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."

35 of 261 comments (clear)

  1. hah...what about the future!? by laymil · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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...

    1. Re:hah...what about the future!? by rollthelosindice · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Independent labels and their success will never go away. There will always be music that major labels have no interest in, and will be put out by smaller, independent record labels.

      And there will always be people that don't listen to the music that is on the radio.

      Stab and Kill Records

    2. Re:hah...what about the future!? by GlassHeart · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Of course, one these "indie" labels get big enough, they won't be "indie" anymore.

      The main problem with the recording industry today is that there are so few players, each with a "big enough" piece of a big pie, that they have no need to really compete. Implicitly or explicitly, they have agreed on a price for a CD, and even how many songs to put on an album.

      If many indie labels become big, the resulting marketplace will be more competitive, leading to better label-artist relationships (because labels now have to compete for the best artists) and better if not cheaper products overall.

      The computer industry is full of examples of small companies becoming big ones. If we exclude the monopolies, you'll see the benefits of competition. IBM used to be able to charge pretty much whatever it wanted to, for example.

  2. I dislike the RIAA by sstory · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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?

    1. Re:I dislike the RIAA by phorm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you are in Canada, and you are already paying for the cost of piracy on every pack of recordable CD's, I'd say piracy has already been assumed, and already been paid for.

      If the RIAA wants to stop assuming our guilt, I'll be a bit more pissy on piracy. As it stands, I avoid it but still pay tax on CD's - so why should I also have to worry about lawsuits?

      Of course, that being said, I've heard of a lot of RIAA against organization/user action in the US and other countries (Australia, etc)... anyone know of anything happening in Canada, or are our CD levies actually covering us (if so... time to heat up my burner and kazaa!).

    2. Re:I dislike the RIAA by alkali · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Well, sure it's theft. The question is who benefits from worrying about it.

      F'r'instance, I bet that every time a fan A makes his/her friend B a copy of an Alison Krauss album, B buys, on average, 2 more Alison Krauss albums. (Yes, she's that good; she's nothing like the "country" music you hear on a generic Clear Channel country radio station.) Alison Krauss has been making records for 17 years, since she was 15 years old. If you are Alison Krauss or her record label (Rounder), you are interested in building a fan base for the next thirty-odd years of her career, not trying to squeeze every dollar out of 15 minutes of fame. The odd fan burning a CD for a pal is just giving her and Rounder free advertising. Anything other than a warehouse cranking out hundreds of copies really isn't going to be a problem.

      On the other hand, if you have a record company built on promoting one-hit wonders, and someone burns a CD of your current artist's album -- well, it's likely that there won't be 2 more albums to buy by that artist. (Not to be mean: Britney Spears is charming in her way and nice to look at, but I really can't imagine that she is going to record 10 albums in her career.)

      The upshot is that major labels pushing top-40 singles benefit a lot from cracking down on copyright infringement; indy labels and serious musicians, not so much.

    3. Re:I dislike the RIAA by NanoGator · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "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?
      "


      Well there's really not enough information to answer this question, but I'll take a stab at it. No. Simply put, I trust that most people are honest. I'm going to treat them that way. If somebody makes my content available, and somebody else picks it up, then I instantly have exposure that I didn't have previously. $20 is a lot to spend if you don't like something that you can't return.

      I don't think most of the people who would acquire my content for free would pay for it in the first place. At least then I'd have my foot in the door. If they don't like it, they're not going to download anymore. No harm done. I didn't get my $20, but at the same time they didn't get satisfactory service. If they do like it enough that they'd download it (bored perhaps?) but not enough to pay for it, then it means my prices are too high or my content just isn't good enough for them. Sorry, but I can't make everybody like anything I make. So no harm done either, especially when their acquisition of my content didn't cost me anything personally. All that's left are the people who download it simply because they don't want to pay for it. Should they be thrown in jail? I don't feel strongly they should. I can't imagine I would have gotten money from them if I had some perfect protection mechanism. At least that way there's the benefit of them sharing it with other people and getting their interest in it. Again, no losses or damage done to me here.

