The Smiley Smile Message Board

Here's a list I've been updating as new NPP stuff has been released.  I originally posted it in Woodstock's NPP Reviews thread, http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,20171.0.html (http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,20171.0.html), but thought it would be a good idea to separate it as its own thread, and maybe be pinned until the release of NPP for easy access.  Anyway, it lists direct links to everything that is available thus far relating to NPP:  samples, studio tracks, live tracks, etc.

Amazon samples:  http://www.amazon.com/Pier-Pressure-Deluxe-Brian-Wilson/dp/B00TB5M9T0/ref=tmm_msc_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=&qid= (http://www.amazon.com/Pier-Pressure-Deluxe-Brian-Wilson/dp/B00TB5M9T0/ref=tmm_msc_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=&qid=)

Google Play samples:  https://play.google.com/store/music/album/Brian_Wilson_No_Pier_Pressure_Deluxe?id=Bc5sies6kucu622hhojlsbkzajy&hl=en (https://play.google.com/store/music/album/Brian_Wilson_No_Pier_Pressure_Deluxe?id=Bc5sies6kucu622hhojlsbkzajy&hl=en)

iTunes samples (only released songs will preview):  https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/no-pier-pressure-deluxe/id965343675 (https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/no-pier-pressure-deluxe/id965343675)

NPP trailer:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_vj5u-CXkE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_vj5u-CXkE)

Soundstage trailer:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GGmDPtrpWE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GGmDPtrpWE)
(Wild Honey:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pF9k3I1sQSE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pF9k3I1sQSE))

Runaway Dancer:  https://open.spotify.com/track/3unsixCRxLQW353fIfg10d (https://open.spotify.com/track/3unsixCRxLQW353fIfg10d)

Runaway Dancer (Live):  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgQQKnT0hv4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgQQKnT0hv4)

On the Island (1:31:58 into the program):  http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05mplm6 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05mplm6)

Our Special Love (Hollens Album Version):  https://open.spotify.com/track/63C74sXSFFjmX64ZgD75X8 (https://open.spotify.com/track/63C74sXSFFjmX64ZgD75X8)

The Right Time:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTkM3uqWctg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTkM3uqWctg)

The Right Time (Live):  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3ZOilWHcYI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3ZOilWHcYI)

Guess You Had to Be There:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgSU2rnMR_k (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgSU2rnMR_k)

I'm Feeling Sad (1:18:00 into the program):  http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05nsb9x (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05nsb9x)

Sail Away:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPT2qSUrmAw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPT2qSUrmAw)

Sail Away (Live):  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUSHyKhpSis (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUSHyKhpSis)

Saturday Night (1:26:29 into the program):  http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05mpzxn (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05mpzxn)

The Last Song (29:15 into the program):  http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05ndvry (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05ndvry)

Edit:  Thanks for the new links WesB8302 and "Big Daddy"

Studio version of Sail Away:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPT2qSUrmAw

Recorded it on my computer for reference and documentation.

“Guess You Had To Be There” http://www.esquire.com/entertainment/music/a33878/brian-wilson-10-favorite-songs/

Wow - what a gorgeous production - very catchy, airy, girl groupy, with just the right touch of Probyn banjo. Wall O' Brians sound great!

Wow, another excellent song!  I was anticipating this one the most and it doesn't disappoint.

I love Kacey. :love :love :love

(http://cdn.hitfix.com/photos/4694462/No.-5--Kacey-Musgraves-Follow-Your-Arrow.jpg)

Great production, Kacey sounds wonderful on this track. This reminds me so much of Wouldn't It Be Nice - it just keeps happily bouncing along. 5/5

Can't wait to hear this in the confines of the album!

Wow, this new album is going to be all over the place in the best possible way. The arrangement almost makes it sound like a recent Wilco song

Sounds good, but again a little too familiar in places.  Sting's "All This Time" anyone?

Not in the slightest. Not your "Greatest American Hero" one either.

Agreed!  :tm

Eh, I can hear it just a little bit, but not nearly enough to make me create an (second?) account and make a post on it.   ::)

Doesn't allow mw to listen Guess You Had to Be there, but god is that Saturday Night great song. Blows my mind.  ^-^

Couldn't agree with you more.  Not in the slightest.  Greatest American Hero??? 

