Slashdot Mirror
Recording Industry Extinction Predicted RSN
nautical9 writes "There's an interesting commentary from Wired's Charles Mann, speaking of the imminent death of the recording industry as we know it. Nothing really ground-breaking here, but it is a good summary and somewhat fair treatment of the RIAA's current state-of-affairs, and offers a little insight into what the world of music may be like without them (hint: perhaps better off)."
Umm.. They just mention Kazaa. I imagine that if Kazaa became pay only, people would just get their music elsewhere.
Ah am not a crook! (\(-__-)/)
This show to me that the music industry makes big money up to this point so most people are buying from them and it's only a small percentage of people who read slashdot who have problem.
Slashdot community little fish in big pond.
All the best,
--Achmed
Swaribabu Consulting Inc. -- We code so you don't have to
But what really worries me is the possibility that the companies that build what we love, eletronic devices and gadgets, take RIAA's place.
RIAA is trying to protect its business model, where they control everything on the mainstream music chain. Technology can break a link of this chain, the distribution of an artist material.
But! The laws and the mentallity that RIAA is leaving is the most dangerous thing. Tech industries may (or will?) have control on distribution.
RIAA is showing them that this IS possible, and that consumers aren't doing much besides complain. No changes on the institutional power and the supplu of money is coming steady.
The recent agreement between the tech industry and the RIAA shows exactly this. Most of the RIAA associates are, in one way or another, connected to the tech industry. It was a PR move to soften its images with the public.
What I really think is that we are becoming less political involved with a lot of issues, but that's a subject for another post!
Buy a Nintendo DS Lite
What do the recording agencies do? Record, remaster, produce, manufacture and market musicians.
Nearly as I can tell computers and the Internet have pretty much taken over those roles. As far as getting paid for their hard work, I guess musicians are left to concert money and merchandise. Most listeners aren't going to be paying for an album that they can download for free, either legally or illegally.
Maybe the recording studios will be replaced by concert halls. Maybe the future is a movie theator with a band stage. Hey that'd be cool.
No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
I remember recent discussion regarding the role of producers and publisher and the article stating that the function of producers is 'filtering of all the crap they are getting and presenting the consumer with the best staff'. I wish it were true. In reality, producers invent the product they believe consumers would like, and since the product is rather vacuous, that is, has no contents, they put the excessive amount of efforts on packaging and advertising (junk food, anyone?) The sooner the present system goes the better. Doesn't look like anyone (except producers) will loose anything.
More importantly, two of the foundation elements of this article are misleading and/or potentially wrong. First, the 11% decline of sales this year can be attributed to
a) the 25% decline in output by the labels
b) the economy
c) the generally boring content
My vote is on a and b. c never seems to have an effect.
Also, the usage of P2P services does not necessarily bode ill for the recording industry. As has been advanced here before, P2P services often drive sales (they have for me and quite a few others). Just because the Suits don't believe it doesn't mean it isn't true.
Still, you gotta wonder about musicians: If someday all music were free, what would they do? Would they still make music, just getting money off of concerts and stuff? I know some bands would, but some of the other more popular bands, I dunno...
To gloat? <wry grin>
The RIAA has made enemies here, and not many friends anywhere. To quote the inimitable Molly Ivins, "My mother may have raised a mean child, but she didn't raise no hypocrites." I'm not an expert, but from where I sit, it looks like the recording industry has jacked up prices unconscionably, reduced the range and variety of music available to the rest of us, and driven independent distributors out of business. I think the recording industry as a whole has become a bunch of parasites, and (worse) parasites that are killing the host.
The wierdest part of this is that I've never downloaded a single illegal song, never did Napster, never installed any version of Kazaa, don't even copy my own CDs. I don't think it's right to steal -- even from thieves. I certainly don't think it's right to steal from artists who create the work I love to listen to.
So I listen mostly to my old CDs these days. I don't think I've bought a dozen CDs in the last three years, and most of those have been from small, independent artists who produce their own stuff.
It is frustrating to have no alternative, though, to being ripped off myself, doing without, or starving out the artists and other good guys along with the parasites. I just picked the least objectionable of those alternatives. :/
So I admit it's nice to hear that the parasites are in trouble. :>
Catherine
She's WON!
The way I see the "radical change" in the direction of the RIAA is as follows.
It is not so radical. The RIAA has gotten absolutely everything it wants.
Every large CPU chip maker (Intel, AMD, & Transmeta) have recently (in the last quarter) unveiled DRM enabling technologies. Inevitably touted as "security" or "trustworthy computing" features, they generally support the TCPA (Trusted Computing Platform Alliance), which in turn can be used to prevent users' access to portions of their computer and to the files on their computer (i.e. DRM).
With the CPU & chipset taken care of via these companies, all that is left to get on board are the BIOS makers, since any DRM technology is dead in the water if the BIOS doesn't enforce certain rules about what can run at boottime (not to mention run HASH checks, key checks, etc). The support that BIOS makers such as American Megatrends, Inc., have recently annouced for TCPA puts all the pieces for effective hardware DRM in place. Of course, the other portion of the pie that is necessary for DRM is a DRM enforcing OS, but Microsoft is working on that with Palladium.
With all the above, the Hollings bill becomes irrelevant. No GOVERNMENT mandated DRM technologies are needed, because the chip makers are implementing the exact DRM "features" the RIAA has always wanted. Control of individual PC users data will now be wrested away from them and given to the content owners. The RIAA has been given exactly what they wanted and they didn't have to go to the government to get it; in effect, the computer industry caved.
From what I know firsthand, it is clear that a trade has been made. The computer industry will supply the DRM framework if the RIAA (and eventually the MPAA) will provide the content that keeps the PC platform as a viable alternative to set top boxes (i.e. get people using "media PCs").
The other thing that makes this an absolute coup for the RIAA is the announcement that the computer industry will no longer fight the DMCA or support users fair use rights. This may effectively kill Rep. Boucher's attempt to reform the DMCA through the Digital Media Consumers' Rights Act (the "DMCRA"). DRM with the DMCA still in effect is almost too horrible for me to contemplate.
There is room for disagreement perhaps, but it seems that the computer companies have sold out the American consumer for a cut of the "content" pie.
"There are laws that enslave men, and laws that set them free. " - Sean Connery as King Arthur