Thread: FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales

Results 1 to 20 of 94

  1. #1
    Join Date Sep 2007
    Location East Glenbeckistan
    Posts 3,796
    Rep Power 536871155

    Default FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales

    Yesterday's piece in the Financial Times backs up what we have been talking about. Important points crossposted: to read the whole thing, get a free 'script to the FT's website.

    Financial Times: Online piracy dents music sales
    Published: January 21 2010

    Originally Posted by Salamander Davoudi in the Financial Times
    John Kennedy, executive chairman of IFPI, said: “It would be great to report these innovations have been rewarded by market growth, more investment in artists, more jobs. Sadly that is not the case. “Digital piracy remains a huge barrier to market growth.”
    Originally Posted by Salamander Davoudi in the Financial Times
    The IFPI estimates that 95 per cent of music downloads worldwide are illegal.
    Originally Posted by Salamander Davoudi in the Financial Times
    In spite of increasing digital downloads, sales of CDs still account for 73 per cent of total revenues.
    The article states that Spain has the worst problem with online piracy, followed by France and Brazil with local acts in those countries taking the brunt of it. In 2008 there were no Spanish acts reaching the European top 50 album chart verses 10 in 2003. Also noted that Sweeden, Taiwan, and South Korea have had success in turning their music sales around after introducing new copyright protections.

    You can read the article in it's entirety at http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7ed038fa-0...44feabdc0.html
    "Far too many people suffer from the anal-cranial inversion. They got their heads stuck up their asses!" - Tom Dowd
    "A great, timeless album is more than just an entertainment app." - Don Was
    "Success does not mean success. You are only as successful as your last hit record." - Patrick Adams (record producer)
    "The tech sector is like a guy in a crowded prison cell, who finds a hand grenade, and sets it off, so that he'll have the entire cell to himself." - Dwoz
  2. #2
    goes looking for thin ice to walk on Not as sentimental as those other silly valentines.
    Join Date Jan 2010
    Location Stafford, England, UK, Europe
    Posts 80
    Rep Power 56587189

    Default Re: FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales

    Hi all. This is my first post. It's a subject I feel quite strongly about so I thought it was an apt place to open my account...

    Interesting that they should blame filesharing for the decline in sales.

    It's like setting fire to a building and saying the match was to blame.

    In reality, I think that the current global sales are closer to the true market value than before filesharing arrived.

    Filesharing has given people the opportunity to audition albums before buying them, meaning the general public are finding out if they like the latest album before going out and buying it, whereas B.F. (Before Filesharing) a significant proportion of sales were people buying an album after only having heard one song from it, then realising they hated the rest of the album.

    B.F. the industry was essentially getting away with murder.

    Nowadays people have the opportunity to try-before-they-buy which has led to a decrease in sales of music that shouldn't have been selling so many copies anyway.

    Hopefully as a result, the industry fatcats will realise that the junk they've been peddling for the last decade or so just won't cut it anymore and that they need to start hiring A&R men that actually have some knowledge of music itself, as oppose to knowledge of how to turn a kareoke fashion model into a millionaire.
    Last edited by fyl2u; January 22nd, 2010 at 09:33 PM.
  3. #3
    Martini Drinker Van Morrison's enunciation coach
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Posts 3,209
    Rep Power 2500000000

    Default Re: FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales

    Hi all. This is my first post. It's a subject I feel quite strongly about so I thought it was an apt place to open my account...

    Interesting that they should blame filesharing for the decline in sales.

    It's like setting fire to a building and saying the match was to blame.

    In reality, I think that the current glabal sales are closer to the true market value than before filesharing arrived.

    Filesharing has given people the opportunity to audition albums before buying them, meaning the general public are finding out if they like the latest album before going out and buying it, whereas B.F. (Before Filesharing) a significant proportion of sales were people buying an album after only having heard one song from it, then realising they hated the rest of the album.

    B.F. the industry was essentially getting away with murder.

    Nowadays people have the opportunity to try-before-they-buy which has led to a decrease in sales of music that shouldn't have been selling so many copies anyway.

