Blogger arrested, accused of posting 9 unreleased Guns N' Roses songs

[suicide]

All I'm saying is that GN'R didn't loose any money when I downloaded the album since I always had the intention to buy the official release.

So just because you eventually bought the "official release" that makes it okay to steal the material that the band did NOT want released to the public? 

Yep.  It's my loss, not GN'R's. But I guess I could live without the surprise.

[Reinaldo]

Also, i'm just curious... Axl said something about when he played CD at a nightclub that he thought was safer than it was leading to some leaks. Does anyone know if that pertains to this, or was that a different situation or different leaks??

First leaks  = IRS, then TWAT and Better.
I think CITR leaked nearly at that time but rumors were it had a different source (it realy sounded older - a tape like recording).
 
From the Billboard Q&A:

Some artists like to test out their new songs in their car stereos or invite friends to the studio to hear playbacks. How did you listen to the album when it was a work in progress?

AXL: My studio, car stereos, a CD Walkman, computers and different speaker setups, clubs, iPods. Actually, our first leaks were from using a sound system in a strip club in the early hours when it was basically empty. I went there to play the tracks for someone I was interested in working with. I'd gone there with a guy who worked band security, who was allegedly somehow related to the owners, feeling it was a bit more of a protected environment than it turned out to be.

http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/news/shownews.php?newsid=1996

[uzisuicide2002]

Los Angeles - The federal prosecutors handling the case against Kevin Cogill, who posted tracks from the new Guns N' Roses album "Chinese Democracy" to his website Antiquiet before its commercial release, are seeking a six-month prison term on the one misdemeanor count of pre-release piracy he faces, Wired.com reported. The government also calculated that Cogill should owe damages of $371,622, based on estimates it made on how many times the tracks were downloaded as a result of the leak; the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), which has been pushing the case, itself estimated damages of $2.2 million.

The RIAA also, however, said it would accept a damages award of $30,000 if Cogill would "participate in a public service announcement designed to educate the public that music piracy is illegal," according to court documents.

"Making a pre-release work available to the worldwide public over the internet where it can be copied without limit is arguably one of the more insidious forms of copyright infringement," prosecutor Craig H. Missakian wrote in court documents.

"That is because once released it is virtually impossible to prevent unlimited dissemination of the work."

Cogill is scheduled to be sentenced on May 4.

[Skunk]

Also, i'm just curious... Axl said something about when he played CD at a nightclub that he thought was safer than it was leading to some leaks. Does anyone know if that pertains to this, or was that a different situation or different leaks??

First leaks  = IRS, then TWAT and Better.
I think CITR leaked nearly at that time but rumors were it had a different source (it realy sounded older - a tape like recording).
 
From the Billboard Q&A:

Some artists like to test out their new songs in their car stereos or invite friends to the studio to hear playbacks. How did you listen to the album when it was a work in progress?

AXL: My studio, car stereos, a CD Walkman, computers and different speaker setups, clubs, iPods. Actually, our first leaks were from using a sound system in a strip club in the early hours when it was basically empty. I went there to play the tracks for someone I was interested in working with. I'd gone there with a guy who worked band security, who was allegedly somehow related to the owners, feeling it was a bit more of a protected environment than it turned out to be.

http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/news/shownews.php?newsid=1996

Thanks for clearing that up

[russtcb]

I bought the album 3 times (so far). To me, I personally have paid for what I might have heard before that.

How does that compensate for the fact that you heard songs before the band wanted you to as well as them being versions that were not intended to be heard?




/jarmo

Thereagain with the fact that I've bought the finished product 3 times over.

Wait a minute; a case isn't being made that the album didn't sell as well as it could've because of the leaks right?

[ppbebe]

Again it's RIAA and perhaps the label and not the band or jarmo that made the case.

[GNR4L]

I like the idea of 30,000 dollar fine and a public service announcement.  Six month prison sentence is alittle too steep for a first time offender I think.

[jarmo]

I bought the album 3 times (so far). To me, I personally have paid for what I might have heard before that.

How does that compensate for the fact that you heard songs before the band wanted you to as well as them being versions that were not intended to be heard?




/jarmo

Thereagain with the fact that I've bought the finished product 3 times over.

You don't seem to get it.

I'm not talking about the loss of income due to somebody not buying the album when he/she can get it for free.

I'm talking about the loss of certain rights of an artist. Such as having the say when and how their art is made public.

How do you put a monetary value on that right?


This guy ruined the surprise. It's not his right to do so!




/jarmo

[gilld1]

If Axl didn't want the music to be leaked then he should have never played them at a titty bar.  I mean, really, what good was going to come out of that?  Titty bars are not usually full of the most upstanding people in the world.

30k seems a bit harsh to me.  The man did us GnR fans a public service so we should throw a few bills his way to help him out.

[GNR4L]

If Axl didn't want the music to be leaked then he should have never played them at a titty bar.  I mean, really, what good was going to come out of that?  Titty bars are not usually full of the most upstanding people in the world.

