IsoHunt Shut Down? 297
psic writes "One of the most popular torrent search sites, IsoHunt, was taken down on tuesday. The owners of the site say that the move came from their ISP without prior notice, though it is probably linked with the MPAA's lawsuit against various torrent search sites earlier this year. They plan on moving ISPs from the US to Canada, and say that moving the servers so someplace like Sweden or Sealand is not an option, as they put it: "BitTorrent was created for legitimate distribution of large media files, and we stand by that philosophy as a search engine and aggregator."" This is a story we've heard before with other sites, only serving to further demonstrate that playing wack a mole with torrent aggregators isn't the solution to anything.
the obligatory... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:the obligatory... (Score:5, Funny)
TMYTYGTTMSSWSTYF
saves screen space
Re:the obligatory... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, its just the nature of politics in the states. There are plenty of countries in Europe with much fairer political systems which do a much better job of representing the people who elect them.
If you just accept that your political system is never going to represent your opinions it never will.
If you try your damnedest to change it you MIGHT be successful.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It's kind of the nature of law.
ISOHunt et al are essentially moonshiners. There's no will in the US to change the law to make it legal to trade someone else's work without their permission. (If you think I'm wrong, go ahead and start a Constitutional Amendment. It worked for Prohibition.)
What's interesting is that RIAA/MPAA are "getting it", and are starting to focus on promoting and working with major players. It's only a matter of time until the hardship of fin
Re:the obligatory... (Score:4, Insightful)
Ah, spoken like a true 8 year-old.
How about next time you be original and quote something like Ren and Stimpy?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ah, spoken like a true 8 year-old.
How about next time you be original and quote something like Ren and Stimpy?
Link is down (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
good idea, bad idea (Score:5, Interesting)
I wholeheartedly agree that, from the perspective of the **AA, playing wack-a-mole isn't a good solution. But as an observer it's pretty funny.
More seriously, I think it is providing a long term solution, just not the one the **AA want. As these stories grow they continue to be seen as the greedy bullies they truly are. The main purpose of the RIAA and MPAA these days is to do the dirty work for the actual labels/studios and absorb the backlash. People get mad at the RIAA, not Sony. Or so the strategy goes. As anti-RIAA and anti-MPAA sentiment grows in severity and spreads into the mainstream, there will start to be bleedthrough to the actual labels and studios.
So basically the wack-a-mole strategy is the best education we could hope for that IP laws are a disgrace, that greed is the real motivator of DRM, and that DRM does nothing but create a nuisance for the consumer without effectively harming pirates. I want more and more of your average Joes to hear about stuff like this and start asking "What is with these guys anyway?" The answers will lead to some sensible IP reform.
It's a long-term goal, and I realize that in the meantime a lot of innocent people are having their lives ruined, but I think that tactics like this go a long way towards the final solution for DRM.
-stormin
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:good idea, bad idea (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:good idea, bad idea (Score:4, Funny)
Re:good idea, bad idea (Score:5, Interesting)
"The point is IsoHunt is purely a medium which people could search out torrents. The purpose was to make a library of legit legal torrents that people have created."
The first clue that the above is bullshit is the site's title. "legit, legal" torrents are seldom distributed as ISOs. If you're thinking that it refers to Linux ISOs, think again -- there's already a site [legaltorrents.com] specializing in "legit, legal" torrents. Notice that there are few if any ISOs to be had there, and no Linux distros.
Listen, I understand why the owners of ISOHunt think they need to keep chanting the "legitimate" line; it's to build a case that they didn't have intent [wikipedia.org]. But we don't need to be their stooges. We know exactly why ISOHunt was there. Let's not kid ourselves.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Good grief, -all- the legit torrents I have got recently have been ISO's (as opposed to the other stuff, it tends to come in divx). They have all been F/OSS distros by the way, and why would I search when I can go direct to the relevant website to find them. The lack of linux distros on the site you list is al
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Thank you.
isoHunt indexes any and all torrents, adds any metadata, caches them, and aggregates trackers for each torrent so you get more speed and availability than any single source. To the GP, you can call whatever you like with my intent but at least get this fact straight.
