|
Do illegal downloads mean lower revenue/royalties for the artists? (pg. 10)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Richard Butler |
| quote: | Originally posted by Storyteller
Music industry is pretty much ed on all levels heh. |
Here's the point as far as I'm concerned;
In any artistic realm only a minority of participants will make some money, period. We just have to accept this truism.
If you are a writer or scupltor, just like in music, there is an army of participants and most will go hungry.
Same for film makers or comedians.
In a way I don't know why everyone whinges, no one is entitled to earn a penny, you either play the game and by dint of effort and luck get to the top, or like all those painters and writers out there, you just enjoy your craft and don't expect anything in return.
People bemoan labels, so my answer is if you think you have the answers and can do it better, go on then, do it.
I'd bet most idealistic people starting a label would soon come to act in just the same manner as established lables do - you would have a picture of your kids on your desk who need the money, need those school fees, want that ski trip and I'm afraid you would succumb to thier needs at the expense of your artists. Maybe the odd moral Saint would not succumb, but most would when all said and done.
So my message is make the very best tracks you can and keep your fingers crossed and just enjoy the ride. You dont feel sorry for struggling writers that never make a dime, so don't imagine for a second that producers are somehow entitled to some cash action.
There
:stongue: |
|
|
| kitphillips |
+1 on the ASCAP/APRA bull.
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
But there actually is a way to virtually kill of piracy, at least for the masses and in that respect limit losses to a just few ardent and super technical consumers - follow what the satellite TV industry did:
Anyone who has done any FTA (free to air) "testing" for Nagra3 knows what I'm talking about ;)
It requires a combination of a few different measures. The first being to implement a type of encryption on the media, especially one that requires a regular update to make it continue to work. The next thing you do is go after manufacturers of software and hardware that bypasses it. Even if you can't convict, you can tie them up in court so hard they go bust. Then combine that with a few very high profile and well publicised arrests for coding teams (killing a monkey to scare the chickens). Then finally, work with ISP's to send threat letters to those consumers suspected of using measures to bypass encyption (i.e via group keysharing etc) and to those forums which even so much as mention anything about circumventing the technology.
The end result is a massive drop in piracy at least for as the average consumer.
It has worked with satellite technology, to the point that the vast majority of people have given up trying to get get free TV.
I know music files are not the same thing, as they are single media files (not a stream) but all it would take is to get the industry aligned as such (and it's already happening with spotify et al), and frankly there's huge incentives to do so; it only costs a fraction of the potential lost revenue to implement this system and everyhting that goes with it. |
Yeah but look at what happened when they tried that with DVD... DVD is a more comparable medium to music IMO, since DVDs aren't a stream and are discrete works, picked by the consumer.
I don't think DRM will ever be the answer, you'll only scare away those who would have bought the product. People are getting a lot more clever about using the internet for like this now, my 14 year old brother was talking about I'd never even heard of in the way of anonimity techniques, and he's not even vaguely into technology.
The solution is to make music cheaper, better value and more accesible. The fact is that its still easier to search google for the tracks you want and then illegally download them than it is to get on beatport and try to navigate its clunky and outdated flash system. |
|
|
| Richard Butler |
| quote: | Originally posted by kitphillips
The solution is to make music cheaper, better value and more accesible. The fact is that its still easier to search google for the tracks you want and then illegally download them than it is to get on beatport and try to navigate its clunky and outdated flash system.
|
A good point.
I feel there is a gap in the market for a simple selling platform. Simplicity is so vital in a bsuy life, but 99% of IT developers get it wrong time and time again. I know it can be done because I designed my own work site and the IT bods were utterly clueless in terms of keeping things functional and simple and they forgot the basics of what it is and end user truly wants.
Little things like remaining logged in no matter what computer I'm using. I hate the fact I have to re log - in if I'm using home PC instead of work to access Beatport. |
|
|
| Richard Butler |
I like this comment on there from a supposed record company indsider, and really I agree with him on the notion that the public support and buy what is easily accesible to them, so it's obvious most dance producers will fail to be commercial as they are often producing for themselves (fair enough) and to be artistically in tact as it were, rather than producing what the public wants (imagine a restaurant where the chef made the food he likes rather than responded to customers desires);
You well know that for the past 25 years I have worked directly with artists, spent the majority of my working life within independent labels and now I work for a major record company so I'll certainly entertain the argument that I'm only interested in defending my position. But ultimately to the non-pop artist a record company is of less importance to them than at any other time. There are more, open and accessible income streams available than there has ever been previously and their music can be discussed, supported and celebrated in more areas than ever before. It's not all a misery fella!
I know that coming out against Bill Hicks is a crime slightly above child abuse but the argument about society consuming only what is fed is patronising. The simplest most unsophisticated forms of culture are the 'largest' across the globe in music, in film, TV, art and literature. Sorry, but the public don't want Faust. They want Jedward. Let them have it I say. It's not like the alternative is hidden.
Cheers, |
|
|
| Magnus |
| quote: | Originally posted by MSZ
brilliant article. |
Agreed. The author nailed the issues in this industry on so many levels. |
|
|
| MSZ |
btw its pretty much impossible to stop fileshare sites, its pretty bs. it takes a day or two to for them to process the copyright claim, when the re-upload and google search-ability is instant, by then 2-3, more fileshare sites have them up.
it should be reinforced that any disputes whatsoever, the file should be removed instantly as well, but oh well. cant stop torrents or piracy anyway.
there was this funny act being talked about in the USA which had a ton of financial backing, found an article here; but i believe it infringes on some rights. I believe this would make soundcloud illegal.
-new-us-anti-piracy-bill-will-kill-the-internet
| quote: |
This bill greatly increases the government’s power to go after alleged copyright infringers, that is something people should be very worried about. But it will also allow private copyright holders to use some of the same tools as the Government does to stop copyright enforcement and intellectual property protection. Can you image a world where News Corp has the same power as the government to go after "dangerous" copyright infringers?
Government and copyright holders will be able to shut you down without due process. I hope you don’t have a website that shares controversial information or anything like that. Because if this new bill is passed there won’t be very much stopping the government from claiming that you need to be shut down for the good of our national security.
And of course, nowhere in the bill does it mention any of the constitutional issues that come with granting government and Big Media power to police the Internet.
|
|
|
|
| aNYthing |
| See my sig, it sums up the topic, IMO. |
|
|
| Magnus |
| Kind of on this topic... Nick Sentience recently released his own album called Syncronized where he cut out the middleman by selling the album himself. The album is only available through his website. I'm very curious to know how this has worked out for him. |
|
|
| sleeping |
| quote: | Originally posted by Magnus
Kind of on this topic... Nick Sentience recently released his own album called Syncronized where he cut out the middleman by selling the album himself. The album is only available through his website. I'm very curious to know how this has worked out for him. |
according to the thread on trancefix, not that great in the beginning... |
|
|
| Storyteller |
Doesn't surprise me at all. You can cut out as many middlemen as possible but you still need to sell on a significant part of the mp3 shops to get any kind of sales.
The market is already very fragmented as it is and you shouldn't be deluded by taking on the shops on your own. Little chance it will work unless you've got a very big name to start with. Nobody is looking for yet another place to get their music from. It just takes too much effort. |
|
|
|
|