30k seems a bit harsh to me.  The man did us GnR fans a public service so we should throw a few bills his way to help him out.

True, but leaking material before is ready to be put out there is wrong.  Which cause's problems with the artist, some people may think its the final version and its not, they may think the album is out and it really isn't, and pretty much damaging any commercial exposure.  Yes it took along time for CD to come, but really ? nobody could wait a couple more months and buy it in Nov ?

[Annie]

If Axl didn't want the music to be leaked then he should have never played them at a titty bar.  I mean, really, what good was going to come out of that?  Titty bars are not usually full of the most upstanding people in the world.

30k seems a bit harsh to me.  The man did us GnR fans a public service so we should throw a few bills his way to help him out.

True, but leaking material before is ready to be put out there is wrong.  Which cause's problems with the artist, some people may think its the final version and its not, they may think the album is out and it really isn't, and pretty much damaging any commercial exposure.  Yes it took along time for CD to come, but really ? nobody could wait a couple more months and buy it in Nov ?

I would  really like to know what kind of agenda the person who made the original leak had. This blogger is just a stupid egotistical pawn.

[themsbreaks]

That's why your analogy is flawed.


It's not just a theft of a physical thing. It's also a theft of an experience (for example: the timing of your first listen) and rights (to choose when and how the public would hear it, what it would cost etc.).


It's like if you're waiting to see a movie that premieres in a few months. You booked a ticket to see it already because you really want to be among the first to see it.

But then D tells the whole world how the movie ends. You can still use your pre-booked ticket to go see the movie, he didn't steal your ticket after all......

That is a good point Jarmo. 

What was truly stolen from Axl and Co., was the right to get their material out to the public when they wanted, and in the form they wanted.

But, now that Chi. Dem. is done, finalized, and "out there", is it still "stealing" if someone downloads Chi. Dem. (like with p2p)?  What is being "stolen"?   i.e. what is being taken from one person, which deprives said person of said thing?

[jarmo]

If you take something that has a price for free, it's not stealing?




/jarmo

[themsbreaks]

Not when the thing in question can be infinitely reproduced - for nothing - with the click of a button.

[mrlee]

the guy leaked out some early demos.

nobody deserves to do time for that.

[Annie]

Back in the stone ages people could tape songs off the radio. Then people taped movies on VCR's.  People will always want something for free. It's just human nature.

[jarmo]

Not when the thing in question can be infinitely reproduced - for nothing - with the click of a button.

So what you're saying is that since a copy can be made for free, it's not stealing.

But to get the music legally, you have to pay. It has a price.

Instead of paying for it, you take it for free. Isn't the the definition of theft?


You don't want to be labeled a thief because you're saying you didn't take anything away from anybody (other than an income).


Why not apply this logic to other things?

Electricity can be made for virtually free too. Use the wind and/or sun.

What if you hook up all your electronics to your neighbor's outlet? Just tell him/her that you didn't steal anything. He/she still has electricity too.

 





/jarmo

[themsbreaks]

the guy leaked out some early demos.

nobody deserves to do time for that.

Certainly not.

And I really hope they don't press for jail time with the goal of it being a deterrent.  This war is already essentially over.   The pirates cannot be stopped.  All that's left now is for the dust to settle.

Back in the stone ages people could tape songs off the radio. Then people taped movies on VCR's.  People will always want something for free. It's just human nature.

Yeah, the record co's thought each of those things would "kill the industry" - but they were proved wrong.

[Annie]

the guy leaked out some early demos.

nobody deserves to do time for that.

Certainly not.

And I really hope they don't press for jail time with the goal of it being a deterrent.  This war is already essentially over.   The pirates cannot be stopped.  All that's left now is for the dust to settle.

Back in the stone ages people could tape songs off the radio. Then people taped movies on VCR's.  People will always want something for free. It's just human nature.

Yeah, the record co's thought each of those things would "kill the industry" - but they were proved wrong.

The problem is that our technology has grown faster than our ethics. I see this in hospitals all the time. The current generation that grew up with computers wants things INSTANTLY!

[themsbreaks]

So what you're saying is that since a copy can be made for free, it's not stealing.

That's part of it yes.  No matter how much music is "taken" from Axl Rose - he still has all of it.

But to get the music legally, you have to pay. It has a price.

So the law is always correct?  Have you ever studied copyright law?  Do you know how it came about?

You don't want to be labeled a thief because you're saying you didn't take anything away from anybody (other than an income).

Buyers determine the market, not sellers.

I don't think Axl will ever starve. 

What if you hook up all your electronics to your neighbor's outlet? Just tell him/her that you didn't steal anything. He/she still has electricity too.

That is not at all the same thing Jarmo.  Electricity is a quantifiable thing.  Yes, he/she would still have electricity, but it would cost him something - it would be taking something from him , i.e. his money to pay for something that he would not get to use (the electricity you took from him).