...AndTimeBegan
Member
- Nov 6, 2007
- 543
- 0
- 16
I've never even heard of MTM, but of course... whenever there is a market change those who cannot adapt will become the casualties.
P2P TORRENTS AND THE EVIL THEY DO
- Thread starter MEGALOUD
- Start date
I've never even heard of MTM, but of course... whenever there is a market change those who cannot adapt will become the casualties.
Trans-Siberian Outcast
Savaholic
This is it, in a nutshell. You'll never rid yourself of the leeches (we all traded tapes back in the 80s and at least 1/4 of my acquaintances were blood-sucking cling-ons). The difference now is simple. Back then your high-bias (CrO2) TDK or BASF cassette tape "duplicate" of an album might have mumbled to 4-5 people in your town/neighborhood who might or might not be interested. Today, even a crappy 128k torrent can sing to a world-wide audience... that being to anyone who has the ability to type google and the name of the band they are looking for.
I say use it to your advantage. The cream always rises to the top anyway.
God three pages of conjecture and nobody is producing hard facts.
Saying that downloads hurt album sales is like trying to disprove a negative--until someone polled everyone who downloads to see if they did not buy an album because they downloaded it, nobody can say for certainty how illegal downloads hurt album sales. And that ain't never gonna happen.
I contend that most people who download an album would never buy the thing anyway. The persons that DO buy the album after hearing it on an illegal download may have NOT bought the album until they hear the download (like me).
Bottom line, nobody has yet proven a causal link between downloads and album sales (for either side of the argument). All I know is, I have a couple hundred albums in my cd jukebox that I would never have purchased, if it were not for illegal downloads.
The face of music sales is changing. If I were to start a band today, I would never sign with a label. Putting up a myspace page and selling the albums directly will put more money in my pocket--if I sold albums at 8 dollars, I would double the amount of money per cd compared to what I would get from signing with a label--and even more profit if I never sold a cd because all my music was downloadable, for a price.
The answer I have for the illegal DL issue is that ALL P2P sites should be regulated so that there are no songs available at a bit rate higher than 96kb. This would make every single illegal download sound shitty enough that people would have to buy the album if they liked the material.
Saying that downloads hurt album sales is like trying to disprove a negative--until someone polled everyone who downloads to see if they did not buy an album because they downloaded it, nobody can say for certainty how illegal downloads hurt album sales. And that ain't never gonna happen.
I contend that most people who download an album would never buy the thing anyway. The persons that DO buy the album after hearing it on an illegal download may have NOT bought the album until they hear the download (like me).
Bottom line, nobody has yet proven a causal link between downloads and album sales (for either side of the argument). All I know is, I have a couple hundred albums in my cd jukebox that I would never have purchased, if it were not for illegal downloads.
The face of music sales is changing. If I were to start a band today, I would never sign with a label. Putting up a myspace page and selling the albums directly will put more money in my pocket--if I sold albums at 8 dollars, I would double the amount of money per cd compared to what I would get from signing with a label--and even more profit if I never sold a cd because all my music was downloadable, for a price.
The answer I have for the illegal DL issue is that ALL P2P sites should be regulated so that there are no songs available at a bit rate higher than 96kb. This would make every single illegal download sound shitty enough that people would have to buy the album if they liked the material.
SeaStorm
Member
I respect everyone on here who downloads to "try before buying" and then goes out and buys. The problem is that you're thinking you have way more of an impact than you do. For every one of you doing it, there are 20 people stealing everything and never buying a damn thing.
[Brent, I chose your quote as a well-spoken version of what many here seem to be arguing - I'm reply to everyone, not you specifically.]
When people say "illegal downloading hurts the industry", they don't literally mean "there's never any good in it". They mean on the whole, it's bad. So yes, they gain one sale when you use it the right way. But they lose 10 sales at the same time (or some other # >1 and <20 because yes, not everyone who steals it would buy it if they couldn't steal it). -9 = bad for the industry. If 10% of people are using it right (and I don't think it's even that high) and 90% wrong, your existence, while laudible, is not helping. You can't even begin to make up for the other 90%. You incorrectly dismiss our argument when you cast in it "100%" terms then "disprove" us by showing it's not 100%. We know it's not 100% and that's not our argument (even if people inarticulately phrase it that way sometimes).