    Hopefully as a result, the industry fatcats will realise that the junk they've been peddling for the last decade or so just won't cut it anymore and that they need to start hiring A&R men that actually have some knowledge of music itself, as oppose to knowledge of how to turn a kareoke fashion model into a millionaire.
    I'm sorry to be harsh on your first post, but I call Bullshit.
    Appalling marketing strategies are no excuse for theft.

    The culture of listening to music has changed. Attention span is the problem. The "zap generation". But kids still love music and those performing it. Who doesn't have an iPod ? Concert tickets have never been so expensive yet I haven't been to a mid-to-big gig that wasn't jam-packed in a long long time.
    But sitting down in front of your stereo to listen to an album is just not happening anymore. At least, that's what I see around me. It's all happening in small, fast, doses. But it has nothing to do with downloading music ilegally. Grabbing it because it's there doesn't make it ok.
  4. #4
    goes looking for thin ice to walk on Not as sentimental as those other silly valentines.
    Join Date Jan 2010
    Location Stafford, England, UK, Europe
    Posts 80
    Rep Power 56587189

    Default Re: FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales

    I'm sorry to be harsh on your first post, but I call Bullshit.
    Appalling marketing strategies are no excuse for theft.

    The culture of listening to music has changed. Attention span is the problem. The "zap generation". But kids still love music and those performing it. Who doesn't have an iPod ? Concert tickets have never been so expensive yet I haven't been to a mid-to-big gig that wasn't jam-packed in a long long time.
    But sitting down in front of your stereo to listen to an album is just not happening anymore. At least, that's what I see around me. It's all happening in small, fast, doses. But it has nothing to do with downloading music ilegally. Grabbing it because it's there doesn't make it ok.
    Not exactly the point I was making. I agree that there's no justification whatsoever for "downloading with intent not to buy regardless of whether or not you like it". That is theft.

    However, due to the amount of money I've spent on CDs in the past only to find that I hate the album and have no desire to listen to it, I feel justified in downloading an album I haven't heard, knowing that if I do like it I will go out and buy the CD afterwards.

    As far as the record companies are concerned, this should be encouraged purely for the market research information they're getting out of it.

    If they'd looked at a list of CDs I bought between 1992 and 1997 it wouldn't be a true reflection of my musical tastes, it'd be more a reflection of how well their marketing department was working, therefore they haven't learned anything of use regarding my opinion of the bands on their rosters.

    I remember on one particular occasion hearing a single on a TV rock show by a band I'd never heard of. I liked the song so I went to my local record shop to see if they had any of their stuff for sale. They didn't have anything in the shop, but their CD album was available on import for £19 GBP (about $32-$38 USD? something like that?) so I ordered it and paid a premium for it. When it arrived, I took it home, put it on, and absolutely hated every other song on the album. It's not like I could take it back and say "it's rubbish, can I have my money back?" Once the wrapper has been removed it's unreturnable!

    This is an extreme but sadly not isolated case.

    If on the other hand, they looked at the list of CDs I bought betweeen 2002 and 2007 they'd be getting a much better picture of which music I actually liked, purely because I'd been able to vet the albums by downloading them illegally before spending my money.

    As a result, bands that "deserve" my money actually get my money, and bands that don't, don't.

    I don't spend less money on music as a result of having access to illegally downloaded music. In fact, if all of a sudden "illegal downloading" became impossible, I would most likely end up spending less on music because I wouldn't get to audition so many albums first and I've spent enough on "duff" albums to last me a lifetime.
  5. #5
    Tainted Love Potion Number Nine Mallory's missing camera
    Join Date Jul 2008
    Location Mars Colony
    Posts 5,049
    Rep Power 536871186

    Default Re: FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales

    Oh God, here we go again...
    Hating Nickelback is the new liking Nickelback.

    ------------

    Current status: Ignoring everybody on Facebook.
  6. #6
    Tainted Love Potion Number Nine Mallory's missing camera
    Join Date Jul 2008
    Location Mars Colony
    Posts 5,049
    Rep Power 536871186

    Default Re: FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales


    I don't spend less money on music as a result of having access to illegally downloaded music. In fact, if all of a sudden "illegal downloading" became impossible, I would most likely end up spending less on music because I wouldn't get to audition so many albums first and I've spent enough on "duff" albums to last me a lifetime.
    This is one case among millions.
    Hating Nickelback is the new liking Nickelback.

