Slashdot Mirror

Hmmm... the lifetime of a CD is quite a bit longer than that of a cassette, shouldn't the cost be higher then? Plus you have the whole analog and digital thing going, so you are getting a higher quality recording. That's not worth anything to you?

Do you work for the RIAA? Just wonderin', because you just echoed their arguments on "Why CDs cost so much."

(short answer : Marketing)

But you're logic still doesn't hold. Because someone has created a better medium, that's cheaper to produce, it should cost more? By that logic the Internet should be too expensive for anyone to use, especially with your digital point.

I thought this article was about the RIAA not the MPAA.

Check the member companies of both, then look at parent companies and the conglomerates that hold them. No doubt both lobbied hard for the DMCA, and both have been shown to be hijakcing citizen's rights.

Lawyers go both ways, IMHO. A necesssity of an overly complex legal system, and abused by the ultra greedy who hide themselves behind the word capitalism.

--

Here's a couple snippets from the Ask the RIAA page:

What is your stand on MP3?

This is one of those urban myths like alligators in the toilet. MP3 is just a technology and the technology itself never did anything wrong! There are lots of legal MP3s from great artists on many, many online sites. The problem is that some people use MP3 to take one copy of an album and make that copy available on the Internet for hundreds of thousands of people. That's not fair. If you choose to take your own CDs and make copies for yourself on your computer or portable music player, that's great. It's your music and we want you to enjoy it at home, at work, in the car and on the jogging trail. But the fact that technology exists to enable unlimited Internet distribution of music copies doesn't make it right. To learn more about digital music, visit the Music and the Internet section.

Waitaminute!!! The RIAA stated only a couple years ago that MP3 was a dangerous technology, did they not? And they tried to sue such items as RIO (the portable mp3 player) because it promoted piracy? Sounds like they were saying MP3 was dangerous and that carrying around a personal copy of a CD you duplicated to MP3 was wrong . . . Nice change of heart, after they lost their lawsuits . . .

And on a link from the "Ask the RIAA" page on cost of CDs, there's this paragraph:

Another factor commonly overlooked in assessing CD prices is to assume that all CDs are equally profitable. In fact, the vast majority is never profitable. Each year, of the approximately 27,000 new releases that hit the market, the major labels release about 7,000 new CD titles and after production, recording, promotion and distribution costs, most never sell enough to recover these costs, let alone make a profit. In the end, less than 10% are profitable, and in effect, it's these recordings that finance all the rest.

Whoa, waitaminute . . . If you lose money on 90% of what you sell, you're not doing very well anywhere. If a hardware manufacturer did this, they'd be out of business. Same with software. You don't go out and lose money on 90% of your products in hoping that the 10% can carry you. No wonder they're suing to get royalties on such things as MyMP3 and Napster, to make up for their lack of marketing and music sense!

Maybe what the RIAA should do is explain to the music industry, "Just because the Backstreet Boys sell, doesn't mean any boy band who sings falsetto will sell well." Get the dino's out of manager spots and contract areas and maybe we'd have better music and less crappy bands, so that they wouldn't lose money on 90% of the CDs and we could get cheaper CDs already.

Sorry for my rant, but I laughed at the front page article regarding how the RIAA was telling us how the law states different copyright infringements, then adds their own, as though it made that law. And then a quick check of their site had even more humour. (: Please, get back on topic now!

Dragon Magic

Yes. http://www.riaa.com/MD-US-7.cfm

Each time the riaa is discussed at slashdot, this guy posts this. It may be a troll, but more probably is someone with interest in the RIAA.

Even if the content is plain hard bullshit, there may be people impressed by it.

Cheer,

--fred

MP3Board is currently getting sued by the RIAA for copyright infringement by distributing MP3s. MP3Board has turned around and sued AOL because their subsidiary, Nullsoft created Gnutella. MP3Board wants AOL to share some of the liability for music piracy if MP3Board is found guilty. MP3Board's reasoning is that piracy wouldn't be happening as much if AOL's subsidiary hadn't created Gnutella.

---

They *are* an RIAA member. OTOH, I've always said that any Sony boycott (at least in the US) would last until October 26, 2000 :).

NO MORE BRITNEY SPEARS!