Kacey is a multiple grammy winner, a quality artist, and this song is amazing.  Great collaboration.

After collecting and compiling these tracks in the order they will appear on the album, I sat down for a listen on my stereo.  Even with only (roughly) half of the tracks from No Pier Pressure I was left extremely satisfied with the end results. The versions I have are of varying fidelity but it didn't distract from my enjoyment. This album has a chance of being something special. While it's not a Beach Boys album or typical 'seasoned artist with famous fans' duets collection, it's a pure Brian Wilson production.

April 7th can't get here soon enough for me.

You are a pirate.

we do not have a linked to any recording or any performance of the song called what ever happened. I have just heard from someone who has listened to the album that this is an extraordinary song and one of the great ones on the record. I hope that this is the case and I hope that it will represents the three beach boys who were involved in its creation. I also would like to know how many songs Al is singing on. I read some material on the song our special love, and there seems to be some confusion about the collaboration and who was sending tracks to whom and how the final result came out. So I wonder if Blondie and Al are singing on that. I suppose that the professor is simply saying that there are many unanswered questions that might indeed be answered when the album comes out.

And my new favorite is...

..."Runaway Dancer" (http://smileysmile.net/board/Smileys/default/cool.gif). Upon hearing the sax, I expected sth. worse, but it turned out to be a real funky stuff. Great clip, I liked the dancing gestures of Sebu like he was skiing.
look forward to hearing the album.

Are you going to buy it or steal from Brian?

I'm going to order it where I usually order music online. Or just ask one of my Smiley friends that will upload it on sendspace. There is no marketing for record players in our lil town. So I have to hear it some way. And since I'm a fan, I cannot miss any new stuff.

As you see, I'm honest and it's not stealing. I'm a genuine fan & I sure don't expect anyone to tell me or hint that I steal, thank you very much.


See? This was all started by The Cin Kid. He's guilty, not me. He 1st started by asking provocative query. I only made harmless comment about a song. And Ovi-like tell me *I* make provocative comments. Again, double standards. :quote

I'm not sure you understand the concept of stealing.

Yep, stealing.

If you don't pay someone who made it, or bought it from someone who made it, it's stealing.

The internet tries to stop people from accusing them, but they are almost always in the wrong.

If more new fans come along via passing the d/l links, I think it only benefits. None of those artists cares, that's for sure. They are all rich, at least you won't deny that? It's not stealing, once again, it's a new way of hearing music. If you don't get it, you may be stuck in the past, I'm afraid.

In other words, I'm with RDZ, who doesn't get this snobbery either.

Buy the damn thing! ::)

Send me your record player ::)
Ah, forget it, shouldn't talk to trolls who repeat the same tish over and over (the troll cries uncover the trollfield). ::)

Stuck in the past? No, it is you who are stuck with this feudal idea that people shouldn't pay for goods. Money makes the world go around Rangerover - if everyone stole this sh*t the artists would have ZERO incentive to continue creating art.

You don't need a record player to listen to music - as you said, there are online music stores that will gladly take your money. I work hard for my money, and I pay for 99% of the music I listen to. In a small way I'm helping keep these artists on the road, I'm helping them put a roof over their heads, I'm helping them create more art. If you're hard for cash I can totally understand the need to have a friend send you something over Sendspace (as long as you're willing to pay for the tracks when you get some extra money), but if you have the money, and actually care about the artists you listen to, you owe it to economics, modern civilization, to those who actually pay for the music, and the artists themselves to pay for the goods you use.

So Brian's new record isn't worth $10 to you?

Thanks everyone for taking this one on.  I felt like I was alone out there insisting that this is theft.  As I recall, my comments on another thread were ignored.  If you can only play MP3's, well, you can most certainly buy them or at least convert the recordings you BUY to MP3's.  I don't care how rich an artist is, if you're enjoying their work, they deserve to be compensated.  Even if someone gives you a recording, you can still buy a copy of it and compensate the artist.  Do you steal stuff from the home of the rich person in your area because they have more money than you?  It's the same dam* thing!  Yes there are thieves with a lot of money.  Artists aren't those people.

And the fact is lots of people nowadays try to find a website that doesn't require registration or paying money. It's been like that & will be. It's called "life-hacking". Sure, if I don't find a certain track, I 1st order to upload it, then if they still don't have it by then, will pay the money for.

