File sharing doesn't hurt musicians

[AaronVonRock]

because he was calling you on your balony? Poor baby, I guess you're taking your football and going home now!

Or would that be someone else's? Hey, it's all good, man

I'm still an active part of this discussion. I'm just responding to people who aren't being immature and resorting to name calling. Good day, sir.

By the way, the correct spelling is "baloney".

 

[dhsierra1]

I'm still an active part of this discussion. I'm just responding to people who aren't being immature and resorting to name calling. Good day, sir.

By the way, the correct spelling is "baloney".

I'd say your attitude shows a great deal of immaturity, akin to a spoiled teenager. Just calling it like I see it, friend.

You still haven't responded to my queries and those of others which are legit.

Technically it's bologna but then I thought this was a music site, but hey, congrats on scoring big points in the discussion

 

[AaronVonRock]

If you've ever worked retail, you probably haven't done it recently....

To use Best Buy as an example since I worked there as recently as 2 years ago, I can verify this as a current selling model. There are many items they run at normal prices and LOSE money (PC sales to be specific) when they sell just that. So how do they recoup money? Protection plans, services, accessories, software, and tying it with something that they do have lots of markup on (Say, a new CD player for your car to listen to all those CD's you'll be burning now). So this is a valid example, but there is much more cost incurred to manufacture and design a computer than to record a song. I've heard many amateur chaps on here record stuff in their garages that could go on a store-bought CD and not sound any different than the "pro" stuff. Since an album is a lower price point than a computer and it's just copied intellectual property or art, it's much more reasonable to see it put out as marketing or advertising. Like someone noted with the Danzig model...if they want an HD audio CD with liner notes, pictures, all kinds of extras and a "making of" DVD included...get them to pay for that.

The Danzig model is a good example. Putting extras in the packaging that aren't available digitally is maybe one way to encourage people to buy products at a retail store or directly from the artisit's website. Rocket From The Crypt used to individually sign all of the music they sold from their website. Henry Rollins does the same thing with his books.

I agree the music may just be used as a marketing tool or free advertising to attract fans (customers). Once a musician or band has the fans through the free music, there are other opportunities to make some money. For example, The Supersuckers have a fan club (P.I.T., People of Impeccable Taste) who pay a yearly membership fee and receive all kinds of goodies like exclusive releases, free merch, being put of the guest list, backstage access,...

Selling hard copies of prerecorded music isn't the only way for musicians to make money. In fact, that option is quickly drying up.

 

[bass12]

I saw your posts. But since you were engaging in name calling and being rude, I chose to ignore them. And I will continue to do so. Good day, sir.

I love it when people will use the "good day, sir" as if to imply some degree of maturity or moral superiority. I wasn't being rude, I was calling you out on what I suspect is some bull**** on your part. If you can't step up and answer those basic questions I'll assume that my assumptions regarding some of your views and background are correct. So continue to ignore as it seems that's what's most convenient for you at this time.

 

[dhsierra1]

Selling hard copies of prerecorded music isn't the only way for musicians to make money. In fact, that option is quickly drying up.

because of people with your attitude.

 

[bkbirge]

Selling hard copies of prerecorded music isn't the only way for musicians to make money. In fact, that option is quickly drying up.

They've been doing that for years on the streets of Hong Kong, Bangkok, Beijing, Jakarta, New York, etc. Oh, you mean selling copies of the artist's *own* music. Yeah, that doesn't happen much anymore.

 

[blue4]

You're going to have people who claim that "theft (or whatever they'd prefer to call it) is theft" but let's be reasonable here. There's a big difference between going into a supermarket and stealing one candy bar versus going in and completely emptying the shelves. To equate the making of a mixtape for one friend with the placement of a file online where it will be accessible by potentially millions of people is silly.

Taking a candy bar is stealing. And so is making a copy of something to distribute to someone else for free. Yes, I know it's legal. And yes, I know one is potentially worse than the other. But it's still stealing. The act is equal, it's just the damage that's different. I don't see anything silly. What I do see are people who spent decades indulging in a behavior that they now judge their kids for doing, using this notion of "Well, our technology wasn't as good, so it's not so bad." I suppose I come off as cranky about this subject, but every discussion I get into on this seems to start at "How do we lessen the damage to artists from this while not limiting legit technology" and then quickly turns to "Kids today suck." It gets old.

 

[AaronVonRock]

Here is a quote from another member from another thread that I agree with:

"To the whole thread and industry alike : Albums are like movie posters. They're not your main product, they're advertisement. If you make any profit at all directly from advertisement, it's already a miracle."

This is the direction that prerecorded music is moving in. It's the movie poster or :30 TV ad to pique your interest and hopefully encourage you to invest in the product. Prerecorded music is no longer the product itself.

