Get in on this discussion...

[m2]

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.

OK Aaron, how much does it cost to produce a major release CD? Seriously. Are you one of those that argue that "Gee CDR's that I can burn on my computer are so cheap that I can make a CD for 35• at home! Why are Pressed CD's at Tower records 15.00?!? CD's Are freakin' cheap to manufacture"
OK, quick how many people get the part where you are paying for the content not the CD itself. Someone explain to Aaron that there is an army of folks behind every release. Ever read the credits, Aaron? Sure the label gets a HUGH pound of flesh from the $ we pay. If the artist cuts that deal, then that's his deal. Not yours. The record label [publisher], the guitar company, the auto manufacturer on down the line, all do the same thing. You don't want to pay 15.00 for a CD? Fine. But don't steal it. I don't steal your car or your guitar do I? There is about 8.00 worth of wood in a solid body guitar and another 6.00 of wire and 2.00 worth of plastic, but I don't see Aaron bitching about the Fender or Gibson when he lays down 200.00 for his cheap poorly intonated copy of a Strat he owns. [That's OK he would NEVER pay top dollar for a real Fender - "theses guitars are freakin cheap to manufacture"]

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.

OK you can take the good with the bad? - well here it is:
You're right you're an amateur. You don't see it from a Artist's POV, only a consumer's. Which means you don't get to vote.

[billf]

Originally posted by qo:
I work for a prominent networking company in engineering. There is no way to do what you are describing without impacting legitimate traffic. It's possible to block e.g. TCP/UDP port numbers, but going further inside the packet (especially in hardware) is problematic, and is not possible with current products. Perhaps we can get there in a couple years, but silicon isn't up to it yet.

IMHO, I'm in the camp that believes there's no closing Pandora's Box. The technology is such that pirating is here to stay. DRM is a joke, and any such attempts will be easily thwarted by pirates. So, what's the answer? I think there are several.

Wow, this is a polarizing topic. I'm almost afraid to comment. Anyway, I have some random thoughts while reading this thread:

One thing I haven't seen mentioned is that file sharing isn't the only problem with piracy. I just saw a study a couple of weeks ago that demonstrated it isn't even the main problem. The biggest problem according to the study is the counterfeiting of CD's and DVD's, which mainly come from China. I'll see if I can dig up the link, it was interesting information.

EDIT: Here's the link:

http://news.com.com/Study+Falling+CD+sales+cant+be+blamed+on+P2P/2100-1027_3-5746291.html

Another thing I question is if you sue Bobby Joe the twelve year old who has 10,000 songs on his shared folder, and get his parents to pony up $3k to settle with the RIAA, does that do anything to put a dent in things? Does it fix the problem?

qo, you are correct, DRM will not work, it might temporarily slow down file sharing, but it will not stop it. Equally as bad is the strategy of suing the audience (as per recent RIAA actions). Both measures are short term fixes that ultimately alienate the audience. There has to be someway to find a middle ground where consumers can get what they want when they want it and artists get paid for their work. Stealing is stealing, but when it is widespread and rampant, something about the current way of doing business is badly broken and has to change.

Lastly, port blocking won't work, because as qo points out, too much legitmate traffic would get filtered. Reading packet data is an invasion of privacy, and creates a whole other can of worms (see the recent identity theft stories). Digital Rights Management (for both the consumer and the artists) is one of the biggest current problems in technology today, but an easy fix is not lurking around the corner. It is going to take a lot of creative thinking to fix this problem.

<small>[ July 19, 2005, 04:26 PM: Message edited by: TimeMist ]</small>

[builder]

"If someone told me I could rape anyone I wanted to without fear of prosecuition I wouldn't do it, even if I were standing in front of Salma Hayek. Why? Because it's morally wrong. The difference, you might say, is that I'd be causing harm to Salma Hayek or said woman, but no harm comes to the victim of the pirate. It's not for me to decide what constitutes harm."

Wow..... that is the first time I have ever seen file sharing and rape compared to each other......

I agree that file sharing is illegal and sometthing should be done about it, but please don't compare downloading music to BEING RAPPED.......... wow, I never thought I would have to say that.

[Matan]

Unless compoletely off, I think there is some double standard with a complete moral outrage at piracy:
Who, among you, haven't EVER copied someone else's copy of some album you liked? If you have'nt, ever, you must have a nice trust fund going. I, like everyone eith music out there for sale, am not thrilled about making less than all the money I am due. I do, however, recognize that there are shades here.
On the flip side, blaming the price of CD's, or any kind of a financial situation as a moral justification for stealing, is absolutely idiotic: Own up to your actions! Just because a sound file is not a material thing does not mean it is less of someone's property.
There are shades in every situation: I, for one, use pre-existing, copyrighted audio material for my pieces. Non are recognizable for what they used to be, and (I hope) would be too much trouble to reverese engineer to be of any kind of legally harmful way for me to use. I have no moral dilemas about that. But, once I made some money, I went to record shop I used to shop lift from as a kid, and gave them money for the CD's I stole. Did it absolve me from stealing? Absolutely not. But, I felt a little more honest that day.