I suspect there's a lot more people using it right within our little genre than in others.
Also, used CD sales is different in scale. Yes, they remove some sales from the market, but it's piddly compared to unlimited digital duplication. Also, they in some ways expand the market for new music. Your granny (who has no idea what you listen to) can buy you that new Britney disc from Best Buy for Xmas more readily because a secondary market exists for you to unload it if (when) you don't like it.
Also, as others have mentioned, we're not arguing against the 'try before you buy' model. You're right, it's a great idea and helps many bands tremendously. And most bands now do allow you listen to some of their tunes for free. I've yet to find a band that doesn't have free music for streaming (and many allow downloading). I don't buy the argument that downloading full albums for free, against the band's wishes, is the only way for you to check out their work. There's a happy medium and I think bands are hitting that sweet spot now in the amount that they allow.
[Brent, I chose your quote as a well-spoken version of what many here seem to be arguing - I'm reply to everyone, not you specifically.]
When people say "illegal downloading hurts the industry", they don't literally mean "there's never any good in it". They mean on the whole, it's bad. So yes, they gain one sale when you use it the right way. But they lose 10 sales at the same time (or some other # >1 and <20 because yes, not everyone who steals it would buy it if they couldn't steal it). -9 = bad for the industry. If 10% of people are using it right (and I don't think it's even that high) and 90% wrong, your existence, while laudible, is not helping. You can't even begin to make up for the other 90%. You incorrectly dismiss our argument when you cast in it "100%" terms then "disprove" us by showing it's not 100%. We know it's not 100% and that's not our argument (even if people inarticulately phrase it that way sometimes).
I suspect there's a lot more people using it right within our little genre than in others.
Also, used CD sales is different in scale. Yes, they remove some sales from the market, but it's piddly compared to unlimited digital duplication. Also, they in some ways expand the market for new music. Your granny (who has no idea what you listen to) can buy you that new Britney disc from Best Buy for Xmas more readily because a secondary market exists for you to unload it if (when) you don't like it.
Also, as others have mentioned, we're not arguing against the 'try before you buy' model. You're right, it's a great idea and helps many bands tremendously. And most bands now do allow you listen to some of their tunes for free. I've yet to find a band that doesn't have free music for streaming (and many allow downloading). I don't buy the argument that downloading full albums for free, against the band's wishes, is the only way for you to check out their work. There's a happy medium and I think bands are hitting that sweet spot now in the amount that they allow.
SeaStorm
Member
Actually, they were. The music industry fought this tooth and nail, as well. Check the extensive legal battles. It just SEEMS like no one was complaining because there weren't internet message boards for you to read back then
Michael TEOF
Master Whorebot
Seriously dude. You can't compare downloading an image of a painting to downloading an mp3.
A better comparison would be an art exhibit with exact replicas of any painting you wanted, with free prints to take home and hang on your wall (via scanning and printing, lets assume some special ink and paper are invented which reduces printing costs to almost nothing). Everyone gets to take home as much free art as they like. Let's say this exhibit had corporate sponsors and marketers/advertisers paying the exhibit to get their message across to the tens of thousands coming in for the free art. Let's also point out that the original artists are being paid nothing. Only then would you have a comparable situation to buying/downloading.
Painting a picture costs what, a 100 dollars tops? The average album costs 30,000 dollars to make. How do you suppose an artist recoups that 30,000 he or his label invests in creating that album? How many albums do you need to sell to recoup that investment (when you factor in retail profit, taxes, etc.)? When you have to sell 100,000 albums... and 50,000 people just downloaded your album. And don't get me started on this whole we'll make it up touring nonsense. Only big name bands like U2, Bruce Sprinsteen, and Rush can afford that. Up and coming bands usually lose money on tours. They're simply playing gigs because they want to share their music and promote their album.
Pretty soon only those with middle to upperclass incomes (assuming they don't have kids) will be able to afford to produce non mainstream albums.
Regardless of how you feel about downloading, there are ethical and legal issues with P2P sites profiting off other peoples work (via advertisers/sponsors etc.).
