NME News

Radiohead, Blur, Keane push for 'three strikes' downloading rule

Musicians sign motion to push for restricted bandwidth for downloaders

September 25, 2009 | 38 Comments
Radiohead news RSS feed
More Radiohead news, reviews, videos and tour dates
Post this on Twitter or Follow NME

Radiohead's Ed O'Brien, Blur's Dave Rowntree and Keane's Tim Rice-Oxley are among the musicians who have signed up to a motion by the Featured Artists Coalition to support the idea of a 'three strikes' rule for illegal downloaders.

Under the proposed rule, users who persistently illegally download would receive up to three letters with increasing severity, then a sanction on the speed of their internet connection if they continued to do so.

The idea is at odds with the UK government's proposal for new legislation. Yesterday (September 24) Business Secretary Lord Peter Mandelson again outlined his proposal to cut off the connections of persistent file-sharers, saying it would be a "last resort" as an action against copyright infringers.

A message on FAC website, featuredartistscoalition.com following a meeting yesterday (September 24) read: "Our meeting voted overwhelmingly to support a three-strike sanction on those who persistently download illegal files, sanctions to consist of a warning letter, a stronger warning letter and a final sanction of the restriction of the infringer’s bandwidth to a level which would render file-sharing of media files impractical while leaving basic email and web access functional."

The members also voted to support Lily Allen, who was recently campaigning against illegal downloading. The singer stepped away from the debate yesterday.

The file-sharing debate: all the key quotes so far

Blog - Why Lily Allen is right about file-sharing

Share this story:
Del.icio.us
Digg
Furl
Reddit
Bebo

Follow NME on Twitter

More News:

Young Knives play fan-chosen songs at London Transgressive gig

PREVIOUS Young Knives play fan-chosen songs at London...

New Sugababe Jade Ewen brands Lily Allen 'untalented' - Daily Gossip

NEXT New Sugababe Jade Ewen brands Lily Allen...

Buy NME Magazine right now

Subscribe here or get this week's issue delivered to your door

Comments (38)

Add a comment

anthealy

Sep 25, 2009

Yeah! "Home Taping is Killing Music"

xymalf

Sep 25, 2009

People can download it so many ways bit torrents, p2p, newsgroups etc even if you stop this people will borrow cd's from friends and copy them or use local library.

MartynDavenport

Sep 25, 2009

OK this is getting annoying now. All these poor musicians getting angry that the outrageously excessive income stream they receive for not doing very much is slowing down. God forbid they might have to actually start doing more "work" like playing shows. Or they could try persuading the industry to charge reasonable prices, but of course they wouldn't get as big a cut then would they. It makes me sick. And all this rubbish about it damaging up and coming bands, preventing them from breaking through? Ask the Arctic Monkeys if they wish no-one had ever file-shared "I bet you look good on the dancefloor"

ungrateful_ninja

Sep 25, 2009

Awesome - another "Home Taping is Killing Music" comment. What a brilliant way to display utter ignorance of the reality of the situation. There is a massive difference between home taping and illegal downloading. Firstly, home taping involved going out and buying the records, and then the tapes to go with them. You could then only copy the music for as many people as you could afford tapes for, and you would generally only give these tapes to friends. With file sharing you are inviting millions of strangers access to music, for the price of the broadband they are already paying for. You don't even need to buy an album in order to have thousands of LPs which you then share. The economics and the scale are completely different. If you want to make a useful contribution to the debate, please do. Otherwise, do shut up and go and play with your toys in your bedroom while the grown-ups have a conversation.

underclasshero

Sep 25, 2009

By not being able to use file-sharing, I'm still not going to be able to magic up 79p for every song I want, so I just won't bother with new as much new bands, ill just be buying the occasional album. Its silly as I find out about new music from various places, then go download their album or whatever they have available using file-sharing sties, if I like what I hear I'm more likely to go to one of their shows or buy one of their releases or some merchandise. I like to try before I buy though...

-G_R-

Sep 25, 2009

Surely if illegal downloaders become worried that their bandwidth will be restricted, they will just go listen to the music on spotify for free!

booicore

Sep 25, 2009

I for one agree that everything we all look at on the internet should be recorded and scrutinised, then restricted based on the opinions of non-elected officials. We need more CCTV and speed cameras too. We have too much freedom and it has to end. Rockstars are exactly the people we expect to guide us to our totalitarian state.

rogerdunn

Sep 25, 2009

http://my.telegraph.co.uk/hastafuego

madmax2b

Sep 25, 2009

there all so poor,file sharing must stop them having private jets?these are all very wealthly people{greed is a word that comes to mind}now if i brought a album then copyied 20 times on the computer,you couldnt stop anyone,so stop moaning and write some songs?{your not straveing}as for keane dont share the files,keep the misery for yourself.

