Anthrax’s Scott Ian: Ban Illegal Downloaders From the Intern

Jeanwah wrote:

Metallica drummer Lars Ulrich may have finally found his soulmate for hatred of Internet downloading – within the Big 4 of thrash, no less. Anthrax axeman Scott Ian recently spoke with New Times about the decline of record sales, Anthrax fans “stealing” the band’s 10th studio album, ‘Worship Music’ and how illegal downloaders should be banned from the Internet.

When asked about ‘Worship Music’ selling 30,000 albums its first week and entering the Billboard charts at No. 12, the band’s highest debut in 20 years, Ian immediately began his tirade against illegal Internet downloading. “The fact that we sold 30,000 the first week and entered at No. 12 was awesome — for 2011,” Ian replied. “But to put it in perspective sales-wise, it just sucks that 30,000 is considered a huge success in 2011. It’s a double-edged sword because on one hand it’s like, “Woo-hoo, we did great,” but then it’s also like, “Yeah, but how many other people stole the record, and you should have sold 150,000 copies this first week?”"

Ian has debated many Anthrax fans about the issue on his Twitter page. “There is no argument. I’m not even going to get into that conversation,” exclaimed Ian. “You’re stealing! It’s stealing, that’s what it is. It’s not free for us to make these records. These records are on sale in many, many places where you can pay your money to buy the product that we are selling. Anything outside of that is stealing. There is no conversation to be had.”

Finally, when asked about what the punishment should be for Internet downloading, Ian responded, “You lose your Internet. That’s it, no more Internet for you. Seriously! Like you drive drunk, you lose the privilege of driving. You download illegally, you lose the privilege of having the Internet. The punishment fits the crime.”

Anthrax are currently touring the U.S. with fellow metal legends Testament and Death Angel. Click here for their latest tour dates.

**********************************************************************************************************************************

I can't blame him. Music piracy is why shows have gotten so expensive. Just because we can download music from the internet doesn't make it right.

I agree it's straight up stealing and many bands lose tons of money froM this kind of piracy. How would you feel seeing the music you have created being taken for free or you had a music store and seeing your cd's walking out the door? It's no fun....bands like my friend Michael Franti allows taping/videos of his live shows depending on the venue he's playing. He makes most of his money from CONSTANTLY TOURING and trust me it takes it toll after years of this. Many times you NOW SEE bands lend their music and jingles to commercials and tv shows. Michael is among them just to make ends meet...then some consider him a sellout I say rubbish at least in the case of MF & SPEARHEAD.

PEACE

http://www.braincrave.com/viewblog.php?id=307

"Dead" against copyrights
from Braincrave Second Life staff

Aug 28, 2010
Jerry Garcia is famous for saying "And as far as I'm concerned, it's like I say, drugs are not the problem. Other stuff is the problem." As the lawyers at the RIAA claim that copyright law "isn't working" for them, wanting to use guns to impose their will, the most successful touring band of all time - the Grateful Dead - proves again that copyright law is not required to create value or to be successful. Property rights are based on the economic concept of scarcity - something that is finite is, by definition, scarce (e.g., think of the space where you are sitting). Only one person can have control over it and, therefore, there is the potential for conflict. Contrast this with something that is infinite - multiple people can control it without impacting the other (e.g., think of an idea or a song). No amount of copying will ever cause a conflict in ownership. The Grateful Dead are a textbook example of how refusing to rely on the copyright crutch to "protect" your content actually helps you sell more of it, and even get rich from it. People who work with open source software have known this for a long time. When your ideas (e.g., music, art, stories) are valuable, you don't need to initiate force to make money - they will sell on their own.

FTA: "By no means the best instrumentally or vocally, the band built its success on an approach to the music business that was 180 degrees from their competitors. While other bands posted signs at the entrances to concert venues saying, "Recording and photography of tonight's performance is strictly prohibited," the Grateful Dead encouraged fans to record their concerts and shoot pictures of the show... Did this taping hurt album sales? No. It served as free marketing for the band. And as David Meerman Scott and Brian Halligan point out in their new book, Marketing Lessons from the Grateful Dead: What Every Business Can Learn From the Most Iconic Band in History, the band went as far as to set up special sections for tapers in 1984. These sections were behind the band's mixing board and would form a "forest of professional-grade microphones rising to the sky." So if there were all these bootleg tapes floating around, has anyone been buying Dead albums? I guess so: the band has had 19 gold albums, 6 platinum albums, and 4 albums that have gone multiplatinum... Committed Deadheads have followed the band around to see hundreds of shows. In some cases these fans support their Dead habit by selling merchandise or food items in the parking lot, and this activity is endorsed by the band. Like Amazon with its affiliate program, the Dead supports anyone who sells band merchandise."

Drowned Out wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

On the other hand, I know there is a lot of music/movies people would never bother to listen to/view if it wasn't available on torrent sites.
...