Re:good idea, bad idea (Score:5, Informative)
-stormin
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I think he's referring to the lawsuits against people who have not done anything wrong but have had lawsuits brought against them.
You assume that people have no legal right to the files they download using links on the site. I have downloaded several games, CD's and even some books that I do own, but they have either become unreadable, stolen or lost over the years.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Well, most of the time they don't have that right.
Depending on where you live and what is stated in the EULA:
- Software, you may make 1 backup copy of the disk. The copy would be of the disk that is in your possession (i.e. copy would have the same CD-Key).
- Audio CDs, the verdict is not out on what is legal and not legal. If the *AA have their way, we won't even be allowed to RIP to mp3 format.
- Books, I believe that, in most places, you cannot even
Same Task, Different Tools (Score:2)
Re:Same Task, Different Tools (Score:4, Insightful)
Torrents generally encompass people-shifting, which isn't quite legal...
Re:Same Task, Different Tools (Score:4, Insightful)
I can record The Office and watch it later at my home, if I want to spend the time to program my VCR. But let's say I'm busy or technophobic: I can pay someone to come to my house, set up a VCR, and program it to record The Office, right? Nothing wrong with that.
Now take it one step further. Why shouldn't I be able to pay someone to record The Office using his VCR, and bring the tape over for me to watch? It saves him the hassle of coming over to my house just to push a few buttons on my VCR, and the end result is the same: I watch the show later, on tape, instead of live.
Now, one final step. Tapes are a dying technology. Why shouldn't I be able to pay someone to record The Office at home, encode it as an AVI file, and send me the file over the internet? The effect is exactly the same as bringing over a tape, which in turn is the same as recording it myself - I'm just delegating the work to someone else who's better at it, or at least more willing to do it. The fact that I'm paying is irrelevant; he might just as well decide to do it for free, and in fact that's what happens every day on the internet.
We can extend the same logic to music that's broadcast over the radio: I can record the song myself and listen to it again, so therefore I should be allowed to have someone else record it and send me a copy. It's nothing that I couldn't do myself, and there's no sensible reason to force me to do it myself when someone else is willing to do the work for me.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a slashdot first.. breaking the law isn't wrong!
Re: (Score:2)
My bad ISOHunt! I didn't realize Apple monitored
the final solution (Score:2)
Combined have a lot more money then the rest of us to push their DRM and intrim law suits. The suits are just a delay tactic anyway, until they get total control of our data.
Re: (Score:2)
In the fantasy world of Slashdot world every site that goes down reveals the light at the end of the tunnel.
Meanwhile, the righta agencies gain experience and precedent, so that each take-down comes easier than the one before.
As these stories grow they continue to be seen as the greedy bullies they truly are. The main purpose of the RIA
are they crazy? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:are they crazy? (Score:5, Funny)
Isohunt (Score:3, Interesting)
I hope they go back up soon. I liked them.
Re: (Score:2)
And THAT is the interesting (and worying) part. They don't even host trackers (last I checked), they just index other trackers! It is kinda like shitting down google because you can find torrents ussing their search engine.
Example: Need For Speed search [google.com]
Re:Isohunt (Score:4, Funny)
shutting down....
yah, I should use preview more often.
Re: (Score:2)
Who's fault is it? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They created the site specifically to allow people to download illegal content. And, with the ads, they profited from it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The **AA figured if you're running a Dell, you've got enough issues already.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It's hard to claim that they didn't know they were providing torrents for illegal material if they categorised it for users.
TorrentBox? (Score:2)
May not be intended to be a solution (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:May not be intended to be a solution (Score:4, Informative)
No, it's not. Copyright is not like trademarks. They don't run out if you don't enforce them. And the only evidence you need to convinct someone is proof they infringed. Past enforcement efforts have no bearing.