The Michael
The Fiddler
Just Do It.
At PPIX, I'd love to see a debate set up during a Friday or Saturday afternoon up in the Loft between proponents of illegal downloading and those who think it damages the industry. At one table could be the fans who defend illegal downloading and at the other table can be musicians playing at PP as well as label executives like Ken Golden, and CD distributors such as Ken, Lance, and Zane, and band managers/label execs such as Claus from Intromental.
I'd rather see the illegal download proponents argue their points in person, to the face of the musicians they claim to support, rather than hiding behind a nickname in the vapor of cyberspace. And I'd like to have the debate taped, so it could be placed on YouTube. If anyone feels so strongly about either side of the arguement, surely they should have the strength and integrity to stand up and be counted in person, right?
To start, the following could be defended by proponents of illegal downloading:
1. There is nothing to prove that 2,082 illegal download actually hurt Sun Caged's CD sales. And for that matter, Sun Caged will make just as much money if their new release was downloaded 20,000 times illegally. In other words, if something can't be physically seen, it simply isn't possible.
2. Touring bands like After Forever playing for crowds of 200 people make as much profit per dollar spent touring as Iron Maiden playing arenas.
3. That there is no such thing as inflation and cost of living increases and that neither impact the price of a CD.
4. The genie is out of the bottle, you can never stop illegal downloading, so artists and labels should just give up the fight and surrender everything they have to the general public at no cost to the public, and continue to make a living doing so.
5. $15 is way too much to pay for a CD, but you can bet I'm going to buy that disc anyway so I can support the band, along with about 20 to 30 other bands I'd like to support from last year's downloading. Money is no object for me as I don't have to pay for rent, tuition, food, diapers, gas, etc., so I'm more than willing to buy 30 physical legit copies of the CD when I already have all those songs burned to CD-R or sitting on my mp3 player.
6. Sound samples on MySpace.com or the band's official website, internet radio, full-length promo CDs, label sampler CDs, forums, band interviews, word-of-mouth, and CD reviews simply are not enough to convince me if I'm going to like the CD, and such resources generate no exposure for the band, and have no impact on CD sales or touring possibilities. Only a free illegal download of the album in it's entirety is to be considered the best form of PR/exposure, and is the only way for me to determine if I like what I'm hearing.
7. Explain the difference between the "free publicity" of an illegal download and a "free product".
8. The CD jacket and jewel case is worth spending $15 to purchase even though I already have the album burned to disc or on my mp3 player via an illegal download.
9. Festivals like ProgPower USA have nothing to do with metal becoming more popular in the USA, and do nothing to influence a former ProgPower band to take the financial risk to further promote their band in the USA. Furthermore, festivals like ProgPower USA do nothing to inspire other individuals to launch their own festivals across the USA, and these festivals have nothing to do with persuading bands to come play at their city in the USA. Rather, illegal downloads that cannot be traced to city, and not Soundscan numbers documenting legal sales by city, have driven the increase in the number of metal bands touring the USA over the past five years.
10. It's more noble to give my money to corporate giants like Microsoft and Sony on products like XBOX, PS2, and latest copy of Halo 3 (along with high-speed internet connection) than to support up-and-coming bands like Riverside or Pathosray by legally buying their CD from a blue collar mom-and-pop store like Laser's Edge, Nightmare records, or CD Inzane.
10. Comparing original, centuries-old, fine art paintings at the Guggenheim museum that would sell for millions at auction to a single bidder to songs intended for mass sale is really just comparing apples to apples - there is no difference. A 72 dpi jpeg photo of Michelangelo's 9' tall David can be enjoyed as much as an illegal mp3 download because the quality of the reproductions are so similar.
11. The cost of a work of art is only determined by the raw materials to make the physical piece of art. The 100s of hours that the artist toiled to create the art is to be considered of no value, and hence should not add to the cost needed to make the physical product.
12. Labels like Lion should shut up and just do a better job of PR for their bands, however, they should not hire additional staff, or purchase additional advertising to do so as it would drive up the cost of the CD.
