From: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org (ecto-digest) To: ecto-digest@smoe.org Subject: ecto-digest V11 #18 Reply-To: ecto@smoe.org Sender: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk ecto-digest Wednesday, January 19 2005 Volume 11 : Number 018 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Going to Philadelphia, Phildelphia here we come [Vickie Mapes ] Re: Guardian song stories [Alan ] Re: good news from charlotte martin! [Nadyne Mielke Subject: Going to Philadelphia, Phildelphia here we come Chris and I will be there for Happy's shows on the 29th. We're flying there, staying overnight, and taking a sleeper train back. The tickets are all bought and paid for. She promised a surprise (privately), and damned if I'm going to miss out on whatever it is! Wheeeee! Vickie ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 10:10:47 -0600 From: "Collected Sounds" <2345@collectedsounds.com> Subject: RE: good news from charlotte martin! Andrew wrote: >All we have to do is >have enough willpower to keep saying NO to copy protection with our >wallets, and lo and behold, it will disappear. Really? See I guess my point when I posted this news was this: How is she or her record company supposed to know that you didn't buy it because it's copy protected? I believe (I know I shouldn't have to say this, but from past experience I know I do..'and this is only my opinion'.), but you have to let someone, the label or the artist, know that you are boycotting it. Otherwise it looks like her CD just didn't sell well. What if that means that the record co. decides to let her go and it's not because she's not likeable, but because of their own poor judgment. I don't think that refusing to purchase something is enough. Especially when the artist is someone you are pulling for (and you probably are since you were even considering buying the CD). We must let them know. Obviously people complained to Charlotte because she said, "I know many of you out there have experienced problems..." I just hate to see an artist not be successful because the record company screwed up and alienated the would-be buying public. They should be told the reason instead of just sitting back and refusing to buy something. That's all I was trying to say anyway. I do hope it sells well now, that would be a great lesson for those record mucky-mucks. ~Amy - -----Original Message----- From: owner-ecto@smoe.org [mailto:owner-ecto@smoe.org]On Behalf Of andrew fries Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 2:10 AM To: ecto@smoe.org Subject: Re: good news from charlotte martin! JoAnn Whetsell wrote: > I apologize if this has been posted already, but given the earlier > discussion about the copy protection on Charlotte's full-length debut > album, On Your Shore, I thought people would want to know that a non-copy > protected version is now available. It really is a wonderful album, and I > hope that some people who wouldn't buy it with copy protection will try > it now. JoAnn np: Maryam Mursal - The Journey Good news indeed. See? We can make a difference. All we have to do is have enough willpower to keep saying NO to copy protection with our wallets, and lo and behold, it will disappear. You have my blessing to go and buy the new version now :) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 10:45:21 -0800 (PST) From: Neile Graham Subject: Ectophiles' Guide request for Siberry chords Can anyone help with this? - --Neile - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- neile@drizzle.com / neile@sff.net .... http://www.sff.net/people/neile Editor, The Ectophiles' Guide to Good Music . http://www.ectoguide.org - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 10:39:37 -0800 From: Heather McGartland To: ectoguide@smoe.org Subject: Ectophiles' Guide - General Comment Name: Heather McGartland Email: lady1fontaine@YAHOO.COM Topic: General Comment Looking for guitar chords to Jane Siberry "Love is Everything"........ Anyone out there to help. I have tried every related site and have had no luck.. I would appreciate any help if any.. Thanks.. I love your site!! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 09:03:40 +1100 From: andrew fries Subject: Re: good news from charlotte martin! On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 03:10 am, Collected Sounds wrote: > See I guess my point when I posted this news was this: How is she > or her record company supposed to know that you didn't buy it because it's > copy protected? I believe (I know I shouldn't have to say this, but from > past experience I know I do..'and this is only my opinion'.), but you have > to let someone, the label or the artist, know that you are boycotting it. > Otherwise it looks like her CD just didn't sell well. What if that means > that the record co. decides to let her go and it's not because she's not > likeable, but because of their own poor judgment. I have no argument