This is the crux of it for some. There is a lot of music out there that is nice to have, but not worth spending money on. I'm guessing the new Anthrax album would fall into that category Quality music is worth paying for...but not at a 2000% mark up. Very few industries get away with that kind of margin. And not when they expect you to buy it in four different formats over 20 years. I understand the anti-piracy argument, and agree somewhat...but I really feel zero sympathy for anyone but the artists (tho in the end, I think the internet is GOOD for ART, and BAD for BUSINESS).
The business model employed by the record industry was unsustainable; instead of focusing on changing with the times and taking the lead with creative ways to keep their customers coming back, they gouged them as long as they could and focused their energy on mergers with other branches of the media, telecom, and electronics businesses etc....they spread themselves too thin and didnt do enough to remain relevant...in other words, they didn't just get fucked by people 'stealing', they fucked themselves. Good riddance.

And I don't buy that concert ticket prices and file sharing are directly related. ALL entertainment ticket prices have risen astronomically over the last 15-20 years. Live theatre, sporting events etc...

I honestly believe that the internet is allowing people who normally would never have sold a record to be able to make a living because they are getting their own music out there without the help of a giant record label who takes most of the profits for their "work"
The artists have historically been raked over the coals anyway, now that the Record label isn't getting its fair share they are finally complaining...before when it was simply the artist who made little why the label made lots it wasn't a problem...
if piracy cannot kill the games industry than it shouldn't be able to kill the music/entertainment industries either.

bootlegger10 wrote:

I understand the argument that dowloading free music may increase a band's fan base and then they'll buy concert tickets, shirts, etc... in the future whereas if they had to pay for music they may never have given the band a shot.

Here is my thought:

It is not up to the consumer to determine whether music should be free. It should be up to the creator of that music. It should be the band's decision whether they want to give away their music to build a fan base, or to charge for their music. The band should be able to choose the business model it wants to follow.

I agree with this 100%. If they think that they'll do better giving their music away for free, that's their right. However, if they feel they'll do better the traditional way, that's great too.

Personally, I like to be able to buy music directly from the bands (at shows, from their websites, etc...)

BinauralJam wrote:

I agree with him, BUT, all those years selling $20 cd's that cost $1.12 to manufactor on which he made millions, if the music business hadn't been greedy, people would have never resorted to stealing in the first place.

this^

and also its a currupt system for his band as well. he gets about a dollar at most for every album he sells. im not a fan of anthrax, but he as an artist deserves more than a buck, especially considering the work that goes into making an album and the fact its on sale for 20 bucks.

laying the blame on downloaders is a complete misunderstanding of the situation. the blame lies squarely on the labels. i feel absolutely no sadness at the fact that the industry is dying. i think we need to seriously discuss a viable alternative, where the artist is treated well, paid fairly for their work, and given respect. Thats the minimum.

i think making a target or example out of people who download is pointless.

for how long now have we heard the same echoes and statements by people, "these are criminals, jail them, fine them, take away their internet". implicit in this argument is the naive belief that illegal downloading is a trend, something that will go away in a few years, if only we get tougher and harsher on those who commit the actions. that ian's words, or the words of any artist on this issue will be paid any mind. in the hours since this story was published how many illegal downloads were made by people? millions? billions? Theres this silly and naive idea many people seem to have that, 1, downloading can be stopped and curtailed, and 2, that to actually go and purchase music, whether on itunes, or at the local cd store, is helping the artist, while dwnloading illegally only has a negative side. this is demonstrably false. Scott ian loses a dollar at most everytime someone downloads his music. Whereas, the cd is being sold for 20 bucks. thats a problem that existed long before downloading and its one that purchasing records, buying records legally does nothing to address.

Artists deserve more. To be paid more. To not be exploited. To not be looked at merely as profit. To not be dropped as soon as they make music that isnt selling well. And that goes for all artistic mediums. Not just music. Downloading isnt the issue.

quimby20 wrote:

blackredyellow wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

Ever think of why the shows are so expensive? It's because of piracy!

Not saying it's right, but piracy has really nothing to do with the cost of concerts.

No, the costs of concerts has everything to do with Piracy. This is the only way they make money these days. So why not give us our money's worth. From the big boys, Pearl Jam and Springsteen are the only ones (my opinion) who make the concert experience worthwhile. Widespread Panic does a good job also. Newer acts like Cage the Elephant, Gaslight Anthem, Against Me! and The Hold Steady do a great job for like $20 a show. Just saying.

disagree. if it were true then concerts in australia wouldnt cost as much as they do. im about to pay twice as much to see ryan adams in sydney as i did to see him in seattle. the venues are comparative... the gig itself will be the same concept in both places. so why such a wide pice discrepancy??
many things contribute to the price of tix.. the hire of the venue, the security, the hire of protective surfaces for grassed stadiums... not to mention the wages of everyone working at the gig on any given night. i think youll find merchandise contributes a shitload to the revenue from tours.