Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Study Suggests Music Industry Embrace Piracy

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the give-the-people-what-they-want dept.

unassimilatible writes to tell us that according to the Financial Times, the music industry should embrace illegal file-sharing websites. A recent study of the recent Radiohead album release found that huge numbers of illegal downloads actually helped the band's popularity and, by extension, concert ticket sales. "Radiohead's release of In Rainbows on a pay-what-you-want basis last October generated enormous traffic to the band's own website and intense speculation about how much fans had paid. He urged record companies to study the outcome and accept that file-sharing sites were here to stay. 'It's time to stop swimming against the tide of what people want,' he said." Update 19:46 GMT by SM: Several readers (including the original author) have written in to mention that it isn't stressed enough that this study was engaged by the music industry itself, making the findings that much more interesting. Take that as you will.

19 of 293 comments (clear)

  1. What "study"? by XorNand · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not saying that there might be some merit here, but this was hardly a scientific study. Someone simply looked at the number of downloads of a single album, by a single band and said "downloads == good." Sure, you can make statistics say whatever you want them to say, but this isn't even trying.

    Secondly, it's no longer "pirating" if it's condoned by the copyright holder, eh? So, we're now expecting labels to just let everyone freely copy music? The problem here is that labels own the copyright and make their money from album sales. Merchandising and concert revenue, on the other hand, typically go into the bands' pockets. So of course there are bands out there that would love to use albums as a loss leader for their concerts. This kinda screws the labels though since the only reason so many people attend the concerts or buy the t-shirts is due to a heavy promotional investment by the labels.

    I can't actually believe that I'm spending a few minutes of my life to defend major record labels, but we do need a bit of intellectual honesty and middle ground in this discussion.

    --
    Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
    1. Re:What "study"? by I2egulus · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Before I start, I agree with parent post. Record labels that invest time in promoting an album have a right to some of the money too, though not nearly as much as they take currently.

      The question though, is whether said labels are necessary to the industry anymore. Can a band sustain itself without a record label, while still releasing music in an album format digitally? I'm not one to pretend to be knowledgeable on the issue but I figure I can at least pose the question.

    2. Re:What "study"? by RonnyJ · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not even a good example of an album to study. Radiohead had enormous success with it, but they were hugely helped by two things:

      1) They were already a very well-established band.
      2) They had a huge amount of publicity given to them because the method of distribution was 'revolutionary' (and they got that publicity largely because of 1) above).

    3. Re:What "study"? by ObjetDart · · Score: 4, Funny

      I definitely agree. It's problematic to try and draw any sort of industry-wide lesson from the experiences of an already enormously popular, wildly successful band like Radiohead. It's like saying U2 benefits from file sharing. Shit, Bono could fart into a harmonica and they'd sell a million copies.

      --
      I read Usenet for the articles.
    4. Re:What "study"? by TheLostSamurai · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The question though, is whether said labels are necessary to the industry anymore. Can a band sustain itself without a record label, while still releasing music in an album format digitally?

      Let me answer your question with another question; Which band? If you're talking about Radiohead, then yes. However, if you're talking about your buddy Joe's local garage band, no. In the end it all comes down to the individual bands ability to market themselves and actually get their music heard.

      --
      I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.
    5. Re:What "study"? by zappepcs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Short answer? Yes. The recording industry as distribution giants are no longer needed. That is not to say that there is no place left for their business, just none left for them to run it the way that they have been. Bands still need help with getting concert venues and promotion. I'll wager that before the large RIAA members figure it out there will be others jumping inline to provide such as is needed by bands who distribute electronically.
      The old methods of finding out about new music are slowly failing. Commercial radio is floundering, magazines are not covering all the music available, so the market (roughly speaking) is wide open for competition to large record labels. I listen extensively to Internet radio. I live in a large metropolitan area and there is NOTHING on regular radio that I can suffer through for 6 songs an hour. I say this because if I have gotten to this point, you can bet I'm not alone and as a result the RIAA members are losing out until they start supporting the "New Way" of doing business. It is now completely legitimate and plausible to do without their services IMO.

      The real problem for RIAA members is that they don't seem to realize how long ago this boat left the pier while they were partying at the boathouse. Now they have to play catch-up to the likes of iTunes, Napster etc. They have given their business away by being afraid to innovate and change with the times and technology.

      Bands mostly sustain themselves on concert generated revenue, not record sales. The smaller the band, the more this is true. The internet sales model is giving some small bands more money than they could have thought possible without a record deal. Direct sales == money. Radiohead, NIN, and others are showing that it's not just a big money pit to throw away your profits in. It DOES work. Some reports say that revenues for a band from CD sales is negligible, so in these terms the Radiohead deal is a big deal. They got all the revenue from music sales. Despite mistakes or blunders, Radiohead and NIN are showing others how to do business in The New Way.

      As technology takes it further, the avalanche of music available to users will overwhelm them, and they will look for the New MTV to help them limit their choices and search for the next pop idol. That is where Internet websites will slowly begin taking share from RIAA members. The new nexus of distribution is being the person who knows what is available and can help you find music you like.

      So, in both short and long answer... yes!

      --
      Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
    6. Re:What "study"? by SpectreBlofeld · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, that explains How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb...

    7. Re:What "study"? by vhogemann · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have to disagree...

      Here at Brazil there are dozens of local bands that I never heard about, but are able to market themselves and earn money. These bands basically perform at regional shows, sell their albuns themselves and basically are ignored by the mainstream music industry. The music is basically "pirated" by the artists themselves, because it's sold on a such informal way directly by the band or by street vendors that copy and resell the albums as much as they want to.

      Eventually some of this bands get attention from the general public and become know nationwide... And some even internationally, see the Calypso band for an example... not my kind of music, but they managed to make some shows on Europe and USA! And this without the help of any major label.

      See, if a kitschy band from the brazilian countryside (hey, by countrysite I mean near the f*sk amazon forrest!) can reach international success all by themselves... Well, I think Record Labels are no longer necessary!

      --
      ---- You know how some doctors have the Messiah complex - they need to save the world? You've got the "Rubik's" complex
    8. Re:What "study"? by hairyfeet · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually they probably could,they would just have to go back to the "old" way of doing things. My mom talks about the way bands worked when she was a kid,and how you would get one "semi-famous" act,along with up to a dozen smaller acts. The smaller acts would all have self pressed 45 records for sale to the audience after the show,and the concerts were such a good deal price wise that it left the kids with plenty of money to snatch up those 45s the bands were selling.

      I think going back to a more "carnival" atmosphere,with the bands having little booths to sell cds,t-shirts,keyrings,etc would work,and they would end up with a lot more money than selling themselves to a record company. I know that when i went on a southern tour with the college band I was playing with we were getting between $400-800 a night easy,just from selling our wares to the audience. And there were plenty of other ways to promote yourself. We would put up "Win one of the bands guitars!" flyers around before a show and take a cheap Kramer that we bought online and play it for the last 3 or 4 songs. After which we would sign it and have a raffle and everyone who bought any of our merchandise got a ticket for each item bought. Sales went up a good 40% and the fans loved it.

      So yes,I think it can work for the little guys too,they just can't sit on the butts and expect the money fairy to drop a sack on their lap. They have to be willing to hustle and put in the effort,but the rewards are well worth it. But as always this is my 02c,YMMV

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    9. Re:What "study"? by badasscat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Here at Brazil there are dozens of local bands that I never heard about, but are able to market themselves and earn money. These bands basically perform at regional shows, sell their albuns themselves and basically are ignored by the mainstream music industry. The music is basically "pirated" by the artists themselves, because it's sold on a such informal way directly by the band or by street vendors that copy and resell the albums as much as they want to.

      Yes, and this is the way it's been done in the United States and England and Japan and everywhere else for decades too. Nothing new there...

      Eventually some of this bands get attention from the general public and become know nationwide...

      And here you've left out about a million steps, most of which involve a record label or at least some form of professional PR. (I'll get to your specific example in a minute.)

      How do you suppose a band that's playing around locally and selling tapes or whatever to local people becomes "eventually" known nationwide? Every local area has dozens or hundreds of bands all trying to do the same thing, so why would somebody pay attention to a local band from 500 miles away?

      The answer is they get mentioned in newspapers, they get played on radio stations, they make it into video games, etc. etc. Hopefully at some point before that they get a more professional recording made, which costs a lot of money that most local bands don't have.

      None of this happens without a record label.

      As for this:

      And some even internationally, see the Calypso band for an example...

      I've never heard of them. A quick Google search turns up nothing either. Searching for Calypso brings up results for calypso music, some technology company calling itself Calypso, a Calypso catamaran... but no band. Searching for "Calypso band" is similarly barren - lots of results for calypso bands, but no band specific named Calypso in the first few dozen results. So they can't really be all that popular internationally - not many people are mentioning them online or linking to pages that do.

      Now, if they'd had a record label, maybe a different story. Record labels have SEO specialists that would ensure they'd be high up in search results. They'd have a nice SEO-friendly official web site with a blog or two. They'd be setting up tours. They'd get them on appropriate radio stations and TV shows. An associated PR agency would be sending out press releases and samplers to various publications.

      Like the parent, I can't believe I'm here defending record labels, but the fact is they do serve a purpose. That doesn't mean I support everything they do or that I think their current form is right for the way music is distributed today - their business model is still very 1950's, and they need to get smaller and streamline. They also need to acknowledge that the internet is not going away. A lot of bands might not need a "full service" record label, but then they shouldn't expect as much help either (be it financial or practical).

    10. Re:What "study"? by mattsucks · · Score: 4, Informative

      And here you've left out about a million steps, most of which involve a record label or at least some form of professional PR. (I'll get to your specific example in a minute.)

      How do you suppose a band that's playing around locally and selling tapes or whatever to local people becomes "eventually" known nationwide? Every local area has dozens or hundreds of bands all trying to do the same thing, so why would somebody pay attention to a local band from 500 miles away?

      The answer is they get mentioned in newspapers, they get played on radio stations, they make it into video games, etc. etc. Hopefully at some point before that they get a more professional recording made, which costs a lot of money that most local bands don't have.

      None of this happens without a record label.

      I have been in one band from my local area that got into the papers and magazines, onto commercial radio, into video game soundtracks, recorded at the same high-end studios that the record labels use around these parts (north TX, USA), done radio interviews on the top local stations and college stations around the state, sold CDs and downloads locally, regionally, nationally, and on the other side of the world (NZ, to be precise). At the time, the bands showed up adequately ranked at in various search engines, as do my current efforts, with minimal effort for SEO on our part. My current groups all have achieved varying degrees of the above as well. And I know of at least a dozen more bands from this area that have done the same ...

      ... and all that happened without any record label of any kind.

      Yes we all busted our asses to get those things done, went into debt, dug ourselves out, and by-and-large nobody I know is rich and famous yet. But we've all played stuff we wanted to play, never had to give away any of our rights to a soulless corporation (oxymoron?), and had a difficult, frustrating, and at the same time fabulous time doing so.

      And the best part is, I can keep doing this til I'm 90 .. without a record label.

      A record label is only one way to make some of these things happen. Sometimes a record label can provide you a shortening of the path you would otherwise have to take. But its not the ONLY way.

  2. This isn't news anyway... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... though it might be good if they are constantly reminded that they are hurting themselves by going against consumers rather than with them.

  3. BRB by pwnies · · Score: 4, Funny

    Gotta go support the music industry and make comcast hate my guts.

  4. RIAA should learn... by mseidl · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Not very many people know this, but the RIAA almost went bankrupt in the 30s with Radio, because they didn't have any licensing fees or "royalties" associated with it. And people stopped buying records because they could listen to it on the radio.

    The RIAA should embrace technology. Because that is where the world is headed. Any idiot can see this. So instead of fighting, go with the flow, because you cannot change people. No matter how much you sue, how much fucking money you waste trying to convince people they are stealing if they think of the song in their head.

    I hereby kick the RIAA in the nuts.

    1. Re:RIAA should learn... by gone6713 · · Score: 5, Informative

      I doubt that the RIAA almost went bankrupt in the 30's, considering it was formed in 1952.

  5. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  6. Re:It's good to have wants... by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People want *everything* for free.

          Not really. It's barely worth my time trying to dig up enough iron, aluminum and other metals, as well as finding the oil and manufacturing the plastics, in order to build my own automobile. I would spend my lifetime doing this, and would nowhere near approach the quality of car available on the market today. I have other things to do.

          However the perceived cost of a "song" - especially in the information age where anything digital can be copied an amazing number of times for virtually no cost - is very close to zero. Therefore that's exactly what I am willing to pay for it. Sure, the band had to spend a few weeks writing the thing, and a lifetime learning to play their instruments properly - that's why they get to charge willing customers for concert performances. Just like I get to charge my patients for the skills I have honed over the decades. However I don't become an overnight multi-millionaire just because I made a successful diagnosis with a single patient. It takes work, you know? The "entertainment" industry is long overdue for a "correction".

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  7. Why the RIAA refuses to embrace piracy by sm62704 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It helps their artists (and them as well), but it also helps artists who are not uinder contract with its members.

    The RIAA has radio and empty-v to advertise its wares, as well as internet radio and P2P. Their competetion (the independants) only has internet radio and P2P. Killing internet radio and P2P is a blow against the indies, and since the RIAA has radio and empty-v, they can do without the internet. Their competetion can't.

    What they are doing is blatantly illegal, but the government is their pawn. We, the People, are defenseless.

    --
    mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  8. It's all about Control, baby by Migraineman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The music industry (and the movie industry) has a business model where they control the conduit between the "talent" and the "customer." They make their money by controlling that conduit ... we have a number of laws that outline the dirty tricks used by these folks to control the distribution conduit, right up to the control interface on your wallet. The Canadian blank-media tax basically siphons cash out of your wallet regardless of your music/entertainment purchases, and gives the lion's share of the funds to ... wait for it ... the distribution cartels. They have a plan for distributions to artists, but that's after they've taken their cut.

    Any proposal that lessens their ability to control the market will be opposed quite vigorously. They already know they're obsolete. What makes you think they're going to give up voluntarily?