TorrentFreak issued an apology— sort of. The P2P site keeps picking a fight with a leading music expert. But why? Their readers don't respect words like “expert" anymore than they do words like, “intellectual property." Meanwhile TorrentFreak and their readers seem to think that Indie labels and their artists are insignificant when it comes to who gets ripped off via illegal P2P.
An old saying goes “Keep your words soft and tender because tomorrow you may have to eat them.“
Ernesto, the faceless, enigmatic lead writer for the P2P lifestyle site TorrentFreak, retracted both his insults to me and some sloppy fact-checking about GrooveShark yesterday in his Mea Culpa. But also implied that, despite the recent sweep of Grammy nominations, Indie artists/labels are not relevant and only the RIAA has authority in the music space.
TorrentFreak led off their story with, “We have an apology to make... At TorrentFreak we have a policy of doing proper fact checking on everything we write, but occasionally we make a mistake. When this happens, we're more than happy to make a correction, and today is one of those days."
The piece goes on with a sugar coated comment that made me feel good... for a moment. “We would like to thank Avalon for opening our eyes... In addition, we would also like to retract our earlier statement where we said that Mr. Avalon was a classic narcissist.“
But then comes the hammer, a twisted headline that got everyone's attention:
“RIAA Promotes Illegal P2P Services, Expert [Avalon] Claims"
Yes, Ernesto, the lead editor for one of the most popular P2P sites, who confesses to having “no background in journalism" couldn't just apologize like a grown up and be done with it. He had to twist my words into a headline that panders to TorrentFreak's readers.
Now, readers of Moses Supposes know that I would never write something so ridiculous as that the RIAA is promoting illegal music services. That's insane. Ernesto and I had an exchange on my blog that you can read for yourself and decide if that's what I'm implying or if he took a few liberties with context.
RIAA APPROVED?
Much of this chitchat revolves around Ernesto's investment in his own nomenclature, “RIAA Approved," and this an assumption from which, perhaps, we can all learn thing or two.
TorrentFreak suggests that because a site is listed on the RIAA's website as “legal" it therefore is immune from prosecution or litigation. Both are poor assumptions.
The RIAA claims to represent “85% of all legitimate sound recordings produced and sold in the United States." Leaving alone the fact that this is somewhat self-postulated, the focus for this discussion is that companies like iMesh or AOL, do not make deals with “sound recordings," they make deals with companies. Not the RIAA— a trade group—but record labels and publishers. In that measurement, the RIAA represents a vast minority of the territory in the US.
It's hard to say with certainty what their coverage is but a safe estimate would about between 5 and 15%. The GrooveShark incident this past week proves with amazing clarity that a deal with one is not a deal with all.
There are thousands of indie labels. The RIAA represents only the four major record distributors (soon three) and approximately 35 “major" labels (give or take, depending on how you define a major) who are controlled by those distributors, Sony, Universal, Warner Music Group and soon to be defunct EMI.
Plus, the RIAA only represents labels and not music publishers. I'm guessing that Ernesto, since he has not worked in the music space, ever, might not realize that you need two sets of “thumbs up" to be legit; one from the labels and one from the publishers.
But assuming that “RIAA Approved" equals “safe to share music from," it still disregards the thousands of indie labels and artists, that TorentFreak and their readers claim to be all about supporting, but who are not represented by the RIAA and who are not satisfied with how of many of the “RIAA Approved" sites are operating. And let's not forget about the 500 pound gorilla and member-of-no-trade group, Disney. “RIAA Approved" certainly does not equal, “Disney Approved" and from a law-suite standpoint, given a choice, I'd rather be “Disney Approved."
This massive and transparent hypocrisy seems to have avoided TorrentFreak's ken in their smear campaign against me (or their SEO campaign for themselves, depending on how you look at it.)
