Dirty Rotten Filthy Stinking Rich - Music Industry File Sharing

[Amelia G]

It is my impression that the music industry is not doing too well as an overall industry these days. It feels like the rock and roll party is over and all the fun people have gone home. I agree with her that most people in bands today are so greedy that it borders on psychosis.

That said, bre.star stated that her objection to bands being upset about their music being stolen is that they are filthy rich.

What constitutes filthy rich?

[Skavian]

Filthy rich in hedgeclippers and hedgehogs!

Personally, I don't agree that everyone that is opposed to file-sharing is "filthy rich," in any way. Most of them are struggling artists. While I think that art itself should be a freely shared creative experience for the betterment of the whole of humanity, not everyone feels that way about their artistic creations. Usually, they are trying to survive on what they create, so they are the fiercest fighters against file-sharing. It takes all kinds, and there are more variances on the topic than I can shake a stick at.

[killerkat]

when you have more damn money than you can spend.........basterds........


but then theres monitarily rich and other rich.......but that ...hell.nevermind....

[Amelia G]

Filthy rich in hedgeclippers and hedgehogs!

Personally, I don't agree that everyone that is opposed to file-sharing is "filthy rich," in any way. Most of them are struggling artists. While I think that art itself should be a freely shared creative experience for the betterment of the whole of humanity, not everyone feels that way about their artistic creations. Usually, they are trying to survive on what they create, so they are the fiercest fighters against file-sharing. It takes all kinds, and there are more variances on the topic than I can shake a stick at.

That is not the question. The question is how do you define filthy rich?

[Amelia G]

when you have more damn money than you can spend.........basterds........


but then theres monitarily rich and other rich.......but that ...hell.nevermind....

There is always something else someone could buy. Do you mean more than they could spend in their lifetime if they are planning to leave something to their family?

[Sceptic_Messiah]

having enough money to spend on things you dont need like a tv with 50 speakers instead of two or a car with alloy wheels and can bounce up and down, having money to waste on pointless things that everyone wishes for but will never get

[killerkat]

There is always something else someone could buy. Do you mean more than they could spend in their lifetime if they are planning to leave something to their family?

people liike(god forbid i say it) the hilton whore for example, she can just spend money with out ever thinkig of a price,like just spend 100 grand and not even think about it,even joke about if she or her whore friend want's to pay becuse there at SUCH a level in that shit(society) that price means NOTHING.........

[ForrestBlack]

Filthy rich in hedgeclippers and hedgehogs!

Personally, I don't agree that everyone that is opposed to file-sharing is "filthy rich," in any way. Most of them are struggling artists. While I think that art itself should be a freely shared creative experience for the betterment of the whole of humanity, not everyone feels that way about their artistic creations. Usually, they are trying to survive on what they create, so they are the fiercest fighters against file-sharing. It takes all kinds, and there are more variances on the topic than I can shake a stick at.

I agree. I think it really boils down to artist's rights. I'm perfectly happy to share a lot. I work really hard to put some really beautiful things out in the world for free. Amelia and I have worked with cool underground magazines all over the world at great personal expense, all to support our scene, our aesthetic, and many of the cool people we know. However, we seem to be lectured on what else we should do for free, like everything. I think an artist can make some really awesome music and give it away for free, while also perhaps writing commercial material and getting paid an impressive amount for that. It is up to the individual. I kinda see art like sex, in a way. It is up to the individual to decide what they want to do. It would be wrong for people to be like 'you did thus-and-such with him so you have to do that for me (and 250,000 of my closest friends)', just as it would be wrong for them to say She did thus and such so you should have to as well. P2P file sharing violates the rights of the artist to decide what they are and are not cool with sharing. File sharing can be both good exposure as well as a violation. You can not say it's always bad and you can't say it's always good. But, It negates the artists free will in deciding what they can give the world for it's own betterment and what they would like to pay their bills with. So, I feel that in the end, it is wrong, because no matter how you draw the diagram, it does victimize those who rightfully try to choose not to have their work ripped out of their own hands.

and yeah, I know that isn't the question...

[Amelia G]

people liike(god forbid i say it) the hilton whore for example, she can just spend money with out ever thinkig of a price,like just spend 100 grand and not even think about it,even joke about if she or her whore friend want's to pay becuse there at SUCH a level in that shit(society) that price means NOTHING.........

I will absolutely 100% agree with that definition of filthy rich. I'm also going to feel compelled to point out that there is almost no one in the music industry with that kind of money. I mean, I'm pretty sure Paris Hilton actually does have to think about it before spending a hundred grand, but I agree with your fundamental point that the Hilton family has generations of wealth that can be passed on and that could certainly qualify as more than one could spend.