    ------------

    Current status: Ignoring everybody on Facebook.
  7. #7
    goes looking for thin ice to walk on Not as sentimental as those other silly valentines.
    Join Date Jan 2010
    Location Stafford, England, UK, Europe
    Posts 80
    Rep Power 56587189

    Default Re: FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales

    This is one case among millions.
    Ah come on, I may be a minority, fair enough, but I'm not yet so cynical as to believe that people capable of fair self-moderated virtue are less than one in a million.
  8. #8
    Tainted Love Potion Number Nine Mallory's missing camera
    Join Date Jul 2008
    Location Mars Colony
    Posts 5,049
    Rep Power 536871186

    Default Re: FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales

    The negative impact is still very much there.

    Also it's very common to be able to stream a whole album, or significant chunks of many or all of the tracks before committing to buy anything. It's not the same as back when you took a chance on a tape or LP in the record store and hoped you liked enough of it to justify buying the whole thing.
    Hating Nickelback is the new liking Nickelback.

    ------------

    Current status: Ignoring everybody on Facebook.
  9. #9
    Join Date Sep 2009
    Location Quake City
    Posts 11,766
    Rep Power 536871396

    Default Re: FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales

    In reality, I think that the current global sales are closer to the true market value than before filesharing arrived.
    No.

    Filesharing has given people the opportunity to audition albums before buying them, meaning the general public are finding out if they like the latest album before going out and buying it, whereas B.F. (Before Filesharing) a significant proportion of sales were people buying an album after only having heard one song from it, then realising they hated the rest of the album.
    The problem is the demise of local record stores and the consolidation of radio into Top 20 format tight playlisted stations that don't allow people to audition music the way they used to be able to. Filesharing is not a good answer to this - it is too open to abuse. For filesharing to be a fair proposition we would need to monitor the bittorrent trackers and license them to collect royalties on downloads so the artists and production people can get paid. Since all BT trackers log all the file transfers they mediate this should not be a difficult proposition.

    Nowadays people have the opportunity to try-before-they-buy which has led to a decrease in sales of music that shouldn't have been selling so many copies anyway.
    As noted above, before consolidation and online marketing nuked the traditional distribution system and radio stopped playing what was actually popular with the local market this was not a problem. And who are you to say that an artist is "selling too many copies anyway"? It's become virtually impossible for anyone except the very top level recording artists (who are the only ones your argument MIGHT apply to) to make ANY MONEY AT ALL from recording. UNCOMPENSATED FILESHARING IS KILLING THE MID AND ENTRY LEVEL ARTISTS.

    Hopefully as a result, the industry fatcats will realise that the junk they've been peddling for the last decade or so just won't cut it anymore and that they need to start hiring A&R men that actually have some knowledge of music itself, as oppose to knowledge of how to turn a kareoke fashion model into a millionaire.
    Once again, the problem is not the "industry fatcats" - the problem is that with no money coming in new talent is not being developed and new artists must somehow finance themselves. This means that few artists who are NOT already known can afford to concentrate on their careers and that mid level artists must tour incessantly just to keep their heads above water. It also means the labels are requiring acts to sign "360" contracts, giving up the merch and other revenues that have traditionally allowed them to survive.

    Again, the result of unpaid filesharing is that ONLY the "karaoke fashion model" types of acts are getting exposure - everybody else is getting killed.

    Filesharing is a great distribution model -PROVIDED it can be harnessed to provide a fair revenue stream for artists, which so far it has not.

    I remember on one particular occasion hearing a single on a TV rock show by a band I'd never heard of. I liked the song so I went to my local record shop to see if they had any of their stuff for sale. They didn't have anything in the shop, but their CD album was available on import for £19 GBP (about $32-$38 USD? something like that?) so I ordered it and paid a premium for it. When it arrived, I took it home, put it on, and absolutely hated every other song on the album. It's not like I could take it back and say "it's rubbish, can I have my money back?" Once the wrapper has been removed it's unreturnable!
    A good local record shop will allow you to audition the record in store. Hell, even a chain like Border's Books allows this.
    http://www.johnnyoklahoma.com/

