Grammy President Lobbies Against Pirates Urges fans to stop downloading music illegally Recording Academy President C. Michael Greene used his moment under the spotlight at the grammy awards last night to take a shot at piracy and file swapping services: "This illegal file-sharing and ripping of music is pervasive, out of control and it's oh so criminal," Greene said. SiliconValley.com has more of his comments.
|
 | | I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene You know why people rip music off the internet? Because they charge $23 a cd. Stop RIPPING US OFF and we'll stop RIPPING YOU OFF. I am proud of my 2,300 mp3s and will continue to STEAL from the music industry. | |
|  |  ArchAngel21xWaiting For iPhone 5Premium
join:2001-10-28
Lincoln, NE
 ·Internet Nebraska
| Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene Umm...2 wrongs don't make a right here buddy. If the CD costs too much then buy a used copy or don't get it at all. The whole, stop cheating me first and I will stop cheating you attitude will get us nowhere. While I support Morpheus for it's legal uses, I also believe that the music industry needs to provide a way to buy just one or several songs.
Granted I am not saying it is ok for the music industry to force the government into perverting technology so we can't make copies for ourselves. Just remember it is not illegal for the music industry to charge $23 or even $50 for a CD. It is illegal for you to rip off music.
--
Arch Angel - "Death is irrelevant" | |
| | |  jhudson2Copyright Martyr
join:2000-11-07
San Marcos, CA | Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene I went to a friend's house the other day and listened to a CD he burned of copyright protected music downloaded using Morpheus. I listened to the music knowing full well that my friend had not "purchased" the music. He keeps the CD only for personal use and will not sell it.
Did I break the law? | |
| | | | ArchAngel21xWaiting For iPhone 5Premium
join:2001-10-28
Lincoln, NE Reviews:
·Internet Nebraska
| Let's not go there I am not a legal expert and am therefore not going to try to tell people which case is ok and which is not. I just know that 2 wrongs do not make a right, and this case pirating music is not the right way to handle the prices being put on CDs. Do I care if you pirate music? No. I am not police.
It's just I felt compelled to response to a childish post. Pirating music because you think it costs too much? Come on. Grow up. If you can't afford a CD where you are looking, try www.cdnow.com. Try buying a used copy at a store or on eBay. There are legal alternative to just downloading a pirated copy.
No I am no RIAA lover. I think CDs could be priced less too. But good grief. Going on that logic then we might as well steal cars because they cost too much.
--
Arch Angel - "Death is irrelevant" | |
| | | | | jhudson2Copyright Martyr
join:2000-11-07
San Marcos, CA | Re: Let's not go there I'm no legal expert either, and I'm not trying to pin you down on some arcane legal argument. It just seems to me that the RIAA's argument against burning songs is mental gymnastics at best. And to call it "illegal" is way beyond wishful thinking.
The price of CD's is (was?) artificially high because only the record companies had the equipment to produce high-quality physical recordings. It certainly didn't cost them anywhere near $23 to do so, but they could charge that much and pocket the huge profits. Now virtually anyone can create these same recordings and the record company model doesn't work anymore. They can't charge $23 per CD anymore. Sorry, get a new business model or go into a new business. Capitalism marches on.
As far as your argument about stealing: I PAY for all my CD's. They're just blank when when I get them. And as it relates to your car argument, if I could make my own Surburban by purchasing the raw materials, what value does GM add to that process? | |
|
|  andunn
join:2001-09-06
Linn Creek, MO | CD companies continue to blame rising costs of their products due to piracy, but as I remember it CD's were always highly priced. Sure they lose money, but it's also an excuse for CD companies to raise their prices. Before CD burners were available to the public at an affordable price CD's were expensive. What a shocker  | |
| | | ArchAngel21xWaiting For iPhone 5Premium
join:2001-10-28
Lincoln, NE | Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene True true. Yet another reason not to pirate. It just gives the music companies an excuse to raise prices again. Good post.
--
Arch Angel - "Death is irrelevant" | |
| | | | | | Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene They can raise prices all they want now, BECAUSE I'M NOT BUYING THEIR CD'S HA HA. | |
|
| | dbarc
join:2000-01-22
Fort Wayne, IN
| said by andunn:
CD companies continue to blame rising costs of their products due to piracy, but as I remember it CD's were always highly priced. Sure they lose money, but it's also an excuse for CD companies to raise their prices. Before CD burners were available to the public at an affordable price CD's were expensive. What a shocker
You're absolutely correct. When CD's were first released, there were many complaints that they were overpriced. The response at the time was that there were only a few CD manufacturing facilities and that as soon as more were online the prices would be down and more inline with vinyl. I believe it went so far as Congressional hearings on it at the time. Of course, the prices never did come down. The critics of the time were pointing more to effectively the monopoly status of the few record companies controlling the industry and market. It seems that it's possibly time to review that situation more as the Napster lawyers are attempting to do in their case. At least this time, for the internet version of their exercise in control, it's in the courts looking at it and not simply being a contribution money hungry Congressional committee that can be lobbied with $$$$.
I'll add that I didn't use Napster or whatever is new these days, and think copyrights are valid, but the labels are treading on thin water hopefully. I personally think they should go back and look at the old payola thing as well. It seems, from what I've read, that's no different now than it was before other than they pay middlemen to do their work to pay the stations for play time.
[text was edited by author 2002-02-28 16:16:08] | |
|
| | | That is the most ridiculous thing i've ever heard..."stopping the pirating will make them lower prices on cds." Give me a break, the record companies are BLOOD suckers, some artists get f*cked over by their own record companies, like the goo goo dolls did. They could care less about the people that buy the music, they just want the $$$. | |
| | | ArchAngel21xWaiting For iPhone 5Premium
join:2001-10-28
Lincoln, NE Reviews:
·Internet Nebraska
| Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene said by CitizenX:
That is the most ridiculous thing i've ever heard..."stopping the pirating will make them lower prices on cds." Give me a break
Just in case you are responding to me, I never said that. I am saying pirating music is wrong. "Because the CDs cost too much" is just a poor excuse to pirate music. If you feel so strongly about this then start a movement to boycott CDs form labels that are as you say "bloodsuckers".
You realize the main reason CDs are high in price is because of demand. People will keep buying them at a certain price. You want to hurt these "bloodsuckers"? Get an effective boycott campaign going and hurt their bottom line. Don't just complain on dslreports with justifications to do something illegal.
One more thing CitizenX. People like you are the reason Morpheus and Kazaa are in danger of being shut down, despite their legal uses....