madmax2b

Sep 25, 2009

ok if i buy the cd,then go home burn 20 copys for my friends,then they go and burn off copys for there friends,ect,that what happens at school work,?keane going to raid my house?the people moaning are very rich,are we stop them getting private jets?remeber were you came from?as for keane dont file share,keep the misery to yourself,we,dont need it shared{sorry girls}

ungrateful_ninja

Sep 26, 2009

Why is there the assumption that because some musicians are rich that all of them are? What about the session musicians that survive on royalties? Yes, Keane, etc, may have put their names to this, but over the years on Motown, Chess, Stax etc there were performers who got paid a daily rate, and still get by on the on-going royalties. Are you really saying that these people deserve for money to be taken away from them? In a world where spotify, last fm etc exist there is no justification for file-sharing. Personally I couldn't give a toss if people rip Keane CDs for everyone in the street. However there are professional musicians who depend on the money they make. Although it's not directly related to file-sharing, check out this article on music copywrite:http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2009/sep/24/music-copyright-ronald-prenticePeople like this don't deserve to have some grubby bunch of spoilt indie kids stealing from them as they grow old. They might not be at the forefront of this debate, but the British music scene was built on the work of these people. In the good old days (pre 5 years ago) people bought music they liked. If you can't afford 79p for a track, stream it. Your options are much wider now than they ever have been for accessing music, yet people still feel the need to steal it. There should be a constructive debate on how to manage this, but as long as people feel it is life-long right (which has only just come into existence) to free music, this can never be tackled.

nowinengland

Sep 26, 2009

I wonder if its just all downloading, or just music. if so, will that work?

drunkenmonkey_92

Sep 26, 2009

booicore i couldn't disagree with you more. Why would anyone want less freedom, ridiculous.

Dangerous Marsupial

Sep 26, 2009

Ok, I'm confused. Is it ok to download something off LimeWire so long as you don't share it?!?

jorges

Sep 26, 2009

Listen Ungrateful_ninja: It's no doubt that file sharing has become a problem for the industry, but that's all it is: A PROBLEM. One they have neglected to solve in a creative and successful way. The world has changed and it's never going to be the same again. OF COURSE it's different technically than home taping, but it's at heart the same thing, just on a much bigger scale. I have no pity for the record industry, they have at every turn failed to the right and the smart thing BUSINESS wise, I'm not even talking about ethics here. The fact that there has been an INCREDIBLE amount of greed on their part is a whole other issue. On a purely business level they have failed repeatedly to come up with a smart solution to this problem. Instead of working with the new technologies they tried to crush this progress so they could keep lining their pockets and putting out mostly terrible music. I'm sorry friend, but I think your views on this matter are severely outdated. Pretty soon people are not even going to want MP3s, why take up space your drive, iPod, etc. when you can just stream it, anytime, anywhere? You get my point? Of course, the TRUE music fans of REAL artists, artists that do the music for love and not for money, artists that sacrifice their lives to play and be the best they can be, those fans are not only going to buy specially packaged music and they are also going to go to the shows and support the artist. The days of a label throwing millions of dollars in marketing and PR at some manufactured bubble gum artist (Alicia Keys, Beyonce, Britney Spears, even Lily Allen, Etc..) are over (and thank god for that). Because even big media doesn't matter anymore; it's been fractured into a million pieces. Used to be MTV and terrestrial radio were the only places you got new music from. Now MTV doesn't even play videos (They went for the money by producing reality TV shows and lost their cultural relevance) anymore and radio just plays what has already broken online or the classics (radio doesn't create Buzz anymore, you have to have much more than buzz to get played at all). So, in conclusion, the only things that matter today are: A) You better write good songs B) You better be a good player in it for the long haul C) You better tour and connect with your fans D) You better keep that connection strong so you can build a fan base that's not going to make you rich, but will support you until the day you die. Ohh, and there's always licensing, at least for now. Hope I have added a constructive point of view for you to consider.

hooray for dananananaykroyd

Sep 26, 2009

I can't believe people are saying "Oh they're rich anyway, it doesn't matter". What about all the small bands that struggle to earn a living from their music. I pay for my music because I usually care about the band who's album I'm buying. I'm not going to **** over people who I actually care about by basically stealing their music.

Decemboy

Sep 26, 2009

Fear not Mr Rice-Oxley, I wouldn't illegally download any of your songs once, let alone three times.

marquis_de_sade

Sep 26, 2009

This kind of article really irritates me, these artists claim to care about the new music scene, do they expect the consumers to throw money at artists they haven't heard before? Personally that's something I will never do, I listen to new music a few times, if I feel it's worth downloading, I will pay for it, else I will delete it and forget it. I also find it rather ironic that Radiohead of all bands are campaigning, aren't they the band that released their latest album on a "pay for what you think it's worth" basis?

graemefife

Sep 26, 2009

if file sharing does nothing else at least we can all share the happy thoughts that we played a tiny part in lily allen giving up music .....next on the shitlist keane

1984orwell

Sep 26, 2009

Personally I think that the music scene at present is as vibrant as its ever been, there is a wealth of amazingly talented bands around. This is because p2p sites have enabled people to take a chance on music they previously would have ignored due to the risk of spending Â£Â£ and getting a cack album. This has allowed countless bands who previously would not have had a following outside of their home town/city to reach an international audience. And guess what happens then? People who've illegally downloaded their album for free go to one of their shows, buy a t-shirt perhaps even pick up the album on CD/Vinyl. Hey presto said band makes a living! The establishment don't like it because it takes the power away from them and hands it to us the consumer.