I'd rather see the illegal download proponents argue their points in person, to the face of the musicians they claim to support, rather than hiding behind a nickname in the vapor of cyberspace. And I'd like to have the debate taped, so it could be placed on YouTube. If anyone feels so strongly about either side of the arguement, surely they should have the strength and integrity to stand up and be counted in person, right?
To start, the following could be defended by proponents of illegal downloading:
1. There is nothing to prove that 2,082 illegal download actually hurt Sun Caged's CD sales. And for that matter, Sun Caged will make just as much money if their new release was downloaded 20,000 times illegally. In other words, if something can't be physically seen, it simply isn't possible.
2. Touring bands like After Forever playing for crowds of 200 people make as much profit per dollar spent touring as Iron Maiden playing arenas.
3. That there is no such thing as inflation and cost of living increases and that neither impact the price of a CD.
4. The genie is out of the bottle, you can never stop illegal downloading, so artists and labels should just give up the fight and surrender everything they have to the general public at no cost to the public, and continue to make a living doing so.
5. $15 is way too much to pay for a CD, but you can bet I'm going to buy that disc anyway so I can support the band, along with about 20 to 30 other bands I'd like to support from last year's downloading. Money is no object for me as I don't have to pay for rent, tuition, food, diapers, gas, etc., so I'm more than willing to buy 30 physical legit copies of the CD when I already have all those songs burned to CD-R or sitting on my mp3 player.
6. Sound samples on MySpace.com or the band's official website, internet radio, full-length promo CDs, label sampler CDs, forums, band interviews, word-of-mouth, and CD reviews simply are not enough to convince me if I'm going to like the CD, and such resources generate no exposure for the band, and have no impact on CD sales or touring possibilities. Only a free illegal download of the album in it's entirety is to be considered the best form of PR/exposure, and is the only way for me to determine if I like what I'm hearing.
7. Explain the difference between the "free publicity" of an illegal download and a "free product".
8. The CD jacket and jewel case is worth spending $15 to purchase even though I already have the album burned to disc or on my mp3 player via an illegal download.
9. Festivals like ProgPower USA have nothing to do with metal becoming more popular in the USA, and do nothing to influence a former ProgPower band to take the financial risk to further promote their band in the USA. Furthermore, festivals like ProgPower USA do nothing to inspire other individuals to launch their own festivals across the USA, and these festivals have nothing to do with persuading bands to come play at their city in the USA. Rather, illegal downloads that cannot be traced to city, and not Soundscan numbers documenting legal sales by city, have driven the increase in the number of metal bands touring the USA over the past five years.
10. It's more noble to give my money to corporate giants like Microsoft and Sony on products like XBOX, PS2, and latest copy of Halo 3 (along with high-speed internet connection) than to support up-and-coming bands like Riverside or Pathosray by legally buying their CD from a blue collar mom-and-pop store like Laser's Edge, Nightmare records, or CD Inzane.
10. Comparing original, centuries-old, fine art paintings at the Guggenheim museum that would sell for millions at auction to a single bidder to songs intended for mass sale is really just comparing apples to apples - there is no difference. A 72 dpi jpeg photo of Michelangelo's 9' tall David can be enjoyed as much as an illegal mp3 download because the quality of the reproductions are so similar.
11. The cost of a work of art is only determined by the raw materials to make the physical piece of art. The 100s of hours that the artist toiled to create the art is to be considered of no value, and hence should not add to the cost needed to make the physical product.
12. Labels like Lion should shut up and just do a better job of PR for their bands, however, they should not hire additional staff, or purchase additional advertising to do so as it would drive up the cost of the CD.
EJC_74
New Metal Member
I am not arguing w/ anyone one this on either side.
I feel like a hypocrite, for I feel it's wrong, but being someone who's on disability; I barely make enough $ to live on.
But, on the other hand, I HAVE bought CD's, & have received many for X-mas, B-day etc. & if it weren't for the Internet, I'd not have discovered 90% of the bands I now listen to! Particularly, My Space; it seems all these bands seek me out due to the other bands in my friend's list. I also do my part by spreading the word-of-mouth, & free advertisisng by wearing said band's T-shirts as well. ESPECIALLY,
when I go to shows!