--
Arch Angel - "Death is irrelevant"
[text was edited by author 2002-02-28 17:51:43]
[text was edited by author 2002-02-28 17:54:38] | |
| | | | | | Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene Oh, I do believe it's beginning elsewhere as well... Too many average people are beginning to ask why they're spending upwards of almost $20 for crap music. A large part of the drop in sales isn't piracy as they're whining it is- it's because the economy just can't sustain the model they've shifted to (Whereas before it was akin to mass logging the money from the population, it's more akin to strip-mining now...). | |
| | | | | | You realize morpheus is 99.9% made up of people like me? I guess not...and I'd rather STEAL from the music companies (or atleast that's what they call it)than boycott. Pirating music has nothing to do with them losing money, statistics actually prove that after naspter was created the record industry was making more profit. Oh and something else....a LARGE number of bands said they would like their music to float around the internet for free, big bands, not just small local groups that want to be heard. The record company owns those certain bands' music so it's not even the bands music anymore, it's the record companies. It's to the point where if you want to be a BIG SHOT band you have to sell everything you work hard to create to a record company that gives you 3% of the total income you make for them. That's pathetic. The record companies use the fact that they lose money to justify shutting down napster, and just like them, i will use the fact that they are overpricing to an extreme to pirate. | |
| | | | | ArchAngel21xWaiting For iPhone 5Premium
join:2001-10-28
Lincoln, NE Reviews:
·Internet Nebraska
| My final thought on this I think the record companies don't pay the artists enough. I also think CDs could cost less. The bottom line is stealing is stealing is stealing. Pirating by any other name with any excuse is still pirating. Pirating, instead of simply going without, or buying the music, is not the legal, moral, or mature way to handle this. That is my story and I am sticking to it. Have a nice day.
--
Arch Angel - "Death is irrelevant" | |
| | | | | | | Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene I believe the bands you are referring to must have signed agreements with these record companies. Those agreements specify the terms and conditions of the business relationship.
No one forced the bands to sign. They signed because they saw a benefit to them for doing so. If they didn't see a benefit they would not have signed. There are certainly places they could have gone to have their music published without willingly entering into an agreement with a major label.
I also agree that stealing is stealing is stealing.
There are other ways to change the system if you don't like it. | |
| | | | | | jhudson2Copyright Martyr
join:2000-11-07
San Marcos, CA | Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene said by JustInit:
I also agree that stealing is stealing is stealing.
It really isn't quite as simple as that, is it? The RIAA has defined "stealing" quite broadly and, not surprisingly, defined the term in their favor. I don't accept their definition because it's not in MY favor. Who has the moral high ground?
As for your assertion that there are other places to get music published aside from record company dominated ones I would suggest that if that were true the bands themselves would keep the $18 or so profit on each CD and use these venues. They do benefit by being on a major label ONLY because the market is rigged by those same labels the bands "voluntarily" signed with.
Clearly there are "other ways to change the system" but why bother? The system has already changed by pure capitalistic means and the record companies lost. Who has a problem with that, except the record companies? | |
| | | | | | | | Do you not get it? The ONLY way a band can make it big is by signing on with a big record company. It's either be a small, nobody band, or sell your creative talent COMPLETELY to a record company, tough choice. | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene said by CitizenX:
Do you not get it? The ONLY way a band can make it big is by signing on with a big record company. It's either be a small, nobody band, or sell your creative talent COMPLETELY to a record company, tough choice.
I get it CitizenX. I have a fairly clear understanding of the situation.
Every industry has it's "rules". It appears that you do not agree with the "rules" of the recording industry so you have decided to violate established law (regardless of what you would like your reality to be there are laws against copyright infringement) as your protest against the rules that you do not like.
You have said it your self. The bands you are so worried about have CHOSEN to sell their music and the rights to it to the record labels of their choice. They must see some benefit and personal gain in the arrangement or they would not do it. If they sign these agreements without an understanding of what they are signing then they need to gain a better understanding of the business world they have chosen to work in.
If the bands felt the same way you did they would not enter into such agreements.
Perhaps you could become a manager for one of these bands and help to drive a legitimate reform of the recording industry. | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene said by JustInit:
You have said it your self. The bands you are so worried about have CHOSEN to sell their music and the rights to it to the record labels of their choice. They must see some benefit and personal gain in the arrangement or they would not do it. If they sign these agreements without an understanding of what they are signing then they need to gain a better understanding of the business world they have chosen to work in.
Look up "Hobson's Choice". | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene How is it they have no choice?
See the previous post regarding a band that chose to make their own CD and sell it for $5.
I do not disagree that there are some very serious problems with the recording industry. However, the fact remains that bands that sign with major record labels do so of their own free will and choice. Or did someone hold a gun to their head and force them?
I work in the television industry. If do not like the business environment I have chosen to work in I can choose to change what I do. So can you. So can a musician.
Or, if I get tired of working in a corporate environment I can choose to work as a free-lance consultant or system integrator.
There may be a situation where a musician is so poor and desperate that he feels he has no choice but to sign away the rights to his music but he still does so with the hope that his fortune will turn around.
My point is there is always a choice. The choice may not be a pleasant one or one that we would prefer but there is always a choice. For instance, rather than sign the rights to your music away to a major label you could choose to have it produced by a lesser known studio, or rent a studio and do it yourself.
Artists sign with major labels because they expect to reap a personal gain (bigger house, faster car, public recognition, whatever) from the deal. | |
|
| | | | | What a idiot mr green is....Nothing like advertising the joys of filesharing to millions of people who might not of ever considered it before. I want that connection he used to get 6k songs in two days...Took me two years to get that many and one of them was with a 56k modem...HA...but now im shootin for 50k....Peace... | |
| |
| I "rip off" the RIAA for a number of reasons... the fact they charge too much for CDs is just one of many. Heres a few:
1. They charge too much for CDs. They have a HUGE profit margin on these things and as costs have decreased... the prices have not. There is a concerted effort to rip the consumer off. SO F EM!
2. Artists see very small percentages of the sales. Not my fault the artist signed a lame deal but unless youre already big EVERY artist goes through this phase of being ripped off by record companies. Thats twice now that the RIAA is making people bend over and take it. If you would like to feel less guilty about having mp3s and hurting the artist then use www.fairtunes.com and donate directly to the artist! Skip the corporate middle man who gets the biggest cut.
3. RIAA actively attacked Napster and other file sharing utilities. Their arrogance is so enormous (from years of unchecked raping of consumers and artists) that they feel morally justified in stopping technology just because it has the ability to distribute copyrighted material... well so does the internet, the routers that serve it, the operating system that holds the files, and the mp3 player that plays them.
4. Contrary to what the RIAA will say... record sales have increased since mp3s popularity. There is a nice analogy here when it comes to radio. Initially radio airplay of songs was thought to hurt record sales... it didn't. Wake up RIAA... people like to try before they buy.
Im guilty of still supporting the RIAA however.. Ever since I've had mp3s I have purchased CDs for groups that I never would have otherwise done if I hadn't been exposed to the mp3 first.
The RIAA can compete with mp3s by making CDs have value added. Put in a booklet with some pictures and lyrics. Maybe then people will feel compelled to pay the extra amount (over free) if theres a value add.
