Slashdot Mirror
CD-Rs and MP3s Not Hurting Record Sales
David Gerard writes "Forget the industry shills' spin - the numbers prove that, for Australia, CD-Rs and MP3s are not hurting record sales in the slightest - based on a recent Australian Record Industry Association survey. It would be interesting to see what the numbers for the US or UK say."
Yep, my band has had a bunch of sales becausepeople can hear it free on my site, and I welcome trading. If you can hear it before you pay for it, and you like it, chances are you'll pay for it. I have several more dollars for beer and guitar strings due to internet sales. Thanks, Al Gore!
So to the RIAA - the WHOLE WORLD is proving you wrong!
People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
this is basically giving proof for what most of slashdot already knew. I for one bought more cd's in Napster's hey-day then I do now.
ARIA (Australia'a RIAA) plainly stated barely 2 months ago that australia had had the worst sales of CDs in history in 2003. Is someone lying here?
Before or after the numbers were manipulated by the RIAA?
...we are from the government - we are here to help...
about four for each of the eight million Australians it says receive them
Woah...so everyone who gets any gets about four?...or am I reading this wrong? That's a LOT of mix-discs floating around...a lot more than I would've guessed or I would estimate for the U.S. as well...
Hmmm, according to this article it has not affected the sales in the US either.
But this article at ABCNews seems to indicate that its not piracy thats really affecting the sales, but services like iTunes -
"CD sales are down 15 percent from last year, while legal online services like the new Napster and Apple's iTunes have taken off, especially for the holidays. Apple's iTunes sold more than $1 million in download gift certificates since October."
I think that more than CD-Rs or mp3 piracy, its services like these which would affect the records sales.
... will it really help? We face a thousand-and-one lawyers and school or workplace administrators running in fear from those lawyers and they still refuse to hear this new, or disregard it completely. I AM Australian. My workplace IS a school (well, a university) where I also study; last semester, that included a semester of Law for IT students; we had to put up with the Copyright Law 1968 and its 21st Century amendments; in our workplace, they've cracked down on MP3s and the central IT section have instituted semi-regular searches of our Windows XP administrative shares (suits me; 1: I use Ogg and 2: I keep my personal music - yes, from CDs I bought - on my Linux desktop anyway).
As has already been said, 'nuff said, heard it all already. Knew it.
But how does this news get to the lawmakers, to the people whose ears are already stuffed with campaign donations by some other "interested" party?
CD-Rs and MP3s Not Hurting Record Sales
The RIAA certainly doesn't.
It's not like you can really prove this or the opposite. I for one stopped buying music altogether at around the time when MP3s became available (long before non-geeks learned about it). Does that mean I stopped due to MP3s? I doubt it, because I had been buying less and less before that, but I can't prove it. What if there had been no MP3s? Yeah, what if.
Has any article mentioned that while music sales for 2003 were lower than those of 2002, less new albums were also released in 03 than in 02
Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by lazy men trying to find easier ways to do something. -Robert Heinlein
Im not saying CD-R's and Mp3's are hurting records sales but im not saying they're not, but to simply say they're not because sales are still up is a little arrogant. Whos to say they wouldn't have gone up more if CD-R's and Mp3's wernt avaliable? I dont anyone could. We'll never really know what impact they've had one sales because interest in music has no doubt spured during the last several years and im not sure if this has anything to do with Mp3s but im sure it has something to do with technology in general. Its makes music more accessable, which Mp3s have had a big play in. So many mp3's are helping record sales, but at the same time, theres tons of kiddies who are ripping and not paying, as i used to when i was 16-20 years old :)
I know i dont make a lot of sense, i didnt want to because i like to confuse. But just imagine!
Giving IE users a taste of their own medicine since 2005 - http://pods.-is-a-geek.net/
Record Sales are indeed down because people would rather burn a CD of great music than the Bubble-Gum Pop and "Pseudo-Punk-My-Girlfriend-dumped-me-and-I-am-in-p ain" Overpriced Crap the Record industry has available in the Record Stores.
Dolemite
_____________________
Save the World! Use a Quote!
Can I just say, as an Australian I'm really enjoying all the sudden attention that the Australian nerd news has been getting on /.? It's great!
Seriously though, I can vouch for this. Most of my friends are stubbornly insistent on buying their favourite bands new album as opposed to letting me download it and burn it for them. Most Australian bands are releasing their albums with a bonus dvd, or a bonus cd with extra stuff like live show video clips, etc. This is the kind of thing that stops people using Kazaa or BitTorrent MP3 sites. They are loyal to whichever band, and that free poster that comes with the CD is something you can't download off the 'net.
--
The last digit of pi is four.
I hate the RIAA as much as the next guy (if not more so), but I do believe that we should look at some numbers for US before wholly condemning the organization...yet again ;). I mean, after all, a single country, such as Australia, is not necessarily indicative of burning/buying patterns in US...although it seems that similar trends can be seen in numerous other regions...and after exercising common sense...and...
...*pauses to think*...
