File Sharing......

[Jeb]

http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2003-09-07-1.html

Great essay by Orson Scott Card on copyrights and p2p.

[tasty]

No I didn't intend to use your musical collection to make any sort of political point, just curious what you listened to. It says a lot about a person's personality, y'know.

I like Jeb's essay from Card. Read my Albini essay.

[Mr.Mellow]

Ahhhhhhhhhhh. First off, I would like to state that this is somewhat hypocritical, since I have downloaded music in the past (but no longer do so). Stealing music doesn't just hurt the record industry and the stars. Sure, the record companies pocket money that the artist earned, but the record companies got those artists famous in the first place. This isn't my point, however. My point is that you're also hurting the companies that print up the CD's, the people who manufacture the CD jewels and print up the artwork, the people who make the artwork, producers, sound engineers, songwriters, managers, promoters, and studio musicians who play on a lot of these albums(well, mostly just solo projects and pop music, but still).
The last one bothers me the most. First of all, these guys and gals barely get any credit in the first place. They're not insanely rich, and work very hard for their money. They don't even get paid enough in the first place. Most of them get paid up front, and probably don't receive royalties from the albums, but if less albums are being sold, they're definately going to get paid less. By illegally downloading music, you're harming all of the little guys a hell of a lot more than the record companies and artists. So please, don't even bother with that "I'm protesting against the RIAA and the record companies" bullshit. You're just using that as an excuse to steal music, and to make you feel like you're on a morally higher ground. These people should be getting sued, and the RIAA has every right to.

[tasty]

make you feel like you're on a morally higher ground

Gee, how ironic.

[Mr.Mellow]

Psh, up your nose with a rubber hose, Tasty. I never said I was better than anyone, I was just pointing out how much stealing music hurts the little guys, and that saying you download music to hurt the RIAA and record companies is bullshit.

[Nail.Im.Ixam]

A long long time ago, I used to purchase all of my CD's. Then I had practically all of 'em stolen. Over 100 CD's, all legally purchased, *poof*. Think about that... at a minimum of $10 a piece per CD, that's over $1000 worth of music. So, we thought about it for a bit, then bought a 52x burner and a couple 50-stacks of CD's for less than $400 and have slowly been using Limewire and Kazaa to rebuild our collection, as well as purchasing new albums I didn't previously own. Granted, I've also downloaded a few I didn't own, but no more than what I've had stolen and didn't download.. And if I download some of a new band that I like, I usually go out and buy their album, as it's too much of a pain in the ass to find all the tracks to have a complete album.

I guess I'm one of the few who actually use hotline/kazaa/limewire for their so-called "backup" purpose.

[|MP|Buccaneer]

One thing the people that keep posting the anti-RIAA stuff need to remember.  The RIAA has gone after some of the very large abusers.  Not the guy that's replaced some stolen CD's or the one that has pulled down a dozen songs.  But people that have shared thousands and thousands of them for the most part.  

How is the RIAA wrong for going after those people?  If you are anti-RIAA, answer me that.

[Jeb]

Like the 12 year old girl with under 100songs, or the 70 year old woman who didn't even know that she had kazaa. Or a mac user who didn't have kazaa or was sharing any music.

I have nearly 6,000 mp3s right now, and there isn't a chance i'm gonna loosen my pants, cause i'd be raped. I just don't want to pay 15$ for a cd, which i will rip and put the mp3s onto my ipod, and only listen to a few songs.

Aside from the obvious complaints against the RIAA, you have to remember that the record companies own the rights to the music, not the artists. As for all the financial harm that has happened to them, think about the fact that they are releasing hardly any music and inflated prices.

Some stats from a recent wired article.
The cost of a cd has risen 16% since 1997
The amount of releases has dropped 14% since 1999
the total amount of revenue has dropped 13% since 1999

It really does seem like a good business model to stop releasing as much music, hike up the prices, then finish off a long day by dropping a nice steaming tubgirl colored shit into the mouths of their prime demographic.

[the oNe]

The RIAA sues the people that upload a lot of music, programs, etc. like Buccaneer said.  I have downloaded music before, and so have 99% of you guys who will read this.  The reason people file share is because it is extremely easy, you have all the resources in your home, it is free, takes a few minutes(depends on what you are downloading and your connection speed).  I'm not sure about this, but won't this eventully hurt the economy more and more.  I mean downloading music would result in record store closings,  fewer artists sponsored by the RIAA>people will lose their jobs and some artists' music we will never hear; people start downloading movies and games for free>Blockbuster will probably close, game stores will close, BestBuy and CompUSA could strip some of their game collection, movie theatres close.  However, programs like Apple's iTunes could slow this process down until a solution is found or it could prevent this.

