The Geek Forum
Main Forums => Entertainment => Topic started by: AppleJax on June 26, 2008, 05:47:23 PM
-
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/06/recording-indus.html
"The recording industry and U.S. radio companies have squared off for decades about whether AM and FM radio broadcasters should pay royalties to singers, musicians and their labels.
But now the debate is getting meaner; there's more at stake as the recording industry seeks new income avenues in the wake of wanton peer-to-peer piracy and declining CD sales in part due to the iPod and satellite radio. A U.S. House subcommittee could vote as early as Thursday on a royalty measure."
good god.
-
Ok, I am not very versed in the record industry, how it operates or how much money it takes to keep it afloat. But how should the industry keep making money if it is losing (as much as they claim) from digital distribution and piracy? I'm not saying I have an answer. I pay for almost all of my music, and it doesn't really bother me that I do.
-
I wonder how much the music industry should save by shutting down the RIAA.
-
Do you know exactly what the RIAA is? It's the engineers, technicians, accountants, etc; everyone it takes to run a Recording Industry. The same as programmers, code writers, game developers, etc; the people who work to make a living producing software. To "shut down" the RIAA is about the same idea as firing or laying off everyone who writes code or programs for a company. If people didn't STEAL the music to start with; there'd be no need for lawsuits on the scale there is today. Same with cracked and hacked software. The only difference is you're talking about recording engineers instead of software engineers; and the recording engineers have one central organization to look out for them (RIAA), where software programmers dont. Yet.
-
If games and music weren't so expensive, people wouldn't steal them.
(yes, I know what I'm unleashing by stating this.)
-
"Dude, I gotta take my freakin' radio transeiver thing down to the Geek Squad to activate my radio wave subscription."
-
If games and music weren't so expensive, people wouldn't steal them.
(yes, I know what I'm unleashing by stating this.)
That's absolutely true. I think CDs are extremely overpriced. The recording industry has created an almost totally insulated world for themselves; regarding customers, equipment, location, production, nearly everything. The result is most "pro" equipment is so expensive; only commercial studios could afford it. This cost was passed on to the consumer (as is always the case). The problem now is anyone can install "pro" recording and editing software (even some semi-pro and consumer products) and turn out a production quality recording, and the proverbial cat is out of the bag now. Everyone knows it doesn't cost 20$ to make a CD; however, the studios have all this expensive gear and highly qualified (read: well-paid) engineers; plus, to bring in well-known talent; you sort of have to almost over-charge them. Billy Joel wouldn't return your call if you told him you could record his next album for $50, see? On the other hand; if you had your assistant deliver his assistant a portfolio of your work, your equipment, your studio, and you charge him $200 / an hour ---- you're hired.
The way out for us as consumers isn't to steal their product, however. Buy used CDs, buy songs from Itunes, etc. Go to concerts and buy buy buy their t-shirts, CDs, posters, and whatever they are selling. The old industry model will die eventually or change drastically; possibly focusing more on production, distribution, and marketing; as they already have the corner on that; and it'll be hard to wrest that one from them.
-
It's the same thing with college text books. It's work that is generally carried out one time and one time only, and the rest of the work is duplicated thousands of times over again by machines that cost very little to operate.
-
It's the same thing with college text books. It's work that is generally carried out one time and one time only, and the rest of the work is duplicated thousands of times over again by machines that cost very little to operate.
If I could steal my books for classes, I would gladly do it.
-
College text books should take a page from Radiohead and let people pay whatever they want. :-)
-
Do you know exactly what the RIAA is? It's the engineers, technicians, accountants, etc; everyone it takes to run a Recording Industry. The same as programmers, code writers, game developers, etc; the people who work to make a living producing software. To "shut down" the RIAA is about the same idea as firing or laying off everyone who writes code or programs for a company. If people didn't STEAL the music to start with; there'd be no need for lawsuits on the scale there is today. Same with cracked and hacked software. The only difference is you're talking about recording engineers instead of software engineers; and the recording engineers have one central organization to look out for them (RIAA), where software programmers dont. Yet.