[Timeline]

Here's the guy that is at the heart of piracy:

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0, ... tw=rss.TEK

[Dockheas23]

While piracy is wrong, it can't be compared to raping someone or stealing your meat. I know many of you don't want to admit it but the wide distribution that file sharing offers has an upside as well as a downside. Whether you choose to take advantage of the upside is up to you.

The harsh reality is that the industry is changing, as it always has and as it always will. What happened to musicians when 'Mary had a little lamb' was first recorded on a piece of tinfoil in the early 20th century? They had to adapt to the new industry that was unfolding in front of them. The changing times caused many to suffer while others prospered. I'm quite sure that there were some musicians who had a real problem with the fact that the way they made a living was being uprooted and turned into something they didn't yet understand.

In today's world, music can be visual as well as aural. Celebrity can be gained without doing anything of merit (take Jordan for example). Many musicians earn more simply from the fact that they're famous than from their music. These are facts. To deny them is to paint a false picture of the world.

On a philosophical note, everyone lives their lives according to their own set of moral values. Whilst many of us may be disgusted by stealing, the fact remains that there are some who find it perfectly acceptable. Trying to impose our own values onto others will inevitably lead to frustration. My point is that injustice is everywhere, but it's the people who can adapt, evolve and reinvent themselves to fit their surroundings who will succeed in spite of unfairness. Madonna, for example, stayed successful for decades by adapting her style to suit the times. Some may find this artistically objectionable, but her success speaks for itself.

In closing, there seems to be two avenues for victims of piracy.

1: Expend a lot of time trying to track down the purpetrators, sueing every one of them and paying most of your earnings to a lawyer, maybe extracting a brief feeling of vindication and justice.

2: Think of new ways to approach the creation and distribution of your music. Be better than the rest in every way you can. Embrace the technology and use it to your advantage as much as possible, even if you don't like it.

I know many of you would love to take route 1, but the second option seems much more conducive to a musician's creativity. True originality and genius will always come through in the end.

OK, I'm finished ranting now!!



PS: Please don't accuse me of justifying or condoning stealing. I, like some others who have posted, am just trying to find a solution to a new and tricky situation. We can either keep up with the tide or get swept away by it.

[newrigel]

I'm a composer and have my authorship to my material... there's no way to keep people from copying anything... I take it as a form of flattery but @ the same time if someone tried to illegally re-produce it for distribution this is total BS.. What can you do? SCMS don't work because you have hijacking software to get around that so really it's all about MF's that have no self dignity and respect to another persons gifts and all we do there is when we come across one of these individuals we make a legal complaint with local agencies and so forth. The guy's @ my University know better than to say the word "cracked" or anything along those lines to me or any of my colleagues. If you don't support it, tell people and that will make a cut into their networking chain. This stuff is like chain letters... if you don't get involved it "implodes" so to speak. So really the key is not to get involved with it, and if you hear of someone doing it... report them!

[John Stannard]

So, seems we never did get this one sorted out then ?
Since my last reply i have started to help a college in Cambridge as a Mac tech guy and it's been a real eye opener in many ways but regarding this subject it's fascinating !
There are students here who would NEVER buy a CD and don't see what all the fuss is about, virtually 100% of their music is downloaded by one means or another but to them it is perfectly normal, they have no experience of queueing to buy somebodys latest CD, ordering an album or any of the ritual I seem to remember that goes with being a member of "the public", forget it, it means nothing to them !, dowloading a piece of music is like getting a burger, they want it NOW and someone will provide.
I haven't been here long enough to find out but i am sure some of our music courses must include the "business" side of the business so i would love to know what goes on in that class when it gets ownership of work etc.
Me at 40+ trying to explain to them the possible downside of p2p must make me seem like a "flat earther" of the very worst kind.
Yes, on the flip side are the bands who will never be signed and see the web as their ONLY means of getting their music "out there" and the fact that people download it for free doesn't bother them, at least people are hearing it.
Mmmmmmmm, maybe i should have just stayed locked in the studio for ever, i like it there, it's warm and cosy and i can turn the volume down as well as up !!

[Timeline]

John, It can be resolved.

It's sorted out when the rights of the music makers/producers are honored per their wishes. If they want to let it go out free then they publish it on the web themselves and hope for public response or future product sales or seek label interest.

If the want to sell it then they do so with a credit card service or listing with someone like CD baby and NOT give up digital rights. Or, they give up digital rights for promo. We did that on a band I produced to get the band out there but held back DD on the second album. We have made more on the second album.