I'd met many Metal-Heads who'd never even heard of say; Iced Earth; for example. & if I turned even 1/2of those people into fans, that has just increased their fanbase. & if they turn a dozen or more people
onto them as well? COOL! Of course, it's not up to me if they buy the CD's, or DL for FREE!
I discovered bands like Iced Earth, & Blind Guardian
througn the net. & I own all of I.E.'s CD's original, except their 1st one. Least fave, but will buy it one day! I also own most of B.G's CD's too! Original that is! & what someone said about needing to spend $ elsewhere in life is so true!
Gas is STILL ridiculously priced! Floating between $2.85 & $3 where I live. Groceries, my 1/2 of the rent is almost $450! Plus, other bills! Shit, I've gone to the movies only TWICE in the last year! I USED to go regularly! WHEN I have the extra $, I DO spend it on music! & I try & replace any CD's I did DL, w/the orginal store bought; or wherever I may buy them from.
Plus, if I AM gonna spend what little $ I DO have on music, I wanna hear if it's good, or crap beforehand! I don't buy DVD's, before seeing the movie first!
Took me a year just to save up $ for a PC, a few years ago, which is now dead, & I am trying to save up for another! If I had more extra $, I'd spend it ALL on music! Before I was on disability, I'd spend nearly ALL my extra $ on CD's! I have nearly 300 original CD's to prove it too!
I feel like a hypocrite, for I feel it's wrong, but being someone who's on disability; I barely make enough $ to live on.
But, on the other hand, I HAVE bought CD's, & have received many for X-mas, B-day etc. & if it weren't for the Internet, I'd not have discovered 90% of the bands I now listen to! Particularly, My Space; it seems all these bands seek me out due to the other bands in my friend's list. I also do my part by spreading the word-of-mouth, & free advertisisng by wearing said band's T-shirts as well. ESPECIALLY,
when I go to shows!
I'd met many Metal-Heads who'd never even heard of say; Iced Earth; for example. & if I turned even 1/2of those people into fans, that has just increased their fanbase. & if they turn a dozen or more people
onto them as well? COOL! Of course, it's not up to me if they buy the CD's, or DL for FREE!
I discovered bands like Iced Earth, & Blind Guardian
througn the net. & I own all of I.E.'s CD's original, except their 1st one. Least fave, but will buy it one day! I also own most of B.G's CD's too! Original that is! & what someone said about needing to spend $ elsewhere in life is so true!
Gas is STILL ridiculously priced! Floating between $2.85 & $3 where I live. Groceries, my 1/2 of the rent is almost $450! Plus, other bills! Shit, I've gone to the movies only TWICE in the last year! I USED to go regularly! WHEN I have the extra $, I DO spend it on music! & I try & replace any CD's I did DL, w/the orginal store bought; or wherever I may buy them from.
Plus, if I AM gonna spend what little $ I DO have on music, I wanna hear if it's good, or crap beforehand! I don't buy DVD's, before seeing the movie first!
Took me a year just to save up $ for a PC, a few years ago, which is now dead, & I am trying to save up for another! If I had more extra $, I'd spend it ALL on music! Before I was on disability, I'd spend nearly ALL my extra $ on CD's! I have nearly 300 original CD's to prove it too!
EJC_74
New Metal Member
[/QUOTE] I don't buy the argument that downloading full albums for free, against the band's wishes, is the only way for you to check out their work. There's a happy medium and I think bands are hitting that sweet spot now in the amount that they allow.[/QUOTE]
Yes, but one or even 3 songs from a CD, will not necessarily tell if you the rest is killer or filler! I've bought CD's based on 2-3 songs I'd heard; or seen vids of back in the days of the ORIGINAL HeadBanger's ball; that sucked ass! What a waste of $$!
Yes, but one or even 3 songs from a CD, will not necessarily tell if you the rest is killer or filler! I've bought CD's based on 2-3 songs I'd heard; or seen vids of back in the days of the ORIGINAL HeadBanger's ball; that sucked ass! What a waste of $$!
Totally agree. I was just stating my response to Lion Musics press release. MTM did have some good releases for sure.....I just dont know how good the marketing strategy for them was.
