Talk:Internet Underground Music Archive

IUMA.com itself seems to still be up and running, but I notice all of the IUMA staffs' and technical and artist support e-mails return "No such address". I sent an e-mail to their owner, Vitaminic Inc., without response. It seems there is absolutely no way to contact anyone at IUMA for anything. As a hosted artist who is unable to login to his account and can't reset his password (it relies on that stupid unsecure "hint" system) how the hell am I supposed to get these people to remove my artist page? I don't even think I can even do anything as far as legal options are concerned, as I think they're officially located in Italy or Spain or someplace. --I am not good at running 19:40, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

Denial of Service?

I have a feeling that IUMA has been hit with a DoS (Denial of Service) attack by a competing website. Apparently, there is some company called eMusic who had an advertisement for independent music artist only they charge money for downloads. This is the same service as IUMA but they are charging money for something that should be free. Are we being mainipulated to buy something before we download it? This is unfair to the fans who are looking for new artists. --Bushido Hacks 14:56, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I deleted a set of spam links.

IUMA - and the large disappointment

IUMA is certainly a leader and pioneer in the music portal scene for independent and unsigned artists. The disappointment is that it seems to have just disappeared into thin air. This bothers me greatly. When a company has provided a valuable service to thousands and thousands of users and just disappears into the ether, it makes me wonder what the original motive was.

I have yet to see any official notice, apology, or blog about what really happened. In my own research, I've found that Peoplesound has taken all of IUMAs artists, and still does nothing except cash in on the checks that come from Google ads. Peoplesound and IUMA are both owned by the same company so it does make valid sense and it further disappoints the entire situation.

Why are artists not able to edit or upload music to Peoplesound? I think it's largely because these people really do not value the artists and their careers. I do strongly believe it's become a matter of profit for their parent company; and that's their bottom line.

I would love an opportunity to investigate and dig further in this matter and fight for all the bands, artists, and musicians who have placed their trust in IUMA. If there is a disapperance of the peoplesound site, it's because I filed a SPAM report.

Type in IUMA in google, and you'll see Peoplesound come up with some weird text that says "IUMA" and "please click here" in it's description tag. Type in peoplesound, and the description text is totally different. If you do not care about your artists and show no intent to allow them an opportunity to further their career; then remove your site from the web and make room for other sites like Music Oxygen, PureVolume, and Last.fm.

The owners of these sites (IUMA, and Peoplesound) are more than welcome to make contact and discuss this matter. They certainly owe an apology to their users. I am a worker of the Music Oxygen movement.

Anyway

I would like to thank IUMA and it's people for music I found with her. It makes half of all music I hear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.77.118.227 (talk) 09:33, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Not taking new listings.

The original concept was excellent, and while the service was working it really did try to be all things to all musicians on the internet. More egalitarian than the services that were spawned from it, it was true to the original model of the Internet, a community of fans and bands that interacted well for the most part. The article here states 'IUMA' was not 'adding new bands after 2001,' and then later states the site was 'finally closed in 2006.' Not only was the site not taking new bands, it was not servicing its old listings, or responding to members emails or forum entries which effectively made the service useless. Vitaminic and Emusic appeared to basically take control of existing content, add advertising and make a few bucks, but the client base didn't receive any service for that revenue track in the post-2001 era. Unable to communicate with the hosts, clients were unable to change, upload or close their band's content. Basically, IUMA fell victim to loss of interest by it's hosts and moderators and the content appeared to have been usurped and apparently left to be exploited. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Docrichards (talk • contribs) 16:06, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

It's pretty clear that it lost out to MySpace and it's ilk. It would be nice to have a good reference confirming that, as such, and note it in the article. I, personally, loathe MySpace, for music/band listings. It's atrocious, and I'd always rather download a track (even a low-quality 64kbit encoding) than futz with a flash audio player embedded into the page. It's atrocious. That said, having a weblog integrated in with an atom/rss feed is useful to bands... did IUMA ever provide that? I can't remember now. 65.112.197.16 (talk) 15:16, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Not that it makes any difference now, but I was "on" IUMA. It did indeed just disappear without any notice to those on the site. I recall trying to upload new tunes only to get nowhere (that was when Vitaminic was involved). Related note: Jon Luini wrote a column in EQ back around the time IUMA started as that's where I heard about it. Unfortunately EQ kind of went downhill. I believe it's no longer published. THX1136 (talk) 22:11, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Stub tag

I removed the stub tag because this seemed pretty encyclopedic. Maybe someone wants to split it into sections as well because it looks like there is enough information. Dreambeaver (talk) 21:40, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Internet Underground Music Archive. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131017044106/http://www.santacruz.com/news/2013/08/20/santa_cruzs_internet_music_pioneer to http://www.santacruz.com/news/2013/08/20/santa_cruzs_internet_music_pioneer

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:02, 20 December 2017 (UTC)