MetaFilter posts tagged with legal and music

Free, legal music downloads

The Deej — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 21:21:39 -0800

Is the music industry embracing free, legal music downloads? Qtrax is now in beta.

Tube Wars. Get your hose.

trinarian — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 13:07:31 -0800

Tube Wars: A new front opens as the IFPI [think global RIAA] threatens imminent legal war with ISP's.

Free Legal Music Online

copacetix — Sun, 16 Jan 2005 20:27:44 -0800

With all of the talk and posts about itunes, the RIAA, P2P, etc. I thought that I would take this opportunity to point out that there are hundreds of great, free music files online that are legal to download. Sites like Soundloads which posts links to new music every day, Garageband which features up and coming bands, and CNet's music site that lets anyone and everyone upload their files to share with the masses, all feature some great music. And the creators of the music are asking you to download the files for free and add them to your playlists.

I've also downloaded some good music from epitonic.com, purevolume.com, audiostreet, even blogs can be a good source of new, free, legal music downloads. While you're not gonna find the latest big media pop diva or boy band, you can find good music if you take the time to look a little.

The nice kind of propaganda

acornface — Thu, 13 May 2004 12:51:52 -0800

Better Propaganda is a site with hundreds of free (and legal!) mp3 downloads by independent musicians. The range is pretty impressive, going from TV on the Radio to Dizzee Rascal. Good times.

LinusMines — Mon, 23 Sep 2002 08:38:19 -0800

Silence is Golden: A bizarre legal battle over a minute's silence in a recorded song has ended with a six-figure out-of-court settlement.

onegoodmove — Fri, 22 Feb 2002 23:35:29 -0800

Copy Protected CD makers lose battle. Was it inevitable? Do you consider this good news?

topolino — Mon, 18 Feb 2002 01:12:29 -0800

Record Labels' Answer to Napster Still Has Artists Feeling Bypassed (NY Times). Well, it seems the shoe's on the other foot now. Some artists are learning that the industry alternative (Pressplay, MusicNet) to free music downloading services isn't paying quite the dividends they'd expected.

"Last December, the major record labels responded with two Internet services of their own where fans pay monthly fees to download songs. Under this arrangement, however, the performers still don't get a dime: for each song downloaded, they stand to get only a fraction of a cent, according to the calculations of disgruntled managers and lawyers. And, artists and their managers say, the labels, like Napster, aren't putting the music online with proper permission either.

Can't say I have a lot of sympathy for any of the principals involved. What is especially amusing (but not surprising) is the apparent duplicity of the labels: "in comments not for attribution, several executives at labels and their subscription services did not dispute the accusations regarding the payment plan. They said their first priority was to make the services attractive to consumers and that the details of compensation could be worked out afterward."

pheideaux — Sun, 03 Feb 2002 17:27:37 -0800

I hate posting a link from the much-derided Fark, but as a musician myself, actions like this by the music industry really burn me. Basically Limp Bizkit held a "Nationwide Guitar Audition" to find a new guitarist to replace Wes, and (so the main link says) proceeded to rip off the original, uncopyrighted tryouts from hundreds of guitarists. What do you other musicians think of this? Was it really a ploy?

mathowie — Wed, 06 Sep 2000 14:04:42 -0800

mp3.com ordered to pay Universal $118 million for copying CDs to the Mymp3 service, a service designed for owners of those CDs (mp3.com made distribution agreements with the other record labels trying to sue). On the flip side, Yahoo scored a deal with the RIAA to let them webcast music. It's a wacky week in online music [via davenetics].

daveadams — Thu, 11 May 2000 08:09:22 -0800

Napster throws Metallica a curveball. Napster has been pointing out to its kicked-off users a certain provision of the DMCA: If an ISP kicks a user off a service for violating copyright, that user may file a counternotification if they believe they were wrongly accused. The plaintiff (Metallica) then has 10 days to respond with a lawsuit directly against that user. If they choose not to respond, the ISP must restore the account. If enough users (among the 300,000 blocked) file counternotifications, Metallica may wish it had never begun this process.