[|MP|Buccaneer]

I just don't want to pay 15$ for a cd, which i will rip and put the mp3s onto my ipod, and only listen to a few songs.

Do you guys not know where to shop for CD's?  I have never paid $15 for a CD that wasn't a double album.  Most of the CD's I pick up are from $9.99 to $12.99.  Remember that for the next part.

Also, what you are saying Jeb is that you don't want to pay.  Yeah, that's what theft is, isn't it?  I mean, you've said it before, you know what you are doing is wrong.  So how does that make the RIAA wrong for going after people?

Aside from the obvious complaints against the RIAA, you have to remember that the record companies own the rights to the music, not the artists.

Not in all cases.  But yes, in most cases, the artists sell the rights to the music to the companies.  But, if the companies aren't making the money, they wont be risking it on new artists either.  Simple economics.  BTW, there are plenty of artists that do own rights to music.  That's usually one of the things they learn as soon as they hit it big.

As for all the financial harm that has happened to them, think about the fact that they are releasing hardly any music and inflated prices.

Some stats from a recent wired article.
The cost of a cd has risen 16% since 1997
The amount of releases has dropped 14% since 1999
the total amount of revenue has dropped 13% since 1999

I've seen these numbers, and I have to wonder how they inflated them.  They based the 16% off CD prices of $17 if I remember the article correctly.  That's bullshit, plain and simple.  Sure, compare the highest priced CD's now to the lowest of 1997.  In reality, I've been buying CD's for 16 years or so.  They were $20 when they first came out.  Then they quickly dropped to the $10-$13 range.  And as far as I can tell, they've stayed right there for years.  Sure, if I go to Sam Goodies at the mall, I'm going to pay an extra $5 per CD, but that's for idiots.  The RIAA doesn't control price jacking at malls, and only the stupidity of consumers that go there instead of Best Buy and other stores keeps them in business.  

Also, look at the amount of releases vs the amount of revenue.  Think they may be tied together?  I release less music and I take in less money.  Those are tied so closely, it's stupid to try and judge anything other then the obvious from them.  It's not like Revenue is the number one priority of these companies (Profit would be).  

It really does seem like a good business model to stop releasing as much music, hike up the prices, then finish off a long day by dropping a nice steaming tubgirl colored shit into the mouths of their prime demographic.                                                                  

I still disagree that the people that steal music are not the prime demographic.  These people wouldn't be buying anyway, right?  So going after them doesn't hurt a bit.

As for the "stories" about the 70 year old woman that didn't even know she had Kazaa, yeah, that's likely now isn't it?  She managed to upload and download many songs without knowing it.  If you really believe that, I have some great bridges for sale.

Like I said, what is the RIAA doing that is so bad??

[Jeb]

the 70 year old woman story is why I'm gonna put a 1tb warez, snuff, mp3 and divx server at my granny's house

I mostly download singles, or buy them from itms. Like i've probably mentioned before, i download and listen to electronic music mostly, and i couldn't buy 90% of the music i download because its not released here, its from a whitelabel or an unreleased remix. I don't have an extensive collection of stolen music from under the RIAA's umbrella, but most of the songs i have i wouldn't have bought anyways.

As far as cds go, the medium is dead, the price is to high. Perhaps if they offered coupons for free beer with cds, it could turn around, but i doubt that will happen.

And as for the article... The statistics are based off studies from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Nielsen Soundscan, and the RIAA. The "average" cd price in 1997 was $13.19, in 2002 the average price is at $15.25. Its in the october issue.

Besides, most of the cds i'd buy aren't the $4.99 bargain bin Jimmy Buffet cds that you cherish in your old age bucc  

[|MP|Nomad]

Besides, most of the cds i'd buy aren't the $4.99 bargain bin Jimmy Buffet cds that you cherish in your old age bucc  

OoOOooOOoo, Bucc, he just called you old man!! YOU GONNA TAKE THAT?

[|MP|Buccaneer]

And as for the article... The statistics are based off studies from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Nielsen Soundscan, and the RIAA. The "average" cd price in 1997 was $13.19, in 2002 the average price is at $15.25. Its in the october issue.

Besides, most of the cds i'd buy aren't the $4.99 bargain bin Jimmy Buffet cds that you cherish in your old age bucc  

Better recheck the math.  The article I read said the 16% figure, but the CD's were in the $17 range.  If you figure out the % you are looking at it's closer to 13%  

BTW, inflation was running at what, 2.5% per year the last few?  (had to go look that up, couldn't remember).  So over those 5 years, prices according to the numbers you just gave went up 13.5%, while inflation went up 12.5%.  So I guess the price of CD's only climbed 1% over inflation.  Is that so much?

