Although I'm sure this has been discussed before, I can't find any thread anymore...
Anyway, this is a very good article, which I wholeheartedly agree with :
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110823/02531915631/why-are-we-letting-obsolete-gatekeeper-drive-debate-anything.shtml (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110823/02531915631/why-are-we-letting-obsolete-gatekeeper-drive-debate-anything.shtml)
Rick Falkvinge has a nice column pointing out how disruptive innovation works: obsolete middlemen are innovated away. He uses the example of ice men: the folks who would deliver ice to be used in "ice boxes" prior to electricity and the refrigerator becoming common. But, of course, technology made such people obsolete:
There were many personal tragedies in this era as the icemen lost their breadwinning capacity and needed to retrain to get new jobs in a completely new field. The iceman profession had often been tough to begin with, and seeing your industry disintegrate in real-time didn't make it any easier.
But here are a few things that didn't happen as the ice distribution industry became obsolete:
No refrigerator owner was sued for making their own cold and ignoring the existing corporate cold distribution chains.
No laws were proposed that would make electricity companies liable in court if the electricity they provided was used in a way that destroyed icemen's jobs.
Nobody demanded a monthly refrigerator fee from refrigerator owners that would go to the Icemen's Union.
No lavishly expensive expert panels were held in total consensus about how necessary icemen were for the entire economy.
Rather, the distribution monopoly became obsolete, was ignored, and the economy as a whole benefited by the resulting decentralization.
As he notes, we're now going through the same sort of disruptive innovation today, with many who slavishly rely on copyright as a business model for content distribution coming to terms with their own obsolescence. Yet, rather than be ignored and go away and let the economy benefit as a whole, they're pulling a different sort of trick. They're falsely convincing politicians, the press and even some of the public that rather than representing obsolete distribution mechanisms, they represent the content itself. It's why you hear the recording industry referred to incorrectly as "the music industry."
But the truth is that the main advantage these particular gatekeepers had was in distribution. They controlled the gates to distribution, and knew they could charge huge rents to get through. Copyright was merely the mechanism that built the gates, but the fact that there was a gate at all was a function of technology. Now technology has done away with that, and opened up the playing field wide. So wide that gates are meaningless, and the real focus needs to be on enabling content providers to do amazing things to stand out in the wide open field. But that's got nothing to do with copyright.
Unfortunately, the industry is pretending that it has everything to do with that. What they're really looking for are laws not to build back up the gate of copyright -- but to take us back into history, whereby the walls of limitations are back up and people have to go through the gates. That era is over. But what's truly amazing is that we still think the gatekeepers matter here. They don't. There was no refrigerator fee and we shouldn't have to set up special systems to re-animate the dead corpse of an obsolete distribution model that the recording industry was built around.
Care to share your views ?
I think that the record companys realise where the world is going, and that is a world where there is no physical media. They will be obsolete in the future any way because why would you need a record company if there are no records? So distribution can be in the hands of the artist. I think music in the future will benifit alot from not having record companies. Think about the cookie cutter artists the put out. But as long as artist sign with them and think they need a record deal, they have all the power. Music will become cheap too because if you dont have to pay to make actual records, then really all your doing is paying the bills of the artist. not giant corporations with thousands of employees.
i read an artical on cracked awhile back that talked about the fall of publishing companies.
5 Reasons The Future Will Be Ruled By B.S. | Cracked.com http://www.cracked.com/article_18817_5-reasons-future-will-be-ruled-by-b.s..html#ixzz1W2qmERtX (http://www.cracked.com/article_18817_5-reasons-future-will-be-ruled-by-b.s..html#ixzz1W2qmERtX)
Public libraries have been lending out books to people, for free, for the last 500 years or so. Publishers are OK with it because the library is paying for the book, and if it's a popular book, they'll buy multiple copies so multiple people can check it out at once. Then they'll replace those every couple of years, because if you read a book too much it falls apart at the binding.
But then the publisher invented a better book. An indestructible book called an ebook that could be read 10 billion times without ever falling apart. How much does it cost to manufacture this marvel? Not a goddamned penny. The readers have the ability to "manufacture" copies of their own, on their computer, at no cost to the publisher. It's a post-scarcity book.
So for the publishers, the next step was clear: Make the book destroy itself.
An ebook sold to a library will thus delete itself out of existence after a year, or after X number of times it had been lent out. This is a big source of controversy between publishers and public libraries, maybe because both of them know they've found the loose thread that can unravel all of society. After all:
A. Why can't the library just buy as many digital copies as are needed for the customers, and keep them forever, if they don't naturally degrade?
B. Wait a second. It's just a digital file. Why not just buy one copy, and just copy and paste it for every customer who wants to read it?
C. Wait a second. Why do you need the library at all? Why can't a customer just buy a copy from the publisher and "lend" copies to all of his friends?
D. Wait a second. If no printing and binding needs to be done, why do you need the publisher? Just buy it directly from the author.
E. Waaaaait a second. Why buy it? Once the author makes one copy available, why can't everyone just grab it for free?
Stop and think about everything that just vanished there. Skyscrapers full of publishing company employees, warehouses full of books, book stores, libraries, factories full of printing presses, paper mills, all the stuff the author bought with his writing money. Gone.