Time for the RIAA to start _competing_ and not _dictating_
Ph*ing the RIAA every day,
Me
[text was edited by moderator] | |
| | |  feek
join:2002-01-23
Philadelphia, PA | Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene yeah they charge too much. it costs about a dollar to make a cd, give or take, depending what's included.
bands must know what they're getting into before signing with the devil, unless they're completely oblivious to common knowledge. so they must just w ant to be famous, and not care what the impact is.
there are plents of thousands and thousands of bands out there, that DON'T charge you 18 dollars to buy there cd, and in most cases it's infinatly better than what you'll get from some band with the riaa. plan-it-x won't charge over 5 dollars for a cd, and they are great. there are tons of other labels like them, too. you just have to look. they can be found everywhere, at your local music venue, etc.
i personally refuse to pay over 10 dollars for a cd. more than that, and it's not worth it to me, because the band/label obviously doesn't care about me.
as far as napster, etc, i've bought WAY more cds than i ever would have without it, simply by finding new music i wouldn't have been exposed to otherwise. i like to know what i'm buying before hand. although, 99% of them are are indie, so the riaa doesn't get my money anyway. i wouldn't be surprised if that's a major reason they won't to stop filesharing. with it, consumers can have more of a choice of music to buy, and see there ARE alternatives to the capitalist pigs that they are.
that's about all i have to say. i apologize if this post makes little sense, i'm in a very big hurry, the bell is about to ring.[at school]
late.3 | |
|
| | | I do remember a case where the RIAA was found to have overcharged for CD's for years. They kept the prices artificially high and now they are paying for it.
As for the artists hurting, please. They hurt cause the record companies control it all. Amy Mann (formerly of the band Til Tuesday) has her own website and distribution for her music on the net. Why? Cause Sam Goody, Tower Records, Best Buy, etc. will not sell her stuff. The reason is because the RIAA pressures these stores not to sell music they don't have a hand in. This of course is all back door and very illegal but no one is going to say anything for fear of being cut off (not able to sell the latest Britney Spears money maker) or being out of the "special pricing" tier. The RIAA has been playing dirty for years.
As for the 2 wrongs don't wake a right, well true but consider this an act of protest. Ganhdi made salt in India (which was illegal because the British taxed all salt production to make themselves rich.)
What Napster did (and what Kazaa and Morpheus do) was to make people aware of music they wouldn't normally hear. MTV used to do that. Because of MTV, many bands of the 80's started selling records. Because of Napster, many people bought Metallica that normally wouldn't have a chance to hear it on POP radio.
Play fair and others will follow. | |
| | RawhideBlue Balls
join:2002-02-18
The Moon | The thing that bothers me most about the music industries position is this. People are ripping cds and sharing the mp3s. Why is this happening, because the costs of cds are way to high. The price of a blank cd is like $.20 and im sure they can get them cheaper. The cost of equipment has come down and cd burners are now common place. The cost of distribution may be the only thing that hasnt changed since the early '90s. The argument that the music industry makes is that they are losing money. Ok, why are they losing money. They have raised the price of the cds they have for sale. It would only make since that the music industry find a new way to distribute there music and lower prices on cd distributed to wholesalers. They may lose some revenue from the sale of each cd, but most of us would probably start buying more cds and purchase music online if it where reasonably priced and available. Cds now cost $23 a piece. Lower that to around $10 a piece. Find a new distribution method(mp3's) online and sell them at a reasonable price say like $.50 a song or $3.50 for an album of songs that the purchaser has chosen. Will the music industry ever do anything like this. I doubt it. Would this help the music industry in the long run regain its profitability, most likely YES. I would probably buy more music if it where more affordable, but as it stands now I can get songs for free. Most of the songs out there are of poor quality anyways. As long as the music industry can produce a superior product for an affordable price then people would be more willing to buy music rather than download it from the net. Stop spending all that money on cd copy protection and just make them more affordable in the first place, so people wouldnt want to download poor quality mp3s. People would start buying the actual cds or purchase high quality mp3 from the music industries web distribution center. | |
| | | | | Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene the cost of a CD is too high?
hello, i wonder how many of you here can think about economics.
lets think about what goes into the making of a cd
the cd itself
the design imprinted on it
the jewel case
the material included within the case
the people who designed the cd design
the people who designed the material in the case
the people who make the cd, and imprint it
the people who prepare and ship it
the people who deliver it to the stores
the people who stock the stores
the people who advertise so you know its in the stores
the people who sell it to you at the store
oh no! 15$ where can i find 15 dollars! thats almost what i smoke in the course of a day! its not fair!!
by your logic, the WHOLE world is RIPPING you off, because they dont sell you things at cost.
its a conspiracy, thats right, targeted at YOU
get a job.
-kwirl@comcast.net | |
| | | | | | Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene and i forgot to include the artists making the material, but then again, the people who post here mostly will hate them unless they waive their rights to money, and work at fast food stores living on mac and cheese while their "fans" enjoy the benefits of .50$ cd's.
yeah, you people live in the real world. | |
| | | | RawhideBlue Balls
join:2002-02-18
The Moon
| said by kwirlkarphys:
the cost of a CD is too high? -kwirl@comcast.net
You BET
said by kwirlkarphys:
lets think about what goes into the making of a cd
the cd itself
the design imprinted on it
the jewel case
the material included within the case
the people who designed the cd design
the people who designed the material in the case
the people who make the cd, and imprint it
the people who prepare and ship it
the people who deliver it to the stores
the people who stock the stores
the people who advertise so you know its in the stores
the people who sell it to you at the store
oh no! 15$ where can i find 15 dollars! thats almost what i smoke in the course of a day! its not fair!!
by your logic, the WHOLE world is RIPPING you off, because they dont sell you things at cost.
its a conspiracy, thats right, targeted at YOU
get a job.
-kwirl@comcast.net
I guess you failed to see my point. They need a new way to distribute this crap they are pushing. If they provide the songs online you can cut 95% of the cost you are talking about. Hell, for that matter of fact you can cut 100% of the costs you are talking about.
Think about it before you post stuff like this.
making of a cd (not needed as mp3 format)
Record it directly as mp3
the cd itself (not needed as mp3 format)
the design imprinted on it (not needed as mp3 format)
the jewel case (not needed as mp3 format)
the material included within the case (not needed as mp3 format)
the people who designed the cd design (not needed as mp3 format)
the people who designed the material in the case (not needed as mp3 format)
the people who make the cd, and imprint it (not needed as mp3 format)
the people who prepare and ship it (not needed as mp3 format)
the people who deliver it to the stores (not needed as mp3 format)
the people who stock the stores (not needed as mp3 format)
the people who advertise so you know its in the stores (not needed as mp3 format)
the people who sell it to you at the store (not needed as mp3 format)
What you will need is:
The music...
People to post the mp3s online...
People to deposit all the profits that roll in...
Oh yeah .... and one more thing. I never said anything about $.50 cds. You need to read a little better or decrease the screen resolution so the font appears larger. What I SAID was online songs ... SONGS ... SSOONNGGSS ... Just one song for 50 cents thats about 45 cents more than it will cost to produce the song provided its in mp3 format.
