Slashdot Mirror
Record Label Thrives Selling CDRs
n3hat writes "'The major music companies may fret over falling revenue, but one label saw its business jump 33 percent last year -- thanks in part to the recordable compact discs that the industry says are hurting its sales. The label, Smithsonian Folkways Recordings, is using recordable CD's, or CD-R's, to ensure that each release in its extensive catalog is always available'."
I just want someone to go point out all these inconsistencies with the RIAA's case... It's amazing what powerful lobbying groups can get away with in the United States.
And how exactly is this a measure of how it would affect EMI/Sony etc who don't have a problem with running out of cds? For whom writing a CDR is considered more expensive than pressing 1000 too many?
This is a good example of just in time manufacturing. However, as was pointed out, it's fairly meaningless for the giants who never run out. Then again, if they could ONLY burn what they are going to sell, then Sony wouldn't be left with 10 million extra copies of Michael Jackson's latest CD after selling only 2 million. That alone would boost margins by eliminating waste.
It is more cost effective to burn those music on CD-R's than pressing them on regular CD's.
Usually you have to press lots of CD's so the cost would be minimal.
I am guessing that the demand for the music that Smithsonian Folkways Recordings is selling pretty low.
Thus CD-R would be economically feasible and more cost effective.
Yeah, this is one thing that cheeses me off against the record industry. There are TONS of songs I'd love to get digital versions of...everything from old tunes from the 50's to one hit wonders from the 70's-80's...but, cannot find due to being out of print. Heck, I've got stuff on vinyl that I need to someday try to convert to digital...because they will NEVER be released by the music industry on a CD. Why don't they open up their catalogs....especially stuff they just have locked up with no intention of re-issuing?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Did You read the article? Gosh! Article states that this company is doing sales of material from old, long dead (not so famous) artists. For first post, You could be little bit more creative.
Sinisa
There are two important conclusions to be made from this article:
1) As always, the very technologies that RIAA/MPAA complain about are often the source of their next, great revenue stream (like VHS).
and
2) What is so wrong about people being able to purchase otherwise out of print recordings? The argument is always that it is too expensive for them to fire up the huge CD presses (that are designed to crank CDs out by the thousands) to simply sell a handful of CDs. Why not take 1 master and burn it to 1 CDR and then charge an extra dollar or so?
It is amazing how the RIAA in particular seems to have this "sacred cow" of wanting to horde older music and make it unavailable even to PAYING customers.
-Michael
Threshold RPG
And how exactly is this a measure of how it would affect EMI/Sony etc who don't have a problem with running out of cds? For whom writing a CDR is considered more expensive than pressing 1000 too many?
I would like to purchase the Clash album _Return to Brixton_ and will gladly pay the copyright holder a reasonable fee for it. Unfortunately, it's out of print. The record company is unwilling to sell me this CD *at any price*
Yet if I download it they claim I've stolen something.
If they had half a brain, they'd burn it on a CD-R for me and sell it for around $9.
The argument about more blank CD's being sold than prepressed makes sense if you think of the sheer bulk in blanks that (perhaps only a minority of) customers buy. At an electronics store, a customer can buy a 100-disc spindle for the cost of a music CD. Each one of these requires 100 customers each buying one music disc. It's clear that it only takes a small number of people buying blank discs to offset the music sales. Not to say this means what the RIAA is trying to say it means. I've bought a few spindles when they're practically given away at electronics vendors. I've yet to burn on even a fraction of these. Additionally, I could be using these (and often do) for data backups. While I believe the RIAA's claim, that doesn't mean I agree with the idea it's trying to prove.
I imagine that is to cover the costs of a human being touching every copy they sell, going down the hall to photocopy the liner notes and such. But how about freeing this stuff to Project Gutenberg or sticking it on ibiblio? Much wider access, no human touch required (you could pdf the liner notes) and Moses Asch's mission would be that much closer to home.
And with that much listenable music out on the web, I'd probably never buy another CD again!
...as long as your burn is to Music CD-R instead of normal data CD-R, you should be safe legally. By paying more for Music CD-R, you're buying a license from the RIAA to burn as much music as can be burned onto a disc, which (they say) will be distributed back to the artists.
Of course, the label in this story owns the copyrights to the music in their catalogue, so they can burn to CD-R themselves without repercussions; it is their right to copy that they're exercising, be it to pressed disks, burned disks, cassette tapes, or even etched onto drums designed to be played on old wire recorders.
This works for the Smithsonian because they're selling music with some staying power.
/. reader.
The archival value of a random track of Brittany Spears's is zero.
In general, her discography's value goes to zero as her age approaches 50. See also Tiffany.
Generalizations of this Law Of Bulging Middles to other pop stars is left as an exercise to the
(hint: analysis of Madonna or Michael Jackson requires taking into account of relativistic effects.)
That's what Rhino's been doing. They've obviously had a great deal of success sellign back catalogues of stuff. Some of it isn't even that obscure - it's just that they package it better.
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
But the shipping isn't the issue! It's a marketing model that is lacking! How do you get someone to pick from millions of songs and buy, buy, buy! Sure, when you have an old favorite that you want to get your hands on, that is one thing... but marketing new music to people is much more complicated.
The shipping cost is insignificant (especially if liners are still requried).
My archaic boombox CD player from 1987 (still works despite maltreatment) plays CD-Rs just fine.