Also, there is a freedom of choice, isn't there? No one should force anyone to do so and so & say that I "owe it to economics". Coz that's ridiculous. Why no one regulates it, then? Why no one officially states a law that it's totally wrong to get music for free? Then it's not stealing.

I sometimes wonder if someone else said the same thing, would you react this way? Nope. Double standards, ya know.

What do you do for a job, Rangey?

https://www.riaa.com/physicalpiracy.php?content_selector=piracy_online_the_law (https://www.riaa.com/physicalpiracy.php?content_selector=piracy_online_the_law)
http://www.riaa.com/faq.php (http://www.riaa.com/faq.php)

Some reading material for you.

Call it "life-hacking", call it whatever you want. For the rest of us who care about our economic system, it's called "stealing". These laws exist for a reason. Laws aside, it's just common sense to pay for the things you use.

Exactly.

Laws don't apply to Russkis, just ask.

Thanks for those links, Rab.  Not that it will matter if someone is insisting on the justification of petty theft by saying it's "modern."  So is trolling.  That hardly makes either acceptable, and one does happen to be ILLEGAL.

Thanks, I did the reading. But thing is, it only applies for the U.S. I am from Russia. 2nd, all the music I download stays only within my laptop. I don't share it with everyone online, only a few folks offline. I never shared anything without permission, be it an authorized picture and so on. Don't go overboard making it worse than it is. I have common sense, don't worry for that. 3rd, that comparison Ms. Levitt gave I think is incompatible. it is not the same as when you d/l music shared by a middling person that I can't see. Whereas you steal the stuff at home directly, you are responsible & you are guilty.

Not sure where to put this but here's Zooey talking about working with Brian:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nqq65IEJI0

agree to disagree

Frankly, it pisses me off when I work hard and use my extra money to buy music and people like you come along and illegally download the music without question. If people like me DIDN'T exist then no one would be making the music in the first place...because the artist would have no incentive to record because they would not be getting paid. You're taking advantage of the fact that hardworking, honest, and law abiding citizens PAY for the music that YOU listen to. So if I appear to be going "overboard", good.

Read those links again...Even if the laws don't apply in your country, the reasons for those laws existing are quite clear.

If you really can't see the ethics behind the concept of buying things that you use (concepts I was taught and understood in grade school), then I'm done debating it with you.

How on earth would you know how Brian feels about this?  We're not talking about equality.  We are talking about theft.  Do you work for free?  If someone provides a service or a product, they deserve compensation if you use it. Period.  I don't care if you're from frikkin' Mars.

I think Brian has always been interested in sales and having hit records.

<<And the fact is lots of people nowadays try to find a website that doesn't require registration or paying money. It's been like that & will be. It's called "life-hacking". Sure, if I don't find a certain track, I 1st order to upload it, then if they still don't have it by then, will pay the money for. Also, there is a freedom of choice, isn't there? No one should force anyone to do so and so & say that I "owe it to economics". Coz that's ridiculous. Why no one regulates it, then? Why no one officially states a law that it's totally wrong to get music for free? Then it's not stealing.
I sometimes wonder if someone else said the same thing, would you react this way?
Anyhoo, "Runaway Dancer" rocks! Way to go, Brian. Hello from Russia.>>

(edited to remove statement lumping in all Russians)  Absolutely no common sense understanding of how the free market works.  Sheer inane insanity.  Living in the past, my ass.  It is stealing, pure and simple.  It's not even a question of profit margin.  It's a question of who pays to CREATE the art?  It isn't just artists salaries or points... it's production time, equipment, musicians, all the expensive stuff that goes into making music.  Perhaps in Russia, the government still subsidizes art, but not here.  Someone has to pay all these people, rent all this equipment, studio time, support staff, technicians, etc.  Who's going to do that?

This modern day mentality that all content should be free - "it's the future" - is bull - children bleating that whatever they want they should be able to have, free, right now.  Whether it's a college education, a high paying job, the latest movies or even the new Brian Wilson album.  It's a mentality that has created an entire generation of self-entitled brats.

No it doesn't. Don't lump all Russians together just because RangeRoverA1 doesn't know right from wrong.