Where I see a problem is that once digital rights are given up, there is NO recourse to reacquire them. They're gone, into the ethernet.

In CDBABY's case they are not offering individual menu items on digital music distributers. This used to be how they operated and they have said they might be interested in returning to that model but as far as i know it's still all or nothing at CD BABY.

Digital music groups like Napster or Rhapsody and soon MSFT and others will offer your music in a subscription model when all you really wanted was iTunes. When it happens, all of a sudden, your tiny income becomes defined in a much different way. Usually NOT to your benefit.

Steve Jobs says he will stay away from subscription as long as he can. How long will that be? The labels will likely set the tone.

This can be dealt with, maybe even in the near future. The sooner the better IMO.

[John Stannard]

Wise words Timeline !
I'm going to endeavour to find out how/what we teach the students here about all this stuff.
I think my point was/is that although we here are all making a living out of writing, playing, recording and producing music or doing it as a "serious" hobby we are so wrapped up in it all we forget that outside those double glazed windows is a whole world of people who just don't give it a second thought.
Wonder how this will read in 10 or maybe 5 years time.
OK, i'm at college today so i really should go and do something with a G5 !

[David Polich]

I think the piracy of CD's discussion is all moot because everything is moving towards downloads. Everything. Tower Records is out of business, Steve Jobs is selling i-Pod nanos like hotcakes and the future record store is the cellphone. Heck, the future everything store is the friggin' cellphone. If you don't think this is so, remember that the major labels weren't ready to accept the future of downloading as recently as four years ago. They're feelin' it now. Problem is, they still don't have a new business model to adequately replace the old one which is already dead.

Computers are still too expensive for most people, really. But if you purchase a cellphone contract you get the cellphone right away. How perfect a market is that? A 10 year-old can have a cellphone with internet access.

It's my belief that this subject of piracy is a dead horse. Even if it's dealt with here or in Europe, it isn't being dealt with in China, Russia and other parts of the world where the subject is only being given lip-service or there are a handful of "demonstration" raids every year to bluff people into believing the governments care about it.

[mhschmieder]

All too true, and a major topic at AES this year.

Several artists (including David Gilmour of Pink Floyd, Prince, and Beck) recognise this, and are proposing to open up their mixes for download.

These forward-thinking artists recognise that the next big thing in music is people making their own remixes.

It's these sort of fresh approaches that keep music alive. Most money is from live concerts anymore, not recordings. The artists that understand how people are experiencing their music will win the most sympethetic audiences.

Even though my own band has never toured and is by no stretch of the imagination a major act, we are getting all sorts of exposure via new media (I can't say much about this as negotiations are still in progress).

Personally, I think this is the most exciting time in music since the Beatles ushered in the era of Album-Oriented Rock in the late 60's.

[David Polich]

Totally agree, it IS the most exciting time to be in the music business. But only for forward-thinking people. The old days are not coming back ever.

Something to chew on - the old business model worked because people could not do two things - record a CD at home, and distribute it. Very few folks had a record cutting lathe at home, which meant that record manufacturing was the province of the labels who had access to the manufacturing plants. A decent recording studio cost at least 150 grand to outfit (excluding the room). The best one could do to hire an outside recording studio was perhaps 65 bucks an hour. When CD's first arrived, there was no technology that allowed the consumer to record and burn them at home. The first CD recorder was the marantz unit which was about 7 grand. CD blanks cost 35 bucks apiece. This was all great for the record companies.

When the ADAT emerged, that was the first step towards democratizing this whole business of making and selling music. Finally, people could make a decent-sounding record at home. And they did (the quality of the early ADAT converters is perhaps another topic of discussion entirely). No more hourly time, you could take as long as you liked to make a record and change things whenever you wanted.

We may bemoan the current state of the biz but we forget how restricted for artists it used to be. I don't care to go back to the old system, with or without the piracy. The old system sucked for artists. At least now you have DIY avenues and can make a little bit of money and get your music out there without having to get signed.

[Jim]

http://www.informationweek.com/internet ... =193401501

[scottchristy]

I don't have a problem with file sharing. The reason why is this. I feel I've already paid for the music I download free. Radio stations and clubs etc. pay ascap and bmI to play the music. So the artists are payed already. The stations recoup their money by selling ads. The advertisers recoup their money by building it into the price of their products. We buy their products..thus we pay for the music! Am I crazy or what? What am I missing. I think most people download what they are already aware of, so new and unheard artists don't fall into this category. For the small select group of downloaders who search out new and upcoming music, it's considered promotion and publicity for the new artist. As a new and upcoming artist myself, I fully endorse giving my stuff away. That is..untill I become the next metalica or something. But like I said, I've already paid for it in one way or another.