      If it reached a point where more people were acquiring my content than paying for it, then I think that's more of a reflection of my price tag or quality than I do of people needing the law to hammer them down. It means that I need to provide more or provide cheaper. That's easy, create an incentive for people to buy it. "Buy this DVD, and you get a statue of the main character for free." Etc. Or, make more content that'd be hard to send with it. "This DVD also contains a High Definition 1080p version of the content" (like in the earlier article about MS and Terminator 2 Ultimate Edition.) Maybe they don't want the media, maybe they want an electronic version they can store on the hard drive? Well in that case I should provide it instead of causing them to seek other methods to doing it.

      For the record, I'm an artist. That's what I do for a living. Copyright's very important to me, but jail time for somebody downloading or distributing a copy of my work is ridiculous. I'd rather just figure out a way to work with them on it. If they're willing to redistribute my work, then maybe there's a deal that can be made there. "At least advertise my deal for purchasing stuff."

      The only time I'd be really worried about somebody redistributing my stuff is if they're making money off it illegally. That's really what copyright law is for. It's not about suing America's future.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    4. Re:I dislike the RIAA by Jester998 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "already paying for the cost of piracy on every pack of recordable CD's, I'd say piracy has already been assumed, and already been paid for"

      That's the way I look at it. If they're going to charge me extra for my media because of "piracy", then I guess I'd better get my money's worth... Hence my relatively large collection (250+ CDs) of movies, anime, games...

      And they want to increase the levy VERY SIGNIFICANTLY... if that happens, my rate of piracy will go up proportionately... the new levy is more than double the current rate, IIRC.

    5. Re:I dislike the RIAA by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 3, Funny

      (Not to be mean: Britney Spears is charming in her way and nice to look at, but I really can't imagine that she is going to record 10 albums in her career.)

      Jesus God, don't jinx us. Knock on wood when you say something like that.

      --

      There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
    6. Re:I dislike the RIAA by CaptainFrito · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Copyright laws were meant to allow someone to recover the cost of producing and circulating original works. It was never contemplated that copyright should be used to support inefficient economies (why don't we still employ scribes and sue printing press owners?) If the internet is cheaper, it should be used, but costs are lower and so prices should be lower. If the RIAA did this (lowered prices in proportion to costs) this would be a total non-issue and no P2P networks would have ever sprung up. Instead it wants to extort obscene amounts of money that has nothing to do with covering its [reasonable] underlying costs to produce and distribute. Now it simply resorting to terrorism. How many times do I have to by the White Album? I've got five store-bought formats and they'd still use the courts to bankrupt me if I downloaded an MP3 of "Rocky Racoon". 'Presumption of Guilt' is not exactly what the American Constitional framers had in mind. Patents, on the other hand, must teach the reader something novel and unobvious so that the new knowledge can be leveraged in new ways. In exchange for the public disclosure, the Goverment protects the indivual's sole right to use that knowledge in the application disclosed in the teaching. What is being done now s that "intellectual property" is being used to prevent others from benefiting and expanding on knowledge and from fair use of information that has been published. This is quite opposite common sense and justifiable protection by law, IMHO

    7. Re:I dislike the RIAA by NanoGator · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Give me a break! If I offer you a free beer or a 50 cent beer (same brand, same born on date) which one are you going to take? Even if the the the beer was discounted 49 cents, most people would take the free one."

      I'd get the $.50 beer.

      1.) $.50 is quite reasonable for beer.
      2.) I don't know that the $.01 beer hasn't been tampered with. (ever download a song that has a glitch in it? Yuck.)
      3.) I could get the $.50 beer really fast, vs. the $.01 beer would take an hour to pour.
      4.) If I'm a fan of that particular brand of beer, I'm going to keep buying it from it's source instead of waiting for somebody to show up with it at $.01.

      The only way I'd take the $.01 beer is if I had never had that brand before.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
  3. Indie labels? Here's one better! by mcgroarty · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Indie labels nothing. The best stuff comes from the struggling self-published artists!

    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?

    1. Re:Indie labels? Here's one better! by deanpole · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Like porn, music has become cheap to produce and distribute. There are lessons to be learned.

    2. Re:Indie labels? Here's one better! by mcgroarty · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Oh, and hey -- The president of CDBaby visited my journal at one point and chimed in with tips when we were chatting over how to get the best MP3 encodes out of lame & CDEx.

      See if Hillary Rosen ever does that for you. ;-)

    3. Re:Indie labels? Here's one better! by linuxbaby · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Cool! Thanks for the kind words. I appreciate it.