What for are you addressing me like that? I wasn't being over familiar with you or rude (I mean your last bit). Very 'classy'. Speaks more about you. :quote
    I was explaining why it's not a case of theft, but somehow, everyone is telling me it is. As to your 1st question, it is a known thing that Brian doesn't care about business side, only recording side of making music. Sure, as Fire Wind said, he likes hits, but it's on the surface, he doesn't actually get into details of how the charts work, behind the scenes or whatev. it's called.

2 Steve Latshaw, I didn't say I'm for all things free - education etc. Let's not exaggerate. We are talking  about digital downloading or at least I was. Do the artists get paid for postings on Youtube? Why are they still up? Are all these viewings equal to a sum of dollars or how they count it? Don't they know there are lots of ways to save any video from there, not just watch it? I think there is some kind of double-sidedness here.

This music would not exist if money wasn't involved.  To say otherwise is just wrong and ignorant.  It's impossible to understand how you think it's ok to steal something that Brian worked on for two years and put a lot of effort into.  Obviously you don't really care about him considering you're not even willing to spend the 10-15 dollars it takes to buy his album.

*sigh* buy the album.....

Those pants are fake. Joe Thomas obviously took a plain old pair of cotton pants and sprayed them with a semi-gloss acrylic sheen. Very unnatural looking. Don't these people know cotton will never go out of style. Why would a beautiful girl cheapen herself with an outfit like that!

The only reason why Brian was able to record music was because people bought his records in the first place. Imagine if everyone stole the 45s or LPs from the record store (which is EXACTLY the same thing) - Brian wouldn't be in the music business for long and I guarantee we would never have gotten Pet Sounds. This is common sense economics.

Youtube videos make money from advertising...so the artist is making money while at the same time getting good exposure for their music. Record companies know that there are ways to rip the music from youtube, but they rely on the honesty of law-abiding citizens to make the right choice to buy the music legally if they like what they hear.

Seriously RangeRover, take an online economics course - they're available to download from iTunes for free - that should be enough incentive for you.

agree to disagree

<<No it doesn't. Don't lump all Russians together just because RangeRoverA1 doesn't know right from wrong.>>

U.B.... you are absolutely right.  I was wrong to lump all Russians into that comment and I will withdraw it.

Damn. Ever since high school, I've loved catfights. 'Bout time we had one on this board!

Who really loves Brian the most?  Prove it!  Ah Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!   ;D

Take the advice of an "old dude" and buy the damm album RRA1, you'll be glad you did.  Besides a CD sounds better than mp3.

 :hat

I like what I've heard (bought The Right Time on iTunes) so far, so I'm buyin' it.  Maybe it will tide me over till Brian's rock n roll album!!

"Whatever happened to me and you...."

agree to disagree

How about next time Brian does a q&a, you ask him whether you should illegally download the album?

Good one, Paul J B.

Why do you think laws about music piracy have been put in place in civilized countries? Because record companies DO mind it when people illegally obtain music...just because the government hasn't banned file-sharing websites doesn't at all mean they don't see a problem with stealing. By your logic the government doesn't mind people buying and selling drugs because they haven't banned the use of city streets. Also, say what you want about how Brian is only in it to make beautiful music, but had there not been a market for it (i.e., had most people stolen records back in the day), Murry would NEVER had invested his own time and money into that band....and the band we know and love today wouldn't exist.

Also, not sure about others, but I'm definitely not questioning your love of the music. I'm questioning your ethics when it comes to the buying (or lack thereof) of music from said band.

Perfect.  That's exactly what I was thinking.  In the mean time, I've given up trying to explain ethics to someone who refuses to understand that stealing Brian's music is a bad thing.

If you have means (logistically) to buy the CD, then of course that's what should be done.

I just find it interesting that this topic comes up in a thread that has links to YouTube, which is a place that is FILLED with infringing material that EVERYBODY looks at and listens to. Yes, when Brian's own VEVO channel posts a video with a track from the new album, that's legit.

But technically, just about everything on YouTube that isn't from an official source or someone's home movies is probably copyright infringement that simply hasn't been enforced. I'm sure this debate has been had all over the internet for probably 15 years or more, but at what point is streaming a YouTube video that is not licensed/sanctioned so terribly different from downloading the album?