Can we please stop calling this stealing? If I download an album, a retail outlet loses nothing. It's exceedingly unlikely that the artist and label lose anything, as it is exceedingly unlikely that I would have bought it if I couldn't get it for free.
The rest of this is pretty ridiculous as well. You no longer need a million dollar studio and marketing budget to make your music and get yourself heard. If you're an artist with a brain, with the options that are available today, you should be doing everything you can to get rid of the engineers, technicians, *accountants*, and all the other parasites who turn you into a hack who makes art for a living instead of for the art itself.
-
Do you know exactly what the RIAA is? It's the engineers, technicians, accountants, etc; everyone it takes to run a Recording Industry. The same as programmers, code writers, game developers, etc; the people who work to make a living producing software. To "shut down" the RIAA is about the same idea as firing or laying off everyone who writes code or programs for a company. If people didn't STEAL the music to start with; there'd be no need for lawsuits on the scale there is today. Same with cracked and hacked software. The only difference is you're talking about recording engineers instead of software engineers; and the recording engineers have one central organization to look out for them (RIAA), where software programmers dont. Yet.
wow.
ahhh. Well, thank you for the information. What I meant was, how much money they would save by not perusing all this litigation against everyone. I wonder if what they spend trying to eradicate the sharing of music, might be doing more harm than good.
What if they put all the money that they spend in legal fees and put it instead into the creation of new music and into reimaging the music industry to fit today's obvious culture changes.
I didn't mean to get all up in your grill, yo.
------------
I always buy a back edition of textbooks when possible the price usually drops to about $10-$30 a book.
-
If people didn't STEAL the music to start with; there'd be no need for lawsuits on the scale there is today.
The lawsuits aren't working as a deterrent, only a money grab, and they are in no way proportionate to the level of the offense being committed.
-
Can we please stop calling this stealing? If I download an albumWindowsXP, a retail outlet loses nothing. It's exceedingly unlikely that the artist and labelthe code writers and Microsoft lose anything, as it is exceedingly unlikely that I would have bought it if I couldn't get it for free.
But it's not ok like this?
The rest of this is pretty ridiculous as well. You no longer need a million dollar studio and marketing budget to make your music and get yourself heard. If you're an artist with a brain, with the options that are available today, you should be doing everything you can to get rid of the engineers, technicians, *accountants*, and all the other parasites who turn you into a hack who makes art for a living instead of for the art itself.
The rest of your post is ridiculous as well; as it is nearly the same thing I already posted just above ya there; on the same page. Do you reply just to posts, or do you read the whole thread, comprehend what the poster is saying, and then form a reply?
... anyone can install "pro" recording and editing software (even some semi-pro and consumer products) and turn out a production quality recording, and the proverbial cat is out of the bag now. Everyone knows it doesn't cost 20$ to make a CD; however, the studios have all this expensive gear and highly qualified (read: well-paid) engineers; plus, to bring in well-known talent; you sort of have to almost over-charge them.
-
The lawsuits aren't working as a deterrent, only a money grab, and they are in no way proportionate to the level of the offense being committed.
I liken them to chopping a hole in your boat to drain out the water that's seeping in.
-
wow.
ahhh. Well, thank you for the information. What I meant was, how much money they would save by not perusing all this litigation against everyone. I was simply wondering if what they spend trying to eradicate the sharing of music, might be doing more harm than good.
I mean what if they put all the money that they spend in legal fees and put it instead into the creation of new music and into reimaging the music industry to fit today's obvious culture changes.
I didn't mean to get all up in your grill, yo.