    Originally Posted by Bob Ohlsson
    Everything is some mixture of awesome and suck. We simply want the awesome to be highlighted sufficiently that it distracts listeners from the suck.
    Originally Posted by Bob Ohlsson
    The appropriate role for science is the study of observed phenomena to gain an understanding. It is not dictating what people ought or ought not to be observing.
    Hey, if I'm Grumpy, where the hell is Snow White????
  10. #10
    goes looking for thin ice to walk on Not as sentimental as those other silly valentines.
    Join Date Jan 2010
    Location Stafford, England, UK, Europe
    Posts 80
    Rep Power 56587189

    Default Re: FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales

    The negative impact is still very much there.
    I agree, but to blame the concept of filesharing for the negative impact is like blaming alcohol for the negative impact of drink-driving. The problem is with the upbringing and the instilled moral values of the people that abuse the facility, not the facility itself. A more moral-centric education system and improved child welfare system are what's needed, not a ban on filesharing.

    Also it's very common to be able to stream a whole album, or significant chunks of many or all of the tracks before committing to buy anything. It's not the same as back when you took a chance on a tape or LP in the record store and hoped you liked enough of it to justify buying the whole thing.
    Yeah, it's been getting better these last few years, especially with the arrival of Spotify, but often you're restricted if the albums you want to listen to aren't particularly mainstream.
  11. #11
    Tainted Love Potion Number Nine Mallory's missing camera
    Join Date Jul 2008
    Location Mars Colony
    Posts 5,049
    Rep Power 536871186

    Default Re: FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales

    Yes, you are right, there is nothing inherently illegal about copying and distributing a file over the internet.

    But violating copyright law is illegal, and the harmful effects of mass copyright violation are one of the main reasons these laws exist in the first place. It's (partly) to protect everyone who has some stake in making money from distribution of copies. That includes people who only just make a basic living off of it, not just "fatcats".

    No one is "blaming a car" if someone speeds, but speeding is still an illegal act that inherently involves driving one.
    Hating Nickelback is the new liking Nickelback.

    ------------

    Current status: Ignoring everybody on Facebook.
  12. #12
    goes looking for thin ice to walk on Not as sentimental as those other silly valentines.
    Join Date Jan 2010
    Location Stafford, England, UK, Europe
    Posts 80
    Rep Power 56587189

    Default Re: FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales

    "How to make friends and influence people on the forum you've just joined, the Fyl2u method".

    Step 1: Pick a subject you hold a controversial view of and do your best to piss everybody off with your first post.



    The problem is the demise of local record stores and the consolidation of radio into Top 20 format tight playlisted stations that don't allow people to audition music the way they used to be able to.
    Agreed, not to mention the "Payola" system where labels pay the radio stations to play specific tracks in their "A-list". It's a crime against art!

    Filesharing is not a good answer to this - it is too open to abuse. For filesharing to be a fair proposition we would need to monitor the bittorrent trackers and license them to collect royalties on downloads so the artists and production people can get paid.
    I have to disagree with that as a potential solution. It takes away the "audition before you buy" aspect for the downloaders and only succeeds to line the pockets of the "unworthy" again, like "the old days".

    The thing is, we're rapidly approaching a time where internet speeds and mobile phone speeds are so high and public wireless networks are becoming so commonplace that actually owning a physical copy of something will soon be a thing of the past anyway.

    People won't be buying CDs or even mp3s anymore, but will be paying for access to streaming services like Spotify instead.

    Once the transition happens in full, there'll be no more CDs sold to rip, no more legal mp3s to download, rip and share, so the only way to rip an album would be to do it by streaming the whole thing and recording it in real time.

    This will kill music filesharing off for good as few people will be bothered to do it when their Spotify-or-similar access is so cheap.

    Since all BT trackers log all the file transfers they mediate this should not be a difficult proposition.
    Not difficult, just not particularly fair either.

    As noted above, before consolidation and online marketing nuked the traditional distribution system and radio stopped playing what was actually popular with the local market this was not a problem.
    It might not have been a problem if you liked the same music as the people in your local area, but if your tastes were more marginal there very much still was a problem.