Many readers on TorrentFreak seem to think that stealing music is okay because you're only pinching the rich a tiny bit. They seem to simultaneously think that illegal P2P is good for indie artists. But, if Ernesto represents the collective voice of this P2P group, then we have a glaring contradiction. “RIAA Approved" should have no weight to a group that disrespects the RIAA and their client-labels and artists. And the services listed on the RIAA's site as “legal" are not paralleled by other key trade groups including the American Association of Independent Music (A2IM) who represent indie labels.
Indie labels/artists nailed about 50% of the categories in this year's Grammy nominations and are statistically responsible for far more releases each year than RIAA labels. I'm guessing those nominations and releases were not “RIAA Approved."
Despite what they claim, do TorrentFreak readers care even less about indie artists than they do about major artists?
WHO THE HECK READS TORRENTFREAK ANYWAY?
But, forget the bickering. What's far more entertaining than the back and forth between TorrentFreak and I are the comments by their readers on his “apology." They were outraged, calling me a “fag" and other mature terms, that betray their age and social leanings over any actual knowledge of facts or even how to use English to make a point. My favorite comment was this one: “Have you ever been so far even as decided to use go want to look more like?"
No, the above is not one of my famous Dyslexic typos. It's verbatim. And remember that before posting on TorrentFreak you have to review and approve your own comment and then Ernesto has to approve it as well. Scary.
Comments seem to come in at about 10 an hour but so far, the most intelligent comment is this: “Come on TF quit giving this moron [meaning me] what he wants [implying I am only out for publicity]. At least leave it out of the “news" section. We all [like?] to harass monkeys at the zoo for fun on occasion but lets not make it a habit."
I like this guy and he's right. Why would TorrentFreak give this “monkey" so much attention if they hate what I have to say?
The answer is simple— business. I guess it's hard to stop when the Avalon articles are among the most popular pages on TorrentFreak.
Yes, contrary to what many TorrentFreak readers presume—that their coverage is good for my SEO— a closer examination reveals something more surprising; apparently, bashing Moses Avalon is very, very good for TorrentFreak.
According to their public page count, the responses for pages that use my name rank higher than all others on TorrentFreak.
Hmmm. I wonder if Ernesto will be willing to donate some of his ad revenue to my Artist's Rights Advocacy fund? Probably not. Considering TorrentFreak reader's lack of regard for Indie artists and their property.
The stones.
Ever onward...
An old saying goes “Keep your words soft and tender because tomorrow you may have to eat them.“
Ernesto, the faceless, enigmatic lead writer for the P2P lifestyle site TorrentFreak, retracted both his insults to me and some sloppy fact-checking about GrooveShark yesterday in his Mea Culpa. But also implied that, despite the recent sweep of Grammy nominations, Indie artists/labels are not relevant and only the RIAA has authority in the music space.
TorrentFreak led off their story with, “We have an apology to make... At TorrentFreak we have a policy of doing proper fact checking on everything we write, but occasionally we make a mistake. When this happens, we're more than happy to make a correction, and today is one of those days."
The piece goes on with a sugar coated comment that made me feel good... for a moment. “We would like to thank Avalon for opening our eyes... In addition, we would also like to retract our earlier statement where we said that Mr. Avalon was a classic narcissist.“
But then comes the hammer, a twisted headline that got everyone's attention:
“RIAA Promotes Illegal P2P Services, Expert [Avalon] Claims"
Yes, Ernesto, the lead editor for one of the most popular P2P sites, who confesses to having “no background in journalism" couldn't just apologize like a grown up and be done with it. He had to twist my words into a headline that panders to TorrentFreak's readers.
Now, readers of Moses Supposes know that I would never write something so ridiculous as that the RIAA is promoting illegal music services. That's insane. Ernesto and I had an exchange on my blog that you can read for yourself and decide if that's what I'm implying or if he took a few liberties with context.
RIAA APPROVED?
Much of this chitchat revolves around Ernesto's investment in his own nomenclature, “RIAA Approved," and this an assumption from which, perhaps, we can all learn thing or two.
TorrentFreak suggests that because a site is listed on the RIAA's website as “legal" it therefore is immune from prosecution or litigation. Both are poor assumptions.
