You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, download files, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
There is an interesting commentary in USA Today by Platinum recording artist Janis Ian who debunks the Recording Industry Associate of America´s claim that they are protecting artists by suing everyone in the world who owns a computer, has seen a computer, or has uttered the word "computer".
Their latest lawsuit is against Verizon to turn over the name and contact info of one of it´s subscribers who may have unauthorized copies of songs on a home computer.
Personally, I am a perfectionist, so I like having the CDs because the sound quality is 100% with the CD. But have I sampled music on the Internet? Sure. There is simply too much garbage being released by the record labels these days not to "test drive" a song or two before you buy. And if Janus Ian´s experience is any indication - it is just another means of exposure.
RIAA is not protecting the artists at all. They´re protecting their pocket books. Artists make next to nothing from selling CDs. I´ve heard more than on artist speak about this issue. I was watching a special on the Dixie Chicks who spoke about this and that they sell CDs to advertise for their concerts which is where artists make their money. Given that I wouldn´t think an artist would have any trouble with the coping of their music via the internet. They would hope that people come to see them in concert that way.
<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD><font size=-1>Quote:</font><HR></TD></TR><TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1><BLOCKQUOTE>
On 2002-10-23 09:35, Anonymous wrote:
RIAA is not protecting the artists at all. They´re protecting their pocket books.
Rick McNeal
Boulder, CO
</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>
I remember reading a few years ago about how the RIAA was suing Mom and Pop record stores because they sold used CDs. Why? Because no royalties were being paid on the Used CDs. I always felt that their position is that you can buy a music cd, but it never really is yours.[img]images/forum/smilies/icon_mad.gif[/img]
This really smokes my bacon! I am so sick of these incompentent fools! Why is it that there ALWAYS has to be someone to blame? It can NEVER be YOUR fault! I submit that it IS RIAA´s own doings that are causing this alleged "slump" in record sales.
There has been a 15% drop in sales according to RIAA´s own statistics. My company has experienced a 20%+ decline in sales of our core product as well. Can I blame consumers for that? If I could, my freaking stock would not be taking such a hit. How can an organization be so full of itself that a cyclical decline in sales due to recession, slump in consumer spending, and confidence, and increased competition for entertainment dollars is blamed on the very people that keep that industry afloat!?
According to an August report by Forrester Research, 31% of consumers download music and burn CDs often. These frequent digital music users buy 36% of all CDs. So it seems that RIAA has gotten hold of some fuzzy math. According to this report, "Labels can restore industry growth by making it easier for people to find, copy, and pay for music on their own terms."
Based on surveys of 1000 online consumers, there is no evidence of decreased CD buying among frequent digital music consumers. In the coming years, the Forrester report states that consumers will demand their right to find music from any label, not just two or three. Secondly, consumers want the right to control their own music by burning to CD´s, copying to MP3, or whatever is convenient for the consumer. Finally, consumers will demand the right to pay by the song or album, not just via subscription based services now offered by EMusic and the like.
The only way music companies can get in on the $2.1 Billion chunk of revenue by 2007 is to match these set of demands, which are known as the Music Bill of Rights.
If the record companies insist on offending their main consumers, as opposed to making music more available, portable, and focusing on consumer ownership of music after the sale, then they will be left behind.
In my opinion, RIAA needs to convene on how to ride this wave instead of trying to stop it by spending billions of dollars they allegedly don´t have because of US, to sue US.
We´ll see what happens. I would like to see labels start dropping out of RIAA. That would send a clear message, and it is going to happen if RIAA continues to inhibit the growth of digital music.
Though Brad points out that the quality of a CD can be better then a digital file on your computer, that is not always so. The quality of your digital recordings can be as good as you like them to be. They´re just digital recordings on the CD after all.
That aside, CDs/Tapes/and any other media will eventually just be media to store something on. That´s all they were to begin with. It isn´t the record industry´s place to step into our harddrives and tell us what files are valid and which ones aren´t. I hope that enough people are paying attention to what is going on to keep them from doing just that. I can´t imagine we´ll let such a thing happen.
However, I don´t have a solution to offer record companies and they´ve spent millions trying to find one themselves and we´ve seen the results.
The problem is that the industry is dead. Just like buggy whips and the cotton gin this too shall pass. They´re dead and just don´t know it yet. They can try pay sites and prosecuting their customers, but it will just prolong the inevitable.
Linear Mode