To keep all that stuff up and running, the publisher is resorting to what experts call FARTS--Forced ARTificial Scarcity. Or they would call it that, if they were as awesome at naming things as I am.
Mark my words: The future will be ruled by FARTS.
Remember the debut of Sony's futuristic Matrix-style virtual world, PlayStation Home? There was a striking moment when the guys at Penny Arcade logged in and found themselves in a virtual bowling alley... standing in line. Waiting for a lane to open up. In a virtual world where the bowling alley didn't actually exist. It's all just ones and zeros on a server--the bowling lanes should be effectively infinite, but where there should have been thousands of lanes for anybody who wanted one, there was only FARTS.
(http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/sexy-pirate-costume-79-p.jpg)
I still buy cds. mp3 can suck my dick. I pirate flac.
Quote from: poofing acid on Aug 28, 2011, 04:46 AM
I still buy cds.
Yup me too, still, I find all this "thief, pirate, steal" terminology to be a fucking joke...
Quote from: tarkil on Aug 28, 2011, 06:27 AM
Quote from: poofing acid on Aug 28, 2011, 04:46 AM
I still buy cds.
Yup me too, still, I find all this "thief, pirate, steal" terminology to be a fucking joke...
Until you understand it first hand, I think it is a hard concept to get. Unless of course you are in a band and I'm accidentally offending you. If that's the case, I do apologize.
I work long hours every day and I stopped interning 7 years ago, if I wasn't compensated for my work, I would be pissed too. Musicians are no different than people working a nine to five job; they work, they work hard, and they deserve compensation.
Whether you agree or not, 'previewing' (aka illegally downloading a copy) an album and then deciding to buy it or not is wrong unless the artist specifically allows for the preview of it via streamable media or it's on a service like Spotify (or as my girlfriend hilariously calls it "Spootifly"). Prime example is the latest blockbuster movie currently in theatres. Generally speaking, there is no way to 'preview' a movie before deciding if you want to pay for it or not. No body watches a downloaded cam version of a movie and THEN goes to the theatres to watch it, ya know? I sure haven't (back when I watched them) and I doubt many others have either. Sure, maybe a few people watch the cam and then buy the DVD, but I doubt it's a big percentage. Same respect goes for albums; most people download it for free, tell themselves they're going to buy the album, then never do. Myself included up until recently!
Nowadays, I use Amazon's 'wishlist' to remind me of albums I need to buy after I've decided through (mostly) legal means of previewing the record. That why I keep a clean conscious and also support the band and label and manager and road crew.
Quote from: skinnypuppy on Aug 29, 2011, 07:38 AM
Musicians are no different than people working a nine to five job; they work, they work hard
buzz, wrong.
i doubt the hardest working artist today is gonna trade their lifestyle for a regular 9-5 job. they work hard and make more than enough sufficient means, whereas a regular 9-5 joe shmuck will beat their asses with overtime and still worry about their mortgage at the end of the month.
i don't feel bad at all about downloading or "previewing" media and not paying for it. i get to keep my money, they get to make money as well, everyone survives, the end. i'd like to see someone tell the story of a successful artist or company that is struggling to pay their light bill at the end of the month because 10,000 people downloaded a torrent of their newest album. it's not happening. it's a rat race about making money to live on and survive and musicians, actors, producers, studios, etc. are still getting the best end of it regardless of piracy. i can't say i'm losing sleep that movie or record companies are making 10 trillion instead of 20 trillion a year. no one is, let's get real. that's why i, along with probably 98% of this board, don't even think twice about downloading free media.
fuck all the holier than thou jackasses who think they're doing the right thing by buying physical media and sticking their noses up at piracy. all your self righteousness is still gonna have you living in your apartment while you give your money to assholes who probably wouldn't give you the time of day if you asked them for it after you become just one of a million idiots who bought them their mansion and bentley.
<3
Also, this next message from me may be kind of cheesy but I'm in a 'I don't give a fuck' mood and I hope some of you get something out of it...
I know a LOT of you view me as the anti-piracy-label-douchebag on these boards. Those of you who know me offline probably do not think this way about me and I'm really happy to know a lot of you in real life.
The reason I am in the music business today is because of Deftones. I was 19'ish and had no idea what to do with my life. All I cared about was music and Deftones. I was working construction work and it was cool and all, paid really well, but it wasn't my passion. All I did was listen to music as I installed dry-wall or cleaned the grit of freshly laid tiles.
Then I discovered the official Deftones street team and was all "omg, free swag and I get to help my favorite band EVER?! OMG!!!" - I became good friends with Bianca at Street Wise, became the #1 street teamer, and later became her intern and was offered a job at Street Wise/Velvet Hammer. Until all this happened, I had NO idea I was good at anything besides construction work. I still remember sitting in my bedroom when I was 19ish and thinking to myself "Is the music business my calling? am I good at marketing?" and after thinking about it for days and days and days... I came to the conclusion that yes, this is my calling.
While I was interning at Street Wise, a little marketing firm decided to hire me part time and I was finally getting paid for what I was seemingly pretty good at. I would work there half the week and with Bianca at Street Wise the other half. Taking the metro to and from each gig every day or getting a ride from a family member.