What Im curious about is how affected Frontiers Records is by this. I always see the releases for download yet they are signing killer project after killer project.
woosta
Member
MTM had MUCH more than its share of bland lifeless bullshit. I like a lot of MTM releases, but for every one I liked, there were 4 that I wouldn't have spent $5 on. I just didn't bring it up because I liked that they at least released melodic music.
General Zod
Ruler of Australia
Agreed.
I think the assumption the labels and artists make, is that a one to one correlation exists between a downloaded CD and a lost sale. There's no evidence to suggest that the person who downloaded the CD illegally didn't later buy that CD. Additionally, there's no evidence to suggest that person ever would have bought that CD in the absence of MP3s.
I think what gets lost in the illegal download debate, is that other traditional forms of media are hurting as well. Just take a look at the way TV ratings have fallen over the last few decades. People simply have more choices. If they want to watch TV, they no longer have to turn to ABC, CBS and NBC. If people want digital music, they no longer have to turn to the major labels. You can listen to satellite radio, you can listen to digital music provided by your cable company, and you can download the music of bands who are all to willing to let you download their music.
Zod
PurpleCrayonWriter
Just a Kid at Heart
Brilliant, Fiddler. You summarized the matter perfectly. And, in print -- in the cold, hard cast of black and white type -- the argument for downloading looks damn silly, even insane.
You echoed sentiments I expressed earlier; namely, that it's not possible to stand in front of Lance King -- or, better yet, Lance and his family -- and say to them all, face to face, "Uh, dude. I didn't think your music was worth paying for, so I downloaded it. But, hey, I think you charge too much, anyway. So it was okay."
What truly amazes me about this thread is that there are people who don't see the difference between iTunes and illegal downloads, or the difference between abiding by laws (whether you agree with them or not) and taking laws into one's own hands. The twists of logic, and denials of reality are astounding. I mean, truly astounding. I didn't know rational people were capable of such flights of fancy.
I don't understand how people -- in the face of overwhelming evidence -- continue to say illegal downloads don't hurt anyone. Right here on this board we have record label owners. We have bands. I, personally, have spoken to many band members and independents over the years. They all, to a person, to an industry, have said that illegal downloads have taken money from their pockets and that they have been hurt financially because of it. Now, what about that do you not understand? That's not conjecture. That's not pulling "facts" or "logic" out of my hind end. That is reality. Just like the law is reality. It is the law. You rationalize breaking one, you can rationalize breaking all. Just because you don't agree with the facts (because you're like an addict on crack who denies he/she has a problem) doesn't mean they don't exist. You merely choose to ignore them.
I think there should be a forum at PPUSA IX for this topic. I agree Fiddler. I would love to see all of these people stand in front of band members, label owners, and -- hey, just for laughs -- members of the FBI. Argue your case for illegal downloads. Be as creative with your excuses as possible. See where it gets you.
PurpleCrayonWriter
Just a Kid at Heart
Yes. And I love how it was labeled: "FREE MUSIC! SHARE IT! Airplay Authorized."
You gave everyone 15 tracks that highlight Nightmare bands, as well as Nightmare's taste in music. There's no need to illegally download any more than what you provided. If someone can't tell from these tracks, singly or cumulatively, that Nightmare bands are worth listening to (and paying for) he/she has no ears.
When I was a teenager in the '70s I bought a crapload of music. In fact, that's where all my money went. There was no way to listen before I bought. I just bought because (a) I trusted the bands whose albums I bought before, (b) I trusted the reviews from magazines I enjoyed, and (c) I love music and usually find something interesting even in music I'm not that fond of at first blush.
It doesn't matter how many promo CDs you give away, Lance. There will always be bozos out here who say it isn't enough. They want music for free. And they will justify breaking the law to get it. (It's not the genie out of the bottle, Zod. It's people's consciences down the drain.)
Personally, I liked the Nightmare promo CD and discovered new bands of yours I wasn't aware of before. Thanks for including the CD in the PPUSA goody bags!
skyrefuge
Member
Over at PMX:2, a list of 2007 metal releases was just posted. The list is surely incomplete, and there are still two months left in the year.
There are 1262 releases in the list.
