Reviews before release date... - Progressive Rock Music Forum

"Maybe not, but other sites were punished because users discussed illegal downloads in their forums, which does not mean that the site promote illegal downloads or offer them."

I'd love to know more about this. How were the sites "punished?" Since there is no law against it whatsoever, all I can possibly envision here is that someone received a threatening E-mail from the recording industry and then didn't ignore it, because they didn't know any better.

nuncjusz wrote:

The T wrote:

tuxon wrote:

Eminem deliberatly released their album on P2P, U2 deliberatly leaked How To dismantle An Atomic Bomb. In both cases they claimed it was because of theft, but it's just a great marketing ploy, and it workes, for they have bypassed the radio and touring part of promoting the album, instead without any costs the internet did their campaign for them.

Most leaks i know of are deliberate leaks by the bands, Nine Inch Nails turned the leaking in an art-form when they slowly leaked their Year Zero Album one song at a time.

look at the timing of the leaks, watch the bands reaction and see how it affects the sales. it's just a marketing tool, and it works.

Yes, you're right... Specially when comparing the commercial viability (and also approach) of Eminem and U2 with DT or Marillion...Yes, what a better example to show us that prog bands are leaking because they want to than Eminem??

While an illegal copy made of a leak off an Eminem album would hurt Mr. Matters' pocket not that much, it really hurts the full-of-holes-wallets of most of our prog bands....

But hey! Let's accept leaks! We're actually helping the bands achieve commercial success by doing so!!!!

Or maybe not???? If there are 1000 DT fans (let's say a number), and there were no leaks, probably 1000 of them would buy the new album, and thus helping the band (maybe DT is not the best example as they're not struggling as much as other bands, but it's THEIR leak we're talking about so...).... But if those same 1000 download "leaks" (an euphemism for INTELLECTUAL RIGHTS THEFT) , maybe only 700 will buy the cd....

Guess who suffers.... The labels? No, they have plenty of more successful artists... the fans? No, some of those cheap fans actually save huge 18 dollars!!!!....The only ones who are being ROBBED are the band members... you know? Those that play the music that you're supposed to like.

Wait, wait. What we are talking about? I suppose the topic is about leaks BEFORE release date, and not leaks in general. As long as we live in the 21st century and we have p2p network, EVERY album can and eventually sooner or later WILL leak to the net. What you are discussing isn't the problem of the leakage before release date, but leakage in general. Do you really think that 1000 of 1000 fans of some band would buy the album it it wouldn't leaked before release date? No way! Because some of them will download it from the net AFTER release date. Simple case and theme for a completely different topic...

I suppose that the simpliest way to avoid reviews before release date would be adding the newly released albums to the site on the day of release and not earlier. Therefore it would be impossible to review an unreleased album...

Now THAT is a great idea "
I suppose that the simpliest way to avoid reviews before release date would be adding the newly released albums to the site on the day of release and not earlier. Therefore it would be impossible to review an unreleased album...[/QUOTE]" Clap

Edited by Melisma - June 21 2007 at 23:17

Melisma
Life is a trip! Death is an odyssey...