Get in on this discussion...

[dougieb]

I'm interested in something... this is about a topic in another section of the board, but I think it is important that if there are any artists left out there, that they say something.

There is a discussion going on in the "Music Business" section of this board related to file sharing.

Last I contemplated, making music was still more about creating something than making money.

Any artists wish to chime in on this discussion?

Link to Napster Rears its Ugly Head

-dougieb

[John Stannard]

"Yes" to music being about creativity but is it too much to ask to be paid for it so i can buy my groceries and smokes like the rest of the "real" world ?
This is one of those topics that will just run and run and run, it's like "which is best, Gibson or Fender?", (Its the Tele for me every time by the way), oooooops, didn't mean to go starting something !!
So, how do you resolve it ?, i want everyone to hear my music but ...............

[pinky]

Originally posted by dougieb:
...making music was still more about creating something than making money...

That is a very naive mind set. Making music, in fact, is both. Unless you are independently wealthy or supremely connected, making music HAS TO be about making money. Otherwise, it's a hobby. As most professional composers know, creating is usually the easy part. MARKETING and selling to a client is the hard part!

There is nothing wrong with music as a hobby, but I don't know a single professional who thinks file sharing is a good thing for their work. If you don't get paid, you do not eat or pay the rent.

Stealing is stealing. Let••™s switch the roles a bit:

Let••™s say Warner Bros. or MGM decide to start collecting YOUR music and ••œsharing••

[wonder]

from the beginning of time, musicians have been well payed (even by the church), somehow we've traveled backwards.
How would they like it if we went to their farms and "shared" their fruits for free. Or went to offices and "shared" their computers for free?
some of us make a living out of this.
I dont support Napsters, or any other site giving out music for free

[aaronlyon]

The question is already academic. The digital-file-sharing genie is out of the bottle, and won't go back. From now on there will be file sharing, and the only valid question is how to survive as an artist in this environment.

For every (often hyped) story about lost revenue due to piracy, there are more stories about indie or under-the-radar projects that gained a larger audience and became large-scale successes because of exposure via file sharing.

My biggest gripe at this point is that the big labels are sticking to their sinking ships. They need to drastically reduce the retail price of CDs. Only then will I buy new CDs, instead of used. CDs are freakin' cheap to manufacture. They need to rely more on sales volume than high prices.

I'm just an amateur; I don't rely on income from my music. But if I did, I'd be prepared to take the bad with the good.

-aaron

[tremolounge]

Originally posted by Aaron Lyon:
For every (often hyped) story about lost revenue due to piracy, there are more stories about indie or under-the-radar projects that gained a larger audience and became large-scale successes because of exposure via file sharing.
-aaron

That's fine, if that's your CHOICE to use filesharing as a marketing tool. But if people are grabbing your property without your permission, that's stealing, and no amount of rhetoric will make it anything else.

[wonder]

i agree ... some of us who make a living making music are being robbed.
again...to beat a dead horse...how would you like it if we came to your workplace and used your produced goods and you didnt get paid for it?

[pinky]

Originally posted by Aaron Lyon:
The question is already academic. The digital-file-sharing genie is out of the bottle, and won't go back. From now on there will be file sharing....I'm just an amateur; I don't rely on income from my music. But if I did, I'd be prepared to take the bad with the good.

-aaron

Clearly, you did not need to tell us of your non-professional status. But you are dead wrong. No genie is out of the bottle and copyright laws still stand. Once your identity and economic resources are identified, YOU WILL BE SUED for illegal file sharing.

You are free to think what you want, but you are NOT free to distribute protected works without payment to the owners. Period.

OK, I have to go back to creating music worth stealing

You may return the your post at WallWart.

BTW - Anyone know the dates for the next BMI distribution in July? I'm ready for a new car.. [all about creation and not about the $$$ - not THIS kid!]

[chrispick]

Originally posted by pinky:

Originally posted by Aaron Lyon:
The question is already academic. The digital-file-sharing genie is out of the bottle, and won't go back. From now on there will be file sharing....I'm just an amateur; I don't rely on income from my music. But if I did, I'd be prepared to take the bad with the good.

-aaron

Clearly, you did not need to tell us of your non-professional status. But you are dead wrong. No genie is out of the bottle and copyright laws still stand. Once your identity and economic resources are identified, YOU WILL BE SUED for illegal file sharing.

You are free to think what you want, but you are NOT free to distribute protected works without payment to the owners. Period.

OK, I have to go back to creating music worth stealing

You may return the your post at WallWart.

He didn't say that he stole (he didn't even endorse the action). He said he buys CDs used.