A quick search on Platinum Certifications notes that Britney Spears has sold over fifteen million records in two years. If over fifteen million people are willing to pay over $10 for a CD, why wouldn't they tip considerably less if given the choice?

Slashdotters who continually bitch about how killing the RIAA will destroy Britney Spears types amaze me. There will always be a market for each generations equivalent of teenage bubblegum pop, killing the RIAA won't suddenly mean that the average teenage girl would suddenly see the Who or whatever as quality music and leave Britney Spears, N'Sync and the Backstreet Boys. In fact they will be reinforced since they cater to the lowest common musical denominator (kinda like how McDonald's is a major player even though their food is nowhere near the best) and will thus benefit more from artist centered music distribution schemes than fringe groups. If you doubt this...consider how many of their concerts are sold out.
FOOD FOR THOUGHT

It's not cheap, but a competent musician can make a decent album for a decent amount of cash. My local studio (I'd give a shout out, but he has no web address and an unlisted number, so why bother) charges $20 an hour to record. That's it. And, he's a freaking cool guy.

The costs climb since you have to buy the reel ($70) and the hours increase with each time you rerecord a part and the time you spend mixing. But it's not unreasonable, and it's perfectly possible to make a vanity CD of three of four songs.

I was cruising the RIAA website recently and found "Why are CD costs so high?" thinly disguised as "What costs go into a CD?" The RIAA comes right out and says "it's promotion and distribution." It's that same promotion and distribution that fills the airwaves with crap bands.

Bands can make a living without huge promotional machines (in fact it might be easier, since the public won't get saturated with and consequently sick of the band). And I can find the music I like without promotional machines, thank you very much. I surf the web, get recommendations from friends, buy sampler CDs and actually leave the house(!) to go hit the bars and groove to tunes.

So screw you, Record Industry! Ha ha!

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Between 1983 and 1996, the average price of a CD fell by more than 40%. Over this same period of time, consumer prices (measured by the Consumer Price Index, or CPI) rose nearly 60%.

Nice choice of years. Now try this one, taken from RIAA's own U.S. market data report: between 1990 and 1999 the average cost of a CD rose by 13%. And yet, sales volume continues to grow by 10% annually. Isn't it a shame that piracy is destroying the CD market?

This comment is quoted verbatim from an RIAA website. The original page can be found here.

Frankly, this is a big load of shit, and doesn't deserve a +2 insightful ;)

Anthony

I'm not sure which list you're looking at (I'm looking at this one), but I don't see them in alphabetical order or with a ctrl-f search. Perhaps you're responding to the wrong message?

These lists don't appear to be totally reliable. Some of the labels listed as independent, found on the sites you refer to, can also be found on the RIAA's list of members.

For example, 4AD is listed on both:
http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/external/T.Wi cks/ill/
http://www.riaa.com/About-Members-1.cfm

Unfortunately, they're listed on the RIAA member page. Who would have thought?! Bad news for Zappa fans, huh?

Well, it's probably easier to list the RIAA members, since there's so many of them. You can find a list right here.

But if you're looking for a great non-RIAA label, I'd check out Sub Pop Records, based out of Seattle. They're a widely-recognized non-RIAA label (they're very big on the college radio circuit) who was responsible for the popularity of Nirvana, Soundgarden, and Mudhoney. Their music is worth a listen if you love grunge rock, I'd recommend the Sub Pop 200 compilation for starters.

--

Alex Bischoff
---

So you can do process of elimination.
The List. Please note that in the Napster case the RIAA is not representing all of its members (Sony is a notable exception).

For high quality indie labels, I recommend Hyperion, Harmonia Mundi, Rounder, and Hightone.

Anyone else find it ironic that the above post was lifted without permission from the RIAA, without even including proper attribution?

FWIW, it appears to come from here: http://www.riaa.com/MD-US-7.cfm

If you want to read the original document, see this page at the RIAA web site.

If you look at the request for the injunction, it lists a dozen cases of person-to-person stealing, where it was declared illegal (how is an individual operating a web site serving individuals not person-to-person stealing?