That's more than four new releases PER DAY. I have no idea how many metal releases there were ten years ago, but I can't believe it was anywhere near that number. So of course individual albums are going to sell less; there is so much competition from other albums. This doesn't absolve illegal downloading, since industry numbers as a whole have been going down for years, but it's a nice number to be aware of.
Whatever the cause, if labels/bands start going out of business, I can say that they won't be missed. There's simply a glut in supply that outstrips the demand. Clearly we aren't going to run out of new music to buy anytime soon.
Neil
There are 1262 releases in the list.
That's more than four new releases PER DAY. I have no idea how many metal releases there were ten years ago, but I can't believe it was anywhere near that number. So of course individual albums are going to sell less; there is so much competition from other albums. This doesn't absolve illegal downloading, since industry numbers as a whole have been going down for years, but it's a nice number to be aware of.
Whatever the cause, if labels/bands start going out of business, I can say that they won't be missed. There's simply a glut in supply that outstrips the demand. Clearly we aren't going to run out of new music to buy anytime soon.
Neil
rockyracoon
...
1. Yes, its illegal. But so is jaywalking and smoking pot. Guess what, nobody cares and still does it. Society as a whole will never feel immense guilt about downloading music. There are some who will, but they are the minority. I'm guessing most people don't need to tell themselves anything to feel okay about it since they probably don't give it a second thought.
2. Independent's losing their asses... Once again, good luck getting people to care. When someone can sit in the confines of their own home with unlimited access to all music, there is never going to be any sort of personalization of the product to the consumer. Expecting the masses to give a shit about record labels is just unrealistic.
3. Speaking to the personal character of someone like Lance King is nice and well deserved, but most certainly doesn't buy you any slack from the masses who really couldn't care less. I'm sure no one wants to say to Lance's face they took $5 from him, but then they'll never have to either.
It's not that I don't sympathize with artists/labels/etc who are trying to make a living. But your points are almost irrelevant outside of a courtroom and a church. Continuously citing the law, morals and ethics just won't resonate with the millions upon millions across the globe who choose downloading as their primary way to obtain music.
As Zod said, the problem is NOT going away. Time to adapt rather than just screaming it's illegal and hoping for the best.
AMBR
Metal Grandma
Remember, the bands are paying those prices too. At least you're getting your disability check, no? What if you were working and not getting paid? Even harder to pay the price at the pump, especially when trying to promote your work on tour.
Not specifically targeting you with the following, but everyone who insists they have a right to try before they buy:
So, because the price of other things you want is high and you can't steal them, it's ok to steal music, 'cause it's easy? And you can hear sample music on the web before you buy. What other product do we buy that we can have the whole thing, at sale quality, before buying it? You read the blurb on a book cover before buying it. You take a test drive before buying a car. Neither is enough to tell for sure if you like it. Even most books (hardcover) cost more than a CD. I'm just not buying that argument.
I love your idea and arguments, Fiddler. A debate on this issue at ProgPower would be highly enlightening as well as entertaining.
Harvester
The Promoter
Thoughts on a few issues touched on over these four pages of posts:
1. Downloading is here to stay. To quote Keith Olberman, "you can't stop him, you can only hope to contain him."
2. Instead of focusing efforts on stopping it, all efforts should be made towards adapting to a model that helps the artists. You are not going to solve the problem overnight, but taking steps towards it will indeed help. Right now, all we do is bitch because everyone is still pretending it's 1980.
3. Neil is right. Product outweighs demand in terms of new releases. Technology allows a band to produce and self-distribute an album for cheap, relatively speaking. With so many choices, you have to have a way to sample the product (and I don't mean listening to 3-4 songs on myspace only).
4. I will go out on a limb and point fingers directly at the media for the majority of the downloading leaks. The reason cds are sent out so far in advance is that the magazines say they need 3-4 months lead time for reviews to be printed. Labels want the reviews printed around the release to maximize publicity and sales. It's an antiquated system that is short sighted for our situation today. I would be more interested at an albums overall sales as opposed to how it did the first two weeks. Get the reviews online when its released and then let them trickle into print media (that most read when taking a shit now a days).
