Pirate Bay's "Promo Bay" flooded with submissions from hopeful artists

Torrenfreak covers The Pirate Bay's new "Promo Bay" service, which has been flooded by 5,000+ submissions from artists who want to have their work promoted on The Pirate Bay -- mostly musicians, but also writers like Paolo Coelho.

“Thus far we’ve done 14 regular campaigns in 3 countries each and 8 worldwide promotions,” Pirate Bay’s Winston told TorrentFreak, who added that the initial plan has changed a bit due to the massive success.

“When we started the project the plan was to do a few worldwide promotions a year, but the submissions have been too good. So now we’re gonna do the worldwide promos every weekend and some regulars every now and then.”

For the artists the promotion campaigns are paying off as well. George Barnett added 4,000 new Facebook fans during the campaign and his video was viewed 85,000 times in total. And Tomás Vergara, the maker of short film The Chase, got 250,000 views of his video in just three days.

“When I had a reply saying that they liked it and I’d have a worldwide display on The Pirate Bay homepage, I pulled off my hair. I think its been a while since I’ve opened my eyes that wide,” Vergara said looking back at receiving the good news.

“Now The Chase is having massive exposure. I’m so damn happy. This is the kind of things you were not expecting in life, I guess,” he added.

5000+ Artists Line Up For a Pirate Bay Promotion

The Promo Bay [The Pirate Bay]

(via The Command Line)


  1. kromelizard,

    Why don’t you lie down with a nice cool compress on your head for the rest of the day.

  2. We need a mechanism where we can pay the artist directly when we download files or music from one site or other. Imagine if you could download from anywhere, but pay directly and know it would go to the person who deserves to be paid.
    I was thinking of some sort of honesty box, but that domain is already registered.

    1.  For musicians, Bandcamp seems to have a pretty good delivery/payment model, with minimal middleman intervention.

  3. I have a suggestion. Create a different site where only members who pay 6-7 Dollars a month or 5 Euro can download stuff. 80-90% of the money could go to the artists who permit their work being downloaded via torrents and 10-20% to the torrent provider.

  4.  4000 new facebook fans, 85000 video views, and a quarter will get you… twenty-five cents.

    1.  If the musicians themselves use it as a metric, surely it means something to them? He now has 4000 More people he can sell stuff directly to, advertise his performances directly to, and Know that they’re interested in his music. For anyone trying to get their content paid for, that’s worth a Lot of money, any advertiser would tell you that knowing exactly what people want and putting an option for getting it in front of them is a very good way to make money.

      He’s not putting an ad up on a telephone pole and hoping the right people will see it, he can now put that poster in someone’s letter box, knowing they already like his work, which boosts his ad/buy hit rate Way up.

  5. Yeah we wouldn’t want independent artists having the option to publicize themselves through a forum with worldwide exposure! How will the middle men put their children through private school?!

  6.  bear with me while I pick this apart, minutiae by minutiae:

    “Granting legitimacy to the criminal organization”

    It’s not a criminal organization, no matter how you want to define this. It’s a website, that engages in offering magnet links to material, much of it in the public domain, freeware, or available under a creative commons license. While some of the material available is protected under copyright law, it is a civil violation, not a felony. Go ahead and try to convict someone of felony copyright violation and see where it goes.

    Further to the point, filesharing is protected under the Charter of Human Rights. And per Dowling v. United States (1985), piracy is not theft under any legal definition.

    Moving along…

    “that exists solely to systematically deprive them of their rights and ability to make a living as artists?

    This is not the case, see this very article. It also exists to promote independent artists, to give them exposure they would otherwise have difficulties reaching without selling their souls and firstborn children to the content industry.
    In addition, It doesn’t deprive them of their rights or ability to make a living as artists. More exposure tends to equate with more sales. It’s no coincidence that the content industry is booming, and has risen with the advent of Napster in 1999 (for evidence of this I give you the independent study “The Sky is Rising, available at http://www.ccianet.org/CCIA/files/ccLibraryFiles/Filename/000000000586/TheSkyIsRising7-130.pdf ) More exposure to media equals more sales, and the more that independent artists can grab without giving it away to the middle men on the RIAA and MPAA, the better. Going right to the consumer is the best option available to starting artists. You don’t need media exposure when you’ve got a direct link to consumers via The Pirate Bay.

    ” is not in the long term interests of the artists”

    You’re right. Making deals with the MAFIAA for sales through their channels, relinquishing almost all rights to your own creation in exchange for the pittance they’re willing to give you,  is a much better option. Clearly.

    I can;t help but notice that it’s the MPAA and RIAA doing all the complaining about filesharing. I don’t hear very many artists making complaints, and certainly not a lot of new artists just trying to feed themselves.

  7.  I don’t think one equates with the other at all. This is clearly a straw man argument.

Comments are closed.