Another interesting feature of "fair use", is that there has never been a case where copying the entire work (as music pirates do), has been declared acceptable when used for non-personal use. Fair use has been around forever, and mostly pertains to using excerpts of works for review, etc. The chance of being granted fair use is inversely proportional to the amount of the work which is copied.

Easy. If the middleman is costing too much, cut the middleman out of the picture and take 100% of the compensation for your work yourself, instead of less than 10%. Think you're too small? Accounts are FREE.

She has already done the math, so I wish that Courtney Love would contact me. *sigh* We could help eachother a lot, IMO, and I liked her recent rant. Oh well.
JMR

Easy. If the middleman is costing too much, cut the middleman out of the picture and take 100% of the compensation for your work yourself, instead of less than 10%. Think you're too small? Accounts are FREE.

She has already done the math, so I wish that Courtney Love would contact me. *sigh* We could help eachother a lot, IMO, and I liked her recent rant. Oh well.
JMR

RIAA pretty much accepts now that they're the Borg of music... go check out RIAA.com, look under their left navigation menu, under "Licensing and Royalties"...

"The RIAA Collective"

I KNEW IT!

Here is an article on salon that you might be interesting in: It is Courtney Love's take on the real culprit in music piracy - the RIAA .
Hope this helps,
Rainbowfyre

Here is what Hilary Rosen had to say about the stay being granted.

"In fact, since the district court issued its order, the illegal downloading of copyrighted music openly encouraged by Napster has probably exceeded all previous records." Who does she think caused that to happen...

Likewise, here is a link to RIAA's motion for the injunction, which is also extremely interesting reading.

www.boycott-riaa.com

www.riaaboycott.org

Napster Buycott (that's not a typo :))

RIAA Member List (for the boycotting, duh!)

RIAA Contact List (let your voice be heard!)

--

I thought the same way until I went and looked at a list of all the labels belonging to the RIAA. With the exception of a few DIY punk "labels", RRRecords, and Alternative Tentacles, I couldn't think of a single label that I'd bought a CD from in the last ten years that wasn't on the list of RIAA members. I can think of a few more labels that aren't on the list, but to claim that they churn out a better product than all these "majors" is a highly suspect assertion.

Recording costs have therefore gone up a great deal in the CD age, and this is reflected in their price. If the CD playing-time limit was the same as that of an LP then it seems likely that they would cost appreciably less in the shops. As it is, the cost of a modern recording of a large choral/orchestral single CD can easily run up to GBP 50,000, especially if soloists are involved. Clearly it is necessary to sell a large quantity to recoup such a sum.

Anyway, the RIAA site does give that 90% non-profitable figure, but what does that mean? How much does the average "non-profitable" recording actually lose? $1? $1,000? $100,000? How does that balance against the huge amounts that something like a Brittney Spears CD rakes in?

Good luck finding one that isn't. Here's the list. As pointed out earlier by someone else. Personally, not every label that is a member of the RIAA automatically is at agreement with everything the RIAA does, nor is every artist. A boycott of the entire RIAA doesn't make much sense. I am sure that a large number of labels and artists under the RIAA do not agree with any of it's actions at all.

Here is a list of RIAA Members.

Anyone who has mp3's downloaded from Napster should now repent -- send your mp3's back to the RIAA and tell them you've deleted them from your hard disk. Send them by email, or through the post on floppy/CD-R/Zip/DAT, etc.

by post:
RIAA
1330 Connecticut Avenue N.W., Suite 300
Washington, D.C. 20036

by email: (report piracy email address) -- cdreward@riaa.com

You might also want to pick up the phone and call them... tell them you wish to send your mp3's back and ask where to send them.

Telephone: (202) 775-0101

Check out the research conducted by the RIAA. Take a close look at the screenshots of Scour Exchange and you will see that MOST of the files that they are downloading are not even FULL movies. I would be willing to bet that many of the "movies" they found on SX were trailers that people had downloaded and placed in their shared directories for download. The thing that I wonder is why is everyone of these major organizations jumping to the legal system as their primary means of problem resolution?

here it is http://www.riaa.com/Copyright-Laws-4.cfm

Not according to the RIAA. I had a link to the page on their website where they explicitly stated this, but they have apparently moved the page and I don't feel like looking for the new location right now. They explicitly stated that ripping a CD that you have paid for is illegal, even if you only use the resulting mp3s for your own personal use. The page was at http://www.riaa.com/tech/tech_ht.htm . Perhaps they took it down because they realized how absolutely psycho this made them look, or maybe they just moved the page and haven't realized that they are pure evil yet.