So all these guys are doing is harrassing people and making themselves look worse. Is there a better solution? I don't know. But it's pretty clear that the shotgun lawsuit approach simply doesn't work.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And it appears estoppel only applies if an infringer was given the expectation that their acts are condoned. Clearly, that's not the case (ie, massive advertising campaigns, etc), so I don't see how that would apply.
'course, this is all speculation from a lightly
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
That *might* come to play when computing damages (though I doubt it), but will have no effect on the course of the trial (ie, it will not come into play when considering guilt or innocence). Either Joe is guilty of infringement or he's not. What other people are doing has no bearing on that.
Furthermore, the statutory damages per infringement are *enormous* for your average joe... additional damages are e
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't get it. (Score:3, Interesting)
Wouldn't a bigger statment be to stay in the states cause that seems ot me what they are trying to do.
It just seems somewhat contradictory to move from the States to Canada and then say we won't move to Sweeden because its too easy?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Try Q-Tips and rubbing alcohol. That'll fix up your stiiiiiicking keeeeeys. HTH
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"It appears to me that they are doing everything that they can to keep BitTorrent as legitimate as possible in the eyes of the public..."
No, sites like LegalTorrents [legaltorrents.com] and even BitTorrent.com itself [bittorrent.com] are "doing everything they can." ISOHunt puts absolutely no effort into maintaining legitimacy; when you visit a tracker site and see that the top stuff mirrors the top ten movies, CDs and games, it's pretty clear that the owners care not one whit about being "legitimate." Plus, the name "ISOHunt" is a pretty
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I believe the basic reason
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
What they DIDN'T say... (Score:3, Insightful)
"BitTorrent was created for legitimate distribution of large media files, and we stand by that philosophy as a search engine and aggregator."
"...and at the same time, we know that 99% of what our customers are looking for is pirated, and we've made handsome advertising revenue. We'd like to keep making money off of the huge demand for piracy -- it's not like copyright owners have a monopoly on the concept of 'greed', you know -- so we're going to keep doing it, and keep throwing around that 'legitimate distribution' phrase, just because we enjoy the irony."
At least TPB is a little more honest and straightforward in their goals. "legitimate distribution." Right, that's exactly what the typical isohunt customer is after, and that's exactly why they were purportedly sued by copyright holders. All that "legitimate distribution."
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't ever downloaded an ISO that wasn't legit.
Re: (Score:2)
"First thing I thought of from the name is can I find Linux Distro ISOs."
I can see how somebody who's had no experience with piracy might have thought that, but a visit to the site [archive.org] would have cleared up that misconception for you REALLY fast. The top three searches recently were "Prison Break," "Snakes on a Plane" and "Miami Vice" -- not Linux distros, obviously. The only OS in the top searches was "Windows Vista," which is not freely distributable.
Is anyone suprised? (Score:3, Interesting)
"king kong torrent"
try it, and check out the top links (the top two are from isohunt)
That was just the first hollywood movie that popped into my head.
It may well be that isohunt carried a lot of perfectly legal torrents, but any torrent site that carries a huge amount of copyrighted stuff is going to be attacked by the people owning the copyright. If you really want to support legal p2p, you need to make damn sure your site is absolutely rigorous when it comes to filtering out illegal content.
In an ideal world, the anti-DRM, pro p2p crowd would be the very people who were actively moderating sites like these and keeping them clean of illegal content. As it is, nobody is going to take seriously any claims about such sites being mostly for legal use.
Re: (Score:2)
The links you found were for Kong: King of Atlantis; which was not exactly a blockbuster movie.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
In the pro-piracy crowd, there are no illegal content. If you buy a CD or a DVD, it's yours and you should be able to do what you please with the information.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
1) a communist
2) a leecher
3) an idiot.
Choose.
Or explain why you have the RIGHT to take my hard work for free? Then explain my incentive to do any further work if that's true? note that this generalises to everyone on planet ea
The fruit of your labour... (Score:4, Insightful)
My problem is that I find it socially irresponsible to fund media cartels who manipulate the legal systems of various countries in an effort to artificially inflate prices and maintain a monopoly over the distribution channel.