[text was edited by author 2002-03-01 00:34:31] | |
| | | | | | Regarding the cost of producing a CD, one of my ex-coworkers used to have a band of his own. They sold their CDs at about $5 each. And these were not recordings made at their garage and then recorded using a consumer-level burner, but professionally recorded at the studio, complete with cover design containing a load of pictures, info on each member of the band, lyrics to all the songs and lots of other stuff (professionally designed too), and then professionally replicated as well. According to him, he still made quite a profit selling his stuff.
Perhaps you forgot to include the greed factor (that usually makes up 50-75% of the cost of a CD) from that list of yours...
--
Ask me no questions, and I'll tell you no lies... | |
| | | | |
| Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene said by Pirate515:
Regarding the cost of producing a CD, one of my ex-coworkers used to have a band of his own. They sold their CDs at about $5 each. And these were not recordings made at their garage and then recorded using a consumer-level burner, but professionally recorded at the studio, complete with cover design containing a load of pictures, info on each member of the band, lyrics to all the songs and lots of other stuff (professionally designed too), and then professionally replicated as well. According to him, he still made quite a profit selling his stuff.
Perhaps you forgot to include the greed factor (that usually makes up 50-75% of the cost of a CD) from that list of yours...
So, if this band could do that why don't others? Why do they sign with major labels? Could it be because of the "greed" factor you mentioned?
[text was edited by author 2002-03-01 10:07:15]
[text was edited by author 2002-03-01 10:09:47] | |
| | | | | |
|  Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene
As for the greed factor, do you really think that artists are paid a lot more when they sign up with a label? If so, I am sorry to disappoint you, but what artists make are pennies compared to what labels pick up. And on top of that, they must give up copyrights to their own work. All their songs now belong to the label, and they could not republish them on their own, or else they'll face a huge lawsuit. Sounds like they are getting majorly screwed over to me.
On the other hand, if you are planning to become famous, going with a label is a good idea as you will never be able to promote yourself as well as they do. However, don't expect to be paid off in large amounts, the labels are not too eager to share the big bucks with you.
Speaking of my above-mentioned friend, his band did have an offer from a pretty famous label. They walked out the door as soon as they saw the contract. They chose to make slightly less but to retain their copyright, as fame was never their major goal.
BTW, did you ever wonder why so many artists do not renew their contracts with labels, and so many others eventually become actors or something else? I would not say that this is because of the big bucks that they made from their label.
--
Ask me no questions, and I'll tell you no lies...
[text was edited by author 2002-03-01 13:36:18] | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene This is what we call a market demand 12 - 25 year olds are making history by telling the music industery, this is what we want, we want to be able to download the music and own it digitaly! We want it to be transferabble to cd, mp3 player or whatever. The CD eara is now DEAD!!!
wow, and my little sister thinks the things in the movie hackers is real. stop pretending you are some cyber hero, you are the reason people charge so much for CD's, to recognize profit over top of the cost of recovery of theft. you are too lazy to pay for things that the majority of us pay for. if you think 15 bucks for a cd is too much, get a job. if you think a band selling cd's for 5 bucks is a great way to make a living, then guess what? move on with your life.
most artists enjoy making music, but there are incentives that drive some of them to love creating the music, and i assure you, a lavish lifestyle is not a perk ANY artist wants to give up.
your idols who sell 5 dollar cd's would turn on you in an instant if they were good enough to make it big, but they probably arent, because they cater to obscure little third rate wannabes like you. tell me, did you even pay your friend for his 5 dollar album? ill bet you cried til you got it for free, didnt you?
creativity isnt cheap, and i have no problem financing the lifestyle of ANY artist who makes music i enjoy. as for you, well - super size it, and yes, i want fries with that.
-kwirl@comcast.net | |
|
| | |  Kid A
join:2000-09-21
Nashville, TN | said by kwirlkarphys:
the cost of a CD is too high?
its a conspiracy, thats right, targeted at YOU
-kwirl@comcast.net
SHINY, ALUMINUM, PLASTIC,
AND DIGITAL
by Negativland
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reproduction of this essay is strongly encouraged.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, why is that new "Oasis" CD so expensive?
In the early eighties, sales of vinyl, cassettes, turntables and cassette players were "flat". This means that sales were stable, not rising or falling. For the makers of all this hardware and software, that wasn't quite good enough. They needed a new angle. A new way to sell music and the stuff you play it on. Luckily, someone at the Phillips Corporation (owner of PolyGram Music and Island Records and one of the worlds top defense contractors) had the bright idea that it would be good for their stockholders and investors if they could get the music consuming public excited about buying music again by introducing a new format and a new machine to play it on (i.e. how can you convince that aging baby boomer to buy yet another copy of DEJA VU by Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young when they already have one?)
Thus was born THE COMPACT DISC in all it's shiny, aluminum, plastic and digital glory. It's maximum playing time, about 75 minutes, was chosen because the president of the company wanted something that could play his favorite piece of music, Beethoven's 9th Symphony, all the way through without stopping.
Well, compact discs weren't as successful as they had hoped. For one thing, their price was too high. The higher price was blamed both on the fact that they were mostly being made in Japan and that they had a high defect rate, with approximately one out of every three discs being tossed out before even leaving the CD factory. Early on, the economics of this led to an industry wide decision to continue paying recording artists a royalty rate based on the sale price of vinyl instead of the higher sale price of compact discs. And nobody was buying those new CD players either, because they were just too darned expensive.
But then, in the spring of 1989, something wonderful happened for the music industry. Everything changed! Almost overnight, CD's were everywhere! Suddenly they were a huge success and suddenly it became almost impossible to get anything on vinyl at all..
This change must have occurred because it was what the consumer wanted.....right? We live in a market-driven economy and the market was demanding more compact discs.....right?
Wrong. What actually happened was this - a flexible return policy had always existed between record stores and the seven major distributors, i.e. stores could "buy" something from a distributor, and if it didn't sell, they could return it. This allowed stores to take more chances on new releases or on things they were not so familiar with, because if it didn't sell, they could always send it back. Well, in the spring of 1989 all seven major label distributors announced that they would no longer accept "returns" on vinyl and they also began deleting much of the vinyl versions of their back catalog. These actions literally forced record stores to stop carrying vinyl. They could not afford the financial risk of carrying those releases that were on vinyl because if they didn't sell they would be stuck with them. Very quickly almost all record stores had to convert to CD's. The net effect of this was that the consumer no longer had a choice because the choice had been made for us. High priced compact discs were being shoved down our throats, whether we knew it or liked it or not.
As we mentioned earlier, record labels were paying artists a royalty rate on sales of CD's based upon the $8.98 or $9.98 list price of vinyl (or achieved the same end result by using contractual tricks like "packaging deductions"). As CD's took over and the majors all acquired their own domestic CD pressing plants and the defect rate dropped to almost zero, the cost of manufacturing compact discs dropped dramatically as well. One would have expected the price of CD's to also drop and for the profits to now be split evenly and fairly with the musicians who were making all the music.
