Hacker News Reader

Comment by gingerjoos | Hacker News Reader

I'm wondering if the backlash might actually be a good thing. If this sort of backlash becomes common, there will be a disincentive for artists to sign up with records who indulge in such nonsense. Perhaps the system will adapt such that prosecutions like this would be eliminated.

View on HN

> If this sort of backlash becomes common, there will be a disincentive for artists to sign up with records who indulge in such nonsense.

Unfortunately this is the last thing on artists' minds when they're about to sign a deal with a record label, and that isn't going to change anytime soon.

That's true, but established artists might have some leverage. If they get fed up enough, they will start looking for alternatives.

> there will be a disincentive for artists to sign up with records who indulge in such nonsense

No, there won't be. The recording companies will keep doing what they do and the artist will occasionally tweet how awful it is but they can't do anything about it since it's the big bad corporation. The company will take the blame along with its cut.

I've mentioned it before, and I'll say it again: hold the artists accountable. They are the one these organizations are speaking on behalf of. Call them out on their tweets about how they support this directly.

Or do more than call them out. If all the people who posted a useless message would instead avoid buying/watching/listening to anything that involved a certain artist, if we could somehow destroy one big artists career, then no artist would want to be involved.

Basically, use old media's strategy against them: we can't touch the big guys, they're too big. But if we could destroy someone they depend on it would eventually kill them too.

Well, by hold them accountable, I thought it was clear that you would also not buy their products. Regardless, I still think calling them out would do more than simply not buying their album.

Latest spin from the .fi copyright mafia is "this demonstrates how we need legislation enabling softer measures for enforcement", cue 3 strikes etc badness.

Maybe people will stop buying music from the MAFIAA

> there will be a disincentive for artists to sign up with records who indulge in such nonsense

Why would a creative person who's primary method of feeding the family are checks from publishers not want their publisher to diligently protect the revenue model?

Because they understand that "protecting the revenue model" distinctly different than confiscating 9 year olds' laptops.

Because "protecting the revenue model" is destroying the whole market. Instead of "protecting" the existing model, the music industry has to innovate. Doing what they're doing might squeeze out a little cash in the short term but it's a sinking ship and when an alternative breaks out, every artist that isn't part of the new model will be left out just as great bands are left out of the current model now.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com