Pink Floyd songs could be removed from iTunes after court ruling

1235

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 113
    applebookapplebook Posts: 350member
    Should "Echoes" or "Atom Heart Mother" cost 99 cents each?



    To me, if an album is not worth listening to its entirety, then I just rip select songs into AAC and play them back on my mobile. Funny how almost every single song that I have on my mobile is from bands post 1990.



    There might be no more than two dozen truly great albums made in the past 20 years, but plenty of good singles. This is the MTV generation, folks.



    I'm glad Pink Floyd won this thing, as they obviously should.



    Anyone who listens to Wish You Were Here and skips any of the tracks is
  • Reply 82 of 113
    malaxmalax Posts: 1,598member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by applebook View Post


    Should "Echoes" or "Atom Heart Mother" cost 99 cents each?



    To me, if an album is not worth listening to its entirety, then I just rip select songs into AAC and play them back on my mobile. Funny how almost every single song that I have on my mobile is from bands post 1990.



    There might be no more than two dozen truly great albums made in the past 20 years, but plenty of good singles. This is the MTV generation, folks.



    I'm glad Pink Floyd won this thing, as they obviously should.



    Anyone who listens to Wish You Were Here and skips any of the tracks is



    Only if you pause between tracks two and three to account for the time it takes to flip the record over.



    I'm glad they won as a simple matter of contract law. Now it's up to them what they do about it.
  • Reply 83 of 113
    applebookapplebook Posts: 350member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Woohoo! View Post


    If one million people want to download just one song off of a Pink Floyd album, the artists and labels should take their money and wish they come back for more and encourage more of the same behavior.



    The one sure way to to encourage piracy it is to keep on destroying the ala-carte business model that has worked so well as it brings the price point down to a level nearly all can participate in.



    All it take is one unhappy customer to turn them into permanent pirates.



    So what if the album is a complete work?, the only reason albums exist in the first place is because of the medium designed to transfer the music to a customer.



    Now that medium is individual electronic files and should be sold as such.



    I sure this isn't used by other artists thinking they are going to make more by forcing albums with one or two good songs and the rest crap, because they are in for a wake up call.



    The "medium" you speak off did not exist when PF albums were created. Aside from The Division Bell, every PF album preceded the digital age, so your argument makes no historic sense, as PF was not specifically writing music to distribute in a digital format.



    As for piracy, I doubt that PF cares. With their wealth, why would they lose sleep on a few million bucks? Besides, most of the people who are downloading their stuff will either end up buying their LPs like I did or continue to rip singles only.



    The point that most people seem to be missing is that just because iTunes is now available, it does not mean that bands no longer have the right to control distribution. In the past, if you wanted a single off a PF album, TOO BAD because the band rarely released any. Why should it be different now? It's the artist's choice, and it may be your choice to pirate their music.
  • Reply 84 of 113
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FormerARSgm View Post


    Of course, the same could be said about MEATLOAF. Will you be speaking up for him as well?



    Hey don't let you Meatloaf !



    Yeah. Pink Floyd is just flying off the store shelves. You need to over 60

    to know who the even are. errr I'm over 60.
  • Reply 85 of 113
    applebookapplebook Posts: 350member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by alkrantz View Post


    What's stupid is BELIEVING that people will listen to an album in it's entirety, because it simply isn't true. No matter how much they want it to be.



    This was true for the most part back when their albums were released. With LPs, most listeners chose not to skip songs. PF basically said at the time of their work, if you don't want to listen to all of our songs, then do not buy our album because we are not releasing singles (with a few exceptions). This was their stance, and they have chosen not to change it just because technology has moved on.



    People, Pink Floyd is not a modern band, so stop comparing them to current artists.



    Please stop romanticizing the past too. There were plenty of boneheads back in the '70s and '80s who used music as background fluff for their social activities too. This is not just a 21st century trend.
  • Reply 86 of 113
    applebookapplebook Posts: 350member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by elroth View Post


    I really like one line in "Atom Heart Mother." Why can't I just buy that?



    I also really like only one song on U2's latest album, but because U2 did not release it as a single, I cannot buy it on CD (I do not want compressed downloads).
  • Reply 87 of 113
    applebookapplebook Posts: 350member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post


    Once was enough, thanks. This isn't about artistic integrity, it's about greed.



    Think before you type. Pink Floyd stands to LOSE money by not selling singles. How is this about "greed"? It's about greed for EMI and record tycoons.



    Think before you type --this is the best adage for internet usage.
  • Reply 88 of 113
    woohoo!woohoo! Posts: 291member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by applebook View Post


    The "medium" you speak off did not exist when PF albums were created. Aside from The Division Bell, every PF album preceded the digital age, so your argument makes no historic sense, as PF was not specifically writing music to distribute in a digital format.





    You read my post wrong or perhaps I didn't make it clear enough, but that's exactly what I meant.
  • Reply 89 of 113
    bdblackbdblack Posts: 146member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by azazel- View Post


    You probably know this as 'background noise', in which you are subjected to the likes of Lady Gaga and Nickelback, probably in your workplace. You'd probably be better off continuing to ignore it.