This, of course, never happened. CD prices have continued to rise to a now unbelievable $16.98 list price (soon to be $17.98!) while manufacturing costs have now dropped to less than it costs to manufacture a $9.98 vinyl release. A CD, with its plastic jewel box, printed booklet and tray card now costs a major label about 80 cents each to make (or less) and a small independent label between $1.50 and $2.50. Meaning that CD's should now cost the consumer less than their original prices over a decade ago, not more. But the music business got consumers used to the idea of paying the higher price and the labels got used to the idea of their higher profit margin, and record labels continue to this day to pay almost all artists a royalty rate as if they're selling CD's for the list price of vinyl. That extra 4 or 5 or 6 bucks goes right into the pockets of the record labels. It is not shared with musicians. And of course, we all had to go out and buy a CD player (which had mysteriously dropped to a more reasonable price) if we wanted to hear any of the music on this "popular" new format. So, all in all, it's no wonder that the record industry and stereo manufacturers loved the compact disc. In fact the following year (when our economy was in a recession) the music industry had its biggest profits, ever!
If any of this bothers you as much as it does us, then you might be wondering why you've never heard about any of this or why no anti-trust action was ever taken against major labels and distributors. The answer to this is quite simple. Most of the reporting on the inner workings of the record business comes from the music press and the music press is almost totally reliant on the advertising dollars and good will of the business that they're writing about. So, in the interest of not wanting to "rock the boat" or anger the folks who essentially bankroll their publishing ventures, this story would, and will continue to remain, unreported. And with the coming "popularity" of DVD, the music industry looks like it is ready to try the same tricks all over again.
-Negativland
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.O. Box 7218
Olympia, WA 98507
fax 510 420 0469
Web site and e-mail - »www.negativland.com | |
|
|  RickPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT | said by CitizenX:
You know why people rip music off the internet? Because they charge $23 a cd. Stop RIPPING US OFF and we'll stop RIPPING YOU OFF. I am proud of my 2,300 mp3s and will continue to STEAL from the music industry.
My personal feeling is that I couldn't disagree with you more. I liken what's going on to the doors of a Dept Store
being left open and certain members of the public feeling
it's right to simply walk in and raid the place.
And, then looking for their own justification in their own
minds to say that was Ok.
I download songs. But I've also bought hundreds of their
albums, CD's and cassettes over the years. And, I've more than paid my price of admission in support of the musicians
with their concerts and merchandise.
But, with all that said, I don't think it matters one bit
what I think, or anyone thinks because it's happening anyway. And, this industry is in trouble the way it stands now. That's all that really matters. The industry for all
their crying also bears part of the responsibility.
They failed to recognize this new distribution system and
the impact it would have on them early on. And, even when they did recognize it, they took the wrong approach.
They got heavy handed and mean...and alienated many people
against them who would then use that as justification
for what is now occuring.
I think very early on they could have resolved this by
realizing that it was going to happen anyway, and they needed to get on board. People love the convenience of being able to Download songs. And, they don't want to
buy entire albums for just one or two songs on it and pay
those prices. If they had worked with Napster, or even started their own service early on that provided a wide
selection, they could EASILY have charged a quarter to fifty cents a song and made their service the most popular
and addressed many of these problems. I would have been happy to pay it. And many others would have too.
It would have passed savings along to consumers and saved
them money as well in the form of an inexpensive distribution system.
For all the industries whining about starving musicians
and such..they fail to mention one thing. How this medium can give a wide audience to musicians at NO COST, at a price that is now paid to the middle man record industry.
Musicians and others who will learn how to capitalize off of that are going to be the success stories of the next
decade. That exposure now costs them a huge amount of money
in the form of payments to the labels and the distribution
system currently in place. This will let them eliminate
a great deal of that..pass along the savings to consumers
and even benefit more themselves.
So, I really don't buy the argument that it's really the musicians themselves who have to suffer. It's the middlemen who need to worry.
I also think they fail to mention that if music was priced this way, a lot more people would be buying songs they might not have in the past. There's plenty of old songs out there that I have no intention of buying the album,
but would gladly pay that price for the individual song.
They are sales that would never have happened anyway that could be realized this way.
Hopefully, the industry quickly finds a way to adapt.
I think their only chance of success is to quickly
create a service where they all participate in it..
and where music is priced individually at a reasonable
25-50cents a song.
And then, it's up to all of us to support that. Recognize
we're getting a very fair value for the service.
Because if we don't do that and refuse to pay that price,
one can only wonder what will happen overall to the whole
industry. What would the last 20-30 years have looked like?
I think there would have been a whole lot less of the talent we saw and the things we've enjoyed.
There is a common ground here. The industry needs to call off their lawyers, and look for it.
And, consumers need to realize that when it's delivered,
they need to support that, and pay for the value that's being delivered.
Or, there just might be a whole lot less music to listen to in a few years. | |
| | | | | Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene ____________________________________________________________
and i forgot to include the artists making the material, but then again, the people who post here mostly will hate them unless they waive their rights to money, and work at fast food stores living on mac and cheese while their "fans" enjoy the benefits of .50$ cd's.
____________________________________________________________
No Instead I guess I will be eating the mac & cheese while they enjoy the fast cars and other things!
By the way, who do you work for? | |
|
| | | This is what we call a market demand  12 - 25 year olds are making history by telling the music industery, this is what we want, we want to be able to download the music and own it digitaly! We want it to be transferabble to cd, mp3 player or whatever. The CD eara is now DEAD!!!
This is scary for the industry because it is use to having so much control, by producing a phical product. They can not control the use and copying of a mp3 file.
If this brings more artists that have a soul for music into the industry, rather than a (bling bling) $oul for music, then I think that is great! | |
| | YearZeroHeavy Metal BakesalePremium
join:2001-08-28 | Total in agreement with you CitizenX.... also side note Greene makes 2million a year.. the most out of any non profit organization in the world... I guess he needs people to stop downloading or he will be downsized. | |
| |  buckbu
join:2001-12-27
Owings Mills, MD | I am not going to say that its ok to use Morpheus, et. al. to download copyrighted songs at will. But when people argue that piracy will simply increase prices, I get really dicey on this issue.
There is a pervasive feeling, quite justified economically by the cost breakdown that was refuted by jc613ua and Pirate515, that we have already been "doing the time", so we may as well "do the crime".
I'm not saying it is right, I'm saying it is human nature.
It is really difficult for me to come down on CitizenX, even though I know better.
--
...cogitae, minimae, copulae...DRS, ver 4.0.0.36, 1350, ss~50, Win98SE | |
| | | | by the way, why do people cry so much about the cost of cd's, but still pay 8-10 dollars or more to see a movie, not to mention the 5 dollar box of popcorn.
(ive heard some theaters are cutting prices by not popping the kernels for the customer :P)
-kwirl | |
| | | | | Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene
As for the band that sold $5 CDs, I actually bought them. Yes, I could have gotten their CD for free, but out of respect for them and their work I paid the full $5 just like everyone else who purchased their CDs did.
As it was said before, many artists do enjoy lavish lifestyle. However, their lavish lifestyle may not be as lavish after all when compared to a lifestyle of a CEO of some major label.