When Street Wise offered me a gig, I was offered a label gig at the exact same time for a little independent label called CMH/Vitamin Records which subsequently released the String Quartet Tribute to Deftones (which I did marketing for) - I took the label gig because I felt that's where I needed to be at the time, and the pay was better. I don't regret the decision but I do wish I was able to work longer with Street Wise/Velvet Hammer and work my way up. Two years later I went over to Century Media Records for three and a half years, and now I'm a content manager at an digital-album distribution company.
The reason I'm outlining all of this for you is because my next statement is something I haven't admitted to you guys, I used to be a BIG pirate. I was deep in the warez scene as a kid and spent every living moment on Napster and Limewire. I have probably 700 CDRs of albums and movies. a 1.5 TB drive, and well over 600gigs of albums.
I would be the first to find a new CD and spread it like wildfire. I was the kid eagerly waiting for the album to leak and then send it to all his friends. Not only that, but also upload it to a fast server and watch the download numbers increase every second...
It was a high. I got off on it. I felt special. It was a rush. It was INCREDIBLE. And not one cent was given back to the artist. I downloaded their life and didn't care at all. No one explained to me the graphic details of what I was doing wrong. No one explained to me that my favorite band is breaking up, or getting dropped by a label, or canceling their tours, because I was too greedy or "poor" to go out and support the band by buying their CD.
I was hurting record labels, record stores, and the artist, every single day of my youth. Even when I joined the music industry, it didn't click. It didn't make sense to me why it was such a big deal to the RIAA. I thought it was ridiculous. . I thought by going to concerts, or buying a shirt at Hot Topic, everything was kosher. All was good.
But it wasn't until I started to see bands getting dropped from labels, or canceling their tours, or breaking up because no one will give them help and they can't afford to produce a record, that it all started to make sense.
I watched first hand that I was a part of the problem, and that I needed to change that in myself, and maybe, just MAYBE, try and help the problem by explaining to people why piracy hurts musicians and labels so much. Labels make a lot of money, sure, I won't lie. They do. But they are a machine. They NEED this money to keep the wheels turning. Musicians can't do it themselves. Bands dont know how to market themselves, they just spend time making music and letting other people do the rest for them.
Most labels have between 7 and 12 employees. Let me break this down for you... A label with 12 employees is probably paying half of the employees between 25-30k a year, another few 35k a year, and then 40k and then maybe 45k and 50k. That means there is an employee over-head of
that's 380,000 a year JUST via employees. Now lets include rent for an office... now lets include printing albums... now lets include spending money for online advertising, tour support, vinyl production, tshrt production, posters, stickers, music videos, employee benefits, small year bonus...
Guess how much all of that costs if you release 10 albums a year? NOT including the albums advance and employee benefits... it costs about 834,000 a year :) Now include album advances for all 10 albums and you're now in the 1m a year category.
Labels are not as greedy as you think. Even major labels aren't that bad. There is a LOT of over-head to help an artist achieve greatness.
Anyway, back to my piracy-admittance. Somewhere in-between my story I started managing some bands, too! While doing this, I learned first hand how hard it is to get ANYWHERE as a band who doesn't have a big fanbase or financial backing. I struggled with an incredible hardcore punk band called Fight Pretty for three years until they had enough and broke up. That day was devastating for me. It was like losing a lover. I put everything into that band but hardcore bands never break unless you tour relentlessly... Guess who couldn't afford to tour? Them! So one thing lead to another and it was over. You know what's hilarious though? Well over 1k people downloaded their last album, but only one person paid for it. Funny how that works isn't it? (if you'd like to download it, by all means, go ahead at this point;http://www.mediafire.com/?mx2yh2zgndn (http://www.mediafire.com/?mx2yh2zgndn)).
In fact, we offered the album for free download. WE gave that opportunity to the fans. The album was well-received, everyone loved it, and no one supported it. We gave the option to hear the entire thing without paying, but still people chose not to pay for it. If all those thousand people paid 5 dollars for it, which is what we were asking, that would have been 5000 dollars that could have gone towards the next album, or a new tour bus, or new equipment. But only one person felt like actually supporting the band.
That cut deep for me, and I started to put a lot of thought into how I could support bands more often. As of today, I put albums I want to purchase on Amazon Wish List's to remind myself to buy it. Or I pick up a copy at a show.
For me, it's also about quality, art, and lyrics. I wont lie, I feel robbed when I buy an album and there are no lyrics. I feel very entitled to lyrics when I purchase an album and get very disgruntled if they are not included. I can't get any of this with mp3s and google doesnt always give me proper lyrics or jpgs of cover art...
I'm not sure why I spent this much time explaining myself to all of you. This, and one other message board (Skinny Puppy related) are the only boards I ever frequent. I used to be a MSG board addict but then stopped. The reason I stick around here is because I have so many fond memories of this place. I really do care about a lot of you even if I make douchy statements sometimes and I'm overly sarcastic. Like I said in the beginning of this post, I know a lot of you find me annoying due to my piracy rants, but hopefully now you have a general idea as to why I feel the way I do. Music saved my life. I am nothing without music. I was the kid in his bedroom thinking about suicide every night and music was the only thing stopping me, the only thing I could relate to, the only thing that made me feel connected to this place. I didn't find god through church or religion, I found god through music. All my friends I found through music, and all my passion I found through music.