Is the argument specifically that not buying Brian's CD is being frowned upon, or is it the infringement involved? What if you download a leaked copy of a CD before release date, but then also buy the CD when it comes out? What if you own every Brian/BB music and video release ever put out, and then you stream something on YouTube posted by a random person? Those things are technically infringing as well.

I'm not defending anyone downloading the album illegally, and/or not buying the CD. This is more just food for though.

FFS, I've been earning nothing but minimum wage since the end of August and even I saved enough to purchase the album. Just buy the damn thing dude...

Lemme tell you sumpthin. A little facto-mundo here.

There is NO ONE (ZERO) people on this board that haven't "stolen" Brian's music before. Not one person.

And I guarantee you that this new album will be available on multiple web sites for free before it's even released. Just like all the previous Brian/Beach Boys releases (i.e. MIC) in the past few years. And there will be alternate versions of the released tracks available for download for free.

Not condoning illegal downloading here at all - just tellin' it like it is.  I'll listen to the whole thing before April 7. But I'll still buy the CD with the boner tracks at Target, then probably look for the other versions later. 'Cause I'm a big fan and collector, ya know.

If you read page 2 of the thread, this person we were having the discussion with made it clear that she pays to download the track as a last resort, if she can't download it for free.  That is definitely not supporting the artist's work and it is deliberately stealing from the artist.  I doubt anyone has a problem with collectors who certainly buy each release in every conceivable form.

Exactly Debbie!

Hey. We already have one cheerleader on this board.  Do you want to be the male cheerleader now?   :-D

Wait. We already have a male cheerleader here. I forgot about Shady.

Debbie, my 'collector's' point was secondary to my first point.  I was covering my tracks before someone suggested that I also download music exclusively for free and don't bother to buy the CD or pay for the download on iTunes or Spotify or wherever the choice is. It's just the nature of the beast with the Internet these days.

All I was saying is what a lot of people here do and won't dare to admit. And why should they? It's obviously better to support the artist, but there will be people who will look to the Rock websites and Torrents and other sources to download it for free instead of paying .99 per song or springing for the entire CD on Amazon. I could go on but I'll leave it to Jude or others. Can't say I disagree with you Debbie because you're obviously right, but unfortunately these days the artist doesn't pocket all the money they're entitled to.

Mikie, I will cheer lead a Mikie vs. Bgas collectors showdown.

Personally, I'd much rather see a Dempsey/Bgas or SMiLEHolland/Bgas showdown. MetalFlake Paint will go up against the winner of that bout.  You can be the ref, SB.

Mikie - Clearly we don't disagree and I'm not naive about what is happening to the music and film industries as a whole with illegal downloads.  And we know that collectors are the best supporters of their favorite artists, so my complaint isn't with these people.  I know quite a few of collectors and they buy every single release no matter what is out there for free.

But for someone to come onto SS and flat out say that they only buy BB's/Brian's work as a last resort when she can't download it for free, and then to argue that it isn't stealing from the artist is offensive to me, and I would think every artist here who would like to be paid for his/her work.

This is so absurd. There are good arguments I've heard about the morality and economic effects of illegally downloading music. None have been raised here. It has nothing to do with illegal downloaders' vs. paying customers' equality or fandom-connection to Brian Wilson, that's for fucking sure. And before I rant--which I'm about to--here's the disclaimer where I say I'm no angel on the topic. And I'm only talking below about downloading commercially available music without paying for it when the music's owners are not offering it for free download. I'm not especially sober, so forgive any errors below. Or don't. I don't much care.

Downloading free copies of music from an unauthorized source when that music is available for purchase through standard commercial means can be discussed in several sometimes interrelated ways. This thread matches my experience in that the points being made on all sides tend to skip freely from one way to another.

Three primary ways to view the practice seem to me to be:
-       Legality
-       Morality
-       Economic effects
 
Legality.
Legally, there is no question in the US. Even for personal, noncommercial use, it is illegal per the “No Electronic Theft (NET) Act,” which changed previous relevant law’s (The Copyright Act, I think) requirements to expand the requirement of “financial gain” on the part of the would-be criminal to mean more than just selling bootlegs (for example), but rather to include “receipt, or expectation of receipt, of anything of value, including … copyrighted works.”
 
