We have this discussion every time.

Bottom line: It's up to the artist.

If they believe giving away their songs for free is the right thing to do, they'll freely release them. If they haven't made that decision, you shouldn't make it for them.

While some may obtain pirated music only to later buy it, most people don't.

So, anyway, I hear Haley's new album will be blusier.

In this day and age, an artist can release singles as they produce them. The people who do this tend to be unknown and are seeking recognition. And sometimes they succeed.

But Haley already has name recognition. What she is seeking is the support of a record label. A collection of unreleased songs by her - a complete album - that they can promote would have more value to them.

(03-09-2013, 02:19 PM)Miguel Wrote: We have this discussion every time.

Bottom line: It's up to the artist.

If they believe giving away their songs for free is the right thing to do, they'll freely release them. If they haven't made that decision, you shouldn't make it for them.

While some may obtain pirated music only to later buy it, most people don't.

Thanks for saying this, Miguel. I completely agree with you.

So, this thread has become choppy, I assume there are more leaked songs.

Anyway, I just hope she's got an album RELEASE coming soon!

(03-09-2013, 02:19 PM)Miguel Wrote: We have this discussion every time.

Bottom line: It's up to the artist.

If they believe giving away their songs for free is the right thing to do, they'll freely release them. If they haven't made that decision, you shouldn't make it for them.

While some may obtain pirated music only to later buy it, most people don't.

(03-09-2013, 02:37 PM)housesothehaley Wrote: Thanks for saying this, Miguel. I completely agree with you.

I agree, thx Miguel....I haven't seen anything from Haley that says she wants them released, but I have defintely seen her disapointed at their release... and she wasn't smiling when she said so...interpret it how you want.

When Swan told her about hoping she is not upset that FMH is his favorite song even if it was leaked, she told him that its OK because she 'thinks' it was released overseas, IMO I think she said it so that she didnt want to make him feel bad about it and told a little white lie. If FMH was released overseas...show me evidence, an overseas cd that says "bonus track: Follow My Heart"?

Partly why I wished Miguel had kept the post in which he relayed his communication with Ole regarding the leaked tracks... Ole, and by extension, Haley, considered the leaks as theft and moved swiftly to remove the links including the ones on this site... On IDF the mods deleted posts asking for links almost immediately and repeatedly warned against asking for or posting them. Does that sound like they thought leaking them helps Haley?

Even if it was ultimately futile in stemming their spread, the people who represent Haley were clear on their opinion on the matter.

(03-09-2013, 02:30 PM)Miguel Wrote: In this day and age, an artist can release singles as they produce them. The people who do this tend to be unknown and are seeking recognition. And sometimes they succeed.

But Haley already has name recognition. What she is seeking is the support of a record label. A collection of unreleased songs by her - a complete album - that they can promote would have more value to them.

Out to curiosity I looked up Lan del Rey on Wiki.According to that Lana bought her way out of her previous record label -5 Points- in April 2010.Her first single-Video Games was first posted on You Tube in June 2011- and at that point she was a virtual unknown- but she wasn't signed by Interscope until October 2011 by which point it had racked up millions of views.Then it was officially released and the album came out a few months after that.It hard to know exactly what went on behind the scenes but looking at that you might want to think that who needs a record label to at least get started.

EDM http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-...ance-music
(I can see Haley messing with this)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jan...l-sales-us Digital downloads overtake physical music sales in the US for first time
(This means more singles, fewer albums)

---

http://www.side-line.com/news_comments.p...80_0_2_0_C

Quote:Update: We were approached by several people working with major labels, who indeed re-confirm that plans do exist to give up the CD. We keep on trying to get an official confirmation, but it seems that the matter is very controversial, especially after Side-Line brought out the story.

& the counter:
http://ultimateclassicrock.com/could-we-...s-in-2012/
http://www.billboard.com/biz/articles/ne...w-graceful

Quote:Contrary to a dubious report that was picked up by numerous blogs last week, there is no major label plan to abandon the CD format by the end of 2012. Such a doomsday scenario has frequently come up but has not materialized. History has proven labels and distributors are willing to work with retailers to keep them carrying music. Retailers may carry fewer titles and they pay less for them - which allows them to charge less - but they still carry CDs.

(03-09-2013, 03:03 PM)kaypea Wrote: It's hard to know exactly what went on behind the scenes but looking at that you might want to think that who needs a record label to at least get started.

5 Points discovered her at a songwriting conference and signed her to a multi-record deal. They paid a well-known producer (who had worked with Paul McCartney) $50,000 and gave Lana "a significant advance." They put out an EP under Lizzy Grant and a programmer at Apple liked it. "So we got featured based on the EP as one of the iTunes emerging artists of that year."

Quote:And then we were moving towards the whole album and that’s when things shifted. She wanted to change her name, got new management, they wanted to change the record.

...The manager came in and was insulting about the record, and I thought, “Wow, we’re an indie label, we got David Kahne to produce this record and you’re negative about it.”

...We put out the album digitally and at first she wanted it “R-A-Y” and then we did one version of it that way, and then she wanted to change it to “R-E-Y” so that was now the third name we were using to promote that artist. Shortly after that, her and her new manager came in and said “We want to get this off the market. We’re going for a completely new deal. We’ll buy you out of the deal.” So we made a separation agreement.

So that’s why it never came out?

They literally insisted. That’s in the contract. We can’t have any reference to it anywhere. They were following up on it weekly, “Oh, there’s an obscure website in outer-Mongolia that still has a reference to it, can you tell them to pull it down.” We did. We took it off iTunes and never released it as a hard CD.

http://www.mtvhive.com/2012/01/30/lana-d...interview/

So, a small label made a significant investment in her. She got some recognition on iTunes. Then her management bought them out of the deal (btw, Lana's father is wealthy). In doing so, they wanted to make sure Lana's earlier songs were not available anywhere on the Internet.

A big concern of mine (and I'm feeling guilty for my mentions of hearing the songs) is something more dramatically harmful than just the lost revenue from sales.

What if the songs were demo's written with the hope they could sell the songs to big name artists, or sold for some commercial use as a theme song etc ?

Perception is reality in many businesses based on consumer demand. The idea that a song is an artists "own song" is probably key, even if 90% of top selling pop songs are not written by the artists, the public doesn't know that (doesn't look for the fine print to read).

From all we've read, it really seems like the alot big money is in writing a song that is widely heard and played (excepting the mega mega stars.. and.. The money that Todd Rungren gets for "life is a highway" belign played on leno was eye opening.

So.. anyway .. like I said.. talking about songs which they're trying to sell might make them less valuable/interesting to the people they're trying to sell them too.

It would be a terrible financial loss if say Beyonce was looking at a song but her publicist didn't think it would help the buzz and her image if she were covering songs of less known artists.. or even petty people thinking "that song belongs to her" and being angry about it.