I would be lost without music. And Deftones made me understand that.
Quote from: bIondie on Aug 29, 2011, 08:07 AM
Quote from: skinnypuppy on Aug 29, 2011, 07:38 AM
Musicians are no different than people working a nine to five job; they work, they work hard
buzz, wrong.
i doubt the hardest working artist today is gonna trade their lifestyle for a regular 9-5 job. they work hard and make more than enough sufficient means, whereas a regular 9-5 joe shmuck will beat their asses with overtime and still worry about their mortgage at the end of the month.
i don't feel bad at all about downloading or "previewing" media and not paying for it. i get to keep my money, they get to make money as well, everyone survives, the end. i'd like to see someone tell the story of a successful artist or company that is struggling to pay their light bill at the end of the month because 10,000 people downloaded a torrent of their newest album. it's not happening. it's a rat race about making money to live on and survive and musicians, actors, producers, studios, etc. are still getting the best end of it regardless of piracy. i can't say i'm losing sleep that movie or record companies are making 10 trillion instead of 20 trillion a year. no one is, let's get real. that's why i, along with probably 98% of this board, don't even think twice about downloading free media.
fuck all the holier than thou jackasses who think they're doing the right thing by buying physical media and sticking their noses up at piracy. all your self righteousness is still gonna have you living in your apartment while you give your money to assholes who probably wouldn't give you the time of day if you asked them for it after you become just one of a million idiots who bought them their mansion and bentley.
<3
Were people holier than thou when they purchased 7 inch singles in the 60s? You can't create a holier than thou mentality out of thin air. You were born into a generation that doesn't care, that doesn't make me holier than thou because I think Poison the Well and their representation deserves 10 dollars out of my pocket...
Plus, 'well off' bands are not making the kind of money you seem to think they make... 'successful' bands are basically making minimum wage, or less. underground artists are poverty level.
Quote from: skinnypuppy on Aug 29, 2011, 08:24 AM
'well off' bands are not making the kind of money you seem to think they make... 'successful' bands are basically making minimum wage, or less. underground artists are poverty level.
TFB. big ol' TFB. maybe they should join the workforce, gain some real survivor and working skills and make what you and i are making. no one is stealing money off our wages, so they'd be better off, eh? i didn't get my mtv music awards invite though, so i could sport that 15,000 dollar outfit i have hanging in my closet. did you?
I actually have been invited to the VMA's before but that's beside the point.
The point is you're basically telling Chino to join the workforce and get a real job instead of making music. Yea, ok. I'm basically done talking to you now.
(http://gifsforum.com/images/gif/dis%20gon%20be%20good/grand/dis_gona_be_good_gif.gif)
Quote from: bright lights, big city on Aug 29, 2011, 05:13 PM
(http://gifsforum.com/images/gif/dis%20gon%20be%20good/grand/dis_gona_be_good_gif.gif)
Hahahaha.
Quote from: skinnypuppy on Aug 29, 2011, 04:23 PM
I actually have been invited to the VMA's before but that's beside the point.
The point is you're basically telling Chino to join the workforce and get a real job instead of making music. Yea, ok. I'm basically done talking to you now.
that wasn't the point at all, chuckles. the point was that you saying artists are making minimum wage or less is a reason i should buy physical media. i'm just not going to 'cause like i already established, they're better off than anyone here regardless and no one can refute that. if you believe otherwise and pity them, that's a bit unrealistic.
feel free to throw your money at them though, i'm not gonna tell you it's wrong at all. that'll just make me feel better about not throwing money at them myself 'cause someone like you already did. ;D
<3
Where exactly did you get this information?
Quote from: skinnypuppy on Aug 30, 2011, 06:36 AM
Where exactly did you get this information?
you and people like you that try to raise awareness of this music industry epidemic. people who see the dying masses of bands that base their sound on unoriginality and try to convey what they thought was unique, only to find the average consumer has already heard that song once, twice or a hundred times before, only from (an) already successful musician(s).
don't get me wrong...your passion for music and your contribution (no matter the magnitude) is very admirable, but in the real world, no one is considering all that, particularly in 2011 where the quality is extremely sparse and accessibility supersedes the ambition to support a band or musician that's struggling to stay above water like the working man or woman that's being asked to fork over money while trying to do the same.
free is easy and convenient. blame who you want, it is what it is and it's gonna stick around for a good while.
Oh come on, there's always been crap musicians and always been great musicians in the music scene. this is not new, we're just pickier. im not saying support kesha, im saying support thrice. quality bands, quality albums, and actually very original. don't jump on the generalization bandwaggon. just because band A doesnt 'deserve' money doesnt mean thats the same for band B.
if a tv show doesnt get good ratings, that show goes off the air, whether it was good or bad. if a band doesnt get good support, they might have to break up.
the argument that 'free' gets new fans is mute to me at this point because those new fans arent bringing in any type of revenue to keep the artist afloat.
Quote from: skinnypuppy on Aug 31, 2011, 04:49 PM
the argument that 'free' gets new fans is mute to me at this point because those new fans arent bringing in any type of revenue to keep the artist afloat.