A cursory glance online shows that virtually all developed nations, including WTO members (which includes Russia), are signatory to a treaty that requires compliance with other countries’ copyright infringement claims. So while I’m far from an expert, it certainly seems illegal to download or upload copyrighted material even outside the nation where the copyright is held.

If you're uploading or downloading commercially available material outside of a legit commercial transaction with the rights-holder, you're stealing (by law). You can try to rationalize it on moral or economic grounds. But legally, you are stealing.
 
Morality.
Illegal downloading is often defended by the “artists are rich” argument—that has been a constant since Metallica spoke out against Napster, just as Garth Brooks was pilloried for his criticisms of used albums being sold without further royalties to artists in the ‘90s (and various artists and labels complaining about cassettes earlier). The good old Robin Hood argument. You certainly could try to make an argument about the ongoing accumulation of wealth by the wealthy at the expense of the poorer…but that doesn’t really relate to this argument. But really, is it OK to steal if it's from the rich? Is it OK to kill an asshole? Is it OK to rape a jerk? The rightness of an action is not determined by the object of the action.
 
First and most obviously, very, very, very few artists are rich. In fact, very few record label/media companies are all that profitable. The vast majority of musicians (and labels) make little or no money.

But more important is that it’s simply immoral for one party to unilaterally make a decision regarding a 2-party transaction. “Because I said so” only works with a parent and a seven-year-old. For a commercial transaction to be morally legitimate, I’d think both parties to the transaction should be complicit. If I offer something for $10, it isn’t the buyer’s choice to pay less unless I eventually concede to the lower price. No person should be able to unilaterally impose his will on another in this respect

The fact that the sites exist—easily recognizable—from which to download music illegally doesn’t change the morality of what is being done. If it is wrong (and I argue it is), then it’s wrong whether you can achieve it or not. A 20-year-old physically fit man could presumably very easily knock down an old woman. The simplicity of getting away with it doesn’t change the morality of doing it.

Economic Effects.
This one comes up a lot in defense of illegally downloading and sharing music, too. It can in some circumstances even make sense. But I think it’s important to realize that even if one were to concede that there is no economic harm involved, that doesn’t undo the legality or morality of the situation.

So is there economic harm involved? One common defense is, by sharing music illegally, I am helping the artist get exposure and his tours will be more successful in the future if he comes to my area. This is not on its face obviously untrue. But neither is it necessarily true. First and foremost, artists can (and do) share their music online for free use—if not possession—already via radio, Youtube, Spotify, etc. Rather than file-sharing, you could simply point your friends to an online link or a radio station where the tune is in rotation and theoretically have the same effect.

Second, there is the common argument that I didn’t take money from the artist’s pocket because I wasn’t going to buy it: if I hadn’t illegally downloaded it, I would have simply done without. On a case-by-case basis, that might be true. But looking at music sales overall, it obviously isn’t true (unless people simply don’t listen to music as much as they used to). Music sales—including legitimate, online sales—are far, far, far, far (enough fars?) lower than they were before file sharing was convenient.

The reality is, a huge number of people steal music rather than pay for it. Some of that money would have gone to very rich record execs. Some would have gone to very rich artists. Some to middle-class ones. Some to poor ones. Some to associated industries, whether graphic designers or engineers or studio janitors or whatever else.

Concurrently, and somewhat ironically through the same kind of technological explosion that allows online piracy, people have become more able than ever before to make music more cheaply and to make more of the money on their own products that they do sell by going directly to buyers online. No argument there. But even if that is true, it doesn’t justify the practice of taking for free.

Also lumped into the economics portion, the thing about the fact that illegal sources aren't shut down implicitly making it OK. That's idiotic. The truth is, police don't stop everyone who speeds because it is not cost-effective to do that. It doesn't make speeding legal. The US government doesn't focus on every single illegal immigrant, but on those committing violent acts or dealing drugs. College security doesn't focus on underage drinking and weed, but on narcotics and violence. In everything, there are choices based on resources. Artists in the US or Europe can't go chasing every odd small-time downloader of a song. It's not cost-effective. But that doesn't make it morally acceptable or legal for the downloader or uploader of the song. It's still illegal and immoral. Hershey's won't hunt you down for stealing a candy bar; it's still wrong to steal a candy bar, and their decision not to chase you isn't the same as their implied consent on the matter.