As for my "idols" turning on me if they could make it big, well, it's their choice. However, any artist must not forget that THEY ARE WHO THEY ARE THANKS TO THEIR FANS. Without their fans, the game is over for them. How many artists are out there who put out one good song on the radio to get people to buy the whole album only to find out that the rest of the songs on it are pure cr*p? Where are these bands now? Probably working at their local McDonald's.
About comparing music to movies, do you know how much work goes into producing a movie as opposed to producing a music CD? Speaking of which, I get to see movies for $5 (one of the perks of my job). And at about $20 a piece, I gladly purchase DVDs of the movies that I like, as I believe that they are reasonably priced (compared to about the same price tag for the music CDs).
Finally, I also have no problems financing the lifestyles of artists who make music that I like. The problem is that only a small part of what we pay for a CD goes back to the artist, the rest goes to a greedy corporate exec who practically makes money out of nothing. And I do have a problem financing lifestyles of those.
Last, but not least, supersize it yourself, and go get your own fries...
--
Ask me no questions, and I'll tell you no lies... | |
|
|  sydney078$From Beneath You, It Devours
join:2001-06-10
Hurley, SD | Sorry- watching Cribs and seeing these people with homes with enough room to house a small country and enough cars to fill up an airplane hanger, I sure in hell dont feel anything for these people. While normal people bust their asses off to provide even a livable home with running water and still struggle to make ends met- And they want to tell us that piracy hurts them?! They can kiss my ass. I would love to see a Record Company CEO and other employee edition of Cribs- I bet their houses are bigger and more outrageous than the stars
Now- off to find out why the whole post here isnt having running water for 2 days in a row!
--
It Must Be Tuesday | |
| | |
See 6 replies to this post | |
| RawhideBlue Balls
join:2002-02-18
The Moon | I posted earlier about making music available in mp3 format. Thats what the future has in store for us. I would much rather own the mp3 and put 150-170 songs on one cd rather than the normal 10-15. The new cd players are going that way and will play mp3 cds. Since cd burners are common place it only makes sense to sell me the mp3 so I can make my on mp3 cds.
To tell you from experience, bands do not make there money directly from major music labels. They do make money indirectly from them, through the way of advertising. Bands like Disturbed made it from word of mouth and now have the support from thier label. 85% of all revenue received by bands are from touring and the attendance at there shows on the tour, selling of merchandise at those shows, any commercial indorsments they may receive, any movies deals they may get, and any donations they may receive.
The money they receive from the labels by signing bonuses or a percentage of cd sales is just a drop in the bucket. These things only make up about 15% of a bands total income. The labels have little or nothing to do with the profits a band makes from the previous paragraph.
Well, hopefully I have got my point across to some. I dont promote the illegal distribution of mp3's. The major labels need to do something to help curb this. How, just read my previous posts.
Im outta here! | |
| | | | | Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene actually, that was nice - a post by someone who knew what he was talking about, (notice he did NOT scream that he was fighting a one man army against the forces of communism)
still, stealing mp3's is just lame. we all do it, but we dont scream how doing it is our way of promoting world peace. you cant afford to pay for things, and have to resort to petty thievery. njoi.
-kwirl | |
|
| | | sounds like Mr. Greene is worried about his own pocketbook! | |
| | | | My thoughts on this issue are that cd's are priced too high but it's is true that lots of other people eat off of that cd's that’s sold not just the artist. I my self have bought tons of albums, before i had a computer i would go a spending benches at record stores spending up to $200 on nothing but cd's. So far my collection of cd's is about 200 albums all store bought, but i admit i do download lot’s of mp3's now and create my own cd's now which make up for about more then about half my collection so far. I do still buy albums at store and pay the $15-$18 they charge when i want the great quality music, want to support the artist, or want the original cd in my collection with the extras tht come with the original cd like the booklet and covers, or at times when I can’t find the album on the net or P2P file sharing appz, but mostly i just download albums because it so easy to find the music on the net and it saves me money now.:)
Currently there are about a handful of artist that i will support by buying there latest album at the store because im a die hard fan of there's but other then that it's off the the net to find there album.:)
--
“The Only Thing That Comes to A Sleeping Man is Dreams"- Tupac Shakur "One Life To Live"The Legacy | |
| |  SnakeEyes1So Much For Subtlety
join:2001-08-23
Lake Zurich, IL | I guess this thread has been stuck on the downloading aspect mainly because of the demonstration Mr. Greene set up. Hopefully nobody missed the fact that he implied that simply copying music from a CD is illegal too. The RIAA has taken the stance that even the act of making copies of CDs you purchased legally for your own personal use is illegal. To me, that's wrong. I have a jukebox changer at home, where I keep all my CDs. I compile favorites CDs from multiple originals to take with me in my car (in the 6 CD changer). I also have ripped many of my CDs to MP3, for playback from my PC (surprise, surprise, my PC is in a separate room from my stereo).
There's nothing wrong with this, as I've already paid for the 'license for personal of the material' in question. I don't distribute my CDs, nor do I distribute the MP3s (sometimes WMAs) that I have created of material I paid for (and for the record, continue to pay for- I do buy CDs through several different CD clubs as well as occasionally pick up the oddball disc in the store that I can't get through my clubs).
If the RIAA was to have its way, I'd be charged with theft, and forced to pay them for copyright infringement.
We've got to draw a line somewhere.
P.S.- I agree that the cost of CDs is outrageously high still, but I don't advocate stealing the songs. disclaimer- I HAVE downloaded MP3's of songs to see if I liked them or not, but I either deleted them if I didn't care for the song or bought the CD if I did like what I was hearing.
--
Snake-Eyes | |
|
 slimPremium
join:2001-02-13
Cambridge, MA | If the record companies had half a brain.... they would offer a monthly subscription service which would allow you do download all of the songs available in their catalogs. And allow those songs to be used as you see fit, like putting them on a CD or on your MP3 player. If this were priced reasonably, I think most people would use it as downloading songs for free is illegal.
Instead, the record companies seem to want to alienate their customers and make them seek out free downloads. Look at their support for the SSSCA and DMCA. This is serious business mates and bad news for everyone who believes in the internet. Look at how they forced Norway to prosecute the teenage creator of DeCSS. Look at how the US, backed by the media content companies are trying to force gov't worldwide to adopt software patents and laws like the DMCA.
Read Lawrence Lessig's new book "The Future of Ideas". It's fantastic. Join the EFF. If people don't start getting involved, we're screwed. | |
| |
See 6 replies to this post | |
| |
See 7 replies to this post | |
 Kelarch
join:2001-12-23
Lawrenceville, GA | Puhlees!quote:
To illustrate how easy it is to steal music, Grammy officials hired three computer-savvy students to test how many songs they could download from illegal file-sharing Web sites. In two days, the students grabbed nearly 6,000 songs, Greene said.
Somebody remind Mr. Greene that not everybody has a T1 in their home. 6000 songs in two days amoung three studens, assuming that all the songs where about 3-5 Megabytes, that's 3000-5000 Megs PER DAY, PER STUDENT. A total of 18000-30000 Megs for all the songs. If I downloaded 3000-5000 megs a day, my ISP would be rightously pissed at me for sucking up all that bandwidth.
