Re: [microsound] online mp3 hosting / mp3.com

[david turgeon <david.t@xxxxxxxx>]

> >my take on the issue is that people would upload silent mp3 files just
> >to clutter the server (go figure, some people _are_ stupid) & mp3.com
> >decided to do something systematic about it.  now, i don't see why
> >"near-silent" pieces would be a problem.  at any rate ~ it's obvious
> >that for any mp3 server intending to make money, any experimental music
> >is a "waste of resources" as it is certainly not driving the most
> >traffic.  hah, & i should know, too.
> I wouldn't take it too personally. I imagine it's an automated process
> where their encoder sets aside files with an average volume below a
> certain point. MP3.com is geared toward mass-market consumption, so it's
> not surprising to me that their policies (automated or not) would
> effectively exclude some kinds of music from their "rotation".

exactly; but part of the point is that minimalist/silent music is
certainly not what's driving the most traffic, so even if they had a few
people complain (saying they're "doing it for artistic purposes" as the
warning message goes), they won't give too much of a shit, so to speak. 
that said...  although i've thought mp3.com sucked for ages, i do think
they have so far served an important purpose in giving artists the means
to be heard.  they were also the first (& only?) large service to offer
a cut of their advertising earnings to popular artists, which is a very
appealing business practice.

moreover, the fact that they are still independent (as opposed to being
owned by some corpsy conglomerate or another) makes them especially
interesting to watch.  & on the legal front, they have had so far much
more of a case against the riaa than say napster can ever hope to have,
even though the latter takes advantage of a legal loophole which has so
far made them harder to sue (& they are effectively spoiling said
loophole for all those who were using it responsibly ~ anytime i see
someone "supporting napster", i think "naive, naive...").

but...  this is more than slightly off-topic.

~ david