    And who are you to say that an artist is "selling too many copies anyway"?
    My apologies if it didn't come across... I was inferring that if I bought an album "blind", say, on release day, or after only hearing 1 song as was the case in my example, only to find that I didn't like the album and wouldn't listen to it after the first time through, then that band and label have sold 1 copy they "didn't deserve to".

    I wasn't saying "my music taste is the one true way" or similar.

    It's become virtually impossible for anyone except the very top level recording artists (who are the only ones your argument MIGHT apply to) to make ANY MONEY AT ALL from recording. UNCOMPENSATED FILESHARING IS KILLING THE MID AND ENTRY LEVEL ARTISTS.
    There's no proof that there's a causal connection here.

    The decrease in total record sales has also been parallel with the rise in the number of reality TV shows being broadcast.
    Does this mean that reality TV shows are killing music sales?
    Of course not.

    Once again, the problem is not the "industry fatcats"
    You know, it's only when you quoted my words there that I realised how childish I sounded when I used that particular phrasing. I would therefore like to retract those words are request the transcript be changed to read "industry exuctives".

    - the problem is that with no money coming in new talent is not being developed and new artists must somehow finance themselves.
    The way it has been for most of history with the exception of a couple of decades near the end of the last century, you mean?

    This means that few artists who are NOT already known can afford to concentrate on their careers and that mid level artists must tour incessantly just to keep their heads above water.
    And yet the major labels keep spunking millions of pounds away promoting safe middle-of-the-road no-talent contrived dross that'll be forgotten in ten years rather than putting that cash to work in decent A&R and taking risks on new artists that actuallly sound different to whoever is selling the most copies in the charts at the time.

    It also means the labels are requiring acts to sign "360" contracts, giving up the merch and other revenues that have traditionally allowed them to survive.
    There should be a law against that sort of thing!

    Again, the result of unpaid filesharing is that ONLY the "karaoke fashion model" types of acts are getting exposure - everybody else is getting killed.
    This is, in my opinion, a flaw in the industry system as oppose to "a result of filesharing".

    Shareholders demand profit from the execs, the execs are too scared to take risks so instead of finding new creative talent they promote the "kareoke fashion models" singing the latest songs by the same old cheesewriters (I hesitate to use the word "songwriters" to describe these 4-chord-frauds) because they know it's instant payoff stuff. Who cares if they's not going to be the next Pink Floyd? Once their shelf-life is up and they start to show facial hair, the next bunch of talentless teens will be queuing up directly behind them, ready to go at a moments notice.

    Filesharing is a great distribution model -PROVIDED it can be harnessed to provide a fair revenue stream for artists, which so far it has not.
    I think filesharing is a great distribution model precisely because it does provide a fair revenue stream to the artists that actually deserve the revenue... from people that follow the same moral code of downloading that I aspire to.
  13. #13
    Join Date Sep 2007
    Location East Glenbeckistan
    Posts 3,796
    Rep Power 536871155

    Default Re: FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales

    Interesting that they should blame filesharing for the decline in sales.
    Are you an economist or a CPA? I trust that the Financial Times, with their international journalistic resources, has better information than the typical gamer-geek who thinks the five-knuckle-shuffle is a cheat for Guitar Hero. So if you are going to make statements that fly in the face of what the more educated have discovered, you better have some bullet-proof facts to back your position up. In the meantime I will turn the thread back to Dave. Yes, you have just been flamed.
    "Far too many people suffer from the anal-cranial inversion. They got their heads stuck up their asses!" - Tom Dowd
    "A great, timeless album is more than just an entertainment app." - Don Was
    "Success does not mean success. You are only as successful as your last hit record." - Patrick Adams (record producer)
    "The tech sector is like a guy in a crowded prison cell, who finds a hand grenade, and sets it off, so that he'll have the entire cell to himself." - Dwoz
  14. #14
    goes looking for thin ice to walk on Not as sentimental as those other silly valentines.
    Join Date Jan 2010
    Location Stafford, England, UK, Europe
    Posts 80
    Rep Power 56587189

    Default Re: FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales

    Are you an economist or a CPA? I trust that the Financial Times, with their international journalistic resources, has better information than the typical gamer-geek who thinks the five-knuckle-shuffle is a cheat for Guitar Hero.
    Ah, I feel at home here already.