God dammit, RIAA. I can't even think of ways to defend you. Stop lying to us, you bastards! Stop with the "you are destroying your favorite artists" Jewish-mom guilt trips! Even if it were true (which it is not), and our "favorite artists" (by whom they apparently mean Brittney Spears and her ilk) will be unable to buy yet another $2 million sports car, then I think I will still be able to soundly fall asleep at night.
*Sigh* As an act of protest, I'm going to go out and send an angry e-mail to RIAA, coloring it a vehement red. I am sure they will read it carefully and alter their corporate policies, thus ceasing to be a terrible cesspool of biomatter waste. *rolls eyes*
"The power of accurate observation is frequently called cynicism by those who don't have it." - G.B. Shaw
I hate the RIAA for forcing me to watch MTV when I wan't to know about the latest (crap) music.
I hate the MTV moderators for being alive!
Why can't I download stuff I'd like to buy from P2P to check it out? Where is the difference between P2P downloads and a VCR copy from MTV? Less commercials, brainwashing and boobs?
Maybe, the only problem the RIAA has is their outdated business model and fear.
I don't think that boobs and bullshit on MTV will sell music better than P2P.
How am I supposed to feel bad copying a cd that costs at the most a nickel to produce and costs me $18??? The worst bit is the Artist only gets pennies on the dollar for the sale. Your better off just giving the artist a buck and calling it even. Check out this article it is a interview with Courtney Love. She does the math and the only person making a profit is the Record Label.
Why is this important to prove? Even though downloading music doesn't hurt CD sales, does it make it more right? If downloading music becomes legal, *then* it will hurt CD sales. Without doubt.
Copyright infringement is wrong, just because its not having a negative affect on sales doesnt mean its ok to continue copying. Im not against fair use, whether implied or granted by the government, but wholesale copying of music, which is what is going on via kazaa etc, is just plain immorally wrong, regardless of what the RIAA or the ARIA or whoever does so people can "justify" it.
The linked-to article states that CDRs and MP3s are not KILLING CD sales. There is a difference, it seems to me, between not hurting and not killing. As I understand it, sales of recorded music in Australia were down 4.5% for 2003 overall. I'm not certain those type of sales declines can be successfully spun into downloading and burning not hurting sales of recorded music.
I don't know about anyone else, but RIAA has never lost an album sale because of P2P for me. I use P2P as kinda a sampling system to see what I wanna buy. Too many times there has been 1 or 2 good songs by a band, then you buy the CD, and get screwed because the rest is horrible. Record sales are down for one reason: music sucks now. All the mainstream rock/pop/hiphop/country stations are now playing the same mindless blather. Thank God for NPR (National Public Radio) and the BBC World Service.
Jason Faulkner
Old Os Administrator
jason@oldos.org
oldos.
In Australia we pay directly for every byte we download.
For our monthly ISP fee we are granted a certain number of megabytes that we may download without incurring extra cost. This "bandwidth cap" varies depending on how much you pay per month. Beyond that we typically pay some rate such as 15c per megabyte, or are cut back to dialup speeds.
Now, this doesn't directly affect the discrepancy discussed in the article (between the rate of people burning CDs for their friends and the lack of a corresponding drop in CD sales), but in general you have to keep this in mind when trying to draw conclusions from any investigation of illegal music sharing in Australia.
Of course, it might just be that illegal music sharing has no effect on sales elsewhere in the world, but it's important to realize that our usage patterns will be very different from areas that have unlimited downloads.
...is that P2P enforces quality.
... and it is ARIA. Wouldn't the organisation with a vested interest in raping money off of someone else's talent want to continue raping that money?
(Misspelling of 'reaping' as 'raping' intentional.)
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
Why don't we hear the film industry bitching more about CD-Rs? I mean, I'm willing to wager that a lot more burned CDs are full of video rather than audio, based on my friends' collections.
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
Go Steve Waugh....
oh yer.. good point too.
Go Steve
The recording industry survey was carried out by Quantum Market Research using a sample of about 1000 people. It suggests that 31 million homemade CDs are given away as gifts each year (about four for each of the eight million Australians it says receive them). If, as seems reasonable, 31 million homemade CDs are kept rather than given away, the total number created each year would top 62 million.
I'm just wondering if every one of those CD-R's they're counting are music disks. I buy CD-R's in bulk for archiving purposes. Are they counting those as well?
Also, what were the demographics of the 1000 people? If they were just interviewing 13 to 24 year olds, then probably many of the CD-R's consumed would be used for custom music CD's, but beyond that, the CD serves as an excellent storage device for keeping archives of web pages, photographs, home movies, financial documents, software backups, etc... Even my parents give me CD's they've burned like the time Mom took her digital camera on vacation.
Heck, my downloaded collection of Linux distro's from ISO's in the past year has used over 50 CD's. I've given out about half of them as gifts. Are they including such uses in their results?
The Real Story is the Music Industry completely dropping the ball on the delivery of digital music formats. When Napster raised its head and "threatened" CD Sales, the industry should have studied and copied it.
