Users List.” Intended as a tool for newcomers to quickly find other Twitter users to “follow,” the list of rap stars, politicos and TV stars was seen by many as capricious and an unfair plug for celebrities who already have more celebrity than they know what to do with.

Univision to make shows available on YouTube Associated Press
Univision, the biggest Hispanic broadcaster in the U.S., said Monday its shows will be coming to YouTube in the new year. Videos to be made available include the talk show “El Show de Cristina,” based in Miami, the variety show “Don Francisco Presenta,” and the murder thriller series, “Mujeres Asesinas.” But they won’t include popular telenovelas from its Mexican production partner Grupo Televisa because of a legal dispute preventing either from putting Televisa content on the Internet in the U.S. Univision has the exclusive right to broadcast Televisa-made shows in the U.S. through 2017.

Antitrust concerns linger in Google Books deal CNet News
The revised Google Books settlement agreement may quiet international opponents, but it still gives Google a monopoly on commercializing out-of-print books where the copyrights are unclaimed and fails to protect consumer privacy, opponents said on Monday. “We’re at a cross roads,” Internet Archive Director Brewster Kahle said during a panel late Monday on the Future of Books at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco. “Is it going to be a subscription life…where one or two companies own the distribution and presentation (rights) to these books?” In response, Google Books Engineering Director Dan Clancy said: “This is just one of a panoply of choices that people will have in the future.”

Follow p2pnet on Twitter.

November, 2009

 Enjoyed this? Subscribe to the feed.

p2pnet news view Music:- They say a fool and his money are soon parted and with that in mind comes the news Rupert Murdoch is apparently on the verge of scarfing up iMeem.

His ailing MySpace is in “late stage negotiations to acquire music streaming service iMeem,” says TechCrunch, also noting,  “MySpace is on a bit of an acquisition spree — they acquired iLike, another music service, three months ago.”

The acquisition hasn’t been finalized and “awaits approval from various stakeholders,” says the story, adding:

“We don’t know the price of the acquisition, but this isn’t going to be a big win for investors. iMeem has raised at least $25 million (that we’ve been able to track) plus at least another $10 million in debt. But the difficultly in making a free streaming music service work as a business model forced them to make some hard decisions.”

iMeem is, of course, aso the owner of Snocap, the DRM creation of Napster inventor Shawn Fanning.

Follow p2pnet on Twitter.

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win ~ Mahatma Gandhi

ailing MySpace – Why would anyone pay for MySpace music?, November 17, 2009
TechCrunch – MySpace Close To Acquiring iMeem, November 16, 2009

 Enjoyed this? Subscribe to the feed.

p2pnet news view | P2P | Music:- With Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony Music, it’s steal as much as you can get away with, give back as little as possible, and then sue your own customers, calling them criminals and thieves.

Fortunately, however, their attitude isn’t shared by most people in the world and it’s really nice to be able to tell you about a small group that’s teaching the Big 4 a thing or 10

Bill Hudson’s Feel Good Music Network recycles and distributes musical instruments and healing with live concerts  in the storm ravaged Gulf Coast area. And on Friday, he and fellow musicians Al Coffey and Craig Counts from Electric Woodshed will be heading to Chapmanville, West Virginia, to deliver guitars and fiddles to children at the Harts Intermediate School.

They’ll also be treating the kids to a free concert.

After some 25,000 miles and 12 trips to the Gulf Coast, the Feel Good Tour has collected and distributed more than 200 musical instruments to schools in the area.

With Dragonfly.com as sponsor, Bill started taking the tour to the Gulf Coast region soon after the devastating hurricanes of 2005.

“It started as a mission to use music as a healing force to ease stress and anxieties for Gulf Coast residents,” he says. Fellow musician Al Coffey joined, and they’re still “looking for that instrument in the closet that isn’t being used,” he says. “We do this by the net, live performance, word by mouth, and it’s gotten around.

“We’ve had donations from as far away as Alaska, Illinois, Wisconsin, Pennslyvania, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, and Virginia.”

Bill goes on »»»

If someone has an instrument to donate, we go their homes to collect it, which makes it very personal.

Some tell stories about the people who use to play the instruments. Maybe a father has passed away, or a son or daughter who has left to collage and doesn’t play any  more. This way, the instruments are used again by children who need all the help they can get.

And they are used.

“I’m the Chorus teacher at St Tammany Junior High in Slidell, Louisiana,” says Brian Bosarge told Bill last year, adding:

“You and your wonderful group of friends surprised us with two generous donation trips.”

With music, life is worth living and as the Feel Good Tour motto says, “music should be shared freely”.

Follow p2pnet on Twitter.