:-)
Don't take it all personally. I just asked if you knew what the RIAA actually was; then explained it and gave an analogy to software piracy. So... Im not exactly sure where you're coming from with the 'wow's and 'bein' allup in my grilly o'. I certainly hope you aren't expecting everyone to simply agree with whatever you post. How boring a thread would that be. :|
-
I liken them to chopping a hole in your boat to drain out the water that's seeping in.
hahaha
+1
-
:-)
Don't take it all personally. I just asked if you knew what the RIAA actually was; then explained it and gave an analogy to software piracy. So... Im not exactly sure where you're coming from with the 'wow's and 'bein' allup in my grilly o'. I certainly hope you aren't expecting everyone to simply agree with whatever you post. How boring a thread would that be. :|
'Course not. Debate is beautiful, I wouldn't have posted something I thought everyone would agree with. :slap
-
But it's not ok like this?
I guess it would depend on whether you consider coding a creative endeavor that is done for it's own sake, or merely for making money. Either way, it's not stealing to pirate it. Not morally, and not legally (at least not yet).
The rest of your post is ridiculous as well; as it is nearly the same thing I already posted just above ya there; on the same page. Do you reply just to posts, or do you read the whole thread, comprehend what the poster is saying, and then form a reply?
I don't think you understand your own point, as you say that and then go on to try to justify the existence of an organization that is fighting a losing battle with obsolescence. You can't admit that the RIAA is completely unnecessary to an artist and then go "OMG! We can't do without them!".
-
Who said we can't do without them?
-
And there's a big difference in justifying something and telling what it is and why. I don't disgree that the recording industry is a dinosaur long lived past its usefullness to anyone not employed by it. I just said, in effect, what the infamous, mysterious "RIAA" is; and compared it to the software industry. It seems everyone here can understand that someone wrote the code for all the software you use; so it's easy to understand how a programmer can lose money (or more likely his job due to layoffs) by pirating software. When talking about the RIAA, however, it seems people forget there are actual recording engineers and staff that work very hard at these studios; much as that programmer writing code does in his cubicle. Maybe it's easier to have one target (RIAA) to hate. I dont know. I do know the choices the industry has made regarding piracy have been a total failure; and has directly pushed them farther and farther toward irrelevancy.
-
I won't go so far as to say that software piracy doesn't affect business, I'm just saying it's not theft in any meaningful sense.
-
I think it helps people: there are some movies I've downloaded that were so bad, if I had paid money for them, I'd feel obligated to hunt down the people responsible for their creation and murder their entire families.
Because I'm NOT paying, I just can't work up the sufficient amount of indignant rage to kill the children and the pets.
Piracy saves lives.
-
So what exactly replaces the recording industry when it does go away? If I want to finally quit my job, and start making a living making music, right now, I need to get signed to a label. Oh sure there's a lot of artists out there that are comfortable doing one gig a week at the bar and getting paid a whole $100, but that is not making a living. Where is the money going to come from to be able to put on a massive show, and get all the advertising out, and pay all the people involved in the process from recording to stage?
Can it all come from ticket sales (to which I say fuck your $75 dollar tickets for nose bleed sections)? Can a young artist really get the exposure they need from giving away their music free on the net?
-
jonathancoulton.com
-
If the RIAA goes away that doesn't mean that labels will.
But the market will be different. There will be more people with smaller pieces of the pie, rather than the way things are now, where you have 5 or 6 big players with the vast majority of it, and all the rest of thoes indie labels with their little scraps of what's left.
It won't be quite as profitable to cater to 'lowest common denominator', instead music (like many entertainment markets) will move more toward niches.
That still won't stop "casual piracy" (i.e., individuals trading music via P2P), but so what?
Almost every major study done so far (most of which have been funded by the RIAA or its Canadian equivalent even) has shown that not only does P2P file trading not hurt music sales, but because of the viral nature of increased exposure to things that consumers might not have bothered with buying, it actually has the net effect of a slight INCREASE in music sales.
And face it... if you're a small label, or a self-produced, self-financed individual or band, that kind of marketing might be the only kind you can afford (i.e., free), when you don't have the financial might of a BMG or a Sony behind your act.