Is that more irresponsible than pirating content? I don't know; I honestly struggle with that question. I do not believe that "information wants to be free" means that people are entitled to take and enjoy the creative works of others without paying. Doing creative work is partly an act of investment, and like any other, one of the rewards can be passive income after the work is created. Some seem to believe that people should be denied rewards on that investment if their trade happens to be creative works. I don't agree, and I don't think that view represents the majority, either.
But along the same lines, I don't believe those who control the market for content creators' products (payola, etc.) are entitled to misrepresent the revenue stream on their balance sheet & rip those artists off, either. I don't believe corporate entities are entitled to retroactively rescind the public domain status of works that have passed into that domain. I don't believe that media corporations are entitled to force internet and satellite broadcasters into using expensive, proprietary streaming formats by legislatively mandating "approved" DRM frameworks. And I don't believe that distributors or creators are entitled to multiple payments for each device I wish to use my purchased content on. Except for a few bright spots, what we've got right now is a crap system, IMO.
Ultimately, I hope a system evolves that enables me to be a good customer of the artists I like and feel good about it. You going independent is a seedling of such a system; I hope something resembling an aggregator of your distribution system becomes the norm instead of the alternative in the near future.
Catastrophic failure, disaster recovery (Score:2)
No sympathy, at all. It's entirely possible to install a system which would withstand a nuclear attack and continue running, hell, these days it's even cheap to do it. If it really mattered to them they could have put a system in which the MPAA couldn't stop running. This is really just a story of inept system planning.
Timing (Score:2)
DMCA (Score:2)
How funny... (Score:3, Insightful)
Please, someone bitch-slap them off the planet, they really annoy me... perhaps to the same planet the buggy-whip makers are on...
Hydra (Score:4, Insightful)
Okay then (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm guessing that more often than not people are downloading for the following reasons.
Price.
Convienence (I missed last night's Office, or a movie that won't be out for months)
So make it cheaper, and make it more convienent and everyone wins. The problem is not just that they are trying to prevent theft, the *AAs are trying to kill fair use at the same time.
Their endpoint has nothing to do with pirating (or very little), it's so
wack a mole (Score:2)
This is what happened with Napster in the beginning. Few 'average' people knew what the entire download 'scene' was until the RIAA drug their butts to court, and then the nightly news. "wow, i can download music on that internet thing.. where do i sign up".
I also think the extra press it generated had a lot to do with the inital movement of the mp3 player industry in general
Their new ISP in Toronto, Canada (Score:4, Informative)
I've never understood this (Score:2)
Why does BitTorrent need aggregators?
Something is not quite right here.
Why don't they implement a distributed database of available files which itself is accessible and updated over BitTorrent?
These "aggregators" appear to be a freakin' waste of time anyway. Every time I have tried to find a file via a BitTorrent aggregator, I find the torrents are alleged to have so
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Ixnay on the Emonoid-day (Score:2)
You can have my torrents when you wrest them from my cold, dead fingers.
Re: (Score:2)
I hear Men In Black is one of their favorite downloads...
http://www.torrentz.com/005f30771f39b8722749dfce0
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't you realize that BitTorrent is designed as a zero-sum game? If some people have ratios over 1:1, other people must have ratios under it because the average of the whole community has to be exactly 1:1.
Bow to the upstream, for he is your master. (Score:5, Insightful)
With the end of network neutrality, it could easily happen.
Re: (Score:2)
If torrent gets blocked at the protocol layer, it will just start working on top of a different protocol - there are plenty avi
Re: (Score:2)
There are already ISPs that monitor for certain kinds of HTTP traffic (eg. T-mobile web'n'walk prohibits streaming video, and they actively check for it, even though it's embedded in webpages).
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"And if all citizens are equal from a legal standpoint, isn't suing IsoHunt and not Google liable to be labeled persecution?"
You've been to IsoHunt, right? You understand their purpose, their business model, and so on?
For those of you who really don't see the difference, a good place to start is intent [wikipedia.org]. Nota bene that when the folks at IsoHunt used the "legitimate distribution" phrase, they were being ironic.
Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap (Score:5, Interesting)
torrents are just the hurricane katrina of the internet.
Cripes, I *WISH* torrents had that sort of speed. :-\
BTW, I fully admit to being a looter. I know the law. I just don't give a shit. In a world where our government is selling us out to another country, where illegal aliens are given more rights than citizens, where some soccer dude can get handed a quarter of a -*BILLION*- dollars for playing a game, why should I be a nice little nobody who follows all the rules? Fuck all that. It's every man for himself from this point on.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
If you're complaining about the cost of software, well then don't buy it
I thought that's what we are accused of? Not buying, that is.
anyone who's taken a simple econ course understands supply and demand
Did you take one of those courses yourself? The cost of a product generally follows the simple equation demand / supply. When supply is infinite, as it is when you can copy something with zero effort without affecting the original, the cost approach zero. In order to be able to extort the consumers in paying a lot more than the products are worth, there are lobbied laws in place to force an artificial scarcity of the product.
Re: (Score:2)
"When supply is infinite, as it is when you can copy something with zero effort without affecting the original, the cost approach zero."
Come on; you know that demand isn't infinite, and that costs are recovered only if the product sells. The supply/demand curve is still very much at play, even with products where the cost of sale is inordinately larger than the cost of production.
While it could be that you're simply smarter than those morons at Adobe, and that they haven't done their due diligence in
Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap (Score:5, Insightful)
Copyright is an arbitrary ARTIFICIAL law -- whose time has come and past. Why is illegal? Because the government says so; and who creates the government? The people, and the people clearely are showing that it's an archaic hold-over when information was a scarce commodity.
Sharing is caring. That's the best kind of (free) advertising you can get!
Cheers
Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap (Score:5, Insightful)
Clearly you have never created anything you hold valuable.
I'm going to have to stand up and give my unpopular opinion here. Copyright does have its place. People SHOULD have the right to retain ownership of things they worked hard to create. They SHOULD be allowed to choose what happens to what they have created. If that means letting a limited number of people seeing it, if that means only allowing it to be seen in certain galleries or theaters or sold in certain stores, if that means charging what they feel is a fair price for each reproduction of that work, if that means not allowing other people to distribute their work freely then they have the right to that - for a finite, and fair, amount of time. I create stuff. I write stories. One day, I hope to publish and make money from what I write, which is why not everything I write is freely available online. I don't want people to randomly copy and paste my stories elsewhere without asking me. I'm lenient, but I draw the line at people who profit themselves from it, or don't give me due credit. Is that so bad? Don't I have the right to draw that line?
The argument is this: the movie studios and recording companies believe that they are losing staggering amounts of money from piracy. They believe - or have convinced themselves - that EVERY downloaded song or movie is a lost physical sale and therefore they SUE indiscriminately, for appallingly disproportionate sums and prison terms (decades in some cases), to make it so that the general public FEARS piracy.
But the fact of the matter is: when you copy me, I may lose sales - or, I may not. But I also gain a wider audience for my work. And through that wider audience I may gain sales - more than I originally lost (whatever that number is). If I am an artist and I created solely so that people could see my work, then I lose NOTHING. If I am a businessman and created solely for profit, I MAY lose something, or I may gain something.
The pro-piracy argument here is surely not that "all information should be free, everything you ever created should be available to everybody for no cost and they shouldn't have to pay you". That's insane. The argument is that choice should be with the creator - something the internet has facilitated, to the **AA's chagrin.
I'm beginning to ramble so I'll stop here.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The people made J.K. Rowling richer than the Queen of England. The people paid damn near a half-billion dollars for tickets to see Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest [imdb.com]
The people are buying the DVD in similiar numbers.
The Geek co
Re: (Score:2)
Who's advocating theft here? Stealing is morally wrong. P2P has nothing to do with stealing. P2P often (thought not always) has to do with copyright infringement, which is illegal. BIG difference.
Also, equating copyright infringement with theft is morally wrong (but not illegal, so you're safe there).