acedrums

Sep 26, 2009

At risk of upsetting an army of morons, I am going to agree with this ruling. This is not going to affect people who just download an album here and there. It will target the serial downloaders who frankly deserve it. It boils down to theft whichever way you look at it. Sure bands should earn for touring, but when you put you heart and soul and a considerable amount of time into recording an album it is nice to be rewarded for it. I think a lot of you would be whistling a different tune if you were trying to make it. Ok, these artists may be wealthy but to be so cynical as to scorn them for standing up for artists less well of than themselves i pathetic. Ignore the fact that you benefit from file sharing for a moment and take a neutral view. If you dont have a moral issue with it then you are a pathetic person. Basically. Most commenters here just resort to personal, and lame insults rather than any measured view as well. Grow up.

Dmar_80

Sep 26, 2009

It's entertaining watching all the downloaders emerge to desperately justify their ways. MartynDavenport? Sure, they could tour more (as if year round isn't enough) but oh that's right, record labels are forced to dig into that profit as well. Madmax2b? Every band isn't U2.

tigermilkboy

Sep 26, 2009

Not every rock star has a private jet and is successful...most are lucky just to get by. It is one thing to listen to the odd track of a new band, but if said new band does not sell any units of music they can't exist and make new music.If you knew what most artists made you would be stunned by how little money most of them actually make. Maybe when you go to work you should go most of it for free.

TheSharkBelly

Sep 26, 2009

I illegally download music.I admit that.But I also own over 200 CD's and am only 14.I simply do not have the funds to pay for every album that I want to buy.But you can't tell me that I am doing more to harm music than someone that buys one song a week on iTunes?Honestly.

Lorenzo Reffo

Sep 26, 2009

Yeah, I think that's a great news!! This way people would not be able to download all this stuff!! So they'll have to find out some different way to get it... I think pirates will be very happy with this!! They will be selling more and more CDs in the next months!! This motion sucks just because it won't stop pirating, it will only change the way of doing that and moving us 10 years back. I don't think that's the right way to step forward, the world had changed since the coming of "the net" and music (and musicians) seems to haven't noticed it yet.

soshush

Sep 26, 2009

Poncy pop and rock stars have had it too good for too long - now their dot com bubble is bursting and the true value of their art without the wrapper is being reassessed. Keane, Blur and Radiohead want to cut off the internet connections of kiddies who go out of their way to enjoy their art - nice way to go fellas - . Nobody see the ill will generated in the US with all the RIAA prosecutions. Get the lot of them doing day jobs in Sainsburys - suffer for your art :-)Only kidding - on a serious note - just sell downloads on iTunes, etc for 10p.

alilamb

Sep 26, 2009

http://alitwittertips.wordpress.com/

1984orwell

Sep 26, 2009

"A million people heard my song, a million people can't be wrong" Mick Jones

dcdc74

Sep 27, 2009

Using the wealth of the bands as an excuse to illegally download their music is not acceptable. They have earned their riches by being good at their job just like rich people in other professions and should not have their music stolen from them.

magnolia36

Sep 27, 2009

it should be three strikes and your out full stop for listening to Keane never mind for file sharing

dfooster

Sep 27, 2009

surely these people if they are facing being banned can just install replay music on their pc in minutes and then record new mp3's from spotifys streaming service in perfect digital quality. you can never stop piracy as technology is always 2 or 3 steps ahead.

dfooster

Sep 27, 2009

surely these people if they are facing being banned can just install replay music on their pc in minutes and then record new mp3's from spotifys streaming service in perfect digital quality. you can never stop piracy as technology is always 2 or 3 steps ahead.

thisit

Sep 27, 2009

ladies and gentlemen we have no fucking control either way 1984 here we come

soshush

Sep 27, 2009

Hey replay music looks pretty cool - where can I get it for free? :-)

Bobby Ewing

Sep 27, 2009

I pirate all my music. I'm used to listening to so much music, there's no way I could afford to pay 79p per track for all of it. Conversely theres no way I would go back to limit myself to one CD every fortnight, which I could afford. I'm not being tight, right now as usual I'm a couple of hundred quid in the red and I've got other priorities what to spend my wages on. Spotify is pathetic right now, many of my searches turn up no results, and theres no way in hell I could afford an iphone to stick it on. In my opinion, the only way forward is a subscription service, similair to mobile phone contracts, varying from a fiver a month to Â£50 a month for as many downloads as you like. I would have happily paid this for Oink.

Ordinarygrl

Sep 27, 2009

yuo cant stop file sharing now. too late, its going to happen like it or not. keane have nout to worry about like no one would bother with there music even if its free.

MartynDavenport

Sep 28, 2009

There's no such thing as rockstars there's just people who play music, and some of them are just like us and some of them are dicks

TheRealTruth

Sep 30, 2009

In related news, I offer a beer to anyone who can successfully listen to three Keane songs without falling asleep, dying, or vomiting. I call it my 'three-strikes' rule.