Signs Of A Struggle?

Back in 2005 Mattafix, the alternative hip-hop group from London, released their 'Signs Of A Struggle' album to critical acclaim, with the first single from the album 'Big City Life' rocketing up the charts across the globe.

The first single was so promising, and coupled with a performance at Parklife in 2006, I decided about a year ago, to go and buy the album.

I found it in HMV for the bargain price of $17.99, and didn't hesitate to take it to the counter for purchase.

Except on the way to counter I read the back of the album - and found the heavy-handed DRM warning and protection taking up half the space on the reverse CD sleeve. From a band who warned us 'don't let the system get you down', seem to have subscribed to that exact system in order to protect their music.


Mattafix: Not Iron Maiden

I don't have any problem with people protecting their music, but as Apple have finally come to realise with their DRM-free downloads, it is almost impossible to stop people copying and sharing tracks.

When I was making my own mix tapes, I had no comprehension that what I was doing was wrong, and if anyone else had pointed it out to me, I doubt I would have cared one way or another. Frankly if I want to listen to Iron Maiden, Whitesnake and Guns n'Roses tracks all alongside each other, then I've bought the music and I'll do what I want with it. (They were all available on 'Mixtape: Metal #4' - available from all good bootleggers)


Mix Tapes: Jail Time

Anyway, the point of this is that after seeing Mattafix with a new single out, I finally decided to buy Mattafix's old album some two years late via iTunes for $17.99. And of course, because it's $17.99 instead of $16.99, that means one thing - it's released DRM rights-free. I can download and copy it a hundred times to my heart's content.

Perhaps Mattafix had original had the decision made for them by 'the system'? Maybe they realised the irony that whilst they may have been perceived to be protecting their music by one section of the music society, many others thought that with their first commercial release, they had succumbed to commercial greed? Maybe they haven't even given it much thought at all?

Still, I'm $17.99 shorter, half-way through the album and trying to decide if it was money well spent...