Slashdot Mirror
Indies Blossoming Despite RIAA
Shadow Wrought writes "We have all read the numerous RIAA articles on Slashdot, not to mention scores of other articles that discuss the industry's purported demise. An article at the Christian Science Monitor calls this assumption into question by pointing to the success that Indie Labels are beginning to enjoy. An interesting read and one that provides pretty good support against the RIAA's argument that a quartet of college students is responsible for their troubles."
Of course, one these "indie" labels get big enough, they won't be "indie" anymore. Just wait for the day when the new management (RIAA friendly) takes over, and suddenly, the era of the successful indie labels is over. But wait, you're saying this could be a cycle? One of those things that happens over and over? wow...
sorry, i'm just a jaded lil kid.
all it takes is one major success to make a label "big" from there, its just a question of whether or not they have the guts to stick to their creed or sell out.
and we all know how tempting it is to sell out...
and their movie friends, but I'm undecided on the larger issue--when you spend lots of money producing an intellectual property, then some retard comes along and copies it to a million of his friends for free, should he be held responsible for committing some (perhaps new variety of) theft?
We have all read the numerous RIAA articles on Slashdot
/. speak specifically of PS2, Gamecube, XBox (or even RPGs, FPS (not Quake), strategy).
Makes you wonder. Why we don't have an RIAA topic, but we have new 'console' based game topics. Honestly, look at how many times articles on
New topics are nice, especially when you have enough stories to make one.
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
Thanks to CD burners costing dirt these days, you can find individual bands all over the net who are publishing on their own. CDBaby.com offers a storefront and listening booth for hundreds of these bands. Dig around a little and listen with an open mind. You will find something you like.
If they still offer it, try and get your hands on one of the sampler discs (100 MP3 tunes from different bands, broken down by genre) and see if you don't find a dozen albums you want.
There's a HUGE amount of good stuff here, and the bulk of the cash goes to the band. You pay less than you pay for most mainstream commercial music, and sometimes the band even writes directly to ask what you thought of the disc afterward. Virtually all of the bands are accessible and love it when you write them to chat as well.
After the band, the rest of the cash goes to the guys you see on the CDBaby website. NO RIAA GOUGING HERE. No subsidizing bastard lawyer cabals. They even run OpenBSD and Apache. It's ALL good! :-)
No, I don't work for them, I'm just a very happy customer. I've bought over a hundred discs, and I don't miss pouring through the old over-hyped and mass-produced sludge to find the rare gem one bit!
Can you tell I like CDBaby?
These days, just spinning yourself as an 'independent' label gives PR dividends.
How many 'independent' labels are members of the RIAA? If you look at their membership list (someone give me a link, please), you'll see more than just the 'mega-biggies'.
I'd be willing to bet that many indies buy onto the RIAA's DRM position. Many artists do, for that matter. So why do we assume that a label is non-RIAA compatible if it's indie?
This is the real signature
(Beats those shadows on the cave wall, don't it?)
The record companies claimed that cassette tapes allowed easy "pirating" of music and evil thieves weren't buying records anymore.
However, sales climbed back up in the 80s, despite the fact that cassette tapes weren't outlawed. Jenkins theorizes that it was actually "personality-free" disco that convinced people to stop buying records. He then draws parallels between disco and today's "teen-pop".
Both are intellectually underachieving, cookie-cutter styles that have made stars of performers not known primarily for their skills as singers, songwriters, or musicians.
It's an insightful article. Definitely worth a read.
Personally, I was never a big music listener, but the RIAA has pretty much turned me off every buying a CD again.
I'm looking for a HEPA media filter for my TV. I'm alergic to reality shows.
I wonder why Ani DiFranco was only given a passing mention in the article? [actually I could probably wager a guess...] She's released 20 of her own albums over the past 13 years, and at least 5 other albums. She dislikes corperate record companies, and has at least a few songs specifically about the subject. Take a look at any local CD store and she'll be there, and been doing it for years.
And this despite the various "taxes" independents have to pay the RIAA for the right to compete with them (built-in fees on DAT tape, CD-R media; attacks on webstreaming, etc.)
Indies Blossoming Despite RIAA
Seriously, if the RIAA weren't into heavy handed tactics, sueing students, making virtually-unusable copy-protected CD's, and charging unreasonable amounts for music... how would Indie music be doing?
Hell, I think that the RIAA is helping Indie music. People don't want to pay for overpriced music anymore, they're looking at alternatives... copying is free but becoming less attractive due to lawsuit... so the next cheapest route is indie and others (not to mention some often damn good tunes).
Who the fuck modded this up? This guy actually believes in intellectual property!