 

[lowfreq33]

Yes, there was a time when we didn't have any of these completely arbitrary "laws" to prevent people from just taking whatever they wanted from whoever had it.

There also weren't any laws to prevent someone from bashing you in the head with a rock when you got caught.

 

[bass12]

Taking a candy bar is stealing. And so is making a copy of something to distribute to someone else for free. Yes, I know it's legal. And yes, I know one is potentially worse than the other. But it's still stealing. The act is equal, it's just the damage that's different. I don't see anything silly. What I do see are people who spent decades indulging in a behavior that they now judge their kids for doing, using this notion of "Well, our technology wasn't as good, so it's not so bad." I suppose I come off as cranky about this subject, but every discussion I get into on this seems to start at "How do we lessen the damage to artists from this while not limiting legit technology" and then quickly turns to "Kids today suck." It gets old.

Unfortunately, the greater the possible damage, the greater the responsibility. And society does change. You think that kids in North America these days don't, in general, feel a greater sense of entitlement than they did forty years ago? And don't think I'm blaming kids - because I'm not. This is as much about adults as it is kids.

 

[dkelley]

Are you actually making a comparison between file sharing and kidnapping? That's pretty out there. I respect your opinion, but your posts have undertones of religious fanaticism that I find creepy. Take care of yourself and try not to do anything rash.

*** where did it say kidnapping ... well maybe the analogy didn't go over clearly....

Anyhow, that isn't fanaticism he was demonstrating... geez (pun intended) it's just a basic ancient history religious rule that exists equally in most culture's ancient documents. Basically, it was always recognized that people do bad things, and cultures have always tried to stop that since it interferes with working together as a cooperative unit.

Anyhow I get your points and agree that recorded music is no longer an industry of it's own. It's a poster to support a live touring act.

This is pretty tragic for those of us who grew up when album sales made artists millions... I was exciting and fun for me but life destroying for musicians who lost it all to people giving their music away instead of charging for it and sending the money back where it was supposed to go.

The sad part is that it's all changed due to the rampant illegal sharing of recognized intellectual content that would otherwise have gone towards the musician's income.

It's impossible to see it as fair to musicians who's contracts pay them by record sales... there isn't any question that recording artists, engineers, producers, labels, managers, etc lost millions to internet file sharing. That is clearly a tragedy.

To artists growing up in this world now it's completely different, but if you were there when it was happening you will remember clearly the stories of musicians lives financially ruined by people not respecting their hard work and accepted expectations.

 

[AaronVonRock]

It's impossible to see it as fair to musicians who's contracts pay them by record sales... there isn't any question that recording artists, engineers, producers, labels, managers, etc lost millions to internet file sharing. That is clearly a tragedy.

Eventually, I think that those type of contracts will cease to exist. Like I said in another post, YouTube views, Facebook likes, Twitter followers, and whatever else the next thing will be could replace record sales as the measurement for compensation.

What worked in the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s (being fully compensated for selling prerecorded music) doesn't work today. The music industry hasn't done themselves any favors by failing to come up with an alternative course of action. Trying to shut down the internet didn't work for them nor did filing lawsuits against individual parties. If world governments can't stop Wikileaks, do you think the RIAA is going to stop file sharing? It's here to stay.

 

[dkelley]

Eventually, I think that those type of contracts will cease to exist. Like I said in another post, YouTube views, Facebook likes, Twitter followers, and whatever else the next thing will be could replace record sales as the measurement for compensation.

What worked in the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s (being fully compensated for selling prerecorded music) doesn't work today. The music industry hasn't done themselves any favors by failing to come up with an alternative course of action. Trying to shut down the internet didn't work for them nor did filing lawsuits against individual parties. If world governments can't stop Wikileaks, do you think the RIAA is going to stop file sharing? It's here to stay.

Of course, that is completely true. However as noted, it's the fact that the clear and plain redistribution of music without charging for it, and therefore without paying the musicians and engineers and labels etc for it, made many musicians bankrupt who lived according to their budgeted income based on projected sales. The sales didn't come through because those protected sales went to people who got it as a gift from torrent and p2p file sharers.

It's like designing an amazing product, investing hundreds of thousands on it, spending another several hundred thousand on marketing it, spending several more hundred thousand making millions of your product for sale and stocking stores with them, ...then having all of your millions of manufactured products literally stolen from you.

It's EXACTLY the same net result that happened to the music industry in the 90s.

Tragic.

Had file sharing been introduced in the way radiohead and others did it much later than maybe it wouldn't have been quite so tragic, or if the sharing tech folks had worked with labels as a pay for download iTunes type of distributor... then maybe it wouldn't have been so bad.