For that matter:

Directories.
Slashdot (and its brethren).
"Internet guides"
Web portals
Web Award Sites (like the Webby). (COuld be legal without linking but then what would be the point?)
The "News from around the net" sections on ZDNet and CNet.
AOL Instant Messenger and ICQ URL link functions
URL Link functions in e-mail programs.
This messsage would be illegal, too.

• They claim 34.4% as explicitly or implicitly stating that they use Napster in a way that displaces cd sales. Actually, only 11.2% do so to make their own cds or avoid buying cd's, and 13.2% do so to get free music. The remainder of that 34.4% have other reasons that are not so blatant.
• Compare that 34.4% to 53.6% who use Napster for the convenience, variety, and community. Notably, 30.0% for convenience and ease of use. Take a lesson, music industry - make your product convenient and easy to use, and you'll gain that entire contingent equal to what you believe you are losing.
• 11.6% use it for rare or hard to find music.
• 5.2% use it to preview music to buy.

• 13.6% don't buy or buy fewer cd's as a result of using Napster.
• 1.4% indicate it causes more purchases of some music choices and fewer of others.
• 5.8% buy more music.
• 2.6% want to buy more.
• 21.8% are helped to make better informed decisions when they buy.
• 6.4% listen to a wider variety now.
• 0.8% listen to different music now.
• 10.8% had some other sort of answer.
• 4.2% did not answer
• and 37.6% did not have an impact or did not know the impact on their musical purchases.

From the RIAA site (again)..

For example, the most significant cost of a CD today is the marketing and promotion of that music. To learn more about why CDs are a great value -- check out Cost of a CD.

The promotion costs also include stuff like music videos, worldwide distrubution, schmoozing radio execs, etc. The whole flap with the FTC was about the RIAA building promotion costs into the cost of the CD with their promotion agreements (i.e. We'll pay to promote it, and you can't lower the price to compete, all competition is through promotion).

It's easier to make a dollar per product when the cost $15 per rather than $3 per. Keep the cost high and your can do the same with your margins. Oh, and use that monopoly power to squeeze, squeeze, squeeze.
--

Here's a list of people against that I gathered from RIAA's website:

-- Elton John
-- Lou Reed
-- Lars Ulrich, Metallica
-- Victoria Shaw, country music singer/songwriter
-- Art Alexakis, Everclear
-- Matt Johnson of The The
-- The Push Stars
-- Denyce Graves, RCA Victor Red Seal, Classical recording artist
-- Scott Stapp, lead singer/ lyricist for Creed
-- DJ Scratch, artist/producer
-- Anastacia, Daylight/Epic recording artist
-- Aimee Mann
-- Deborah Harry of Blondie
-- Bif Naked
-- Kristin Hersh, Throwing Muses
-- Mike Greene, President and CEO of the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences
-- Ron Stone, Gold Mountain Management (represents Bonnie Raitt, Tracy Chapman, Ziggy Marley and others)
-- Mike Robertson, Mike Robertson Management (represents Nitty Gritty Dirt band, Wade Hayes, BlackHawk and others)
-- Ken Crear, Creative Management Group (represents Next, Sisqo, Mary Mary and others)
-- Chris Robinson, Black Crowes
-- Jonatha Brook
-- Morgan Rose, Sevendust
-- Cliff Burnstein, Q Prime Management (represents Red Hot Chili Peppers and Metallica)
-- Miles Copeland (manager for Sting)
-- Sean "Puffy" Combs, CEO, Bad Boy Entertainment, Inc.
-- Simon Renshaw, Senior Management (personal manager of the Dixie Chicks)
-- Rusty Harmon, Fishco Management (represents Hootie & The Blowfish)
-- Frank Breeden, President, Gospel Music Association, Inc.
-- Jeff Cameron, Jeff Hanson Management & Promotions (represents Creed and other artists)
-- Robert Holleyman, President and CEO, Business Software Alliance

Here is the link: http://www.riaa.com/Napster.cfm

I also believe Eminem is against.