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win ~ Mahatma Gandhi

a2f2a – a2f2a.com update, October 17, 2009

 Enjoyed this? Subscribe to the feed.

p2pnet news view P2P:- In July, 2007, “an unsigned Reader’s Write accused Fred Wilhelms of having a vested interest in criticizing SoundExchange for not paying artists,” said p2pnet last month, going on »»»

The author later proved to be Dick Huey (right), one of the RIAA-appointed ‘label representatives’ on the SoundExchange board of directors.

An exchange of comments ended in Huey agreeing to answer questions put to him, partly in apology for what he acknowledged was an unjustified personal attack on Wilhelms

Huey’s responses have been a long time coming, but here they are, in part, at least »»»

Dear Fred,

This took longer to respond to than I wanted – both because of a busy couple weeks, and because we moved away from the topics where I have direct knowledge and into areas that require research on my part.

I’m not interested in being a SoundExchange conduit for every question you’d like answered – SoundExchange has official communication outlets, which you should engage directly with to answer your questions. I’ll focus on several key points, for the purpose of illuminating my own thinking – and thank you in advance for the good suggestions you have made so far – but I will not get in the middle of disagreements you may have with the organization.

I don’t speak on behalf of SoundExchange and my engaging with you in a limited discussion doesn’t obligate me to divulge what goes on with the board. In some cases, what you’re asking is not appropriate. The SoundExchange board works together toward the organization’s stated goal of distributing royalties to artists and copyright holders, but members represent different constituencies and do not share their motivations with everyone else. It would be irresponsible and unprofessional of me to speculate on their reasoning, or share anyone’s votes.

Every issue you addressed in your post is complicated, even the ones that look simple at face value, and many require a substantial amount of research. I *want* to answer some of your questions, even the hard ones, because they have good and solid answers. But we need to continue to do that in the spirit of a respectful exchange of ideas. I’m all for reasoned debate, and stepping out on the branch to have that conversation, as long as we keep this focused where it needs to be; working toward clarity and solutions. If this digresses into personal territory, that will be the end of our discussion.

With those preambles, on to answering some of your questions:

• re Artist Reps and RIAA control of the process – You’d be hard pressed to find an artist representative on the Soundexchange board who’s in any way beholden to the RIAA, that I can say from personal experience. What about the artist board members who represent performers organizations? Surely they’re responsible to their constituency of artists, many of whom are Soundexchange members? That said, I’ll reiterate that there is nothing stopping anyone from taking the step that other board members have taken – putting themselves up for board membership, and then pushing for the change they desire. As far as accountability to other artists, I understand your point about insularity and putting contact info up on the SX website, and will discuss this. The communications team at SX did mention reinstituting periodic, open– entry conference calls with a few board members at a time. This used to happen, but was discontinued due to lack of interest.

SX *did* start out as an RIAA offshoot, many years ago in a previous form and name. SX kicked off as a nonprofit organization long before I joined the board. That makes sense, after all: the organization set up to pay royalties out to artists and rights holders should be, and IS, run by the people it benefits and serves. SX sticks to that core mission, but I’ve seen the organization change since I started on the board, as a direct result of the inclusion of new faces and fresh ideas. My own efforts to create change and to drive policy within SX are listened to, and continue to push the organization in new directions. It is in this spirit that I continue to look for new ideas, and also in this spirit that I’m pursuing this dialogue.

• MusicFirst – I am glad we agree that the effort for a performance right for musicians and sound recording rights owners itself is a worthwhile goal. I am not on the MusicFirst committee, so my exposure to the issue is primarily at board meetings. Here’s what I know:
• Deductions authorized by the board from *member* proceeds are allowed under language in the membership agreements. The agreements apply only to members, not all royalty registrants. I believe the language is very clear.
• Soundexchange is not a 501(c)3, it is a 501(c)6. Here is a relevant explanation of SX’s mission, which I am comfortable with:

“Section 501(c)(6) entities are permitted to lobby on matters that are consistent with their tax exempt mission. SoundExchange’s tax exempt mission is NOT defined solely by the provisions of the copyright statute; indeed, SoundExchange corporate purposes and tax exempt mission are independent of that designation. All of SoundExchange’s relevant corporate documents speak to a mission broader than simply distribution of the current Section 114 royalties. For instance, SoundExchange’s tax exempt application speaks about dealing with legislators on “public policy issues of concern to copyright owners and performers.” SoundExchange’s 990 Form notes that SoundExchange “represents the interest of all copyright owners and performers.” And there are similar provisions in the SoundExchange bylaws. So SoundExchange attempts to benefit performers and rights owners through lobbying on performance rights matters is consistent with SoundExchange’s corporate purposes.”

