Yet Another Reason to Hate Metallica

[Dirtbag59]

news: Act 4 removed due to copyright violation


Hi folks,

Deus Ex Machina: Episode 9 - "Doomsday (Part 2 of 2)" [Act 4] has recently been pulled due to a copyright violation, specifically the use of "Ride the Lightning" by Metallica. Guess I gotta start being more careful. No one's really cared about my music usage up until now.

So currently I'm re-rendering the act with different music at the beginning, music that I own the license for.

It definitely takes the edge off the beginning fight sequence a bit as well which disappoints me, but there's nothing I can do. Life's a bitch.

Act 4 will be back up eventually.

Thanks,
Jon

Posted by DigitalPh33r at 10/17/2008 Links to this post
----------------------------------------------------------------
Context: This is from a guy who basically post YouTube videos using Halo and the like. I have actually posted a few of his video's on the Super Happy Fun Thread and they have actually gotten a pretty good response. To go a little further he's huge on YouTube, so much that people post fake episodes of his shows to rick roll unfortunate souls. Still Metallica has become the biggest group of pussies ever since the whole Napster sharade. Ironically they remind me of Eminem going after people like his Mom and Christina Aguleria (How Gangsta).

[Hog1]

Hate Metallica?...???
That's just not right.............

[mooby]

Yeah. I'm a Metallica fan (I even like their new c.d. Death Magnetic, which is leaps and bounds better than that p.o.s. St. Anger lol) but they are always on everybody's nuts about using their music for free. It's annoying but what can you do I suppose.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Artists have the right to make money and people shouldn't profit from their another artist's work unless they pay that artist. But guys like Lars should stfu and admit that they are greedy bastards who have made millions upon millions but don't think that's enough.

[MTK]

It's just funny this was a band that once encouraged taping and trading of their shows.

[Daseal]

This is the same band yelling at people for taking pictures during a concert. Get over yourselves.

I think writers should stop letting libraries carry their books. Writers don't get merchandise sales like musical artists, plus once you've read a book no need to buy it. Libraries are far worse than Napster/Limewire.

[redsk1]

Originally Posted by Daseal

This is the same band yelling at people for taking pictures during a concert. Get over yourselves.

I think writers should stop letting libraries carry their books. Writers don't get merchandise sales like musical artists, plus once you've read a book no need to buy it. Libraries are far worse than Napster/Limewire.

Good point.

[SkinsOrlando]

Another reason why I havent purchased a Metallica album since Re-Load and havent gone to see them in concert since either. Hell just watch there interviews now a days, they try to act all inciteful and knowledgable like they are the great thinkers of our times. PUKE, and everytime I DL one of there songs I get a big woody knowing Lars is losing sleep.

[onlydarksets]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

Artists have the right to make money and people shouldn't profit from their another artist's work unless they pay that artist. But guys like Lars should stfu and admit that they are greedy bastards who have made millions upon millions but don't think that's enough.

Absolutely. I really don't understand the sense of entitlement these days. How are people so dense that they do not understand they are stealing?

If you want the music - man-up and pay for it. Don't steal it and then whine when you get called out for it.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by onlydarksets

Absolutely. I really don't understand the sense of entitlement these days. How are people so dense that they do not understand they are stealing?

If you want the music - man-up and pay for it. Don't steal it and then whine when you get called out for it.

The sales off records does not only take money away from the band but takes money away from the song writers and others involved with the music. My cousin is married to a man who writes songs along with other stuff and each month he gets a list of his royalties for what he writes. Its pretty neat how he gets a penny here and a penny there each time a song he wrote is plyed on the air. We talked about this and he personaly cans say with modern technology he has seen a decline in his royalties for music he writes.

[MTK]

Digital music has presented a number of new challenges to the recording industry which I believe they have been slow to react to and haven't gone about it in the best ways (remember all the lawsuits thrown at people downloading music?).

Along with the easy access to free and or cheap music, I think we have to consider part of it was a backlash against CD prices that were getting a little out of control before Napster came along. I know I'm guilty of downloading free stuff, but I've since changed my ways. I think $9.99 is a pretty reasonable and fair price to pay for albums. But I recall a few years ago seeing CDs going for $19.99 and above in some of the big music chains and just being totally disgusted by those prices. I feel bad for the artists who have been caught in the middle of the battle between the industry and consumers. But I place most of the blame on the industry.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Digital music has presented a number of new challenges to the recording industry which I believe they have been slow to react to and haven't gone about it in the best ways (remember all the lawsuits thrown at people downloading music?).

Along with the easy access to free and or cheap music, I think we have to consider part of it was a backlash against CD prices that were getting a little out of control before Napster came along. I know I'm guilty of downloading free stuff, but I've since changed my ways. I think $9.99 is a pretty reasonable and fair price to pay for albums. But I recall a few years ago seeing CDs going for $19.99 and above in some of the big music chains and just being totally disgusted by those prices. I feel bad for the artists who have been caught in the middle of the battle between the industry and consumers. But I place most of the blame on the industry.

I agree. The industry failed to realize a game changing technology was taking hold and that efforts to thwart it would ultimately fail. If they had opened their eyes to digital music early on they could have been in on the ground floor of iTunes and so forth and probably had made a better position for themselves. I think it is pretty reasonable to pay .99 for a song. I do it it now after spending years of just "stealing" the free ones. The industry needed to figure out ho to make money this way and totally blew it when they didn't.

A part of this that is often overlooked is the relationship between the "industry" and artists. Most artists don't make all that much money off album sales (relative) because labels take most of it. They make their money touring and so forth. These artists don't have much motivation to fight piracy because of that. If the labels had realized that their best assets in the fight against piracy were the artists themselves then they could have worked better deals for the artists to motivate them to fight this. Only the mega artists like Metallica have a true stake in album sales nowadays. You know who else is a dick about this stuff. Good ol' Kid Rock. Another fight the establishment type. He doesn't even let his stuff get sold on iTunes.

[gibbsisgod]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

I agree. The industry failed to realize a game changing technology was taking hold and that efforts to thwart it would ultimately fail. If they had opened their eyes to digital music early on they could have been in on the ground floor of iTunes and so forth and probably had made a better position for themselves. I think it is pretty reasonable to pay .99 for a song. I do it it now after spending years of just "stealing" the free ones. The industry needed to figure out ho to make money this way and totally blew it when they didn't.

A part of this that is often overlooked is the relationship between the "industry" and artists. Most artists don't make all that much money off album sales (relative) because labels take most of it. They make their money touring and so forth. These artists don't have much motivation to fight piracy because of that. If the labels had realized that their best assets in the fight against piracy were the artists themselves then they could have worked better deals for the artists to motivate them to fight this. Only the mega artists like Metallica have a true stake in album sales nowadays. You know who else is a dick about this stuff. Good ol' Kid Rock. Another fight the establishment type. He doesn't even let his stuff get sold on iTunes.

Didn't he come out recently telling fans to steal his music? I think he was giving it away for free on his website.

[SmootSmack]

There's also the people involved that aren't the artists: the people who design the cover art, the people who package the CS, the people who deliver the CDs to the stores, the people who stock the shelves, etc. Compensating them has to be taken into consideration.

[SkinsOrlando]

If the music companies had actually cared about the product they were putting out this wouldn't have been such a big issue. OOOOH a good single, hurry throw 10 other crap tracks on it and package it for 15 bucks and refuse to sell the single as a "single". Hell I can't even remember the last time I saw a "single" packaged anywhere. It became either buy the whole album of crap or find another way, people found another way and with the success of I-tunes it shows people are willing to pay for a product when it's priced accordingly.