Instead, the devs and endorsers of the tech used it to blatantly take from and not pay for the music of the musicians they appreciated.

 

[Desirsar]

Here is a quote from another member from another thread that I agree with:

"To the whole thread and industry alike : Albums are like movie posters. They're not your main product, they're advertisement. If you make any profit at all directly from advertisement, it's already a miracle."

This is the direction that prerecorded music is moving in. It's the movie poster or :30 TV ad to pique your interest and hopefully encourage you to invest in the product. Prerecorded music is no longer the product itself.

And I quoted my quote myself in this thread as well.

Invalid Link Removed

It's working as a "loss-leader" or as advertising rather than a product. It's not working as a primary product because there are too many albums coming out, not because people are downloading one or a billion copies. Apparently, the only way to stop this is to stop spreading your money around on indie label stuff. Metallica and Madonna albums only from now on...

 

[AaronVonRock]

And I quoted my quote myself in this thread as well.

Invalid Link Removed

It's working as a "loss-leader" or as advertising rather than a product. It's not working as a primary product because there are too many albums coming out, not because people are downloading one or a billion copies. Apparently, the only way to stop this is to stop spreading your money around on indie label stuff. Metallica and Madonna albums only from now on...

Excellent article. Thanks for sharing it. Everyone should take five minutes and give it a good read. For those who are too lazy to read it, the things that jumped out at me were:

"the “broader music industry,” which included “revenues from music in radio advertising, recorded music sales, musical instrument sales, live performance revenues and portable digital music player sales (among a few other income categories)” grew from $132 billion to $168 billion."

"From 1999 to 2009, concert ticket sales in the US tripled from $1.5 billion to $4.6 billion"

"The number of albums has also been growing rapidly. Nielson SoundScan estimates that 38,000 new albums were released in 2003, a figure that swelled to 106,000 by 2008, then fell during the recession to 75,000 in 2010."

 

[dkelley]

that's good news for sure.

Almost makes the careless and selfish way the the formerly successful music industry was destroyed seem less significant.

Almost.

Ok ok ok, I'm done being maudlin ;-)

I'm definitely happy that the music industry is managing to thrive with new technologies pushing the way.

Cheers

 

[blue4]

Unfortunately, the greater the possible damage, the greater the responsibility. And society does change. You think that kids in North America these days don't, in general, feel a greater sense of entitlement than they did forty years ago? And don't think I'm blaming kids - because I'm not. This is as much about adults as it is kids.

No, I don't think kids today feel more entitled as a whole. I think there are more desperate and left behind children today then anyone could have imagined 40yrs ago. Entitlement is in the eye of the beholder. But this is probably off topic. I just don't care for the holier than thou tone some people take in these discussions.

 

[bass12]

Excellent article. Thanks for sharing it. Everyone should take five minutes and give it a good read. For those who are too lazy to read it, the things that jumped out at me were:

"the “broader music industry,” which included “revenues from music in radio advertising, recorded music sales, musical instrument sales, live performance revenues and portable digital music player sales (among a few other income categories)” grew from $132 billion to $168 billion."

"From 1999 to 2009, concert ticket sales in the US tripled from $1.5 billion to $4.6 billion"

"The number of albums has also been growing rapidly. Nielson SoundScan estimates that 38,000 new albums were released in 2003, a figure that swelled to 106,000 by 2008, then fell during the recession to 75,000 in 2010."

That's not an excellent article at all if you're looking for specifics that go deeper than some fairly vague statistics. Portable digital music players? What does that include? smart phones? If so then that alone is going to bolster the numbers significantly. Too bad the sale of iPods and smart phones doesn't help musicians. Increased ticket sales? At what prices? Funny how many venues have shut down in the past number of years and how many touring budgets have been slashed. Sure, big festivals like Coachella have bolstered the number of ticket sales in a certain market but, again, what are the specifics? Musical instrument sales? Again, that's not helping musicians out any more than increased sales in business suits. These figures sound really impressive but, somehow, things don't seem to be adding up so well for the actual working musician. This is also a really good read:

http://www.amazon.ca/How-To-Lie-With-Statistics/dp/0393310728

 

[Clef_de_fa]

Hum ... then now that music isn't art anymore and it is just a marketing plot to sell whatever they want ... then why would any one put a lot of effort making great music when its more important to have nice shirt to sell ?

so it is the death of music as an art form, music is now a marketing plot like a tv pub or whatever ... sad world

also I think we can't use the words "artist" and "musician" when talking about someone in a band with either a guitar,bass,drums or keyboard.

 

[knumbskull]

also I think we can't use the words "artist" and "musician" when talking about someone in a band with either a guitar,bass,drums or keyboard.

well, maybe not the last two