• Even though the SX regulatory directive allows pool releases every three years, the board (including me) continues to vote to postpone the release date of unclaimed monies. This is overwhelmingly due to a genuine desire to register more artists and make sure they’re getting paid. I didn’t mean to suggest that this work should stop at any point, what I meant was the amount of money spent as the list of artists shrinks and the amount these artists are owed shrinks should be reflective of that. I agree with you fully – that work can never stop. See below, Communications section, for more on this.
• I understand you’re opposed to the size of the reserve. The critical point here is that the reserve is set up to pay – in full – any artist who signs a membership agreement, even if there’s been a pool release that contained that artist’s monies. Fulfilling SX’s mission, in this case, requires the reserve.
• Communications – I appreciate your suggestions in this area, and this is an area where I have consistently stepped forward. You are wrong about substantial numbers of artists not coming off the SX list, but I understand the info to figure that out isn’t on the website. EVERYONE at SX understands that there needs to be a better way to provide up– to– date information about artists that have come off the list, and artists that have been contacted but who simply choose not to respond or who never finish filling out forms, etc (there are a lot of those). The board is also looking forward to examining the status of these results at the next board meeting, and I and others will be paying close attention as we have at other meetings.

SX employs outside consultants with specific genre expertise to address the unregistered list (in addition to in– house staff such as Neeta, Shane, Rich and Sean). Lupe handles Latin, John Styll (former head of the Gospel Music Association) does gospel, contemporary Christian, and Nashville– based artists, John Kertzer (World, Folk, Blues, former Smithsonian and KEXP Radio DJ), Bill Holland (Jazz, bluegrass, estates)…

• small webcasters – I understand your point, understand there is a push/pull between monetization and artificial barriers. However, I think the problem is that letting people listen a lot doesn’t provide the same value, equally, to all artists. Smaller artists benefit more from pervasive play on the internet – larger ones, maybe not so much, especially if their inclusion and availability, at a cheap rate, means a lost sale somewhere else at a higher rate. Now I know there will be a million opinions on *that*, and I also believe that this inequality between artists is part of what drives differing opinions on what the rate for webcasters ought to be, but it’s the situation we have now. So this is currently not an equally balanced discussion for all artists, in my opinion.
• metadata – so, your primary concern regarding SX providing software – by the way, no one’s decided that’s going to happen yet, or really even discussed it, I haven’t even officially started the sub–committee! – is that the information will be utilized by members, but not by “non– members” who would be artists whose copyrights are controlled by labels or others? OK, that’s useful information to have. Will think about that one. I’d be curious if any radio station folk who are reading this feel the same way? I would like to get more than one perspective on this.

Regarding your specific suggestions for finding unregistered artists:

1 – This is a great suggestion, and one that SX has frequently employed in the past. It’s just wrong to say that SX hasn’t. EVERY NewsExchange newsletter, EVERY distribution memo asks for help in registering artists, as does SX outreach at conferences and festivals. SX Communications showed me a list that they used at this year’s CMJ where they had artists calling their friends, etc. CD Baby just completed a match for artists and blogged about the success. See above about inside– industry and artists contacts employed as outreach consultants.

2 – Also a great idea, and some parts SX has repeatedly done. Positive press and blog coverage has been a great source of bringing in artists and they have consistently gotten good responses. Online advertising is a cost concern, but I believe they have used remnant ad space whenever available to help push out the message. I am interested in the idea of a more organized street team, and will think about this in advance of our next board.

3 – SX did focus on creating a media and education strategy of this kind, and hired an outside group to handle it when there was concern about unclaimed royalties being released. That resulted in a lot of positive coverage. Those definitely weren’t puff pieces – I believe that SX has a lot of great people doing good work, and I think the stories reflected that. Now they have someone full time again doing this work – Laura.

Finally, you wrote:

“I didn’t ask what it “means to have consistently voted to authorize funding expansion in this area since getting to that place.” I asked if the way you put it meant that your votes were in the minority, and that more resources weren’t being used. It was a direct and simple question.”

The direct and simple answer is: I was in the majority.

I don’t think I ever said everything on the website is out of date – I think I said the website is out of date, especially the unregistered artists list. Now that SX has a communications department, and some very talented individuals, I expect a new website shortly that will at least be updateable without having to contact a company to do the updating (as has to be done now). The updates of the unregistered list will also be addressed in the upcoming website revision.

• SX reporting on track level data vs. a sampling of data – the vast majority of SX data *is* reported on track level data. In fact, 95% of the money distributed is based on census data. So the statement in absolute is not correct, but in practice, it is primarily correct. And it’s possible that that the sampled 5% disproportionately affects both the artists you represent, and the artists (and labels) I represent. So naturally, I’m interested in getting to 0% sampled data, which is one of the reasons I’ve established the metadata committee to review the feasibility of providing software to get past the inherent difficulties small webcasters (especially schools) face in reporting. I expect this committee to get into the trenches of this issue, and I welcome all opinions and suggestions in order come up with the best possible recommendation to the full board.

Best wishes, Dick

Stay tuned.

Follow p2pnet on Twitter.

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win ~ Mahatma Gandhi

p2pnet – Wilhelms, Huey, SoundExchange exchange, October 19, 2009

November, 2009

 Enjoyed this? Subscribe to the feed.