"stealing" music

[Boris]

It was technological innovation that allowed a select few artists and corporations to make billions of dollars. Now a new technology has been invented that renders the old technology obsolete. The big corporations that used to control the music business need to face reality. Their billions in profits were the result of technological innovation so it only seems fitting that technology renders the traditional industry model obsolete.

Just in time as well. The industry conglomerates have been polluting our popular culture for far too long. Ever notice how the only musicians who take a stand against internet music sharing are washed up acts with over paid recording contracts? As Exhibit 1 I give you Metallica, Garth Brooks and Aerosmith. No wonder major industry labels are seeing their market share dwindle. They offer a crap product. The consumer now has an altnernate choice for a distribution channel. No longer is the hapless teenager browsing the music selection at WallMart limited to choices of Crap Band #1, Crap Band #2 or Crap Band #3. For the first time the consumer has a choice. Take a look at the small, independant record labels. They sure as heck aren't bemoaning the advent Internet file swapping. And why should they? Their sales are sky rocketing. The "independant" artists are thriving in the new market place. Ticket sales are increasing right along with CD sales. These acts are thriving because they are responsive to consumer demand, not because they are the only game in town. Do you really think we would've had to put up with bands like Creed if the Internet had been invented 10 years earlier? Please.

As for the allegation that file swapping is theft of Intellectual Property, I say Bull#%$@. If you don't want your song distributed without your permission then don't put in on a CD and don't allow recording devices into your concerts. Real simple. I can't think of too many other products where the buyer is so restricted with what he can do with the product after he buys it. Is it theft of intellectual property if I let my neighbor read the newspaper I bought? The magazine I read? The book given to me for Christmas?

[Jimbo]

Those are compelling arguements Boris and very well stated. Bravo!!

[adios]

"For the first time the consumer has a choice. Take a look at the small, independant record labels. They sure as heck aren't bemoaning the advent Internet file swapping. And why should they? Their sales are sky rocketing."

I really didn't know that. How interesting. The fact that the consummer has a better choice and that the market has been "opened up" to more competition is a good thing I would think.

"The "independant" artists are thriving in the new market place."

That makes sense.

"If you don't want your song distributed without your permission then don't put in on a CD and don't allow recording devices into your concerts."

You know I've heard a more than a few bootlegged recordings of concerts over the years. If memory serves me correctly, I believe concert proprietors and performing artists do frown on recording devices at concerts.

"I can't think of too many other products where the buyer is so restricted with what he can do with the product after he buys it."

Off the shelf software has this characteristic to a certain degree. I've always felt that easy access to software has helped increase it's sales as well.

"I can't think of too many other products where the buyer is so restricted with what he can do with the product after he buys it."

It seems that once you pay for it, it should be yours to utilize as you see fit within reason.

One thing about sharing music over the internet is that it doesn't mean thay you'll NEVER spend money for music. I can envision scenarios where it would actually encourage one to spend money that they weren't inclined to spend. I think the bottom line is that prices from those that gauge will have to come down before people will buy their music.

[Mark Heide]

Boris,

I heard the same arguments from the music industry when cassettes were popular. Their argument does not hold up. Futhermore, I believe that they may try to lobby congress to claim alleged losses (to make their books look better).

Making recordings of live concerts is usually for the die hard fans. No one makes any significant amount of money of these live recordings. Plus, almost all of them sound like crap, even the ones produced by the major labels.

I stopped listen to rock music in the '70s, basically because it's boring. Who wants to hear some old fart, like Ozzy Osbourne, when he has not done anything creative since the early '70s. Rock bands today appear to be like what sequels are to movies--Follow the formula. This is why I listen to classical music, because there's more to it.

Good Luck

Mark

[Ray Zee]

property rights is a tough issue. everyone hates the rcording industry. when ascap sues a small business for just playing songs from tapes or cds they have purchased. it makes me crazy. totally wrong and a system where the politicians make laws to favor their crying businesses interests is bad news.
But, where does your rights start and end. can someone take your picture and use it on a comerrical or for a painting without your permission. they could say to you, if you dont want your picture used stay home.
maybe the answer is closer to that you cant make any profit from someones elses property. its just so hard to define the line.
but i hope all decisions go against the recording industry.

[Kevin J]

So you wouldn't mind if someone scanned all Two Plus Two material and started an internet network where every poker player on the planet could print out a copy of any book or article for free, instead of purchasing it?

Probably a bad example, but then I don't really disagree with you. Just being a devil's advocate.

[John Ho]

What if you make 10,000 copies of the book at work and leave them in a pile in Central Park for anyone to grab? Would you then finally agree that is theft of intellectual property?

That's like saying if you don't want your software copied why sell it? Or if you don't want your novel stolen why publish it?

There's nothing wrong with swapping songs if the owners are fine with it. It is the songs that the owners insist need to be paid for with $$$ that need to be protected. Indy record companies can distribute their songs all they want for free if they want. It's their right. But it's also your right to sell a song without having the rest of the world have it for free.

[John Ho]

I don't hate the recording industry. Without them I probably never would have heard Michael Jackson (before he went crazy), Mariah Carey, Pearl Jam, U2, etc. Plus I get to see Britney Spears half naked all the time.

The recording industry has done fine things for young men. Shania Twain in thigh high leather boots? Oh yeah!

[brad]

i guarantee if they did that their sales would go up.

[adios]

I wonder if you're right about that. You probably are. Astute observation really IMO.