      Yeah CD Baby is blossomming, too. It's really funny when you hear those stories from the major labels saying that the whole music industry is declining (cough cough).

      I suspect it's just the majors that are declining because all the independent musicians I know are reaching more people than ever, and are more in control of their own career than ever before!

      Look at this most recent sales chart for our one little store.

      Slump? What slump?

      - Derek

  4. Indies, RIAA incompatible? by petronivs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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?)
  5. History repeating itself? by HeroicAutobot · · Score: 5, Insightful
    This reminds me of the Hit Charade article by Mark Jenkins on Slate which talks about declining record sales in the late 70s. (This was reported on Slashdot, but I can't find the story anymore.)

    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.
  6. You mean... by jdunlevy · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Finally, it occurs to the mainstream press that RIAA labels might actually be getting killed be legitimate competition and NOT by "pirates"??

    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.)

  7. Despite RIAA?? by phorm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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).

  8. Indies know things that the big labels don't! by Newer+Guy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "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!

  9. One musician bucking the system by GamezCore.com · · Score: 5, Informative

    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
  10. RIAA members by gorbachev · · Score: 3, Informative

    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
  11. The RIAA... by Peterus7 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Another secret of [indie band's] success is that the labels target consumers - namely, adults - who are still willing to pay for their music, rather than download it for free.

    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?

  12. Reply to the RIAA... by Peterus7 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    9 percent dip in CD sales in 2002 that it [the RIAA] blames for largely on online file sharing.

    No, your music just sucks as of late. Indie bands are so much better.

  13. Deja Vu George by icewalker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
  14. Dischord by good+soldier+svejk · · Score: 4, Informative


    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
  15. I run an idie label... by zenasprime · · Score: 3, Informative

    ...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

  16. Re:Icon? by NanoGator · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Here's my nomination for the icon.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  17. help me find an alternative to mp3.com ... by claud9999 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  18. Indy labels rely on big labels for $$$ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  19. CD Baby by linuxbaby · · Score: 3, Interesting
    10 Reasons You Should Check Out CD Baby:
    1. We carry 34,000 CDs from independent artists that are not affiliated with the RIAA. (Meaning: you can boycott the RIAA and still buy damn good music.)
    2. We only work directly with the musicians, not distributors or labels. So we pay the artists every week. Unlike buying the majors, your money spent on CDs goes directly to the artists. We've paid over $3 million directly to musicians already.
    3. We actually listened to every one of those 34,000 CDs before selling them, and can tell you which ones we highly recommend, here: http://www.cdbaby.com/picks. (It's somebody's full-time job, listening to 75 new albums a day, writing internal reviews, and linking up to other albums in the store, for the last 5 years.)
    4. We've made some fun collections (flavors) of CDs: music for Long Drives / Road Trips, CDs to Have Sex To, albums for Academics and Musicologists, ones where someone is Naked on CD Cover, and more.
    5. If you enter the name of your favorite famous artist, it'll show you the best new artists in that style. (Yes, it really works. It was built by ears not computers.)
    6. Miss walking the aisles of a record store, looking at album covers? Check out the album art gallery .
    7. You can listen to about 8 minutes of every single CD in the store, in 128k streaming MP3
    8. We're ditching RealAudio for OGG soon. (Only reason we use RealAudio is that I started this site in 1997 when that's all there was!)
    9. We never use any Microsoft products . Even the desktop computers in the office are FreeBSD running Opera.
    10. The founder & president is the programmer is a Slashdot addict is me.
  20. Re:not theft, damnit! by alkali · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The theft isn't of a thing, it's of a right. If I copy an album, I am appropriating to myself the right of the performer to decide how and on what terms he/she will permit copies of that recording to be made. Likewise, if I showed up at your precinct on election day pretending I was you and cast a vote, then I stole your vote, even though you didn't lose any tangible thing.

    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.)

  21. already happened by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A very large number of 'indie' labels are RIAA members. Check the list, your favorite indie label is probably on it.

    1. Re:already happened by AndroSyn · · Score: 4, Informative

      Even better, here is a good interview with Ian MacKaye, from the good folks at the Onion.

      http://www.theonionavclub.com/avclub3517/avfeatu re 3517.html

  22. This is hardly surprising by anon*127.0.0.1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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!