BTW, CD's will be dead in a few more years I'm sure.  The latest BNL comes out on DVD that I'm getting next week.

And I'll have you know that I do not have one single Buffet CD or mp3 in my collection.  Not even "Cheeseburger in Paradise".  I will fess up to some James Taylor though, but only because I've found that it's great music to mash to with new girls.

And yes Nomad, I'll take it from Jeb because like sex, he can't really deliver much of a punch, if you know what I mean.  He listens to electronic, but couldn't even find "Red Tape" by Agent Provocateur.  Pffft.

[Mr.Mellow]

Bucc beat me to it. Damn. Like he said, I don't know where you guys shop, but I've never seen a CD for over $12 other than at the mall. If anything, prices have gone down. About 5 years ago, I remember CD's being at least $15 at Best Buy. Then again, even if CD's were $5, a lot of people wouldn't buy them, unless the CD store was right next door. It all comes down to laziness. =D That's why the iTunes music store is so popular.

[|MP|Buccaneer]

iTunes is also great because it's bringing back the single.  I know I'm really showing my age now, but we used to buy 45's all the time when I was a kid.  It's where the term "b sides" comes from, because eventually you turned it over and listened to the other side of the single you bought (they were labeled side A and side B usually).

Singles were cheap, like 45? a piece when I was buying them.  Which is still in line with the 99? deal that Apple has going now.

I think buying music through iTunes is a great option for everyone.  They just need to keep adding to their library.  Overall I'm impressed that in the first few months they had about half the songs I was looking for on the whim.  Which is about the same as a typical music store unless I go to a real good one. (for example, I'm trying to replace a lost tape and was looking for "Chuck Taylor's" by Tom Collins and the Cocktail Shakers.

[tasty]

Outkast is selling for 19.98 in the iTunes store. You can buy the physical discs at Best Buy for 10.99. Somehow, I don't think I will be shopping at iTunes anytime soon (since I like full albums and don't particularly care for singles anyway).

The reason people are angry at the RIAA for prosecuting file sharers is that most feel they represent only their own personal economic interests and not the artists that we love. And yes, I know, they assume the risk and put out the CD and yadda yadda yadda, but you have to realize your audience here. I think Belle and Sebastian accurately spoke for the musical community when they said "boo to the business world": most music fans don't care if record execs get a paycheck or not. The record industry created this value-added system of distribution themselves as a way to make profit off of art. Music can exist without them, and dare I say I think it would be a lot better without them. Why should we care if they collapse? Independent music fans like myself feel that the RIAA labels are a very negative influence on music today, and we want them to die. So in the words of SiX.roybatty: "diediediediediediedie".

I own "Songs You Know by Heart" by Jimmy Buffet and I'm proud of it. Cheeseburger in Paradise is a damn catchy song.

[|MP|Buccaneer]

Tasty, your "revolutionary" ideas about the worth of business are old and tired, not to mention ignorant.  Music itself would exist, but not in a healthy, strong way.  You think we'd know who Wolfgang was today if it wasn't for the industry?  Remember, they bought the rights to his music too.  And they put it out there for people to hear.  

Without the industry, most bands would never get published widely.  That is a fact.  Just look at your independent artists.  Yes, they chose to be independent, and that's great for them, but are they making more $$$ then if they signed with a label?  Is more money making it into their hands staying independent?  A greater percentage is theirs, but a higher percentage of jack shit is still jack shit.  

You also ignore all those studio musicians, etc that have been mentioned.

Tasty, understand that being against the rich just because they are rich, is just as stupid as any other prejudice.  

[Mr.Mellow]

Exactly Bucc, and not to mention the fact that if these artists didn't want to share their profits with the record companies, they wouldn't have signed with them in the first place. They pay a price to have their music distributed all over the world. Now I don't like record companies any more than the next guy, but you have to give credit where credit is due. Besides, like Bucc was saying, these musicians signed to major labels are still putting more money in their pockets compared to the ones signed to independent labels, even with the percentage of money the major label pockets. You have to realize, however, these labels aren't just keeping all of this money. They're spending it on advertising, promotions, and a bajillion other things that most of us, including me, don't know about. Now, if a band wants to give all of their music out for free, they have every right to, but since they're signed to a label and trying to SELL albums, that means that they want to profit from their music. There is absolutely no excuse for downloading music illegally, no matter what you tell yourself. If you don't have the money to buy an album, then you just live without the album until you can buy one. I don't steal cars just because I don't have the money to buy a car.