[ForrestBlack]

For the record, I don't have any problems with success, wild massive success. However, I do think it makes sense to give back in your own ways. People want to choose those ways for you, and I think that is wrong, but ultimately, you have to live with yourself, so I feel that you should give back in ways that you feel are right. If you are an oil barron, you should perhaps also work to help clean the environment. If you are an artist, you should lend your talents to folks you feel could use the support. It's about being a good citizen. However, I don't think too much money is simply by its nature bad. If you cause destruction, disrespect what is around you, etc. that is bad. So to some degree I think actions can dirty your money. Filthy money would be money gotten from horrible acts. So, someone could be rich, but if they got it through really destructive terrible means, then they are indeed filthy rich. And I mean that in the worst possible way.

[killerkat]

I will absolutely 100% agree with that definition of filthy rich. I'm also going to feel compelled to point out that there is almost no one in the music industry with that kind of money. I mean, I'm pretty sure Paris Hilton actually does have to think about it before spending a hundred grand, but I agree with your fundamental point that the Hilton family has generations of wealth that can be passed on and that could certainly qualify as more than one could spend.

i actually think theres a bit of people like that in the music biz,hell look at the baby guy(his names "baby") he's worth like 400million,and look at all the other super rich "rappers" and such, the money is there, i think you forget all those 12-16year olds with there new fangled,multi-genre music/trends spend something like a coupoe BILLion anually....a good portion of that falls right into the music industry.....

[bre.star]

It is my impression that the music industry is not doing too well as an overall industry these days. It feels like the rock and roll party is over and all the fun people have gone home. I agree with her that most people in bands today are so greedy that it borders on psychosis.

That said, bre.star stated that her objection to bands being upset about their music being stolen is that they are filthy rich.

What constitutes filthy rich?

really im just talking about the music artists who are already selling mutli-platinum albums, whos names are known, and are solid in the music industry. it just makes me want to say "cry me a river" you filthy rich bastard! who cares if people are burning your music, not everyone is as rich as you, or dumb as you, seeing as how you are probably part of the population who doesn't even know how to download the software! hehe why does this make me so angry??? i think it is just my crazy love of music!

[Amelia G]

i actually think theres a bit of people like that in the music biz,hell look at the baby guy(his names "baby") he's worth like 400million,and look at all the other super rich "rappers" and such, the money is there, i think you forget all those 12-16year olds with there new fangled,multi-genre music/trends spend something like a coupoe BILLion anually....a good portion of that falls right into the music industry.....

Yes, but there are a zillion people employed by the music industry, so those billions are divided up many times. A lot more money is made in fast food and people need to eat. Why are people not yelling about free cheeseburgers?

I will accept that Babyface is extremely wealthy. I admire the wealth built by entrepreneurs such as Russell Simmons. Tommy Mottolla will probably be able to decide who to leave something to when he goes. But these people are in the minority and they certainly don't have Hilton type family wealth.

In the land of the American Dream, a fundamental spirit this country was based on, are we really going to demonize the self-made man?

[Skavian]

That is not the question. The question is how do you define filthy rich?

Fair enough. I define filthy rich as a person who displays opulence as a means of distancing themselves from the rest of their fellow brothers and sisters on this earth. The stereotype of the yuppie cruising around in a big yellow Hummer comes to mind immediately. Also those who claim to be elevated in stature because they have "proven" themselves in terms of success, and therefore determine opinions on a matter as being the truth.

[Amelia G]

really im just talking about the music artists who are already selling mutli-platinum albums, whos names are known, and are solid in the music industry. it just makes me want to say "cry me a river" you filthy rich bastard! who cares if people are burning your music, not everyone is as rich as you, or dumb as you, seeing as how you are probably part of the population who doesn't even know how to download the software! hehe why does this make me so angry??? i think it is just my crazy love of music!

Ever been to the home of someone who had a gold or platinum album ten years ago? Odds are that that album is not paying for much today. The money comes fast, but most people don't know how to save it or invest it. They don't know how to make it last. Hell, I wouldn't know and I think I'm more even-keeled than the average drummer.

Yes, a lot of musicians are greedy and they try to get everyone around them to do things for them for free, while they are getting paid, and I understand why there is a backlash against that and people do not want to pay them.

I just am uncomfortable with people using the musician's supposed wealth as an excuse for theft without any measure for what filthy rich even means. That encourages a nation of whiners and complainers with secret bank accounts and I find that unpleasant.