"Another secret of their success is that the (indie) labels target consumers - namely, adults - who are still willing to pay for their music, rather than download it for free"... The simple fact is this: in this dumpy economy, adults have the most disposable income, while kids have LESS money to spend. Yet, the 'big five' still cluelessly market primarily to kids! It's no wonder why their sales are down! One other thing not mentioned in this article though: If you go to most of the artists' web sites mentioned in the story, you'll find that you can listen to and/or download their music there. These artists don't have airplay, so they rely on the web as their 'radio'. They USE the web to get their songs heard. The web and downloading is BENEFICAL to them! This runs entirely opposite to the 'big five' who see the web as evil, something to be sued out of existance! Gee, I wonder who's wrong here? Even stranger, I wonder why Congress seems to always listen to the 'big 5 losers' instead of the winners when they pass their laws concerning the Internet!
Normally I do not watch MTV, but it was on and one new musician's story caught my attention. A guy by the name of Cody Chesnutt, who has a bit of oldschool R&B sound and flair, was being featured. He created his first album all by himself in his bedroom studio, and released his two-CD set called "The Headphone Masterpiece" in a limited amount on his own. The CD sold out everywhere, and major record lables were courting him to release his CD on a much bigger scale... Cody turned them all down.
:)
His CD is only available via his website (codychesnutt.com) and he is going it alone to make a stand against the music industry. I can appreciate this man's efforts, and it parallels a lot of what we in the OSS community are up against. If you're wondering, I have no ties to this guy at all... I just heard about him a couple hours ago, but I wish him nothing but the best... and his song "Look Good In Leather" is pretty damn catchy as well
www.GamezCore.com For Hardcore PS2 Gamerz : By Hardcore PS2 Gamerz
This statement presumes that there is only one kind of business research--the old kind. Although it flies in the face of outmoded business models, the "piracy" model has many strenghts, from which the RIAA is too bloated to learn.
Bye-bye, Bronto!
A new distribution model will achieve prominence within the next five years, and with it a cascade of changes in the the structure of copyright law.
It's funny that they didn't mention the most successful indie label out there, Epitaph.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
http://www.riaa.org/About-Members-1.cfm
Looks like 50:1 on Indies vs. Big 5 in there...
Though I'm not sure how many of the members are subsidiaries of the major labels.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill RIAA
In Soviet Russia, I ruled you
You'd think the RIAA would try to do things like that, or at least try to appeal to the older generation of music listeners, maybe even try to get them to stop their kids from using P2P networks before they get into college, etc. But no... The RIAA probably eliminated their HR and Marketing board a while ago to pay for their Anti P2P hackers...
*/conspiracy rant*
What I don't get is why they are still doing the same old thing (poisoning P2P networks instead of enhancing their own.) They have a bad reputation as it is. I would try to see if Hilary Rosen or some RIAA/ex-RIAA could do an Ask /. article, but... no. That could be bad, although it would be interesting to see how they answered the questions... Would they lie or just squirm?
It's real easy to not be greedy when you don't have any cash. People always talk about how "indie" labels don't screw over their artists, and about how the music is so much better. While this may be true in some respects, look at the other side.
The local band I can't sing but my tits are great, are more than willing to accept the major label money when it is offered to steal them away from the local record label, based out of Bobs garage. ("It doesn't pay well, but we love making music") The label then dishes out tons of cash to promote this shit band, who would never get any publicity outside of the leaflets they plaster all over their local, BoonFuck, Iowa clubs. The label also gives tons of free swag to the big DJ's in the major markets to get them to play the first single off their record. They take off, become multi-millionaires, and all of a sudden complain of mistreatment from their label.
Again, this is just my opinion, but when Sheryl Crowe cries, I just keep thinking "Go back to stripping, Honey."
If this article confuses you, don't worry. It was posted yesterday in a much clearer fashion.
No, your music just sucks as of late. Indie bands are so much better.
This all sounds familiar.
Yup, I guess you could say that the RIAA is feeling the pinch. Let me think. I bought on average 50 CD's a year at roughly $15.00 a pop. That comes out to $750 a year. But since the RIAA has decided take up an attitude that we are all crooks, I have decided to support the INDIE groups instead. If it's an RIAA music company, I don't buy the CD. Well, looky here, that's a 100% drop in business from one person. One does not make a pattern, but I know for fact I'm not alone!
Just read my comments from other posts.
The truth is usually just an excuse for lack of imagination.
Smaller 'Indie' labels don't need to move 4 million units to show a profit. True social Darwinism.
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
I am glad the CSM published this, but disappointed they did not mention pioneering Dischord Records. Dischord is truly "in the business of making music, not money." They charge fans exactly what they charge record stores and forego distributors entirely. Send Dischord $10 and they send you a CD, post paid. In some cases you can even get vinyl. Dischord are just good people.