    Less than a day and I've already been greeted with the ubiquitous web-forum attitude of "if you have a different opinion to mine then you must be a: retarded, b: ignorant, c: underinformed, d: a child, or e: a combination of the above".

    So if you are going to make statements that fly in the face of what the more educated
    questionable

    ...have discovered, you better have some bullet-proof facts to back your position up.
    Where are the FT's "bullet-proof facts" in the article?

    The closest we get are a few figures from the IFPI, no solid proof that there's a causal link between filesharing and the decline in sales, not a single mention of the other side of the coin - of the possibility that anyone in the record industry might be to blame for their own crisis.

    In the meantime I will turn the thread back to Dave.
    Should I take a ticket and wait my turn? Is that how it works here?

    Yes, you have just been flamed.
    "Flamed"? I've been "flamed"? Is that what you just said?



    My mistake, I didn't realise this was Burger King.

    I should've known from your hat.
  15. #15
    Tainted Love Potion Number Nine Mallory's missing camera
    Join Date Jul 2008
    Location Mars Colony
    Posts 5,049
    Rep Power 536871186

    Default Re: FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales


    I think filesharing is a great distribution model precisely because it does provide a fair revenue stream to the artists that actually deserve the revenue... from people that follow the same moral code of downloading that I aspire to.
    First, I can't agree with you that filesharing is any kind of legitimate distribution model since legitimate would entail honoring copyrights. We have to start there as the crux of the argument because any sense of the appropriateness of file sharing is dependent on suspending the need for adherence to the rights of the holders of legal copy privileges.

    We've had a long and exhaustive thread recently about that and as I recall a forum member named Mesmer tried to make a case starting with the legitimacy of copyright per se so you might want to go over some of that:

    http://thewombforums.com/showthread.php?t=12261

    But it's a belabored issue here and the anti-copyright position is fairly unpopular so prepare for some tense exchanges if you choose to take it up. Sorry, man, it's just the slant that this place has. The majority of the people who get on here are recording industry professionals in one capacity or another so you can't blame them for being attached to the idea of protected copyrights.

    As to your last statement in the quote, I personally don't agree that your habits reflect the majority of file sharing tendencies. I can buy it that there is a healthy percentage of people who preview music through sharing before buying a CD, but I think the number is significantly less when it comes to people who are strictly looking for mp3's. Then it really is a pure matter of conscience and I think huge numbers of people bypass that issue.

    I'll give you that it's a complex situation but for a very large number of people the issue is bone simple: they can get it without paying for it and that's too good a deal to pass up.

    I'm also not sure that everyone will jump on the streaming service bandwagon, at least not for quite a while. Wireless connections will have to become faster and more reliable and that still doesn't mean everyone will automatically go for that because free still beats cheap and they can build exactly the catalog they want with DL's rather than having to adapt to whatever the streaming service offers.
    Hating Nickelback is the new liking Nickelback.

    ------------

    Current status: Ignoring everybody on Facebook.
  16. #16
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Location Long Island, NY, USA
    Posts 11,590
    Rep Power 536871425

    Default Re: FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales

    Hi all. This is my first post. It's a subject I feel quite strongly about so I thought it was an apt place to open my account...
    Obviously someone with a handle like "file to you" starting out trolling ignorantly from post #1 is crying out for enlightenment and/or flaming...

    Interesting that they should blame filesharing for the decline in sales.

    It's like setting fire to a building and saying the match was to blame.
    No, the arsonist is to blame. But there's a reason you can't easily get a hold of an operational military flamethrower. See if you can figure out what it is.

    In reality, I think that the current global sales are closer to the true market value than before filesharing arrived.
    I don't think a more clueless statement has been issued here, and there have been quite a few.

    Filesharing has given people the opportunity to audition albums before buying them, meaning the general public are finding out if they like the latest album before going out and buying it, whereas B.F. (Before Filesharing) a significant proportion of sales were people buying an album after only having heard one song from it, then realising they hated the rest of the album.
    Only an idiot would buy an album today after only hearing one song. Most bands have samples if not entire songs posted to their official and/or myspace sites and/or have songs up on youtube.

    If you only hear one good song that you want, but that song on itunes. If they don't post additional songs, assume they only have one good song. Otherwise, what are they trying to hide?