I think this depends on the type of music we're talking. I know that i'm absolutely dependent on free downloads if i am to quench my thirst for new music. I wouldn't have known half the artists i do if it wasn't for "piracy". And i also think it's necesary for smaller, less known acts who don't get airtime on the radio or anything of the sort, to be able to have their shit heard. People aren't just going to go spend money on music they've never heard. Of course i'm like most music lovers, if i find something i really like, i'm gonna buy it the next time i see it in a store.
skinnypuppy, you've sold out to the man. Bands don't make much off of album sales. They make their money on the road. Which brings me to:
Quote from: skinnypuppy on Aug 31, 2011, 04:49 PM
the argument that 'free' gets new fans is mute to me at this point because those new fans arent bringing in any type of revenue to keep the artist afloat.
Firstly, it's moot, not mute. Secondly, the claim that fans bring no revenue is false. If they enjoy the band, they go see them live. Thirdly, majority of the time, it's labels trying to sue users that download.
Look at the movie, Hobo with a Shotgun. You can't tell me that piracy didn't make that movie blow up. They sell it in fucking best buy.
"Delivering his keynote address at this week's annual CA Expo in Sydney, former Google CIO Douglas C Merrill added to the growing belief that punishing and demonizing file-sharers is a bad idea. Merrill, who after his Google stint joined EMI records, revealed that his profiling research at the label found that LimeWire pirates were iTunes' biggest customers."
But, either way, piracy is here to stay. Just recently, courts have settled on napster lawsuits. Pirates will evolve.
"You can't stop the internet, baby"
-Joe Rogan
Quote from: bright lights, big city on Aug 29, 2011, 05:13 PM
(http://gifsforum.com/images/gif/dis%20gon%20be%20good/grand/dis_gona_be_good_gif.gif)
hahaha!
Quote from: poofing acid on Aug 31, 2011, 11:10 PM
Look at the movie, Hobo with a Shotgun. You can't tell me that piracy didn't make that movie blow up. They sell it in fucking best buy.
Exactly, I know about a dozen people that've now seen that. Every single one saw a pirated version. Then I went and fukcing bought it at best buy because I pirated it and thought it was absolutely amazing.
If piracy is such a good way to make money then why is every band broke and every label dead or dying?
We found good music with or without piracy back in the day. Good music finds a way. I'm not selling out, I'm actually keeping the BAND in mind here. I know what goes on behind the doors, and I know bands make money off record labels. Bands don't just give records to labels for free, you know. They DO make money off albums sold. They make/lose just as much money off touring and merch at this point too.
The idea that supporting a band through tickets or merch is a 'better' option is silly. Everyone takes a slice of the pie with touring and merch, and when the day is over it's almost the same profit gross as an album sale. Not exactly the same, but almost. Bands who sell 500 concert tickets are NOT making as much money as you think. Plus, most of your favorite bands can't even bring in more than a few hundred people to those venues, so the revenue is even less. Then gas. Then car repairs... It's never ending. The added revenue of ALBUM SALES can truly make a band continue on.
Quote from: Crazylegs on Aug 31, 2011, 05:02 PM
Quote from: skinnypuppy on Aug 31, 2011, 04:49 PM
the argument that 'free' gets new fans is mute to me at this point because those new fans arent bringing in any type of revenue to keep the artist afloat.
I think this depends on the type of music we're talking. I know that i'm absolutely dependent on free downloads if i am to quench my thirst for new music. I wouldn't have known half the artists i do if it wasn't for "piracy". And i also think it's necesary for smaller, less known acts who don't get airtime on the radio or anything of the sort, to be able to have their shit heard. People aren't just going to go spend money on music they've never heard. Of course i'm like most music lovers, if i find something i really like, i'm gonna buy it the next time i see it in a store.
Those less-well-known-acts don't have a shot without having a roster of people helping them or a near-cult like following that helps boost them to the top. It's not as simple as posting a song on Youtube or Facebook and BAM you're a success, it takes a team of dedicated people who all believe in your music and support it financially to get it moving in the right direction.
Quote from: poofing acid on Aug 31, 2011, 11:10 PM
skinnypuppy, you've sold out to the man. Bands don't make much off of album sales. They make their money on the road. Which brings me to:
Quote from: skinnypuppy on Aug 31, 2011, 04:49 PM
the argument that 'free' gets new fans is mute to me at this point because those new fans arent bringing in any type of revenue to keep the artist afloat.
Firstly, it's moot, not mute. Secondly, the claim that fans bring no revenue is false. If they enjoy the band, they go see them live. Thirdly, majority of the time, it's labels trying to sue users that download.
Look at the movie, Hobo with a Shotgun. You can't tell me that piracy didn't make that movie blow up. They sell it in fucking best buy.
"Delivering his keynote address at this week's annual CA Expo in Sydney, former Google CIO Douglas C Merrill added to the growing belief that punishing and demonizing file-sharers is a bad idea. Merrill, who after his Google stint joined EMI records, revealed that his profiling research at the label found that LimeWire pirates were iTunes' biggest customers."
But, either way, piracy is here to stay. Just recently, courts have settled on napster lawsuits. Pirates will evolve.
"You can't stop the internet, baby"
-Joe Rogan
Labels have never sued anyone. If you're going to make an argument, at least know your facts. the RIAA is not labels.