Anyway, that’s my little thought-vomit on the subject.

Zooey Deschanel on Working with Brian Wilson

(Jimmy Kimmel Live)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nqq65IEJI0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nqq65IEJI0)

Thank you, Captain, for that little masterpiece of analysis. I think you've covered the topic definitively. I think your most compelling point perhaps (among many compelling points) is that file sharing made stealing so easy, and so invisible to anyone who might catch you in the act, that it has become easy to reframe it and think of it as something other than stealing.

As a thought experiment (and I realize this is a very radical comparison), imagine yourself exactly as you are, with all your current foibles, except you suddenly have the power to make someone disappear from the Earth forever, just by thinking it. And what's more, you don't even have to see the person or be in the same vicinity to make it happen, and no one except you will ever remember that person ever existed in the first place. It wouldn't be very long till you got angry at some stranger you know nothing about (maybe it's road rage, maybe they cut you off in the grocery line) and used that power. And in order to live with yourself, you'd find a way to understand what you had done that isn't "killing." That, my friends, is part of human nature.

I still don't know what Rangie does for a living. Whatever it is, I want one. For free. Whether it's something she makes, something she sells, or whether it's a chunk of her time. For free.

Captain - I am very grateful to you for taking the time for your detailed description of what is legal and where it's legal regarding "free downloads."  The unauthorized downloads certainly aren't "free" to the artist or anyone else who was involved in producing a recorded musical work (or film). That took money and work with the intention of having some return on that investment. 

How wealthy the artist/producer etc. happen to be has nothing to do with whether they should be compensated for their work or not.  I'm certainly not wealthy, nor are most of the people I know who insist on paying for an artist's product whether they are friends, family, or whatever.  It's a form of respect - both self-respect and respect for the artist.

Officially: Just to clarify and restate according to the rules of the forum, not that it's needed but just in case, sharing upload links of commercially released music is not permitted here and any links or requests to "pm" or share such material is a violation that will result in very swift action. No sharing of commercially released material, period. YouTube links as those that have come out from NPP are similar to radio airplay in that they get logged, tallied, and the artists and publishers get a cut. It's common sense what is allowed and what is not.

Unofficially and personally: As a member of ASCAP I support every effort to make sure the artists and all involved in creating music receive what is rightfully theirs for the work they produced. Are they "gray areas"? Sure. But suggesting music should be free for all, free for the taking is, to me, absurd. As mentioned, it would be like walking into anyone's shop or place of business and demanding the service, goods, or whatever else they offer be given for free. Walk into a restaurant, demand a free meal with desert. Same difference. If that restaurant chooses to give free food, it's on them. Suggesting they *must* give out free food or suggesting someone is entitled to free food from that restaurant is as absurd as expecting artists to give their recordings for free, to play shows for free, to allow free and open use and sale of their songs by others for free, etc.

Having done budgeting and financial planning for everything from recording sessions as both a client and as a studio operator, to live shows, to my fees for writing and turoring and factoring in everything that goes into the process, anyone who thinks or expects it to be offered "free" should just ask for a rundown of what things cost both in terms of money and time and see exactly what they're asking for. Those figures, as the Three Stooges would say, are staggering.

Add my voice to those saying artists, especially musicians since it affects me, should be paid for their work and paid fairly.

Yes, I've ripped streams of advance material, but I always buy the product when it's released, for the following reasons:

1 - I'm supporting my favoured musicians (not that some of them need it, but hey...).

2 - paying for anything confers the right of criticism, be it "this is the best buy I ever made !" or "I can't believe I actually paid for this sh*t !!".

3 - "download it for free" = theft. Or as RRA1 would have it, "dwnld it f/fre" = thft. Or smth. lk. tht.  ;D

On The Island video:
http://hellogiggles.com/brian-wilson-on-the-island-she-him/

Thanks, Ontor.

This is the perfect video for that song. Especially love this:

(http://i.imgur.com/fgftzsd.png)

Very cool!!

Shifting the blame is not cool nor is stealing.

So NPP made it to #28 in the USA and #25 in the UK.  Not too bad!!

Kudos to the TRUE fans who support your favorite artist and brickbats to those of you who don't!