    I hate that background noise with a passion.
  • Reply 90 of 113
    applebookapplebook Posts: 350member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kruge View Post


    No matter how much you might like to listen to Dark Side of the Moon, don't you want to, sometimes, just listen to Money?



    No.



    I listen to Pink Floyd and Radiohead on my speakers when I have the time to do so. If I want to hear singles, I just bring up 1990s pop music.



    Besides, most of my PF listening is on vinyl anyway, so playing just one track is not practical.
  • Reply 91 of 113
    toestoes Posts: 55member
    yawn ... I never liked Pink Floyd and I did grow up during the boom days of vinyl record stores.



    And before you call me a "Menudo fan": I like complete classical symphonies, and any number of other different musical styles and artists, PF just never did anything for me (maybe it's the lack of mind altering substances in my life?).



    More power to them to be allowed to package and sell their music however they like, it doesn't affect me (and I bet _most_ anyone else). True fans already own the complete catalogue and people like me will continue to ignore their music.
  • Reply 92 of 113
    alanskyalansky Posts: 235member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DCno10 View Post


    To anyone that disagrees with the position of listening to/releasing only whole albums: go listen to The Dark Side of the Moon in its entirety.



    Then come talk to me.



    There has never been anything stopping anyone from buying whole albums instead of individual tracks?if they want to. There has never been anything stopping owners of music CD's from playing individual tracks if they want to. The notion that Pink Floyd is somehow protecting the artistic integrity of their albums by forcing customers to buy them in their entirety is ludicrous.
  • Reply 93 of 113
    alanskyalansky Posts: 235member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JimDreamworx View Post


    [sarcasm]

    I'm surprised more artists have not gone after radio stations for daring to play a single track instead of the entire album. That's how this problem started.

    [/sarcasm]



    Good point!
  • Reply 94 of 113
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DCno10 View Post


    To anyone that disagrees with the position of listening to/releasing only whole albums: go listen to The Dark Side of the Moon in its entirety.



    Then come talk to me.



    Long Duk Dong likey Dark Side of Moon when he was 12.



    But not when he was 13.



    No more yanky my wankee! Must go now!! Donger needs food!
  • Reply 95 of 113
    How often did artists release a record or CD that had only two or three good songs on them and the rest were garbage intended to "pad" the rest of the recording space. For those of you old enough to remember buying records, how many albums did you own that actually had decent songs on side B?



    Most people do not want to pay for cable TV "packages" of garbage channels that they do not want. How nice it would be to select and pay for just the five or six channels out of seven hundred that you actually want to watch. Why should music be any different in this regard? Is buying an entire album worth the trouble and expense, if all you want is two songs?



    "Classic rock" and "lite rock" have had a good run, and they are about to join WWII big band music as "ancient" music on yet another "oldies" radio station: Something you listen to while pumping gas or doing the dishes on a Sunday afternoon. "Lite rock" is also commonly found at the dentist's office......
  • Reply 96 of 113
    rainrain Posts: 538member
    The medium is the message.



    - Marshall McLuhan
  • Reply 97 of 113
    I agree with Pink Floyd's right to want their albums sold as a whole. I have pretty much their entire collection on LP, and CD. I even had some on cassette. If I didn't own them, and was to purchase in mp3 format, I'd certainly get the whole album.



    What I find funny though is that they have released some singles before.



    http://www.discogs.com/Pink-Floyd-Mo...release/510353

    http://www.discogs.com/artist/Pink+Floyd

  • Reply 98 of 113
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Bourgoises Pig View Post


    Most people do not want to pay for cable TV "packages" of garbage channels that they do not want. How nice it would be to select and pay for just the five or six channels out of seven hundred that you actually want to watch. Why should music be any different in this regard? Is buying an entire album worth the trouble and expense, if all you want is two songs?



    TV stations and cable companies are not artists. Thanks for making the point that PF has been trying to champion. They are the talent, not the corporations.
  • Reply 99 of 113
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by toes View Post




    More power to them to be allowed to package and sell their music however they like, it doesn't affect me (and I bet _most_ anyone else). True fans already own the complete catalogue and people like me will continue to ignore their music.



    But you choose not to ignore an internet post about them. If you lost 1 minute posting about every band that you didn't care for, wouldn't you have wasted an entire lifetime? Or is PF somehow special in that you especially want to ignore them?



    What is clear is that most trolls love to trash things that they do not like, even if they are needlessly offending people.



    I don't care about the Stones much, but since they have sold hundreds of millions of albums, I'm not going to go out of my way just to criticize them. If I did, then I would be a low-life loser troll who is just flaming to tick people off. Get it?
  • Reply 100 of 113
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by alansky View Post


    The notion that Pink Floyd is somehow protecting the artistic integrity of their albums by forcing customers to buy them in their entirety is ludicrous.



    The only thing ludicrous is your thinking that Pink Floyd is FORCING customers to buy anything.
Sign In or Register to comment.