Of course piracy is here to stay, but right now these conversations are 'gimme gimme gimme im not doing anything wrong i want free albums shut up and gimme' - and that just isn't fair, and is hurting music and the business of music.
Quote from: bright lights, big city on Sep 01, 2011, 01:13 AM
Quote from: poofing acid on Aug 31, 2011, 11:10 PM
Look at the movie, Hobo with a Shotgun. You can't tell me that piracy didn't make that movie blow up. They sell it in fucking best buy.
Exactly, I know about a dozen people that've now seen that. Every single one saw a pirated version. Then I went and fukcing bought it at best buy because I pirated it and thought it was absolutely amazing.
Just because it worked for that movie doesn't outweigh the damage that has been caused for other movies. Same with albums.
Like I explained in my other post earlier in this thread, I _WAS_ YOU (you being in general). I was deep in the warez scene, I was a hacker, I was a full time pirate obsessed with mp3s and file sharing. Then I dove into the music industry and witnessed first hand the result of people downloading albums, not caring about it, and not properly supporting the bands through other means.
FFS even Deftones need to keep their career afloat at all times or else they wont be able to afford touring, merch, mortgages, etc. it's not like theyre 'living rich' - they're able to get by and keep the deftones business going, which is HEAVILY influenced by the amount of money they get from warner for each album.
Also the ticket marketing is falling every year too, so fans are NOT picking up the slack by buying more tickets. Deftones have been playing to the same sized crowds for nearly a decade in LA but do their album sales increase? no, they decrease. that means its not leveling out because the demand for their tours is the same with an album that sells 60k units as a record that sells 200k units.
The United States isn't bombing Libya, NATO is...
I never said, gimmie gimmie gimmie, Henry Rollins did. I still buy albums.
But how is it hurting music? Are people not writing songs because they fear someone will pirate it?
And hobo with a shotgun is the perfect example. Maybe if the labels stop putting shit music out, more people will buy albums.
I think in past decades, fewer bands existed and had the chance to do professional recordings. So the average music fan listened to ummm, lets say 15 bands max. And he spent on many of 'em (but the others were pirated in cassete format)
nowadays, with the advent of tecnology and other stuff, recording your stuff and having a good sound out of it is really possible, and for whatever is the reason, a lot more bands exist. A LOT. & the internet helped people get into more bands which they wouldn't have known.
now the average music fan listens to 100 bands? 200 bands?
they might spend on 30 of them, 40 of them?
so maybe people are spending more on music (wether be cd's or whatever), there are just a lot (A LOT) more bands to cut the cake, resulting in thinner slices.
i'm not saying this is the absolut truth, just my take on the cause, I hope to open a debate rather than closing it. this comes from a musician (in 3 fucking bands) who is the writer, producer & recorder (I studied as an audio engineer a few years ago).
If it's for any additional interest, I paid 3 times the value of the normal cd price for most of the Thursday records(hoping to buy No devolucion the next week). I feel sorry, but I can't really do it for everyband I like/love.
Quote from: skinnypuppy on Sep 01, 2011, 01:56 AM
Also the ticket marketing is falling every year too, so fans are NOT picking up the slack by buying more tickets. Deftones have been playing to the same sized crowds for nearly a decade in LA but do their album sales increase? no, they decrease. that means its not leveling out because the demand for their tours is the same with an album that sells 60k units as a record that sells 200k units.
really? not a condescending question at all; i'm totally unaware of deftones' current state 'cause i have been giving less of a fuck every year since SNW and chi's accident, but the last time i tried to buy a deftones ticket (this year), they were sold out and the ticket cost like 3 times what it cost back in 2006 and they're playing big butt-fucking gay venues built for shitbags like aerosmith.
maybe you or someone can fill me in on when they decided 50+ dollars was a normal charge to see them live.
Quote from: skinnypuppy on Aug 31, 2011, 04:49 PM
don't jump on the generalization bandwaggon.
p.s. this statement fails coming from someone who thinks they're well involved in the music industry and trying to oppose piracy.
just sayin'.
:-*:-*:-*
Quote from: Deftones-argentina on Sep 01, 2011, 03:48 AM
I think in past decades, fewer bands existed and had the chance to do professional recordings. So the average music fan listened to ummm, lets say 15 bands max. And he spent on many of 'em (but the others were pirated in cassete format)
nowadays, with the advent of tecnology and other stuff, recording your stuff and having a good sound out of it is really possible, and for whatever is the reason, a lot more bands exist. A LOT. & the internet helped people get into more bands which they wouldn't have known.
now the average music fan listens to 100 bands? 200 bands?
they might spend on 30 of them, 40 of them?
so maybe people are spending more on music (wether be cd's or whatever), there are just a lot (A LOT) more bands to cut the cake, resulting in thinner slices.
i'm not saying this is the absolut truth, just my take on the cause, I hope to open a debate rather than closing it. this comes from a musician (in 3 fucking bands) who is the writer, producer & recorder (I studied as an audio engineer a few years ago).
If it's for any additional interest, I paid 3 times the value of the normal cd price for most of the Thursday records(hoping to buy No devolucion the next week). I feel sorry, but I can't really do it for everyband I like/love.
sadly, no, music sales as a whole, whether you include the influx of new bands, does not equal out. it thins out. album sales have been decreasing as a whole because the industry is indeed catalogued. there is a reason record stores dont exist anymore...its because no one is buying the albums. i actually do think just as many bands existed in the mid to late 90s as they do today, they just didnt have myspace pages.