Plus, Amy Pickering is a fox.
It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man
-James Baldwin
...and it's been dreadfully hard to get people to buy cds. We are actually looking to release more music on vinyl now because it seems to be the current trend in our market. Personally, I buy all my music from indie labels directly which has been cheaper and a much more enjoyable process then going to the local music store chain, but I don't think most people are doing that. We have been around for almost five years and we sell just enough to keep the releases flowing. Which is OK by me but I am sure that the artists and those of us doing the work (that would be me and my partners) would like to benefit finacially from our labors. :)
zenas(prime)
http://www.zenapolae.com
Uh, so doesn't this mean that these indie labels are succeding becuase they purposely target their music to those who will pay for music? Sorry I don't see this as an argument against the RIAA, more likely it's an argument that downloading music does effect sales.
In my mind, mp3.com *should* have remained the premier indie band site but they screwed themselves with their my.mp3.com section where they provided mp3's of big studio albums for d/l. Since they got bought out, they've dried up as a source for indie artists.
Anyone know of an alternative distribution site that deals only in indie artists and:
* provides a percentage of the songs for free d/l
* provides the entire album for d/l once purchased
* allows the artists to retain copyright
* has a good variety of styles / artists
* has a long laundry list of albums $10
cdbaby.com looks promising, but pricey.
One problem here though - the way many small indie labels works is that they sign a band in the hopes that they will become large enough that a big label will want to buy out their contract, and they can make some cash.
It's somewhat analogous to some shareware authors that make a really badass app in the hopes that a large corp. will want to buy their code. The whole thing is that you risk losing some effort that might end up making a small profit, in hopes of making the big discovery that wins you the lottery, which should hold you over until the next time you find gold.
Especially in the "indie" music genre, that's how things work - you start out on an indie label, but if you are successful, you get signed to someone big and you get more cash, your previous label makes some cash, and the only one that might lose in the equation is the customer (due to RIAA). For many, however, this is the only way to make your dreams comes true of playing your own music full time.
I just thought I'd shed some light on the symbiotic nature of the two worlds of music publication.
You are right on the mark with the ascertion that Indies are a big threat to the media moguls. The media giants know it and find every way possible to thwart independent film and music development.
Independent film makers are a threat in two big ways: There is direct competition in that the indies take attention away from Hollywood. They also are a prime example of how new technologies are making way for new voices...going square in the face of the RIAA's claim that piracy is leading to cultural doom.
The RIAA wants to create a Star Wars theme of evil pirates stealing from artists. The surge of independent film making is showing the opposite...that the technology is opening ground for new voices. As we see independent artists making in roads with new technology, we see that the true pirates of the silver screen are the big media moguls and Hollywood super class that has dominated film for the last century
And yes they certainly do go bonkers. The music-listener job has a pretty high rate of dropout due to insanity.
:-)
You can argue that the performer shouldn't have such a broad right to decide how and on what terms copies are made (and there are limits on that right, e.g., fair use and the right to make copies for one's own personal use). But there's no debate about whether, under current law, artists have that broad right.
(There is no single "legal definition" of theft under American law. Many states don't use the word in their penal code; they call it "larceny" or something else depending on the circumstances.)
484. (a) Every person who shall feloniously steal, take, carry, lead, or drive away the personal property of another, or who shall fraudulently appropriate property which has been entrusted to him or her, or who shall knowingly and designedly, by any false or fraudulent representation or pretense, defraud any other person of money, labor or real or personal property, or who causes or procures others to report falsely of his or her wealth or mercantile character and by thus imposing upon any person, obtains credit and thereby fraudulently gets or obtains possession of money, or property or obtains the labor or service of another, is guilty of theft. [Irrelevant stuff at the end is omitted]
"We have got to make Stan understand the importance of voting, because he'll definitely vote for our guy." - South Park
Well in a way he is right it probably is a marketing problem. The truth is that we just don't have the financial muscle to do that marketing blitz thing that might just get us the recognition that other more established labels have. We do a lot of "grass roots" marketing and try and get our name out there as much as possible but there is only so much you can do with small time funding and limited time. If I didn't have a day job and could completely support myself with the label, I am sure that there would be a hell of a lot more going on as far as "marketing". To put it in a nutshell, Time and Money are needed to move things forward, which means that fans have to invest in those artists that they appreciate. If there is no revenue generated by CD (or other mediums) then the money is just not there to make more releases. Not that everything is that bad. We still put out music on CD even though we know the return isn't great but that is because we actually believe and enjoy what we are doing. I have been racking my brain for years trying to figure out how we can change the business to reflect the emerging digital music era, but maybe I'm just not the one to figure it out. I am open to ideas. :)
zenas
http://www.zenapolae.com
and to a lesser extent Metropolis Records
and Middle pillar
and labels like
Projekt Records - Who said napster was a good thing
Flaming Fish
UR-realist (Russian)
I can get a lot of good music and avoid the crap that the majors sell. I hope more artists begin to realize that majors are not the way to go to sell their music, your better off going independent and actually make money.