(It can also be argued that copyright law is morally wrong, but that's
The rose wasn't looted (Score:2)
None of the RIAA members funded the Internet or any of the technologies that make file sharing possible, yet they want to restrict the rest of the society from enjoying its benefits although we as taxpayers funded these innovations! That's why they are assholes!
Millions of people copy routinely digital media every day irrespective of copyright,
You're damned right... (Score:5, Informative)
The only people who will continue to lose out in big ways are the content creators who sell their copyrights to big business like the **AAs of the world. Right now, we are seeing the beginning of content creators starting to distribute their products without the help of the **AAs of the world, and its working. The more that happens, and the more that we, the people with a clue, name the companies responsible for bad laws, jacked up prices, market manipulation... the more chance there is of John Q Public understanding what is happening and voting appropriately.
So, who is responsible? Sony? No, there are way more than a few. Here is the RIAAs board of directors:
Polly Anthony Geffen Records
Mitch Bainwol RIAA
Glen Barros Concord Records
Steve Bartels Island Records
Victoria Bassetti EMI Recorded Music
Jose Behar Universal Music Group
Tim Bowen SONY BMG
Bob Cavallo Buena Vista Music
Mike Curb Curb Records
Joe Galante SONY BMG
Ivan Gavin EMI Recorded Music
Charles Goldstuck RCA Music Group
Zach Horowitz Universal Music Group
Dave Johnson Warner Music Group
Craig Kallman The Atlantic Group
Lawrence Kenswil Universal Music Group
Michael Koch Koch Entertainment
Mel Lewinter Universal Music Group
Kevin Liles Warner Music Group
Alan Meltzer Wind-up Records
Deirdre McDonald SONY BMG
David Munns EMI Recorded Music
Jason Flom Virgin Records America
Tom Silverman Tommy Boy Records
Andy Slater Capitol Records
Rob Stringer SONY BMG
Tom Whalley Warner Bros. Records
http://www.riaa.com/about/leadership/board.asp [riaa.com] Board of directors
If you want to know if someone's music is safe from **AA, try http://www.riaaradar.com/ [riaaradar.com]
I am certain that there are plenty of other resource on the Internet as well. So, lets all join together and try to make sure that content creators understand what the **AAs are doing to their business... namely killing it and any chance of real revenue.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I think that's a dangerous, counterproductive way to phrase it. Just because you disagree with their philosophy, or think that they're greedy or evil, doesn't make them less than human. That's a very dangerous game that historically led to very bad results.
Re:You're damned right... (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh dear. you REALLY think that statement is true?
firstly, they are not 'subhuman'. secondly, there is nothing preventing you going home right now, writing some music or making an amateur movie, and releasing it free on the web. The fact that you don't bother, but would rather make illegal copies of other peoples work instead, speaks volumes about the issue. They are not restricting the supply of entertainment. not even vaguely.
If you really gave a damn about the issue, you would avoid *evil RIAA* content entirely and stick to free content, or purchase your content directly from the content creators. Either way, downloading hollywood movies from isohunt makes their point, not yours.
Re: (Score:3)
If those kind of people had any balls at all, they would just stop leeching the works of others, and instead enjoy a few nice evenings reading books from the Gutenberg project while listening to C64 mods.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The main problem with any sort of solution the *AA does to curb piracy is that they rarely allow the law to take its course. The MPAA is strong-arming ISPs with threats of legal action unless they shut someone down. This is akin to getting rear-ended while stopped at an intersection, getting out of your car, and then threatening to sue the offender for every penny he's ever had unless he pays gives up all his cash, credit, and debit cards on the sp
Re: (Score:2)
don't quote figures if your pulling them out of your ass. Many many years ago I was in a band that got offered a record deal. yes, the deals suck, but they don't suck to the extent of 1% going to the artists.
pretending that they only get 1% might make you feel better, but it's bullshit.
I think you will find that the artists aren't getting some token sum from the RIAA. they get what was in the contract. Many bands have smart accountants (like the rolling stones) who 100% ensure they get every penny they