Speaking of genies out of bottles, Ms. Aguilera probably makes more a year than most heart surgeons. Hell, Simon Cowell probably does. How's that for inequity, cultural and monetary? I try to keep these sorts of things in perspective when I feel kicked in the shins.

[wonder]

who cares who's makin' what unless its kids starting websites dedicated to stealing and "sharing" music?
thats what kills me, people THINK that all these people in the music business are making SO much money...granted some are. But to hear people complain and say "well, i'll stop downloading (illegally) music when the cd prices go down."
FYI...cd prices have jumped partly because of the boom of music stealing and illegal downloading.

[James Steele]

Guys... please keep posts in the appropriate forum. I'm moving this one to "Music Business". Thanks.

[Keith Henry]

Originally posted by Aaron Lyon:

My biggest gripe at this point is that the big labels are sticking to their sinking ships. They need to drastically reduce the retail price of CDs. Only then will I buy new CDs, instead of used. CDs are freakin' cheap to manufacture. They need to rely more on sales volume than high prices.

-aaron

Aaron,

I do agree with you that prices of CD's should be more reasonable and the public would buy 10x's more product. However, the reality of the labels/industry lowering their prices just isn't going to happen. I was at the AES Convention in San Francisco in Oct. During Q&A from the audience, someone brought up this very question. Of coarse the audience erupted in cheers. Only to be promptly put in their place by panelist member Ron Fair (Christina Auguilera, Black Eyed Peas, etc.). Mr. Fair started naming off all the factors which actully keep the prices up;

i.e. publicity, promotion, vocal coaches, recording cost, video shoots, producers, engineers, legal services, accounting, advertisement, and on & on & on.......... Manufacturing is probably the least expensive item. Too, the successful artist profits (to the label) offset the failure artist. You see, on the major labels side, there's a lot more to producing an album than we realize. Granted, on an indy scale we can produce a product for much less therefore keeping the cost to the buying public lower. Indy artist percentage wise can actually make more money. But, it's the major distribution you get with a BIG label deal. But, if your CD's don't sell, you now owe the BIG label and you're in debt for the rest of your life.

Again, I agree lower prices would move more product. And, often I wish I were the King of England.

Ciao

<small>[ May 25, 2005, 10:29 PM: Message edited by: julio ugliass ]</small>

[John Stannard]

dougieb !, see what you have started !, i just dont think this will ever be resolved, OF COURSE it's illegeal, like driving 34MPH in a 30 zone or parking for "just a minute" in a no park zone and i'm sure we never do those things either. (Maybe its just a UK thing) but hasnt making cassette tape copies of albums and CD's always been illegal too ?, so, is file sharing just the "post modern" version of copying cassettes ??.
I'm lucky that what i do does earn me a living and i would never, ever condone piracy of any sort, i just don't see how you can police and then convict the people involved, who pay's for it ?, do large companies really have the will to prosecute on behalf of a (rightly) aggrieved artist and could smaller ones afford it ?
See, it's a tough one .....
Julio, sometimes you "dream of being king of England ?", well come on over, we could do with a hand sometimes !!

[dougieb]

Speaking of genies out of bottles, Ms. Aguilera probably makes more a year than most heart surgeons. Hell, Simon Cowell probably does. How's that for inequity, cultural and monetary? I try to keep these sorts of things in perspective when I feel kicked in the shins.[/QB]

Cowell has some sick 10+ million contract for Idol, but don't forget, he also OWNS a nice chunk of Idol and all of its related companies. One thing... I don't think anyone has put more unknown talent out there than this guy. Too bad they don't showcase musicians as well. I think he deserves whatever he makes - as does anyone as long as someone is willing to pay it.

As for Ms. Aguilera - she is just bad ass... a great performer - a great singer - material... eh... there are moments... but her voice is just awesome.

[dougieb]

I think a lot of the whole point of the post is missed...

There are some suggesting that there should be a tax on computers because they MIGHT be used to pirate music. Using that logic, you should put a tax on computers for anything else someone MIGHT do with it - stock fraud, etc. - just charge $100,000 for a computer why not... because god knows what someone MIGHT do with it.

Now we come to the people that just wanted their music distributed free - can they still do so? Well it is more then problematic. Why? Because file-sharing in general is in jeopardy. Last I checked, there were still songs on the radio you could record with a $20 tape deck. What about the piracy there?

With the new satellite radio stuff - artist will be compensated (i would guess) for actual play. Pretty cool! A lot of other artists are making more than they normally would by distributing via these new avenues. You can be your own record company.

In this case, for the door that was closed - 100 opened.