I just noticed earlier this afternoon that theres no metallica no led zeppelin and a few more artists missing. Whats going on over at slacker.
artists missing on g2
- Thread starter Kevin2500
- Start date
Might be better to ask what is going on with these artist! Both of which seem very, very protectionist with who they give permission to use their music. I think I was reading that there are dozens of online music services that don't include these artist because of that.
It is licensing, artists like the Beatles are also missing. And yes, these bands are very protectionist when it comes to their stuff. We've been waiting for the Beatles to get into the digital age for years.
Like I said on the Slacker forums, I don't blame slacker, I place more blame on the Record Companies, the RIAA, and the artists themselves. And it's another way for Metallica to show contempt for their fans (of which there may not be many left).
Like I said on the Slacker forums, I don't blame slacker, I place more blame on the Record Companies, the RIAA, and the artists themselves. And it's another way for Metallica to show contempt for their fans (of which there may not be many left).
Last edited:
While I sympathize with Slacker having to deal with the scumbag labels, it is entirely up to Slacker how they market and advertise their products.
The bottom line is, if someone walks into a Best Buy today and buys a G2 - they will have no clue as to the licensing side of things. They may try the web player and like the experience, and wrongly expect the portable to mirror it. They'll have no clue that months from now, artists they love could disappear from said device.
Obviously Slacker doesn't want to have to print "artists played on this device are contingent on licensing" on the box and marketing materials; but they certainly should imo, and at this time they are not.
Furthermore, I think they should facilitate a way for us to contact the proper artists and/or rights-holders to request that they get with the times and embrace digital distribution. They just keep saying "it's not our fault, we have to comply". They are right, but it is their fault that they are somewhat obscuring it from potential and current customers.
The bottom line is, if someone walks into a Best Buy today and buys a G2 - they will have no clue as to the licensing side of things. They may try the web player and like the experience, and wrongly expect the portable to mirror it. They'll have no clue that months from now, artists they love could disappear from said device.
Obviously Slacker doesn't want to have to print "artists played on this device are contingent on licensing" on the box and marketing materials; but they certainly should imo, and at this time they are not.
Furthermore, I think they should facilitate a way for us to contact the proper artists and/or rights-holders to request that they get with the times and embrace digital distribution. They just keep saying "it's not our fault, we have to comply". They are right, but it is their fault that they are somewhat obscuring it from potential and current customers.
To that end, most consumers have done their homework long before they ever walk into Best Buy. I started looking at Blackberry vs. iPhone differences about six months before I got my 16GB iPhone. I knew what I wanted, how much I was going to pay, and what features were included. And what the limitations were. I won't say ALL consumers are like that, but the ones that aren't are just asking for it.
The only way a potential Slacker G2 customer would know about licensing issues would be by visiting this or the official Slacker forums, which used to be linked at the top of their page and has now been buried a bit. So even if one did read many reviews and do research online, unless they peruse discussion boards it's likely they'll miss the licensing debacle. I think most of us here are going to check out their tech before buying it, and yes it's the smart thing to do - but it shouldn't be a mandate and we're probably not your "average" users.
I think Slacker should be much clearer and honest about these licensing problems so as not to further tarnish their reputation, which has already been muddled some with several buggy devices. I have a feeling they may not be putting a G3 out, and I currently have no plans to start streaming Slacker Radio over Cellular towers. Live content I'd consider streaming, but caching via WiFi makes much more sense to me in the Slacker environment, even if the labels and/or artists don't like it.
I think Slacker should be much clearer and honest about these licensing problems so as not to further tarnish their reputation, which has already been muddled some with several buggy devices. I have a feeling they may not be putting a G3 out, and I currently have no plans to start streaming Slacker Radio over Cellular towers. Live content I'd consider streaming, but caching via WiFi makes much more sense to me in the Slacker environment, even if the labels and/or artists don't like it.
Last edited:
I think Slacker could solve this issue by simply putting a statement on every box. Not all artist are available! BAM simple as that! The question though is how many people even bother to read the box or the include tiny manual that comes with it? Slacker would still be blamed and in reality it isn't their fault.
More and more artist now are taking control of their own digital rights to who gets access to their music. We are soon going to see a point where just negotiating with labels will not get you all artist as you'll have to negotiate with artist individually. Depending on how greedy these artist maybe, you may get access to their library or you may not.
We can all talk about how this is an license issue, but ultimate end users will blame Slacker regardless. So, I think it would be in their best interest to make it known that not all artist are available.
More and more artist now are taking control of their own digital rights to who gets access to their music. We are soon going to see a point where just negotiating with labels will not get you all artist as you'll have to negotiate with artist individually. Depending on how greedy these artist maybe, you may get access to their library or you may not.
We can all talk about how this is an license issue, but ultimate end users will blame Slacker regardless. So, I think it would be in their best interest to make it known that not all artist are available.
I bought a transistor radio at the 99c Store, but I wound up taking it back cuz it didn't get Stern. I guess I lost my receipt so they gave me a store credit. Well, I'm boycotting that place cuz the checker shoulda told me the limitation (in whatever her native language was) so keep your eyes peeled on eBay if you wanna bid on the credit.
It's Slacker radio for me these days.
It's Slacker radio for me these days.
Workshy is not on Slacker. Not a big name artist but I would have thought their music would be available. Maybe in good time.
I agree with both perspectives. Slacker should make an official statement about the licensing differences between the portable and webplayer. But, if Metallica doesnt "like" music on the g2 for whatever reason that isn't Slackers' fault. Metallica is greedy, plain and simple, and for other bands that have this same issue it seems self-destructive.
I root for the little guy, Metallica and company(already rich beyond belief) need to realize that music is about the fans and that without us they are dead.
I root for the little guy, Metallica and company(already rich beyond belief) need to realize that music is about the fans and that without us they are dead.
List the baddies, so we can boycott em. If band "x" doesn't wan to be on slacker..I dont want to buy band "x" cd,dvd,tickets,shirts, or tunes either.
IdRatherBeSkiing
Sherbet is NOT and NEVER WILL BE ice cream.
I thought Slacker was supposed to have these revolutionary agreements with the Record Companies to have access to ALL their music? Beatles, Eagles, Led Zepplin are pretty big ommisions.
Not on the G1 or g2. The web player is a differrent story and it is some artists and the R.I.A.A that think these devices are mp3 players that store the songs.
They do have agreements with the record companies, but many artist now aren't covered by record companies since the won the rights to their own music, they are doing their own agreements, yes artist like Led Zep, Beatles etc. Also some artist allow streaming, but don't allow storing the music on a device for playback.
However, none of those jerks that can't make their music available at a decent price for Slacker bother me one iota. If they can't get their act together then I don't need to listen to them, simple as that.
List the baddies, so we can boycott em. If band "x" doesn't wan to be on slacker..I dont want to buy band "x" cd,dvd,tickets,shirts, or tunes either.
I don't doubt some of the bands (Metallica, Beatles) are being fussy about licensing, but honestly we really have no clue what is going on behind the scenes. Slacker could just be cheaping out on us. I find it kind of odd that all of the sudden on the same day we lose a pretty large amount of artists that we used to have. That seems to imply a large contract expiring rather than individual bands all deciding at once.
By the way, we can add Pink Floyd to that list - my wife noticed they were missing from her G2. Oddly, I was able to scrape a few oddball Floyd tunes out of the G1 but nothing since. Someone else noticed no John Lennon anymore either.
So its a label or group of labels. just switch band "x" to Brand "x".
Out the labels if they're the ones being unreasonable.