with writing, especially to smaller record companies or artists, who actually read their mail. But what I am saying, complaining is not enough unless it is backed by actual refusal to buy. Yes, it ideally it should be a two-pronged approach, but boycotting is the essential element, while writing is desirable. Writing not backed by action merely tells them (if they even read it), that you're unhappy. Well guess what - they already know that, yet they want to push this thing no matter how we feel about it. But you can bet they are closely monitoring the impact it has on sales! Poor sales will go into the general pool of information they collect, and that's why I think even if we neglect to inform them, the figures alone will tell the story. Yes, in any individual case it might be hard to tell why the artist didn't sell. But if copy-protected recordings average significantly poorer sales than non-protected ones, it will become very clear to the industry as a whole, and I would say, very quickly. > I just hate to see an artist not be successful because the record company > screwed up and alienated the would-be buying public. So do I, but I also feel this is more important than any individual artist. It's the future of all media, for the rest of our lives! > I do hope it sells well now, that would be a great lesson for those record > mucky-mucks. Agreed! Go. Buy. And I will modify my original statement: "All we have to do is have enough willpower to keep saying NO to copy protection with our wallets, and additionally, inform them of that fact if possible..." hmm yes, this might be more accurate but it's not quite as snappy :) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 18:08:38 -0500 (EST) From: dmw Subject: Re: good news from charlotte martin! On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, andrew fries wrote: > I have no argument with writing, especially to smaller record companies or > artists, who actually read their mail. But what I am saying, complaining is > not enough unless it is backed by actual refusal to buy. Yes, it ideally it > should be a two-pronged approach, but boycotting is the essential element, > while writing is desirable. Writing not backed by action merely tells them > (if they even read it), that you're unhappy. Well guess what - they already > know that, yet they want to push this thing no matter how we feel about it. my two cents ... boycotting AND writing are both essential if you really want to effect a change. plenty of records don't sell well for a large variety of reasons. trust me, if a record does poorly, the first conclusion is NOT going to be "well, it was the DRM." if you want them to know that the reason was DRM, you must tell them. there are a lot of attempts to marginalize this as a geek issue, one that only affects (this is the spin it's given, now, not my opinion) music pirates and the handful of malcontents who insist on using linux. one thing that writing (i'd suggest writing to the labels pr dept and the artist's management, if you're really serious) does is let the artist and the label now that it ISN'T just a geek issue. the more the profile of the issue is raised, the harder it will be to sweep the negative consequences of DRM under the rug. of course trusted computing is going to make the tussle over music look like a tempest in a teapot. and unfortunately i don't see large scale boycotts of office 2003, acrobat 6+, or the hardware vendors who are shipping fritz-ready chips. so it goes. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 19:37:51 -0800 From: Alan Subject: Re: Guardian song stories On Mon, 2005-01-17 at 23:20 +0000, Adam K wrote: > And the other about two guys trying to do a "Morris dancing" remix of > Bjork's "Army of Me" > (http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/features/story/0,11710,1392093,00.html) > That is just *wrong*. - -- "If any sign of pleasure is exhibited, report to me and it will be prohibited. So shall it be! This is the Land of the Free!" - George W. Firefly ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 15:28:58 -0800 From: Nadyne Mielke Subject: Re: good news from charlotte martin! At 03:08 PM 1/18/2005, dmw wrote: [snip] >there are a lot of attempts to marginalize this as a geek issue, >one that only affects (this is the spin it's given, now, not >my opinion) music pirates and the handful of malcontents who >insist on using linux. DRM doesn't affect just geeks. I've unknowingly purchased DRM-protected discs, only to find that they won't play in some of my CD players. The CD player in my car is especially sensitive to those discs; my home player will occasionally refuse to play them as well. My Linux server, on the other hand, couldn't care less. My Mac doesn't seem to care, either, and my Mac is what I generally use when I rip CDs. Way to miss the boat, guys. /nm ------------------------------ End of ecto-digest V11 #18 **************************