And, let's face it, you don't want the most recent Jessica Simpson album and that is not what you are downloading.

[killerkat]

In the land of the American Dream, a fundamental spirit this country was based on, are we really going to demonize the self-made man?

american dream? that's shit's been dead for years,in our own country at least,kids these days want nothing but to be rich as fuck by doing nothing and fucking as many peole as they can......

"American dream" is a myth now, i think, not for immagrants of course but for your typicall, trendy american..........


i'm not making alot of since anymore....damn.....



and hell yea poeple look down upon the self-made in the since of joe shmo blacksmith,hell i'm a baker, on the side i make guitars and didges, people have often said i won't make shit for myself doing that...and loking down upon me for not going to colledge,ect....

[ForrestBlack]

Fair enough. I define filthy rich as a person who displays opulence as a means of distancing themselves from the rest of their fellow brothers and sisters on this earth. The stereotype of the yuppie cruising around in a big yellow Hummer comes to mind immediately. Also those who claim to be elevated in stature because they have "proven" themselves in terms of success, and therefore determine opinions on a matter as being the truth.

What if they are better? What if they work harder? What if they are more innovative, more creative, more industrious? Have they not earned the right to enjoy themselves? Did they not earn the right to raise their status? A capitalist economy is built to battle the caste system. You are given the opportunity to choose your station in life and work hard to improve it. What you seem to be saying is that nobody needs to strive to be better, for any rewards from doing so would be wrong.

[Amelia G]

Fair enough. I define filthy rich as a person who displays opulence as a means of distancing themselves from the rest of their fellow brothers and sisters on this earth. The stereotype of the yuppie cruising around in a big yellow Hummer comes to mind immediately. Also those who claim to be elevated in stature because they have "proven" themselves in terms of success, and therefore determine opinions on a matter as being the truth.

I live in Los Angeles where a lot of people buy big yellow Hummers on credit and hope that their investment in perceived success will eventually lead to real success. Sometimes it works. For those people, the big yellow Hummer is a lot like a pipe wrench is for a plumber, tools of the trade. FYI, that is not my thing, so I don't know what car is in for this type of biz this season, but I think big yellow Hummers are like really 2003 at this point.

[Skavian]

What if they are better? What if they work harder? What if they are more innovative, more creative, more industrious? Have they not earned the right to enjoy themselves? Did they not earn the right to raise their status? A capitalist economy is built to battle the caste system. You are given the opportunity to choose your station in life and work hard to improve it. What you seem to be saying is that nobody needs to strive to be better, for any rewards from doing so would be wrong.

I was asked what I thought "filthy rich" means. I gave a stereotype. Those people might consider themself successful, but certainly don't agree. If anything I think they are failed human beings. But rather than replying now and arguing over my definition of failure, why not just take it as an opinion and not an attack on your world paradigm, eh Forrest?

[Amelia G]

american dream? that's shit's been dead for years,in our own country at least,kids these days want nothing but to be rich as fuck by doing nothing and fucking as many peole as they can......

"American dream" is a myth now, i think, not for immagrants of course but for your typicall, trendy american..........


i'm not making alot of since anymore....damn.....



and hell yea poeple look down upon the self-made in the since of joe shmo blacksmith,hell i'm a baker, on the side i make guitars and didges, people have often said i won't make shit for myself doing that...and loking down upon me for not going to colledge,ect....

I think you are totally making sense. I think it is tragic that so many people want to basically get direct deposit into their accounts for doing nothing and perhaps steal what they are not handed for free. Yet this country's greatness was founded on the concept of working hard for a better future.

[Amelia G]

I was asked what I thought "filthy rich" means. I gave a stereotype. Those people might consider themself successful, but certainly don't agree. If anything I think they are failed human beings. But rather than replying now and arguing over my definition of failure, why not just take it as an opinion and not an attack on your world paradigm, eh Forrest?

My point was that conspicuous consumption and filthy rich are not at all the same thing.

[ForrestBlack]

I was asked what I thought "filthy rich" means. I gave a stereotype. Those people might consider themself successful, but certainly don't agree. If anything I think they are failed human beings. But rather than replying now and arguing over my definition of failure, why not just take it as an opinion and not an attack on your world paradigm, eh Forrest?

I thought it was a discussion. I'm not attacking anyone. Just questioning your assertion, trying to find the foundation of your opinion.

[Skavian]

My point was that conspicuous consumption and filthy rich are not at all the same thing.