A very large number of 'indie' labels are RIAA members. Check the list, your favorite indie label is probably on it.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
One thing I've noticed about my own music buying habits over the past 25 years. The amount of music I'm buying has stayed relatively constant. But the type of music I'm buying lately has shifted radically, away from the more popular bands and towards the less-appreciated ones.
Popular music is relatively easy to find on the p2p networks. Type in "Eminem" or "Korn" and you'll come up with hundreds of hits. Downloading and burning a CD is easy. Why go through the hassle of ordering online or driving to the mall when downloading is simpler and cheaper?
The less popular stuff is a lot harder to obtain. Usually I can find a song or two, enough to make me know I want to hear more, but finding the more obscure stuff is an exercise in frustration. It could take me hours or days of searching and downloading and listening to locate all the tracks I want. In that case, it's a lot easier to just break out the plastic and order the CD.
From a Karma standpoint, I'd much rather spend my money supporting a struggling artist then helping Christine or Britney put another platinum album on their wall. I understand the legally, pirating is pirating, and it doesn't matter whose music I steal. But Paul McCartney isn't going to have to take a second job because I ripped "Help!" instead of buying it.
I think this is what the RIAA members are really worried about. Not that music sales will drop, but that they'll be spread out a lot more evenly. Once an artist gets popular enough, it becomes easy to pirate their music. Sales for those artists will tend to "cap out" when it becomes easier for people to pirate the album instead. Meanwhile, less popular groups will tend to sell more albums, because more people will be exposed to their music. That means more work for the record companies, because they'll have to start promoting ALL of their artists, not just the popular few that they know will sell the most.
I am NOT a man!
I am a free number!
It would be more insightful if that person were advocating not using codecs that are not freely available. Perhaps the president of CDBaby could spend some time helping to popularize Ogg Vorbis and give portable digital music players more reason to pursue a market not based on patent encumberance (that many people claim sounds better than MP3 anyhow).
Digital Citizen
They don't have enough money and never will. Someone noticed that everyone but the RIAA can do better without the RIAA. So what happens when the RIAA buys out hundreds of independent record lables and shuts them down or otherwise makes them suck? Hundreds of new ones sprout up. If you are a manager who was feeling furfilled making money for yourself and your musicians by promoting good music, you set up a new shop. The artists, who didn't have to give up their rights to their work the last time, walk right on over too.
Game over, you lose.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
Way back in the day there was a funky country and western record shop that sold some punk records in the back. Most of the time they were bands I never heard of, but they were on SST or Beggars Banquet and the like, so it was a pretty good chance the record was something I liked (ain't no way Epic records or Sony could make the same claim). Also, the records sold for close to $5 apiece. If it completely sucked, I wasn't out a whole lot of cash.
And friends from across the country would send me tapes of bands that were local or the grand tradition of the punk comp. Range of music tastes broadens, buy more records...
The argument then was home tapeing was killing the record industry. This was when indie labels were flourishing. All without radio airplay, promotion, or any of the other things that were making the major labels' records cost near $12. I had close to 100 records. Maybe 15 were major label.
Fast forward. I now have (err, carry the five, add the two) close to 1000 CDs. Most of them are indie releases.
And the recording industry is claiming downloads are killing the music industry.
I still buy CDs. A good portion of them are used. I have yet to see my favorite used CD shop close because all this rampant piracy. If anything, I buy more music because of the used CD store. I can listen to the CD before I but it. I can try out other music forms. And the guys are usually pretty cool about returns. Plus the CDs usually run around $8.
But this also means I have to wait a couple of months for a CD to show up used. Long painful wait. If the CD is $11 new, I might pop for it. Or if it is a very good recording (Mobile Fidelity, when they use to be around), or if is hard to find; $30.
A reasonable computer costs near $700. Add $50 a month for DSL service. An ink cartridge every couple of months if you want inserts, $240. The inserts themselves about 50 cents apiece. Plus blank media, 50 cents for something decent. Plus reasonable burning software, $50.
$841 to burn a CD. Even with the best economies of scale, close to $15 a CD.
I'm just not seeing this free download.
Not to mention it's a hassle to find something you actually like and burn it, no liner notes, and MP3s don't sound very good.
I have yet to see piracy flourish unless prices where artificially high ("Psst... come here. I have a copy to sell you for $5. Oh, you could buy a used copy for $8, or a new copy for $12..."). Give me a break.
I do, however, have lots of burned software $).