Piracy and the music industry

[fillalph]

I was at CDFreaks and read this article CEA: It's time for music industry to quit singing the blues. Take a look. Very interesting.

]Bonkers[

[CoffeeFiend]

Well, that's what we've all known for a while, but the RIAA says otherwise no matter what. I could dig dozens of similar stories

It's not like we don't buy new albums because all the new ones suck, and that nobody buys a 20$ remix of songs (or best of) you already have and own instead of burning it yourself, or that nobody wants to pay 15$ for a single with 3 different (and very bad) mixes of a single song that's just ok... </sarcasm> We also got "normal" radio, XM (satellite) radio, internet (IP) radio, radio on digital satellite or cable, and now, people are moving on to web stores like iTunes.

There's far more reasons and explanations to this. It's just the RIAA that just wants more profit for their shareholders - even if it means suing 12 yo girls (hey, it's not like they actually care about the artists). But again, this is all old news...

[prathapml]

ha ha...

Good analogy there:

"Third, consumers are listening to music differently. Loudspeaker sales have fallen 33 percent since 2000 - twice the drop in music sales. Yet, we are not running to Congress and insisting the law be changed to protect our industry.

[Mr. Spock]

"Third, consumers are listening to music differently. Loudspeaker sales have fallen 33 percent since 2000 - twice the drop in music sales. Yet, we are not running to Congress and insisting the law be changed to protect our industry.

It's not like we don't buy new albums because all the new ones suck, and that nobody buys a 20$ remix of songs (or best of) you already have and own instead of burning it yourself, or that nobody wants to pay 15$ for a single with 3 different (and very bad) mixes of a single song that's just ok...

It's all about money and the problem is that they ask outrage prices for everything.

It's not only the music, but also movies, software games. that makes a lot of people going for the pirated stuff.

For a lot of people are the prices they ask unpayable

[jordanmills]

I would have been inclined to buy more CDs if the prices were more reasonable. Now, though, I'm on interested in giving money to companies that sue their customers.

[diesel_98a]

my rant & raves........

if the government worked as well as the RIAA does, a lot more criminals would be behind bars. honestly if they could actually put out some descent albums then maybe people would buy them. like duhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!! albums are selling, could it be the songs were never that good in the first place, (guess the record companies haven't thought of that yet, but then they would have to admit they were wrong) of course there are only so many remixes are person can take, especially when the song sucked in the first place. somebody ought to sue them for the emtional distress they cause, maybe someone will, it just irks me off when they charge a 12 yr old & then go after the parents. what is the world coming to???? just cause the RIAA is going after everybody, does mean that anybody is going to the stores to by the cds or movies? no, in fact i would rather not & save my $$$$.

[^_^]

I think artists would be smart to release all their crap on p2p, and make the money at concerts and such.

After all, most people work for a living, and selling CDs isn't really working.

Dancing and singing is.

Then the true artist would come out of the woodwork, and the fakies like Britney would go away

[CoffeeFiend]

I think artists would be smart to release all their crap on p2p, and make the money at concerts and such.

After all, most people work for a living, and selling CDs isn't really working.

Hmm, digging for old threads?

Salling CDs is like selling software or anything else. It might not be work, but composing, recording and such definately was. (Just like Bill Gates won't release windows on p2p and expect to make money from say, service on the road or something) It costs a LOT of $, takes a lot of time and they need to make the money back. AFAIK, the tours hardly rake in any money, it mostly promotes CD sales, and not all artists want to be on the road all year to make a living (lots don't even do tours). They work for a living, but the sales part definately needs to be looked at again.

[Ge0ph]

The most successful artists make it by touring. They are the working musicians. Look at “The Greatful Dead” who made a boat load of money over the years and they promoted the idea of fans recording their concerts and passing around the taps. They did everything just the opposite of how the RIAA thinks it should be done, and they where one of the top money making groups in history.

Another is “Pink Floyd”. They make the bulk of their money from tours.

Not only does the RIAA screw its customers, they screw the musicians too.

I can say these things because I am a retired working musician and I know how it works form experience. After over 25 years in the business I gave up because it is no longer about making good music first and then let the good music make money. It’s now about making money first and then putting out crap music to try to support the money. It is truly a sad state of affairs.

I would like to see all musicians self produce, promote, and sell their works on the internet so that they are free to create the music they want and the bulk of the money made goes straight in their pocket. That way if they are truly good, they will survive, and if they are bad, they will just go away. But the control would be entirely in the musician’s hands. And it’s the loss of that control is what the RIAA doesn’t like. They are scared and are fighting with every tool they have to retain that control. But I believe they will loose in the end, and that will be a good thing for all.

That’s my rant, I’ll go back to my corner now

[galvanocentric]

Bonkers[,Oct 4 2004, 08:17 PM] I was at CDFreaks and read this article CEA: It's time for music industry to quit singing the blues. Take a look. Very interesting.

]Bonkers[

I buy all my music from the little stores that sell trades. Trades, for those not in the know, are when small CD stores pay to get your old CDs, or trade 'em. Then they can keep a fresh inventory. So... I don't pay a dime back to the RIAA. I do pay for concerts, etc... so I feel like I'm one of the only ones who is soley supporting the artists, not the RIAA.

[CoffeeFiend]

Not only does the RIAA screw its customers, they screw the musicians too.

(...)

I would like to see all musicians self produce, promote, and sell their works on the internet so that they are free to create the music they want and the bulk of the money made goes straight in their pocket. That way if they are truly good, they will survive, and if they are bad, they will just go away. But the control would be entirely in the musician’s hands. And it’s the loss of that control is what the RIAA doesn’t like. They are scared and are fighting with every tool they have to retain that control. But I believe they will loose in the end, and that will be a good thing for all.

I completely agree. RIAA is all about corporate profits and protecting that. They don't care about the artists one bit, nor do they care about the buyers. (They don't have a problem with suing 12yo kids either)

I'd like to see the same. Music sold on the net in a convenient way for people, at a reasonable price, so people don't mind paying the lower fees to directly support their artists (they could afford it easily if it wasn't for all that money the RIAA stuffs in their pockets), that way everybody wins. (A bit like iTunes I guess, but perhaps in a more "open" format that would work with most platforms/software players/portable players) But, it's not like the RIAA would let that happen. I care to support good artists for their good work, but who really agrees with all that money going to the wrong pockets?

[^_^]

Yup, agreed with the RIAA screw thing.

I don't mind if the artists make a ton of money, I just think they shouldn't get rich from working for 3 months to record a new album, and then make millions for the next 5 years. Plus, the RIAA gets more power from every "hit"

Kinda like organized crime.

I'd rather download the stuff and send the actual artist money directly

[Ge0ph]

I just think they shouldn't get rich from working for 3 months to record a new album, and then make millions for the next 5 years.

First, if it only takes them 3 months to record a new album then they are not spending the time they need to be spending to create a quality piece of work.

Second, if what they create is high quality material then yes they should get paid accordingly. That way if good music is put out by an artist then they will get paid good for a long time but if poor music is put out, they will go broke. That way the music market is driven by quality of goods, not corporate greed.