From the Yahoo story:

"It looks like Napster clearly has an impact on sales in the U.S.," said John Schwarz, CEO of digital rights management firm Reciprocal, which commissioned the study, released yesterday. "Coincident with the arrival of MP3 and Napster, these sales take a pretty severe dip downwards."

Having a look at 1999 Yearend Market Report on US Recorded Music Shipments, there is a quote from the President and CEO of the RIAA which states:

"The nearly 20% growth in list dollars that the industry experienced over the last two years is a clear indication that despite the ever-increasing competition for the consumer's entertainment dollar, music has an intrinsic value that touches Americans -- they love their music and they want more," --Hilary Rosen, the RIAA's President and CEO.

My feeling the only people profiting from Napster are the lawyers who are fabricating loads of BS in the interest of the poor 'ol record companies.
Geez...

How has the recording industry been doing lately anyway? According to the RIAA, the year end market reports were $12.3 billion USD in 1995, $12.5 billion in 1996, $12.2 billion in 1997, $13.7 billion in 1998, and a healthy $14.6 billion in 1999.

Now, I am not too good at stats, but it looks like the numbers are on a steady incline. If MP3's are hurting CD sales, then why does it say on the MPAA's 1999 market report say "Despite the maturity of this format, in 1999 full-length CD shipments grew nearly 11% over the previous year"?

Looks to me like everything is ok. I think that the burden of proof is still on the RIAA.

How has the recording industry been doing lately anyway? According to the RIAA, the year end market reports were $12.3 billion USD in 1995, $12.5 billion in 1996, $12.2 billion in 1997, $13.7 billion in 1998, and a healthy $14.6 billion in 1999.

Now, I am not too good at stats, but it looks like the numbers are on a steady incline. If MP3's are hurting CD sales, then why does it say on the MPAA's 1999 market report say "Despite the maturity of this format, in 1999 full-length CD shipments grew nearly 11% over the previous year"?

Looks to me like everything is ok. I think that the burden of proof is still on the RIAA.

How has the recording industry been doing lately anyway? According to the RIAA, the year end market reports were $12.3 billion USD in 1995, $12.5 billion in 1996, $12.2 billion in 1997, $13.7 billion in 1998, and a healthy $14.6 billion in 1999.

Now, I am not too good at stats, but it looks like the numbers are on a steady incline. If MP3's are hurting CD sales, then why does it say on the MPAA's 1999 market report say "Despite the maturity of this format, in 1999 full-length CD shipments grew nearly 11% over the previous year"?

Looks to me like everything is ok. I think that the burden of proof is still on the RIAA.

How has the recording industry been doing lately anyway? According to the RIAA, the year end market reports were $12.3 billion USD in 1995, $12.5 billion in 1996, $12.2 billion in 1997, $13.7 billion in 1998, and a healthy $14.6 billion in 1999.

Now, I am not too good at stats, but it looks like the numbers are on a steady incline. If MP3's are hurting CD sales, then why does it say on the MPAA's 1999 market report say "Despite the maturity of this format, in 1999 full-length CD shipments grew nearly 11% over the previous year"?

Looks to me like everything is ok. I think that the burden of proof is still on the RIAA.

How has the recording industry been doing lately anyway? According to the RIAA, the year end market reports were $12.3 billion USD in 1995, $12.5 billion in 1996, $12.2 billion in 1997, $13.7 billion in 1998, and a healthy $14.6 billion in 1999.

Now, I am not too good at stats, but it looks like the numbers are on a steady incline. If MP3's are hurting CD sales, then why does it say on the MPAA's 1999 market report say "Despite the maturity of this format, in 1999 full-length CD shipments grew nearly 11% over the previous year"?

Looks to me like everything is ok. I think that the burden of proof is still on the RIAA.

Is your average 13 year old with a cable modem going to download the new xxxxxxxxx cd in 10 minutes or spend $15 and buy it?

Perhaps if some 13 year old has a cablemodem and a CD Burner and a bunch of blank media, then all this spoiled brat has to do is ask mommy and daddy for the damn CD and they will surely buy it for their precious little darling.