Quote from: bIondie on Sep 01, 2011, 07:20 AM
Quote from: skinnypuppy on Sep 01, 2011, 01:56 AM
Also the ticket marketing is falling every year too, so fans are NOT picking up the slack by buying more tickets. Deftones have been playing to the same sized crowds for nearly a decade in LA but do their album sales increase? no, they decrease. that means its not leveling out because the demand for their tours is the same with an album that sells 60k units as a record that sells 200k units.
really? not a condescending question at all; i'm totally unaware of deftones' current state 'cause i have been giving less of a fuck every year since SNW and chi's accident, but the last time i tried to buy a deftones ticket (this year), they were sold out and the ticket cost like 3 times what it cost back in 2006 and they're playing big butt-fucking gay venues built for shitbags like aerosmith.
maybe you or someone can fill me in on when they decided 50+ dollars was a normal charge to see them live.
Deftones, much like most smart bands, only play venues they know they can sell out, and if there is demand, they will add another gig to the tour in the same area. so, for example, during the white pony era, deftones played the palladium. for the next decade, they would only play gigs at the avalon, or house of blues, etc. maybe two or three shows at the avalon (totalling about 3k tickets) or two shows at the henry fonda (also 3k tickets) or one night at the wiltern (about 2k tickets) - they did this over and over and over, it was their normal touring pattern. plus, every single one of those shows sells out. as of RIGHT NOW, they can fill the palladium again which is awesome (5k venue) but when you think about it, its not that much different than three nights at the avalon. so its all push and pull with them...
theyve always gotten good festival spots, nothing really changed there, either. same type shit. but the difference between the white pony era and the era today is gas is more expensive, food is more expensive, everything is more expensive. so ticket prices go up a little more but not THAT much. a deftones ticket during white pony era was prolly 25 or 35 and now its normally 35 or 40ish. but the capacity of the venues is the same, and they have more road crew now.
I still buy CDs, but I think piracy may not necessarily be a band thing either...Personally I like having a 'hard copy' of a musician's work (mp3 files seem to take a sort of soul out of music for me). But hey, nothing is going to stop people from downloading mp3s 'illegally' (wasn't everything fine until Metallica freaked out?).
Bands make WAY more money doing footwork ie. touring. This means bands have to work...and rather than making everything sound perfect in a studio, they may have to sound good live!...haha I'm just being facetious here...but seriously, artists (who don't already) can really become innovative live! Every show a fan goes to can be different, allowing fans to hit up their favorite artist at various venues and receive a different experience (ie. different set lists, improvisation reminiscent of the jam bands in the days of woodstock, more meeting and greeting of fans). I think it all comes down to people, too. If artists make themselves so inaccessible to their fans, people may not want to support them entirely. I'd like to really see the hard facts of 'record sales' vs. 'mp3 sales' and compare for the last ten or twenty years...
Bands also have merch, let's face it, you can't pirate a tshirt (and if you can, it probably looks like shit). The record labels want to make money...that's the bottom line, so print more tshirts and record LIVE SHOWS...sell those...
Laws telling people not to do something aren't going to change anything. Think of the prohibition era. With good intentions Prohibition only allowed for crime to escalate and get out of control...this is what's happening with piracy. We know from history telling people not to do something isn't going to stop them, especially when it's become a modern everyday part of peoples' lives. It's time to move on, and switch the focus in my opinion.
laws at the very least can shut down the sites that release albums without consent 4 months in advance, dontchathink?
Also... the reality to touring is bands cant afford to tour unless the label helps, most of the time. labels wont help if they have no income due to album sales. see the problem? same goes for shirts.
in case yall havent seen this before... (however please be aware that these numbers are AFTER the label has already paid a large sum of money to the artist to release an album. the label splits seem 'greedy' from afar but are not as sinister as you think. labels pay between 500-500,000 dollars for an album and then have to recoup that money before they start shelling it back out to the artist. If a label spends 3M on an artist, that artist needs to profit 3M to the label before they can start receiving money again)
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/infobeautiful2/selling_out_550.png)
Nah, they don't always need labels to help them out. My bro's old band got a government grant fairly easy and spent the money renting a van and on venues...with places like youtube,myspace, last.fm, facebook etc. independent artists have a better chance of becoming recognized and connecting with fans! :D
in canada, that doesnt happen in the US. its not fair to make an absolute statement when the vast majority do not get those opportunities.
Fair enough. (and yes he lives in Canada) so the moral is: move to Canada...lol. It's hard, you know, cracking down on the 'crime' of piracy takes money, also...and what pays for crime crackdowns? Our taxes...I will definitely say most tax payers would rather see their money go into eliminating violent crime. And, as far as the internet goes, people want to see predators brought down, not 14 year olds downloading albums.
I'd rather my tax money go to salvaging the music industry than anti-gay movements or teaching creationism in public schools ;)
haha, me too...absolutely
A+
off topic, are those your pedals?
Quote from: skinnypuppy on Oct 07, 2011, 11:29 PM
A+
off topic, are those your pedals?