I know it's just a demonstration on how easy it is, but it's spun out of proportion. He's trying to make people believe that it's that easy for ANYONE to download songs like that. But John Q. MP3Trader doesn't have a snowballs chance in Hell of downloading songs at that rate.
He's trying to say, "Piracy is out of hand! These three students downloaded 6000 songs in two days! We could have made thousands on CD sales on what they downloaded!"
... Deja Vu.... have I posted this before?
--
ICQ - 139492227, Odigo - 903182, AIM - Ranukhan | |
| | | Anon | Re: Puhlees! ya when i first got my cable modem (overexcited) i did download around 5 gigs per day of whatever i could find...it was quite fun, till all my hard drives filled up lol (and i can't believe no one at the isp complained...now that is the mark of a quality internet service provider) | |
| | | | Anon | Re: Puhlees! note* i am not a freak, most of those files were over 500 megs, i did not download tons of mp3's | |
|
 belushiPremium,MVM
join:2000-11-08
Twinsburg, OH
|  Getting the message out!
[text was edited by author 2002-02-28 15:08:34] | |
| |  ki1oPremium
join:2001-04-12
Atlanta, GA | Re: Getting the message out! I was also on Morpheus during the Grammys. If it wasn't for Jay Leno telling jokes about the Grammys on his show, I wouldn't even of known it was on TV. | |
|
| Feed this food to the wolvessaid by Michael Greene:
Songwriters, singers, musicians, labels, publishers. The entire music food chain is at serious risk.
And for good reason. How about we take out the labels/publishers (corporate radio networks and sleazy concert promoters too), and give the money to the songwriters, singers and musicians for a change?
I've long been saying this industry needs to be killed off and started all over again by a savvy 19-year-old who has fresh ideas about what people want to listen to and how to deliver it.
Good riddance to the old industry. Indeed, old is the word for it. I watched the Grammy's off and on last night, and was struck by how many of the artists are in their 40s and 50s. Not many of the under-25 set. Under-25 was the typical age of rock superstars when I was growing up. Kudos to the Grammys producers for inviting 16-year-old Olympian Sarah Hughes to the broadcast. When she made a comment about her peers in school, it brought this youthful-talent thing into sharp relief for me (and hopefully millions of other viewers).
We need to make room for a whole new generation of superstars.
[text was edited by author 2002-02-28 15:20:56] | |
| | | WHOOOOOOOOOOO CARESSSSSSSSSSSSSS hey i download a song...I like it ... i buy the cd .... | |
| | | heheheh ive bought only 2 so far | |
| Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Egotism What I think really irks me is the egotism behind the music industry's assumption that if the music doesn't have a price tag affixed to it that people will stop making music.
quote:
The entire music food chain is at serious risk.
quote:
the new and less established artists are in immediate danger of being marginalized out of our business
You could unleash righteous fury from the heavens and burn every recording studio to the ground....and someone would write a song about it.
The whole concept that music will stop if their profits are harmed always gives me a good chuckle. Fine. Go away. I'll write my own songs on piano and skip this whole process altogether.
the Record companies aren't making lawnmowers....
Come to think of it, they aren't making anything.
And I'm sorry to Mr. musician who got slighted on his last album, and my sympathy really does primarily lay with the artist, but he could be working in a Steel mill somewhere.....
--
- | |
| | | |  DaSneaky1Done wall to block them allPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
 ·Charter
| said by Leviathan:
The whole concept that music will stop if their profits are harmed always gives me a good chuckle. Fine. Go away. I'll write my own songs on piano and skip this whole process altogether.
And when you do, I'll make sure to rush out and download it on WinMX!
--
-- Someday, I'll be the most powerful Jedi ever. | |
|
Reviews:
·Comcast
| Grammy?!!? Who actually watches the Grammys anymore anyway. It seems that they are usually fixed anyway. The Billboard and MTV award shows are more entertaining anyway.
But...
The fact that these record companies can't decide among themselves a format or a company to do this with doesn't bode well for the industry. 6000 songs! Talk about inflating the numbers. | |
| | | Another Take on MP3's Here is the way I see it. I hear a song on the radio, its made available for everyone to do what ever they want with ,right ? I can either listen to it or tape it if I choose. Therefore once a song has been release to the public over the radio its fair game, its been released into the public domain. The RIAA still lets radio stations play music right and its ok for us to listen to it ? So someone tell me the difference from me recording a song off the radio or downloading it from morpheus, there is no difference its still the same song. | |
| |
| Re: Another Take on MP3's .
[text was edited by author 2002-02-28 16:45:05] | |
| | | | makes ya wonder if in the near future, will radio be "pay-per hour"??? ooh, i forgot, it already is, it's called satellite radio | |
| | | | | Re: Another Take on MP3's Can you tape off the air, or do you have to pay extra on top of the $10/month? | |
|
| | Piracy
As for 6000 songs.....6000??? what the crap they probably was downloading like Barry Manalow songs and the exec was dancing in the back going "COBA CABANNA!!!"(or however that song goes tells you how much I listen to him....lol). Six thousands songs in 2 days pa-leeze. I agree with the one guy saying that they should have had a subscription as far as their music because you think of it like this. It would probably cut down on some of the downloads but they can't. It takes away from that 6 million dollar mansion they have in florida. Before mp3's a CD was costing you around 20 bucks then. I can remember once in a while you bought a 20 buck CD for "one" song and you listen to the rest of the CD and it sounds like crap. Then you think "Man I just got JACKED!!!".
Well that was my 2 cents hope I didn't offend the Barry Manalow fans(or is there any I don't know). | |
| | | | Re: Piracy talking to a friend of mine and he told me to watch MTV cribs and how some of the artist live....woooooo dang everyone just took away their next wide screen movie theathered TV which they REALLY need and that last car payment on that new Porsche they always wanted.
... and that's why they're 6 million dollars in the hole in 6 months and have to release a terrible 2nd full length just to hopefully try to keep their exhorbitant spending habits above water. I have no sympathy for mainstream artists. They know what they're getting into when they sign on the dotted line... they see the stacks of money and never think that they will be bankrupt in 2 years because they wanted to buy a viper for each day of the week. Most mainstreamers will step all over you and smaller, lesser known artists to push themselves to the top... trust me, they laugh at you paying 23 bucks for a cd and they use all those 10's and 20's for toilet paper. | |
|
 pranky
join:2001-04-17
Mount Kisco, NY | Dowloaded.....er more like searched I cant see anyone downloading 6000 songs in that short of a time. I think it was actually like they searched for the 6000.
--
"All these thoughts they make no sense, I find bliss in ignorance"Like Porn? Try Seti | |
|  BrianDamageWe Are The Hounds From HellPremium
join:2001-08-14
Rowlett, TX | The real criminals are...... Record company executives, publishing companies, etc.
If one wants to get to the real root of the evil that is mainstream music today, one needs to look at these entities.
1. These companies rip artists off more than file sharing ever will. Musicians today generally only make money off of merchandising, touring, and endorsements. Out of the $16-23 you pay for that CD, the arist gets about 40 cents.
