Used CD's and Artist Support

[courderoy guy]

So, a question for those who might own record stores and the like.

When the store sells a new CD to someone, how does the actual artist get his share of the profit (I realize its not much, but still)? Is it a matter that when the store owner buys the CD from the distributor, the profits are split up then, or it is at the point of sale when the kid buys the CD?

The reason I ask is because I'm then curious about used CD's. Does a recording artist get any profit when used CD's are sold? If that person doesn't, then are you really supporting the artist by buying used CD's? And if you're not, and the record company doesn't make money on the sale of used CD's, why haven't they come out against the sale of used product like they have internet downloading?

[Juneau]

A good article on the subject

http://www.8bitjoystick.com/archives...y_used_cds.php

And no, used CDs do not generate profit for the artist or the record company. They got their money on the initial sale. Also, I imagine, the artist and record companies get their money when the store orders the CDs. It then becomes the store's responsibility to get rid of them all. At that point though, they are sold as far as the record companies and artists are concerned.

[LajoieT]

Originally Posted by courderoy guy

why haven't they come out against the sale of used product like they have internet downloading?

Around here, at least, they tried. About 10 years ago several places started selling used CD's and the topic was brough up. Some of the labels issued "Cease & Desist" orders to some of the stores and tried to get them to keep track of the albums/artists they sold as used CDs and give the label a cut of it. That didn't work out so the labels (in their quest to be seen as nice and reasonable folks) convinced the distributers to require that stores who purchased from them did not sell used CD's and could face a "Surcharge" on all previous invoices if they were found to be selling used CD's. This was eventually seen as a discriminatory buisiness practice (with all of the Anti-trust lawyers looking on with baited breath) and the distributers quickly pulled that part out of their contracts and told the lables they couldn't help them. There is also DECADES of precidence in the vinyl market which the labels NEVER brough up and made an issue which made their chances of fighting the used CD market very slight. Eventually it all settled down just about the time that the Napster stuff hit the fan and started keeping the labels lawyers busy. Now nearly every small shop in the area sells used CDs

[Juneau]

Thats also where small shops make most of their money is in the used CD trade. Its the same with used anything, cars, instruments, all that stuff. You sold it once, its gone and doesnt belong to you anymore. You dont get kickbacks on that used car you sold in the 80's everytime someone new buys it, neither does the manufacturer. Presidence was set long ago on many other items for sale or trade in the market.

[jondog]

With the mp3 wars, wasn't the RIAA position that cd/record/tape buyers were not buying a physical object, they were buying the right to listen to the songs? Selling used media might imply that the right is transferred w/ the object and therefore the mfr./artist could still deserve a cut.

I seem to remember that books from the UK had some legalese saying they could not be resold. I bought several used ones.