I think there is a bit to be said about the use of the adjective filthy in conjunction with rich. Rich, fine. People are rich. They use it for better or worse. Somebody that is filthy rich though has an implication with, well, filth. It's a negative connotation.

[Skavian]

I thought it was a discussion. I'm not attacking anyone. Just questioning your assertion, trying to find the foundation of your opinion.

I believe the assertion is that I think that people that truck around like high and mighty examples of divinity are in fact not. At least not to me. I think it is fairly sad that they are out of connection with humanity because they are somehow better than the rest of humanity. But, like I have said, that is my opinion, and I'm not necessarily saying that I am more right, or more wrong on the matter.

[Amelia G]

I think there is a bit to be said about the use of the adjective filthy in conjunction with rich. Rich, fine. People are rich. They use it for better or worse. Somebody that is filthy rich though has an implication with, well, filth. It's a negative connotation.

I was quoting bre.star's reference to filthy rich musicians being the ones who oppose music theft. I wanted someone to define how much personal wealth equalled filthy rich. So far, only killerkat has come up with a workable definition.

[ForrestBlack]

I was quoting bre.star's reference to filthy rich musicians being the ones who oppose music theft. I wanted someone to define how much personal wealth equalled filthy rich. So far, only killerkat has come up with a workable definition.

I think I did.

[23*]

What if they are better? What if they work harder? What if they are more innovative, more creative, more industrious? Have they not earned the right to enjoy themselves? Did they not earn the right to raise their status? A capitalist economy is built to battle the caste system. You are given the opportunity to choose your station in life and work hard to improve it. What you seem to be saying is that nobody needs to strive to be better, for any rewards from doing so would be wrong.

i believe that there is something wrong with any society which accepts money as its fundamental reward.

Status is imaginary.

[Amelia G]

For the record, I don't have any problems with success, wild massive success. However, I do think it makes sense to give back in your own ways. People want to choose those ways for you, and I think that is wrong, but ultimately, you have to live with yourself, so I feel that you should give back in ways that you feel are right. If you are an oil barron, you should perhaps also work to help clean the environment. If you are an artist, you should lend your talents to folks you feel could use the support. It's about being a good citizen. However, I don't think too much money is simply by its nature bad. If you cause destruction, disrespect what is around you, etc. that is bad. So to some degree I think actions can dirty your money. Filthy money would be money gotten from horrible acts. So, someone could be rich, but if they got it through really destructive terrible means, then they are indeed filthy rich. And I mean that in the worst possible way.

Forrest and killerkat both gave good workable definitions

[Amelia G]

i believe that there is something wrong with any society which accepts money as its fundamental reward.

Status is imaginary.

There has never been a society of any kind, either among humans or animals, at any point in time, in the history of the universe which did not involve status of some sort as a part of its structure.

[killerkat]

Forrest and killerkat both gave good workable definitions

awww,well,gee thanks.....

[23*]

There has never been a society of any kind, either among humans or animals, at any point in time, in the history of the universe which did not involve status of some sort as a part of its structure.

I am talking about status & money as primary rewards for industrious behaviour in human society.

i think it is an example which highlights the primitiveness of our civilization.

[Amelia G]

I am talking about status & money as primary rewards for industrious behaviour in human society.

Money is just a tool for exchanging goods.

Status has existed in every human society which has ever existed since the dawn of time.

There is not one example of a human society which did not have any type of status awarded for anything.

[23*]

Money is just a tool for exchanging goods.

Status has existed in every human society which has ever existed since the dawn of time.

There is not one example of a human society which did not have any type of status awarded for anything.

no. money is more than a tool for exchanging goods. it is the primary reward for social behaviour.

and there is not one example of a human society which could not have been considerably better.

[ForrestBlack]

no. money is more than a tool for exchanging goods. it is the primary reward for social behaviour.

and there is not one example of a society which could not have been considerably better.

I'm not sure I understand. I feel that I do a lot of pro-social activities at great cost. My goal is not money, so I'm not sure I see how money is the primary reward for social behaviour. I'm not trying to be a snigglet, I just don't totally get it. Is this part of the anti-success sentiment that seems to be being shared here by a few folks, or do you mean something else?

[Amelia G]

no. money is more than a tool for exchanging goods. it is the primary reward for social behaviour.

and there is not one example of a society which could not have been considerably better.

There are, of course, people who foolishly think money is somehow its own reward, but I do not believe they are in the majority. I personally don't feel money is good for anything but what you can exchange it for. I suppose it is ideal to have enough on hand to be able to exchange it for a comfortable change of situation. I've always just been one to change my situation and be uncomfortable.