The RIAA claims to represent “85% of all legitimate sound recordings produced and sold in the United States." Leaving alone the fact that this is somewhat self-postulated, the focus for this discussion is that companies like iMesh or AOL, do not make deals with “sound recordings," they make deals with companies. Not the RIAA— a trade group—but record labels and publishers. In that measurement, the RIAA represents a vast minority of the territory in the US.
It's hard to say with certainty what their coverage is but a safe estimate would about between 5 and 15%. The GrooveShark incident this past week proves with amazing clarity that a deal with one is not a deal with all.
There are thousands of indie labels. The RIAA represents only the four major record distributors (soon three) and approximately 35 “major" labels (give or take, depending on how you define a major) who are controlled by those distributors, Sony, Universal, Warner Music Group and soon to be defunct EMI.
Plus, the RIAA only represents labels and not music publishers. I'm guessing that Ernesto, since he has not worked in the music space, ever, might not realize that you need two sets of “thumbs up" to be legit; one from the labels and one from the publishers.
But assuming that “RIAA Approved" equals “safe to share music from," it still disregards the thousands of indie labels and artists, that TorentFreak and their readers claim to be all about supporting, but who are not represented by the RIAA and who are not satisfied with how of many of the “RIAA Approved" sites are operating. And let's not forget about the 500 pound gorilla and member-of-no-trade group, Disney. “RIAA Approved" certainly does not equal, “Disney Approved" and from a law-suite standpoint, given a choice, I'd rather be “Disney Approved."
This massive and transparent hypocrisy seems to have avoided TorrentFreak's ken in their smear campaign against me (or their SEO campaign for themselves, depending on how you look at it.)
Many readers on TorrentFreak seem to think that stealing music is okay because you're only pinching the rich a tiny bit. They seem to simultaneously think that illegal P2P is good for indie artists. But, if Ernesto represents the collective voice of this P2P group, then we have a glaring contradiction. “RIAA Approved" should have no weight to a group that disrespects the RIAA and their client-labels and artists. And the services listed on the RIAA's site as “legal" are not paralleled by other key trade groups including the American Association of Independent Music (A2IM) who represent indie labels.
Indie labels/artists nailed about 50% of the categories in this year's Grammy nominations and are statistically responsible for far more releases each year than RIAA labels. I'm guessing those nominations and releases were not “RIAA Approved."
Despite what they claim, do TorrentFreak readers care even less about indie artists than they do about major artists?
WHO THE HECK READS TORRENTFREAK ANYWAY?
But, forget the bickering. What's far more entertaining than the back and forth between TorrentFreak and I are the comments by their readers on his “apology." They were outraged, calling me a “fag" and other mature terms, that betray their age and social leanings over any actual knowledge of facts or even how to use English to make a point. My favorite comment was this one: “Have you ever been so far even as decided to use go want to look more like?"
No, the above is not one of my famous Dyslexic typos. It's verbatim. And remember that before posting on TorrentFreak you have to review and approve your own comment and then Ernesto has to approve it as well. Scary.
Comments seem to come in at about 10 an hour but so far, the most intelligent comment is this: “Come on TF quit giving this moron [meaning me] what he wants [implying I am only out for publicity]. At least leave it out of the “news" section. We all [like?] to harass monkeys at the zoo for fun on occasion but lets not make it a habit."
I like this guy and he's right. Why would TorrentFreak give this “monkey" so much attention if they hate what I have to say?
The answer is simple— business. I guess it's hard to stop when the Avalon articles are among the most popular pages on TorrentFreak.
Yes, contrary to what many TorrentFreak readers presume—that their coverage is good for my SEO— a closer examination reveals something more surprising; apparently, bashing Moses Avalon is very, very good for TorrentFreak.
According to their public page count, the responses for pages that use my name rank higher than all others on TorrentFreak.
Hmmm. I wonder if Ernesto will be willing to donate some of his ad revenue to my Artist's Rights Advocacy fund? Probably not. Considering TorrentFreak reader's lack of regard for Indie artists and their property.
The stones.
Ever onward...