Instead they tried to shut it down and failed miserably. The current tactics are just the tail-end of a poorly implemented policy that has simply highlighted the availability of online peer-to-peer media to people that normally would not engage in these activities.
There are online music sellers now but if the Music Industry had acted earlier when peer-to-peer had first come into prominence, we would not be talking about CD's at all. Compact Discs would be the same as Cassette Tapes and Vinyl Records. They would only be sold to those who had not adopted the new digital technology or those who like to hang onto older formats (like reel-to-reel machines).
By now instant access to entire music catalogues could have been made available online (not just the latest hits) and the price would have dropped to a reasonable amount, due to true competition in the marketplace. Independent artists would be setting up their own operations based on similar business models. It would have been similar to independent record pressing, where it would be servers holding and distributing the collections rather than an industrial process.
Any mention of CD sales at this time is just another reminder of how much they messed it all up.
The RIIA has lost the battle. Even if they succesfully outlawed mp3, cd-burners and p2p services they will lose simply because their model is wrong. The labels no longer invest in new artists as they used to... record companies are no longer run by people who know music, but by coorporate moguls that thinks in terms of short term benefits and market share and share prices. So we are sold a product not a piece of art. The same way McDonalds sales are going down in many First Worl dcountries because many people no longer want to be fed overpriced third class meat and frozen potatoes and prefer instead to go out to dine just once a month to a good rest, music lovers will stopp buying assembly line music, that is all you can get unless you live in a big, specially culturally city, and prefer to go to live acts and buy mail order from the artists themselves, or small independent labels. I know the preceeding sentence is a little bit too long... anyway I hope everyone gets to know what I mean.
... y Dios vio que Linux era bueno... Genesis 99.666
Its not like password trading is hurting the porn industry either... this is all just a load of crap. The only difference is most don't see that xRIA is raping artists and consumers as damaging to our society (aka social fabric)
OTOH, we can also say that the RIAA's little legal war hasn't effected sales either.
Sounds like gaming over the net in Australia can rape you wallet in a hurry. Must suck to be a gamer down under. But, at least WiFi is an option right? Maybe once Aussies start going wireless, then a true public network can be formed by interconnecting all of the WiFi nodes in a P2P fashion.
Could it work? Any thoughts on this.
Life is not for the lazy.
It's quite probable the RIAA is going to say: 'look, it's working! We're cracking down on mp3 exchange and our sale numbers go up!'
Crying Wolf for years ? Crying wolf implies that someday your bluff will be called. Remember the Story of the Boy Who Cried Wolf ?
If the bluff ain't ever going to be called then is it really crying wolf ?
Is the RIAA and MPAA bluff ever going to be called ? Has it ever been called out even after the above listed examples ?
Big Money speaks. And Big Money carries a big stick. In today's world don't underestimate the belief that brawn overcomes brains. Hopefully, though, someday the brains will inherit the earth.
To see a world in a grain of sand, and then to step back and see the beach where the sand lies
The music, software and all such industry assumes, that piracy - scenario:
Customer with product - Producer without money
replaces classic "sale" scenario:
Customer with product - Producer with money
In fact, it usually replaces a different scenario:
Customer without product - Producer without money
The industry loses nothing at all. If they want $30 for a CD album, I won't buy that album. Simple as that. And doesn't matter if I downloaded it or not, they wouldn't see my money ever. At best, I will be pissed off at their ridiculous price and refuse to buy it later when it's cheaper, simply because I don't support thieves (yep, I mean what I just said!)
But when I download the album, another situation appears. They may gain one, rather esotheric thing from me: Gratitude. Maybe I'll buy some crappy product of theirs, just to support them in the future, just to express my thanks. Maybe I will buy "colector's edition" of what I copied earlier. Just because I like it so much.
Under one condition: They can't piss me off before that. If I hear about stupid lawsuits, sites closed due to ridiculous copyright issues, evil marketing techniques - then, sorry. I'll gladly make a copy for my friends: "Hey, don't support that assholes with your money, get a copy instead!"
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
There are way too many short-term factors confusing the long-term trends. The RIAA will say that the crackdown on file traders is bringing results. Others will say that P2P networks promote the sales of CDs... both are obviously bullshit.
First, CD sales are much more dependent on economic circumstances than they used to be. Prior to 1998 or so, CDs were the only way to get music, and like drug addicts, we stood in line and paid the price. The fact that the music industry was robbing us blind made us detest them, and we still do. When CDs cost $0.50 to produce, we paid more for them than LPs.
Secondly, people's listening habits have completely changed. Digital music means we are able to (and used to) listening to much more music, and in a much more personal way than ever before. The "45 minute album" concept is completely irrelevant in an age when people build 24-hour playlists for their MP3 players.
Thirdly, the competition is not between CD sales and P2P. Most music sales happen by word of mouth, from friend to friend, and "friendly copying" on CDR already sabotaged CD sales long before P2P became big. Clearly P2P is a big problem for CD sales but it's just one of the many channels people use to get music. Trading CDs, listening to the radio, exchanging casettes (in many parts of the world)... these are probably more significant.