I would ask you to name one society which did not involve status in its construction, but I know there is no human record of such a structure ever existing. Not one. It is not possible. Humans can select a variety of attributes to award status, but status itself is an intrinsic part of society.

[Camby Savelle]

First I'll admit that I only read Amelia's question & not the rest of the thread, so if my answer has already been stated I apologize.

I consider being "filthy rich" the point when you actually pay people to do things for you that you could easily do. (such ass change the tv channel, whipe your ass) Or when your to the point that you literally waste money on overpriced dumb things just for fun. (10 bottle of 2000$ a pop champaigne just to spray them everywhere)

[23*]

absolutely not. I like to see people being successful. I can't reiterate that enough. For example, I am genuinely excited at Mistress Jennifer’s shot at a movie deal and would wish her only the best even though i have never met her in person.

It just goes back to the earlier discussion we all had on an another board recently. I think it is backwards to believe that people’s incentive for industrious behaviour should be money tokens and status. I believe that people who are well placed in their careers deserve no more money tokens than anyone else and that if they are good at their job, their non-monetary reward should be in doing something they enjoy. I don’t want to say more because I might find myself in deep water and I already stressed these opinions recently.

[23*]

There are, of course, people who foolishly think money is somehow its own reward, but I do not believe they are in the majority. I personally don't feel money is good for anything but what you can exchange it for. I suppose it is ideal to have enough on hand to be able to exchange it for a comfortable change of situation. I've always just been one to change my situation and be uncomfortable.

I would ask you to name one society which did not involve status in its construction, but I know there is no human record of such a structure ever existing. Not one. It is not possible. Humans can select a variety of attributes to award status, but status itself is an intrinsic part of society.

ah. i think i have been clearer explaining the economic side of my argument. sorry.
I believe status is a very apt reward for people who are good at their jobs.
But just as often it is a meaningless masquerade which disguises mediocrity.

[Jax]

Ever been to the home of someone who had a gold or platinum album ten years ago? Odds are that that album is not paying for much today. The money comes fast, but most people don't know how to save it or invest it. They don't know how to make it last. Hell, I wouldn't know and I think I'm more even-keeled than the average drummer.

Yes, a lot of musicians are greedy and they try to get everyone around them to do things for them for free, while they are getting paid, and I understand why there is a backlash against that and people do not want to pay them.

I just am uncomfortable with people using the musician's supposed wealth as an excuse for theft without any measure for what filthy rich even means. That encourages a nation of whiners and complainers with secret bank accounts and I find that unpleasant.

And, let's face it, you don't want the most recent Jessica Simpson album and that is not what you are downloading.

Quite frankly Ive been to the APARTMENT of a band member whos band has 14 platinum albums. Their apartment is half the size of ours. He lives meagerly, all I noticed was a small kitchen with dishes and a tv and stereo. A few old couches, etc. These people work HARD for their money, and anyone who says they dont needs to be shot. They earn EVERY penny. Does anyone think of the fact of how much money they SPEND to get where they are at? My band is already looking at 20,000 and thats small time. Its 5,000 just to get on a tour with a popular band, then you have expenses on the road. You have to pay distributing, booking, lawyers, labels, managers, etc. We figured out that if we sold CDs at 15 a piece, the band would only make about 10 from that, now divide that by five. Each band member makes only 2 bucks per CD! Not to mention the cost of merchandise, etc. If we hit the road right now, each band member would make 5 bucks a night profit, playing 5 shows a week. And that has to go right back into food and gas to get to the next place. Bands defineately PAY their dues. Plus if a labels signs you and says heres 50,000 bucks to get the next record done, band have to pay that BACK to the label.

Its sad when people complain about the cost of CDs. They steal from these people who are working very hard and HONEST to be successful.

Filthy rich to me is the person who is successful who got that way from being dishonest.

[Morning Glory]

What about aboriginal culture? their society doesn't have any basis for economics, they know that the earth provides all thier needs. I have so much respect for the people that live in the harshest most barron places in the world, and not only survive, but thrive. and on a different subject we praise the use of technology, but it really limits us in some ways, you an me wouldn't last three days in the desert with just a stick. but back to the point, they do have have people of varying importance in thier society, like shamans are respected and revered more than the common man. That is because they ackowldge the wisdom of that person, so it's ultimately a ranking based on character, not on an arbirtary number system of worth. In our society even though my life experiences aren't so different from paris hiltons, she's afforded so many more luxuries and privalages and status in our society for no reason, other than because she's rich and subsequently famous.