2. The RIAA is a politburo, with only a specialized few benefitting. Sounds like czarism to me.
3. If artists were rightly compensated by record companies, and these companies stopped charging outrageous prices for product, then people would buy and not file-swap as much.
4. Under current law, you do not violate a copyright UNLESS you illegally copy an intellectual work and disseminate for profit. If you download MP3s for your personal use, and don't burn CD copies and sell them, then you have violated no laws.
5. I think the last CD I actually went out and bought was Creed's first album. Since then, I have become a user of file swapping servces....first Napster (the first casualty of the RIAA nazis) and then Morpheus, Limewire, Audigalaxy, and others. I have never sold any songs I have downloaded.
6. As a musician myself, I think that file-swapping services do the opposite of what is described my these mogul types and media people. Napster and others got my music heard by folks who would have probably never heard it otherwise. Some liked my stuff, some not....but at least it got heard.
It could do a lot for others with no other resources. | |
| |
See 7 replies to this post | |
| | Does anyone remember back in the 80s.... More specifically around '87 or '88, the Sam Goody music chain store had kiosks called 'Personics'. It was where you could choose various songs from virtually all genres and make your own personal tape. Prices if I recall ranged from $1 to $2. Once you made all the selections, and chose the title of your tape, it was completed in about 10 minutes. One of the problems with it was that the selection of music that was allowed was limited but it seemed to be a great concept at the time; Pay for the titles that *you* wanted. The concept I believe only lasted about a year. I wish I knew exactly why it was discontinued.
What I'm getting at is why couldn't the music industry have kept that concept and transferred it over to CDs? They could've made a fortune. Now they're playing what appears to be a hopeless game of catch-up. | |
|
|  MAYBE IF?
--
My wife dosen't like that the computers in the house out number the people... But what are the cat and the dog gonna use?
[text was edited by author 2002-02-28 18:14:44] | |
|  fewtch
join:2001-01-23
Renton, WA | It's too late... The music industry will either have to adapt or die. It would be nearly impossible to legislate file trading out of existence -- the only way to stop it would be to shut down the Internet. Things have progressed too far.
If the music industry (note that I'm saying the industry, not musicians or artists) choose to die rather than adapt, so be it. Maybe everyone would be better off without 'em anyway. | |
| | | | Re: It's too late... Oh it is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay past too late! Downloading music I remember started around 1996. 6 years of downloading and bypassing CD's and it is still going strong. | |
| | | | Anon | Re: It's too late... yep exactly right...i guess we all just have to wait and see how long it takes them to die
the technology is going forewared and they have fallen down and can't catch up in time | |
|
| | Soundbites "Many of the nominees tonight, especially the new and less established artists, are in immediate danger of being marginalized out of our business"
Haha...He actually said that. They, the artists, the industry's lifeblood, are in danger of being 'marginalized' out of the "recording industry's business". Nice. | |
| YearZeroHeavy Metal BakesalePremium
join:2001-08-28
| Grammy's all about the benjamins....
1) execs are stealing money from people they represent and call it fair business.
2) Grammy's are to me fixed because if bob dylan, who is a good musician in his own right, put out a cd of him farting it would get grammy nods based only on the fact that bob dylans name is on it.
3) THis is not to sound racists and please don't think about it the wrong way but it seems that if you look back over time its seems that if there is a black women who is up for an award she usualy does really well no matter who she is against in the same category. The grammy's kind of use these black women as a way to say, "look we vote for black women too and this is our sacrifice to the NAACP and such so they won't be up in our face for being racists." I mean if you look back to lauren hills album she was one of hte only black women up for an award and she took home a ton of them. I think alisha keys is good and put out some quality work but to go and clean house in that fashion seems kind of unheard of. Is the album that good? I guess it is up to the person listening.
4) U2 is the most hypocritical piece of shyt I have ever heard... Bono and his crew had the largest profits for a tour the last year and the highest priced tickets. yet you see his ass out there saying how we should help with 3rd world debt and relieve it... how about you relieve some debt on the tickets to your shows. Also in an interview when asked about the prices he basically said he thinks the prices are kind of high but the fans pay for it so they must not have a problem with it.
5) the piracy won't go away until the execs realize they might not get there millions from making whores out of musicians. Once the fools leave I think there can then be an understanding of what direction we should then take in the face of piracy. I know right now it will never end. Personally if I want one or two songs off a cd that I know is crap I am not going to buy it... They sit and complain about how much money they lost last year due to record sales and don't even think that maybe the product has something to do with it. That is ignorance and a good sign of people we are dealing with.
ok that is all I have to say.. and the for the record I am not racist and that comment is not meant to be expressed that way.
oh side note Micheal Greene makes 2 million a year the most out of any non profit orgranization in the world....ironic isn't it...makes you think...
[text was edited by author 2002-02-28 19:26:41] | |
| | | | Re: Grammy's all about the benjamins.... cry me a river. that d00d said it was killing new artists with low margins. boo joo, im sure 1 hit wonder along the way will replace the one that was *lost*
remember hanson? the riaa owes all of us money for putting that @!#$ in the air | |
| |  BrooklynZooFor Everthing Else, There's Mastercard
join:2001-04-01
Atlanta, GA
| In regards to your comments about black women in The Grammys, you may be right. That definitely highlights a bigger problem in general.
If what you are saying is right, then we have to take a look at a deeper issue. The issue being groups having the option of saying, "see, I gave your people/group/etc. an award. Now you cannot call me a racist or accuse me of not including you." That is one of the reasons I appreciate award shows like The Soul Train Music Awards or The Essence Awards. The African American community get a chance to honor their artists in the way they see fit.
Man will always find more ways to separate himself from others than to see himself in others. In addition, you must also realize culturally, differences exist. Embrace the race, meaning the human race .
--
"What?" - WWF's "Stone Cold" Steve Austin
[text was edited by author 2002-03-01 09:26:35] | |
| | YearZeroHeavy Metal BakesalePremium
join:2001-08-28 | I totally accept all the human races and I think the problem that the grammys present is that they do what is necessary to make money. Its kind of sick. | |
|
| a lot of you really make yourself look like idiots. not everyone, so don't all jump on me, but some of the comments i read on here border on the stupid.
"i will keep stealing from you, untill you give me things for free"
*addendum* - "i work part time jobs to finance my drugs, and don't want to spend money on legitimate endeavors"
get a life, grow up, your not a "super hero savior" to the free world. I have dozens of gigabytes of MP3's on my machine, I also have hundreds of CD's, all of which i have paid full price for. I use morpheus for 2 reasons, to download hard to find independent releases (which i buy legally as soon as i can find them) and to try out new artists or songs that I have not yet commited to purchasing an entire album for.
the world is capitalism, and if you want anything for free, lets just think how eager YOU are to start giving away things you have worked or to other people. are you flipping burgers for free?
probably not. and i doubt you do it because of your passion for the frozen meat industry.
-kwirl@comcast.net
[text was edited by author 2002-02-28 20:42:06] | |
|
| |
|
|