5. You have to give credit to the labels for tying to prevent leaks. However, they are being held hostage by print media. For example, Nuclear Blast watermarks the individual promos that are mailed out. They know exactly where the leak came from once it hits the net. Case in point is the last Dimmu release. They nailed the assclown that did it. He worked for a major magazine in Europe. They were going to prosecute him and they wanted to stop all relations with him. HOWEVER, the magazine he worked for essentially said that if they didn't leave it alone, they would stop all relations with the band/label. There would be no publicity for the band in the future. The record company and band could not afford to lose that so the problem went away quietly.
6. I have made a suggestion with a few industry reps. While it's not perfect, no one has told me it was a bad idea either because no one is actually losing money on it. There is no overhead required, just a bit of work. We know with 99% assurance that an album is going to be leaked online way in advance of the actual release date (for our size/genre anyway). If you know this is going to happen, why not offer it online directly from your website at a cheap price ($2-$3) for a reduced quality mp3 the same day that promos are sent out? Imagine the income that Lion would have generated based on just one P2P torrent numbers. Is that going to stop leaks and downloading? No. However, it offers an alternative for those that want to try before they buy and support the artist in the process. You can then offer a discount to those same people who purchase the actual release ($1 off). You can even have them sign there name on the website so they can proudly say they are supporting the artist and showing other fans on the web they back up what the say. If someone then starts posting about an album, then you can ask them point blank how they got it and what there rationale was for not spending $2 to support an industry they supposedly love. There are of course things that need to be worked out in the process, but I'm just trying to give an overall picture of a type of solution.
1. Downloading is here to stay. To quote Keith Olberman, "you can't stop him, you can only hope to contain him."
2. Instead of focusing efforts on stopping it, all efforts should be made towards adapting to a model that helps the artists. You are not going to solve the problem overnight, but taking steps towards it will indeed help. Right now, all we do is bitch because everyone is still pretending it's 1980.
3. Neil is right. Product outweighs demand in terms of new releases. Technology allows a band to produce and self-distribute an album for cheap, relatively speaking. With so many choices, you have to have a way to sample the product (and I don't mean listening to 3-4 songs on myspace only).
4. I will go out on a limb and point fingers directly at the media for the majority of the downloading leaks. The reason cds are sent out so far in advance is that the magazines say they need 3-4 months lead time for reviews to be printed. Labels want the reviews printed around the release to maximize publicity and sales. It's an antiquated system that is short sighted for our situation today. I would be more interested at an albums overall sales as opposed to how it did the first two weeks. Get the reviews online when its released and then let them trickle into print media (that most read when taking a shit now a days).
5. You have to give credit to the labels for tying to prevent leaks. However, they are being held hostage by print media. For example, Nuclear Blast watermarks the individual promos that are mailed out. They know exactly where the leak came from once it hits the net. Case in point is the last Dimmu release. They nailed the assclown that did it. He worked for a major magazine in Europe. They were going to prosecute him and they wanted to stop all relations with him. HOWEVER, the magazine he worked for essentially said that if they didn't leave it alone, they would stop all relations with the band/label. There would be no publicity for the band in the future. The record company and band could not afford to lose that so the problem went away quietly.
6. I have made a suggestion with a few industry reps. While it's not perfect, no one has told me it was a bad idea either because no one is actually losing money on it. There is no overhead required, just a bit of work. We know with 99% assurance that an album is going to be leaked online way in advance of the actual release date (for our size/genre anyway). If you know this is going to happen, why not offer it online directly from your website at a cheap price ($2-$3) for a reduced quality mp3 the same day that promos are sent out? Imagine the income that Lion would have generated based on just one P2P torrent numbers. Is that going to stop leaks and downloading? No. However, it offers an alternative for those that want to try before they buy and support the artist in the process. You can then offer a discount to those same people who purchase the actual release ($1 off). You can even have them sign there name on the website so they can proudly say they are supporting the artist and showing other fans on the web they back up what the say. If someone then starts posting about an album, then you can ask them point blank how they got it and what there rationale was for not spending $2 to support an industry they supposedly love. There are of course things that need to be worked out in the process, but I'm just trying to give an overall picture of a type of solution.
Similar threads