    Nowadays people have the opportunity to try-before-they-buy which has led to a decrease in sales of music that shouldn't have been selling so many copies anyway.
    As explained above, that's a lame rationalization for selfish freeloaders crudely attempting to justify wholesale copyright infringement.
    Man! You have GOT to try a hit of this RANGE SUNSHINE!

    IMTBO = In My Thoroughly Biased Opinion
    CMIIW = Correct Me If I'm Wrong
    Never underestimate the amount of contempt a failed musician has for those of us who are still trying.
    If the party's good enough, you can actually suck to a remarkable degree.

    Greedle
  17. #17
    goes looking for thin ice to walk on Not as sentimental as those other silly valentines.
    Join Date Jan 2010
    Location Stafford, England, UK, Europe
    Posts 80
    Rep Power 56587189

    Default Re: FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales

    First, I can't agree with you that filesharing is any kind of legitimate distribution model since legitimate would entail honoring copyrights. We have to start there as the crux of the argument because any sense of the appropriateness of file sharing is dependent on suspending the need for adherence to the rights of the holders of legal copy privileges.

    We've had a long and exhaustive thread recently about that and as I recall a forum member named Mesmer tried to make a case starting with the legitimacy of copyright per se so you might want to go over some of that:

    http://thewombforums.com/showthread.php?t=12261

    But it's a belabored issue here and the anti-copyright position is fairly unpopular so prepare for some tense exchanges if you choose to take it up. Sorry, man, it's just the slant that this place has. The majority of the people who get on here are recording industry professionals in one capacity or another so you can't blame them for being attached to the idea of protected copyrights.

    As to your last statement in the quote, I personally don't agree that your habits reflect the majority of file sharing tendencies. I can buy it that there is a healthy percentage of people who preview music through sharing before buying a CD, but I think the number is significantly less when it comes to people who are strictly looking for mp3's. Then it really is a pure matter of conscience and I think huge numbers of people bypass that issue.

    I'll give you that it's a complex situation but for a very large number of people the issue is bone simple: they can get it without paying for it and that's too good a deal to pass up.

    I'm also not sure that everyone will jump on the streaming service bandwagon, at least not for quite a while. Wireless connections will have to become faster and more reliable and that still doesn't mean everyone will automatically go for that because free still beats cheap and they can build exactly the catalog they want with DL's rather than having to adapt to whatever the streaming service offers.
    I'm not "anti-copyright". In fact far from it! As a musician myself, I'm firmly in the "help the artists" camp.

    I just think there are fundamental flaws in the current system.

    From the artist/label's point of view, they get radio play, they get paid.

    That's great for artist and listener alike if the radio DJs are playing music they chose because they like it, not music they're told to play because Label X have paid the radio station to put the song on their playlist.

    From a listener's point of view, they turn on the radio, the music is free.

    This is great for the listener if the radio stations play music the listener actually likes, but for people with more marginal tastes the airwaves are full of all this free music they can't stand.

    They can see all around them other people getting free access to the music they like, and although they want to be in on the action too, nobody's catering for them.

    Filesharing has allowed those people to effectively create their own radio stations in their own homes, and in my opinion, as long as do intend to buy the music they like after hearing it, they shouldn't be criminalised for it any more than you should be criminalised for turning on a radio to listen to what are increasingly becoming mere commercials for the major labels.

    This frustration has been highlighted in the UK recently by the successful facebook campaign to make Rage Against The Machine's Killing In The Name the Christmas number one single, beating the X-Factor winner down into second place - the first year an X-Factor winner hasn't had the Christmas #1 since the show's inception!

    It sold something like 750,000 copies in a week!

    That's three quarters of a million people in the UK standing up to shout "stop peddling this crap music to us! Give us something good to listen to instead of force-feeding us this drivel over and over!"

    To translate that into another wording, more people in the UK would like to listen to a 20-year-old rap-metal song about racism inherent in the U.S. police force at Christmas time than want to hear a brand new single by the latest X-factor winner.

    That speaks volumes about how wrong the industry executives actually are about the public's taste in music over here.