The underlying trends in the music industry are driven by technology and are impossible to stop except by bombing the world back into the stone age. Consumers expect more choice, more control, and as much music as they can consume. The only viable option for the music industry is to channel this demand (as Apple is doing) into its own products.
Trying to sell 1970's products (albums) to a 2000's market is just plain stupid.
Ceci n'est pas une signature
I'm straining to think of the last time I bought a CD new at retail price. I believe it was in the winter of 1997 or Spring of 1998.
I get most of my music now on used CDs or vinyl, $2.99 and $1 respectively at Goodwill, a bit more at used music stores. Nowhere close to even the $10 and $12 'reduced' prices.
Before you laugh, I've picked up a lot of great jazz and classical at Goodwill, most in mint condition.
Could the downward price pressure of all the accumulated used CDs hitting the market (and people like me buying them) be responsible for the recent sales declines and price reductions as much as P2P?
OK, so, a few MAJOR differences:
1: Australia pays an INSANE duty on imported music, to the point that when I lived there a few years ago, CD's from the US and UK cost TWICE as much as local fare. As such, it was ALREADY a culture in which people swapped tapes or (more likely) purchased all their music on overseas trips, particularly to asia, where it was ALL boot.
2: Bandwidth is by the byte.
Put these two together, and the stats don't add up.
Hey, I hate the RIAA as much as everyone else, but it baffles me that people can think that in the CURRENT status quo, the internet hasn't hurt CD sales. I've bought fewer CDs, everyone I know has bought fewer CD's. My babysitter has NEVER bought a CD. Neither the math nor the social motivation makes any sense.
On the other hand, the fact that 1980's CD sales we're likely artificially inflated by people "rebuying" their LP collections, never seems to be mentioned, and of course, just because people are buying fewer CDs doesnt mean they wouldnt follow some OTHER (itunes or whatever) business model.
In case anyone is wondering what this image is, it's supposed to be Guy Sebastian - the winner of Australian Idol - being received digitally. Oh the imagination of newpaper artists... Not that non-Australians would want to know, of course. ;)
I downloaded the Dixie Chicks off Kazaa. Never heard them before but decided to give them a try after hearing about the absurd US boycott of their music.
Loved it so much I bought all their CDs and went to see them live on their Top of The World Tour.
Without MP3 sharing they wouldn't have got a penny of my money and I'd have missed out on a great band. (I dislike country as a rule so wouldn't have bought a country cd on the off-chance I might like it).
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
And we all know how quickly spin evaporates in the face of facts! The whole MP3 debate should be over really soon by now so I can go play with my kitties! ^_^
These studies have been going on for the past 5 years. But thanks for the old news. Let see something not old and/or obvious posted about MP3's
--dan
I don't spend much time at all fixing computers on my home network. Routine maintenance, on the other hand, does eat some time. There isn't a Windoze machine in the house, which I think accounts for some of the lack of "fixing".
I gave friends and family a relatively small number of CDR's over the last year. When the recording industry does the count they will all count as pirated despite the fact that all of them were legal, either legal downloads the copyright owners want distributed or I simply converted vinyl to CD for the record owner. I wonder how careful this survey was to establish what was actually on the CDR gifts.
The industry hate it most if you convert old formats because selling us back catalog is pure profit. If they could drop support for new music they would do it, as long as reselling the same content over and over pulls in the cash.
not downloads...
just read that dvds take up 50% of the retail space in music stores this year and dvd sales are way up over last year. been a steady climb for quite a few years and it seems very likely that this accounts for cd sales drops. money spent on dvds that would have in the past been spent on cds.
we are on a public forum, and he did just stand up and publicly state why he is doing this. whats your point? oh and guess what, theres some three hundred million people out there that broke the law, while hiding behind their activity and for it the industry has at least something on their radar. i think it's accomplished quite abit(hell, cd prices are half what they used to be. its almost affordable, at 20$ per cd now)
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
local tampa community radio... everything from polka to death metal. seriously.
The year before the Napster decision came down, the music industry had their best year ever. The year after they shut down Napster, the business went into the tank.
Sure, cause and effect cannot be implied, but it makes you think.
I am inclined to agree with the general concensus. When I download an MP3, and like it, chances are, I'll go buy the CD.
Primarily, I don't think that kind of report would ever reach the bovine of the us. The RIAA is going to do everything they can to keep reports, and surverys that are going to hurt their cause from us. What public leg would they have to stand on if someone proved that CD sales in fact went up with the advent of P2P programs that most people can use?
Unlimited broadband, and 15gb+/month broadband is readily available in Australia. I would suggest you're getting ripped off on your current ISP plan. Even Telstra doesn't charge for excess usage aymore, just drops to 64kbps. Have a look here: http://bc.whirlpool.net.au/bc-plan.cfm
I was just in the shops today getting some CD-R's and I noticed that some were labeled AUDIO CD-R, while others were labeled DATA CD-R.
The only difference was the price.
DATA CD-R worked out about $0.80 per CD-R
AUDIO CD-R worked out about $1.30 per CD-R
I wonder how many people will get the audio cd-r's thinking that somehow the data cd-r's will not play audio?
it is only after a long journey that you know the strength of the horse.
Would anybody else like a feature in Slashdot which filters out RIAA articles, MS-paranoia articles, SCO's latest bullshit articles, etc?
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.
At best, I will be pissed off at their ridiculous price and refuse to buy it later when it's cheaper, simply because I don't support thieves (yep, I mean what I just said!)
Most of the time I disagree with you. However, I have bought a few albums based on one song I have heard. The rest of the album was junk. In these cases, I agree with you. I buy less music nowdays. It's too much like a box of chocolates. You never know what you are going to get. I wouldn't be disappointed if they were all sweet, but the moldy ones tend to be a turn-off. Quality Control definately needs fixed.
While I'm on that topic, the DVD's are starting to get that problem. I picked up some old television shows. I got some Andy Griffith show and Beverly Hillbillies. What happened to the opening music? It's been replaced by some muzak junk. Talk about not getting what you thought you bought. So much for a walk down memory lane. I really look at any pre-packaged recording on the shelf as a pig in a poke now with a let the buyer beware attitude.
With Audio, I always look for the Compact Disk logo. I won't knowingly buy any DRM broken CD's.
The truth shall set you free!
When did that ever cause an American organisation to reconsider? :/
Unlimited broadband, and 15gb+/month broadband is readily available in Australia
What is being called "unlimited" by various ISPs is not in fact unlimited. Data shaping, i.e. dropping back to dialup speed when a cap is reached, is not "unlimited" by any reasonable definition.
I would suggest you're getting ripped off on your current ISP plan
No, I don't believe that I am. No one provides true unlimited broadband to my knowledge. If you want to link to a specific plan that you think does, feel free to go ahead and we'll see. I'm pretty certain they all use data shaping of one form or another - so they're not "unlimited" at all.
Of course, I may be wrong, but I think you've been taken in by a very debatable use of the word "unlimited". Take a look around the Whirlpool site for any given ISP, and I think you'll find no one provides true unlimited broadband.
Even Telstra doesn't charge for excess usage aymore, just drops to 64kbps.
Except that's clearly *not* unlimited! It's capped to a certain number of megabytes, then you drop back (almost) to dialup speed. If you read my post more carefully, I did include mention this case. This is very obviously not unlimited as far as I'm concerned.
Lots of people will pay for something that they know they like even if they know they can get it for free. In fact, public radio in the United States is pretty much supported by people who know that they can get it for free but choose to pay anyway. Just because you have a somewhat dim view of human nature doesn't make it so. People can be quite generous towards someone who is doing something they consider worthwhile.
We've had a very good year for the music industry in the UK. CD prices have dropped, which has lead to record sales.
On several occasions, the BPI (UK's RIAA) have politely told the RIAA to piss off when they've tried to convince them to start suing customers. Not only are the BPI just generally much nicer people, but they also realise the futility of suing their customers while their sales are at record highs.
The BPI also believes that offering singles for download will help revive the crippled singles chart.
For the moment, at least, we're much better off than the US is.
I am wondering here if the same people that are trading music online is nothing more than a new forum for trading music. I remember in high school friends lending others a CD or providing a CD or tape copy of the CD. When I was a senior in HS the whole MP3 thing really started and people would give others MP3 CD's. Granted, HS is a small sampling, but the comclusion that I have reached is that the people who will pirate just have a new forum; instead of relying on contacts and friends, people rely on people on the internet. Technology has allowed would-be pirates to get the "goods" online rather than in more traditional forums.
The second point is how on earth would people give that many CD's to each other? Four? That is a little excessive. Maybe I am speaking from my US perspective, but four is a lot, considering out of all the people I know, I had only ONE friend give two CD's to his girl friend. No one else would give a recordable CD. Personally, unless it was some sort of romantic mix I would think that giving a CD as a gift that you mixed would be cheap.
The views expressed are mine own and do not express the views of my employer.
should the RIAA be able to buy laws that make doors illegal since some people use them in the course of stealing music?
people using mp3s sometimes don't have money to buy cds. so whether they have music to listen to or not, they still don't have money to buy to cds.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/7/34693.html The original poster asked for trends in the UK and the US, this story is not perfect for the cause but it will help complete one more piece of the puzzle.
I enjoy music piracy, but I'm not delusional enough to claim that it isn't hurting music sales. I buy a few albums, still, sure, especially comedy albums which are hard to find online, but I don't buy nearly as much stuff. I don't buy the crap with 2 or 3 good songs at 17 bucks a pop, and I'm *proud* to admit it.
mlylecarlin
Vivendi's actions show how much the music industry really cares about the artist!
Wikileaks, no DNS
The only fluctuations in CD sales has been during
times of TOTAL and complete crap new music from
the industry (which sucks totally)
Most of the time the stuff that's released is just sucky
in general and CD sales stay the same as always.
Good, now I can get back on kazaa without feeling guilty.
Oh wait there is no music worth downloading lately. What am I saying, there is no music worth grabbing for the past 5 years.
Every more or less famous musician has a web site these days, and most of them (well, at least the ones whose music I call "good") even go to their web sites and talk to fans sometimes. Email the web guy, ask your favorite artist's opinion on file swapping. Chances are you'll get a reply from the band directly published somewhere on the web site. At least you will know if file sharing is hurting them or not.
"Civil disobedience in these cases is where you publically declare that you are going to break the law, state your reasons why, and publically do it."
Why do you get to define what civil disobedience is?
When the speed limit was federally mandated at 55 MPH, I routinely went faster. Oooh. I was doing *illegal* stuff.
No, it was civil disobedience.
Lets look it up in the dictionary:
CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE - nonviolent protest: the deliberate breaking of a law by ordinary citizens, carried out as nonviolent protest or passive resistance
(Microsoft(R) Encarta(R) Reference Library 2004. (C) 1993-2003 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.)
Seems to me he is practicing civil disobedience.
Try again, but use actual definitions next time.
I love Slashdot. It always latches onto some single study or report and drives it home as evidence for their entire viewpoint. For instance, when the RIAA sent hundreds of thousands of lawsuits, and a couple of them happened to end up at places where someone used a grandfather's computer or some 11-year old girl used her mommy's computer. Suddenly, the RIAA is bullying! And the mantra repeated is that it's "crappy music" that is hurting sales, even though both crappy and good music has always been around.
Now, a single Australian study shows that sales went up instead of down, and suddenly that's evidence that MP3s and CD-Rs don't hurt sales. Meanwhile, COMMON SENSE AND LOGIC dictates that someone would rather go online and download an album for free in 10 minutes rather than go to the store and buy it for $10.
Nobody on Slashdot can offer a single valid justification for downloading music without paying for it. Not a one. I feel sorry for the artists that get ripped off. Here comes the part where people try to reply with "BUT THE RIAA RIPS THEM OFF EVERYDAY!1" even though the bands willingly signed contracts with their labels.
You want to know how much of a joke it's become? See What A Crappy Present. Kids aren't going to be buying albums anymore because you people have made downloading so commonplace. Think it through. What do you think is going to happen? Labels will stop taking chances on bands because they don't get returns on those investments, since "culture movement" people like you download the fuck out of them.
"Sufferin' succotash."
slashdotters are nothing but pirates.
What is it about Slashdotters that makes them think they're always the majority?
I guarantee at least 80% of downloaders never even dream of leaving the house to buy the CD they just downloaded. You are being PURPOSEFULLY naive if you believe everyone is holding themselves to an honor system here.
Wow, you bought CDs in Napster's heyday. That changes everything...
The problem is that nobody here can morally or legally justify downloading the music that other human beings worked hard to make. This leads to:
1.) Everyone trying to justify it as a "culture movement." Music wants to be free! Never mind nobody getting paid for making it.
2.) It's an anti-RIAA thing! We're just battling the RIAA by ripping off these artists. Two wrongs make a right, and the immorality of stealing music is rendered null by the fact that some bands signed contracts they didn't like later on.
3.) Having a product that is in stores available illegally online magically makes people go and purchase the product in the stores! When someone downloads an entire album off of Sharereactor's forums or Kazaa or WinMX, there is a magic spell that makes them suddenly want to purchase the album they have already just obtained for free. People are honorable like this. Society is perfect and moral and I choose to believe such to alleviate the pang of guilt I feel over it. After all, I bought CDs during Napster's heyday!
Blech.
"Sufferin' succotash."
I wonder if it's occured to any of these staticians that the drop in CD sales in the US might be due to the rise in prices?
You used to be able to buy a CD for $10-15US, but now the prices are more like $15-20US. A careful shopper pays less for a DVD than for a CD. I've stopped buying since the price hike which seems to correspond in timing to all of the lawsuits. I think that the lawsuits were just stupid, and I don't appreciate them trying to make me pay for them!
Everyone has an agenda. Except me. --Michael Crichton
Let me see if I get what you are saying:
1) Artists only get a few cents per album.
2) You think artists deserve more.
3) You therefore think it is right to not give them anything.
Am I the only one who sees a problem with this?
OK, so you are saying that the record labels get the majority of each CD sale and you do not like that fact. But you do realize you are punishing the already punished artist even more?
Of course, then there are people who look at recording artists driving expensive cars, living in huge mansions, and think that the people therefore have a right to take back and copy their albums (a Robin Hood type thing).
The only problem is that the people in Robin Hood were actively stealing from the poor. People *willingly* give money to artists for their music. This is capitalism, and there is nothing wrong with it. [1]
CDs Cost too much? Do not buy them. Enough people do that and CD prices will drop. It is simple supply and demand.
One thing I have discovered about Slashdot readers (and most people in the world): They are cheapskates. They say they would buy CDs if they were only $10. They say they would buy an iPod if they were only $100. They say they would buy a Macintosh if they were only $500.
My thoughts? Yeah, right...
As soon as CDs are $10, most Slashdot readers would be saying "Well, I would buy them when they are $3. It only costs a nickel to make! In the meantime, I am going to continue to download free MP3s. Compete with that!" [2]
As prices get lower, more and more people would purchase the item in question, but there would still be a vocal group on Slashdot that would continue to call for prices to go down even more.
[1] Oh, I forgot, most of us are in the U.S., and we default back to our Puritan beliefs that "rich" = "evil". We have a love/hate relationship with rich people. We would love to be rich, but we hate people who are rich.
[2] This process continues as prices get lower.
- (c) 2018 Hank Zimmerman
Record sales increased by 10% in 2003 according to salefigures compiled by IBM Consulting in Iceland.
With 80,6% of Icelanders having access to computers and 76,9% (2001, Statistics of Iceland) with access to the internet, we have welcomed P2P and there are numerous P2P networks run in Iceland as well as most have access to foreign networks.
Downloading music from the internet is not illegal under Icelandic statues, though sharing music is in a gray area. The Icelandic version of the RIAA, STEF has no interest in litigation with those who share music.
The retail price of compact discs ranges from $25 to $40, with the latter being the norm.
that CDR's and MP3's dont affect the number of CD sold? I know plenty of people who just burn MP3's onto CD's instead of buying the album as this technology has become available. I've done it myself. And thats only a small example of what must be happening in the wider community.
I couldn't think of a sig.
Here's some interesting stats that I calculated a month back.
I was an Emusic.com member for a year and a half. In that time, I paid about $180 to be a member. A good chunk of that I'd bet made it's way to different music labels.
In that time I bought 40 CD's from bands I would have never heard of if it wasn't for Emusic.
Since they have gutted Emusic and turned a fantastic service into basically a "pay to sample" service, I have bought cancelled my subscription and haven't bought a single CD.
Now... Unless I go back to what I was doing before, which was stealing music from different sources online, I doubt I will be buying another CD soon.
The RIAA needs to get a fucking clue.
Karma means nothing to me, so suck it...
but maybe CD piracy in Australia doesn't affect sales because CD burners (or any technology for that matter) is outrageously expensive. My wife is Australian, and much of her family lives there. Her nanna bought a DVD player a few months ago for $300.00 that would cost $99 here. Even with exchange rates it's still like $75 dollars more expensive.
Dude. Dude. Dude. Dude. DUDE!!!! Duuuudde. Yeah, I guess you have a point there. (Baseketball)
Sit Down and Watch MTV/MTV2 for a couple of hours. Of all the 'Rock' songs that appear how many fit the style I mentioned above.
You'll see that it's not elitist but a correct assessment of what is being played on MTV.
KNDD in Seattle used to play MTV heavy rotation 'pseudo-punk' all the time. The now have abandoned this format for real punk and real alternative as the 'pseudo-punk' format was a money looser for them.
There are lots of music out there but the ones that the RIAA are shoving down our throats, for the most part, are the ones I mentioned above.
I'm crapping over the lack of choice available to me. Did you ever stop to think THIS is why piracy is at an all time high and record sales are in the dumper?
Probably not.
Dolemite
_________________
Save the World! Use a Quote!
Also, some people aren't so short sighted as to believe that an immediated apparent financial gain is always the best course of action for the long time."
Er, and I guess that makes you a Eurosphere-Socialist?
Hey, it's fine if you want to talk in terms of Socializing music -- in fact, I wish more people would just come out and admit that's their goal.
But let's not pretend that this musician stands a better chance of making a living as a musicin by depending on the Utopian idea that people will voluntarily come back and pay for something that they already have...
Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
I am not one of those people who "are really into" music. I don't keep track of bands and what they're doing, i don't peruse the local weeklies for who's playing where, I don't even know what bands play a good third of the old songs I hear someone else playing and I think "oh yeah, I remember that song, it's good."
I gave up listening to the radio not only because most of the new stuff on there is either terrible or a rip off of something else, but because I quite frankly could do without the pure smarm of the commercials and having to hear yet another caller yell "WOOOOOOOOO!" into their phone brcause that's what they think the international symbol is for "PARTY!"
I gave up on watching Music Television long ago, even before MTV stopped playing entire videos and moved to their own programming.
I do not "have my finger on the pules of new music."
Because of that, I konw I miss out on a lot of good stuff out there, most of which doesn't get out there for casual listeners to hear anyway.
Bottome line: left on my own, i don't purchase music. I buy MAYBE one CD every couple months, and 4 out of the 6-7 i buy in any given year are crap I buy as little gifts for my wife who's tastes in entertainment are pretty much the antithesis of mine.
I've never been a regular purchaser of music for my own, and I doubt thats going to change.
HOWEVER, the last 8-10 CDs i HAVE bought over the years have ALL been a direct result of listening to something that was either burned for me by a friend (we all have those friends that are total musicheads, no matter what the genre. You know the type... if they don't buy SOMETHING new for their collection they start to get real jittery after a couple weeks.) or downloaded for free because of something I read about or was told about or whatever made a strong enough imprint on me that I actually cared enough to remember to follow up on it.
I realize it isnt a huge amount of money, but those couple hundred dollars that went to the music industry would have never gotten into their hands if it werent for "illegal" copies of their music flying around. A couple of the bands have even made money by being so good I actually bought tickets to see them play somewhere live. Again, wouldnt have happened without those terribly awful copies of illegal music.
Illegal? yes. Morally wrong? No more morally wrong than going 40mph in a 35 zone (or, 70kph in a 60 zone, for those of you in the rest of the world), which is also illegal [and, more importantly, physically unsafe for yourself and others]. Do I feel a pang of guilt when I speed? Nope. Do you? Probably not. To you feel guilt when you get a speeding ticket? I doubt it. Last speeding ticket I got all I felt was annoyed and a little stupid.
Remember folks, your moral sense comes from your upbringing, which ranges widely depending on where in the world you're from. Laws USED TO come from moral sense (as opposed to now, where in teh US laws come mainly from pressure from large corporations and vocal minorities with money)
Breaking an old law typically involves breaking a moral taboo of some sort and causes you that pang of guilt, breaking a "business-protection" law (like those dealing with trademarks and copyrights) pretty much HAS NO MORAL BASIS and thus most of us break them at will without caring.
I don't know if i'd go as far as calling it a new forum, but sharing of unlicensed music is here to stay, and after this whole wailing and gnashing of teeth by those involved (that actually give a fuck), those that actually make music and those that car
s'wut i sed.
I'm an Australian, and almost everyone I know either owns or has easy access to a CD burner. CD-Rs are ridiculously cheap. Technology isn't *that* expensive here dude. That said, most of these people still buy CD's of the bands they like, because of all the cool stuff you get with CD's here - bonus DVD's, posters, etc.
i have came across a LOT of people who have "publicly" anounced that they are being disobidient, and ignoring whatever law, because the law is either stupid, harmful, broken, or whathaveyou. on the order of at least a good five hundred or so. and that's not including slashdot, and that's really only the people that I have come in contact with. granted, that's not everyone in the world,.. and granted at least half of them eventually break down and then go back to being a happy little prozac consumer type...but there are a LOT of people out there who are doing it because it is the Right Thing to do. it is their duty, however to convince the rest of the people who think they are doing the wrong thing, that they are actually doing the right thing.
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
are you that stupid or are you trying to not see the light here.
civil disobedience has been going on since the days of moses. just recently has it gotten a name and the qualities you describe, but so long has there been civility, authority, and a reason to stay alive/not follow the authority, there has been reaction against the authority in this manner. some civil dissobedience will get you jailed, some killed, and some will land you with a meaningless slap on the wrist. Emmanuel goldstein i seem to remember going to a sort of civil-dissobedience-sit-in-sort of thing and coming back on the air after being arrested, with no charges, after the authority in the matter knew that it was in the wrong. to classify all civil disobedience sooo specifically you miss the bigger picture, this is about a reaction that happens when authority, self-awareness and a structure of action determining rules or laws coexist, if i even have a broad enough scope on the matter.
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
I recently wrote a paper Located Here in regards to this subject. Recording artists would embrace MP3 technology ( in my paper I give a few names whom did just that); yet it is not the artist whom makes the decisions and is against MP3's. It is the recording labels, whom have the music artists over a kettle. Kyndig
My Thoughts, Kyndig
unless it was some sort of romantic mix I would think that giving a CD as a gift that you mixed would be cheap
More expensive than nothing.
Besides, we're not talking fiftieth-anniversary gifts here: most people burn CDs just as something nice for a friend. If I discover some new band that I think one of my friends will enjoy, I can throw a few tracks on a CD for them. I've burned CDs with odd tracks from the 365 Days Project and the like, with tracks that the person would never have otherwise heard.
Giving a CD doesn't have to mean a copy of a Top 40 album, or even anything you can by in stores. I value the ones I've been given more than I value a lot of the shit I've paid money for.
Interestingly, iTunes Music store is not even availiable in Australia yet. Heh - this is probably why cd sales haven't been effected (but for God's sake don't tell the RIAA otherwise they'll use this for amunition...).
RIAA: "See - this proves MP3s are Evil! Eeeevil I tells ya! EEEEVVVIIIILLLL"
MP3's and CD-R's had SOME impact, I'm sure, but what is REALLY hurting sales is lack of talent, creativity, and innovation in popular music. Like it or not, the pop music market has made the music industry profitable in the past. There really isn't much of a variety out there anymore. There are many factors. The hottest item with many of the previous superstars has been artistic control and their share of the profits. The artist to label profit share difference is unfair to artists. The portion of the profit that should be going to marketing is argued by many artists as not being used to market their product. Since many mergers have gone on in the entertainment field the Artist must not only market him/herself, but other products as well. Most talented people will not want to put up with business as it is now and are either cutting out the middle man and going solo (ultimately earning more $$) or chaging their career objectives. The American music business is terribly corrupted by the Majors disallowing radio stations to play anything but what they approve. This leads to consumers not being exposed to new music and the problem snowballs to the poor record sales.