Haha, no..but thanks. That's Stephen Carpenter's pedal board., I know I wish those were mine..it's a pretty kick a$$ set up.
Interesting figures :
Like most indie and d.i.y. artists, Uniform Motion relies primarily on digital sales and streaming to earn income from their recorded music. Without the benefit of profits from brick and mortar retail, as Uniform Motion released a new recording, they decided to research and share with their fans what each source of income was going to pay them. While its an unofficial snapshot of what one EU based band is earning, it provides a valuable primer for any artist or label:
(1 EUR = 1.36 USD)
SPOTIFY:
With Spotify, we'll get 0.003 EUR/play.
If you listen to the album all the way through, we'll get 0.029 EUR.
If you listen to the album 10 times on Spotify, we'll get 0.29 EUR
If you listen to it a hundred times, we'll get 2.94 EUR
If you listen to the album 1,000 times (once a day for 3 years!) we'll get 29.47 EUR!
If you use the free version of Spotify, it won't cost you anything. Spotify will make money from ads. If you use any of the paid versions, we have no idea how they carve up the money. They only disclose this information to the Major record labels...
DEEZER: (A Spotify like service in UK and France)
Deezer seems to pay a little more.
We've been getting 0.006 EUR/play from them. That's 0.052 EUR/album play. If you listen to the album 10 times on Deezer, we'll get 0.52 EUR. If you listen to it a hundred times, we'll get 5.2 EUR. If you listen to the album 1,000 times (once a day for 3 years!) we'll get a whopping 52 EUR!
If you use the free version of Deezer, it won't cost you anything and Deezer will make money from the ads. If you use any of the paid versions, we have no idea how they carve up the money either.
eMUSIC:
eMusic is a subscription service. The cost of the album will depend on the plan you have. We get roughly $0.29/song or $2.60/album (9 songs).
AMAZON MP3:
You'll pay 7.11 EUR to download the MP3's. We will get 4.97 EUR of that. That's a 70-30 split.
iTUNES:
The album will cost you 8.91 EUR to buy from Apple.
There's a 70-30% split there too, so we will keep 6.28 EUR/album.
That being said, it costs us 35 EUR/year to keep an album on iTunes, Spotify, and Amazon (105 EUR per year for all 3 of our albums!) so we don't make any money until 24 people have bought a digital copy of the album on iTunes, or 150 single songs, or if we get tens of thousands of listens on Spotify! In most cases, it's actually more economically viable not to sell the music at all.
But what about if you buy the Digital version directly from us?
DIGITAL:
We allow people to pay what they want for the digital version. If you choose to pay 5 EUR, Paypal takes 0.37 EUR, Bandcamp takes 0.75 EUR. Uniform Motion keeps 3.88 EUR. it doesn't cost us anything to have a page on bandcamp.
If you decide to pay nothing, well, we get nothing, but at least you didn't give money indirectly to major record labels, which seems to be the case with Spotify!!
CD:
If you buy a CD, directly from us for 10 EUR, Paypal takes 0.515 EUR, Bandcamp takes 1.5 EUR. So there's slightly less than 8 EUR left for us. But hold on a second, it costs a fair bit to make the CD.
The CD itself costs 1.2 EUR, the booklet costs about 50 cents, the CD packaging is 1.8 EUR and the sticker on the front costs 35 cents.
That's a total of 3.65 EUR
So in reality, there's 4.34 EUR left for us.
VINYL:
If you buy a 12" Vinyl from us at 15 EUR, Bandcamp takes 2.25 EUR, Paypal takes 0.646 EUR so there's 12.10 left. The cost of the Vinyl itself is 3.06 EUR
The labels cost 1.3 EUR. For a total of 4.36 EUR
So there's 7.75 EUR left for us.
However, we had to press 250 of these (because that's the minimum order), so it's very unlikely we'll make any money on them.
We need to sell 72 copies before we break even on the vinyl edition. We've sold about 30 so far.
If we break even, we'll lower the price a little bit. :)
Hmm, interesting figures, and quite revealing...thanks!
All those figures are factual, FYI though slight variations depending on how who and how you manufacture physical products (cds, vinyl, shirts, etc) though even if you print 10,000 shirts, you're only saving a small amount per unit compared to a short run of shirts, CDs, etc.
Also very interesting;
http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/101111spotify (http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/101111spotify)
http://www.musicthinktank.com/blog/spotiwhy-are-subscription-music-services-a-sustainable-busin.html (http://www.musicthinktank.com/blog/spotiwhy-are-subscription-music-services-a-sustainable-busin.html)
LOVE this comment from a user;
Comment By: MDTI
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
by empirical study of the "markets", i found that independant artists make more money by playing in the street/metro/subway in half a day than having tracks on those streamers for monthes and years.... The only difference is that the guy putting his track on streamers doesn('t want to beg in the metro (this is probably a bad business plan if an economic desicion has to be based on revenues only ;-)
Some of those subway player are actually real bands and they sell CD on their venues too....
Sustainable economic model: begging !!!!! it is proven to be an even older trade than the oldest trade of the world...
Streamers are an evolution from the dinosaurs :-)
What will happen when the public will only have access to the top 10 of what remainj of the "major" "companies"...