How has the recording industry been doing lately anyway? According to the RIAA, the year end market reports were $12.3 billion USD in 1995, $12.5 billion in 1996, $12.2 billion in 1997, $13.7 billion in 1998, and a healthy $14.6 billion in 1999.

Now, I am not too good at stats, but it looks like the numbers are on a steady incline. If MP3's are hurting CD sales, then why does it say on the MPAA's 1999 market report say "Despite the maturity of this format, in 1999 full-length CD shipments grew nearly 11% over the previous year"?

Looks to me like everything is ok. I think that the burden of proof is still on the RIAA.

Is your average 13 year old with a cable modem going to download the new xxxxxxxxx cd in 10 minutes or spend $15 and buy it?

Perhaps if some 13 year old has a cablemodem and a CD Burner and a bunch of blank media, then all this spoiled brat has to do is ask mommy and daddy for the damn CD and they will surely buy it for their precious little darling.

How has the recording industry been doing lately anyway? According to the RIAA, the year end market reports were $12.3 billion USD in 1995, $12.5 billion in 1996, $12.2 billion in 1997, $13.7 billion in 1998, and a healthy $14.6 billion in 1999.

Now, I am not too good at stats, but it looks like the numbers are on a steady incline. If MP3's are hurting CD sales, then why does it say on the MPAA's 1999 market report say "Despite the maturity of this format, in 1999 full-length CD shipments grew nearly 11% over the previous year"?

Looks to me like everything is ok. I think that the burden of proof is still on the RIAA.

Is your average 13 year old with a cable modem going to download the new xxxxxxxxx cd in 10 minutes or spend $15 and buy it?

Perhaps if some 13 year old has a cablemodem and a CD Burner and a bunch of blank media, then all this spoiled brat has to do is ask mommy and daddy for the damn CD and they will surely buy it for their precious little darling.

How has the recording industry been doing lately anyway? According to the RIAA, the year end market reports were $12.3 billion USD in 1995, $12.5 billion in 1996, $12.2 billion in 1997, $13.7 billion in 1998, and a healthy $14.6 billion in 1999.

Now, I am not too good at stats, but it looks like the numbers are on a steady incline. If MP3's are hurting CD sales, then why does it say on the MPAA's 1999 market report say "Despite the maturity of this format, in 1999 full-length CD shipments grew nearly 11% over the previous year"?

Looks to me like everything is ok. I think that the burden of proof is still on the RIAA.

Is your average 13 year old with a cable modem going to download the new xxxxxxxxx cd in 10 minutes or spend $15 and buy it?

Perhaps if some 13 year old has a cablemodem and a CD Burner and a bunch of blank media, then all this spoiled brat has to do is ask mommy and daddy for the damn CD and they will surely buy it for their precious little darling.

How has the recording industry been doing lately anyway? According to the RIAA, the year end market reports were $12.3 billion USD in 1995, $12.5 billion in 1996, $12.2 billion in 1997, $13.7 billion in 1998, and a healthy $14.6 billion in 1999.

Now, I am not too good at stats, but it looks like the numbers are on a steady incline. If MP3's are hurting CD sales, then why does it say on the MPAA's 1999 market report say "Despite the maturity of this format, in 1999 full-length CD shipments grew nearly 11% over the previous year"?

Looks to me like everything is ok. I think that the burden of proof is still on the RIAA.

Is your average 13 year old with a cable modem going to download the new xxxxxxxxx cd in 10 minutes or spend $15 and buy it?

Perhaps if some 13 year old has a cablemodem and a CD Burner and a bunch of blank media, then all this spoiled brat has to do is ask mommy and daddy for the damn CD and they will surely buy it for their precious little darling.

How has the recording industry been doing lately anyway? According to the RIAA, the year end market reports were $12.3 billion USD in 1995, $12.5 billion in 1996, $12.2 billion in 1997, $13.7 billion in 1998, and a healthy $14.6 billion in 1999.

Now, I am not too good at stats, but it looks like the numbers are on a steady incline. If MP3's are hurting CD sales, then why does it say on the MPAA's 1999 market report say "Despite the maturity of this format, in 1999 full-length CD shipments grew nearly 11% over the previous year"?

Looks to me like everything is ok. I think that the burden of proof is still on the RIAA.