    My sincere hope is that they'll realise that's what has happened and will start looking to sign and promote more "risky" artists trying to push the boundaries, rather than seeing how many artist-wedges it's possible to hammer into the same musical crevice before it falls apart and they have to start looking for a new nice safe backing-track-genre-basket to lay all their kareoke-clone-eggs into.

    There's a massive market over here crying out to be tapped into! People who are ready and willing to part with their money if only the labels would give them something worth buying, even to the extent where they part with their money at Christmas time to buy a 20-year-old single they probably already own just to prove it!

    That said, I just want to clarify that I don't see this as justification for downloading all your music and never buying any.

    I do however see it as justification for a "code" such as my own.

    On a related note, my last 3 CD purchases have been...

    Ojos De Brujo - Techari Live
    9-piece live flamenco band with a turntablist.
    Utterly stunning live album!

    Maria Pia De Vito - Mind The Gap
    Italian folk/jazz/experimental electronica/sonic art
    Possibly a little pretentious for most people, but there's a lot of really interesting stuff on this album.

    LITE - Phantasia
    Virtually-unknown young Japanese math-rock 3-piece.
    Incredible musicians, especially considering their young age (around 18-19 years old). Imagine Liquid Tension Experiment without a keyboardist, but with the metal element toned-down to mere rock.

    Living in England, there's no way in hell I would've heard any of these albums if it hadn't been for illegal filesharing.

    All 3 were downloaded first, tried, then bought.

    With LITE in particular, I love the thought that there's 3 young lads in Tokyo trying to make it in the industry who are at some point in the near future going to be enjoying a drink that they've bought with the money I paid for their album after downloading it randomly and loving it.

    As I said... the artists who "deserve" my money are getting it, and it makes me very happy knowing that.
  18. #18
    goes looking for thin ice to walk on Not as sentimental as those other silly valentines.
    Join Date Jan 2010
    Location Stafford, England, UK, Europe
    Posts 80
    Rep Power 56587189

    Default Re: FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales

    Obviously someone with a handle like "file to you" starting out trolling ignorantly from post #1 is crying out for enlightenment and/or flaming...
    Close, but no cigar.

    fyl2u

    Phil to you

    as in, "My name is Philip..... Phil to you"

    = FRIENDLINESS

    No, the arsonist is to blame.
    You just need to stop there. The rest is superfluous.

    But there's a reason you can't easily get a hold of an operational military flamethrower. See if you can figure out what it is.
    Reductio ad absurdum?

    I don't think a more clueless statement has been issued here, and there have been quite a few.
    I refer you back to the start of my last reply to radiationroom.

    Only an idiot would buy an album today after only hearing one song.
    I couldn't agree more. That's why nowadays I download the whole album.

    Most bands have samples if not entire songs posted to their official and/or myspace sites and/or have songs up on youtube.
    "Most bands"? Maybe most bands you like.

    If you only hear one good song that you want, but that song on itunes. If they don't post additional songs, assume they only have one good song. Otherwise, what are they trying to hide?
    Indeed. Once again, an interesting viewpoint, just not one that I find true in my own perception of reality.

    As explained above, that's a lame rationalization for selfish freeloaders crudely attempting to justify wholesale copyright infringement.
    Well, possibly.

    And possibly it's the tip of a global conservative conspiracy to dumb down the media and brainwash the public into being mindless sheep so that the already-rich can keep the poor man in his place.
  19. #19
    Has Many Personal Intergritys Expensive Boat Anchor
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Location New York
    Posts 10,659
    Rep Power 536871393

    Default Re: FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales

    Hi all. This is my first post. It's a subject I feel quite strongly about so I thought it was an apt place to open my account...

    Interesting that they should blame filesharing for the decline in sales.

    It's like setting fire to a building and saying the match was to blame.
    .

    or

    it's like watching people rob a bank and saying the bankrobbers are to blame

    as opposed to it being a much need revaluation of money
  20. #20
    Has Many Personal Intergritys Expensive Boat Anchor
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Location New York
    Posts 10,659
    Rep Power 536871393

    Default Re: FT: Online Piracy Dents Music Sales

    Ah come on, I may be a minority, fair enough, but I'm not yet so cynical as to believe that people capable of fair self-moderated virtue are less than one in a million.
    how many songs are on your ipod?

    can we REALLY multiply that number times $1 and believe you paid that much?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts