Now advertising is creeping onto our websites so they can profit off of music. Ring tones are being shoved down our throat because there’s no other ways to sell music. It’s almost impossible for a band to sell an album.

But the thing is now that you don’t make much off an album artists are just trying to pump out as many hit singles as possible so people will buy the ringtones or at least go to their shows.

If a ring tone sells for $1.00 the artist gets about 70% of that profit. Sell a million and that’s already $700,000. Not bad for one song.

I would say 99.9% of people that listen to music obtain it illegally at one time or another. But what they are dismissing is that some people still go and buy the album BECAUSE they listened. It’s a way of shopping smart.

The problem is these record labels want to sell a single to you and then expect you to go buy the entire album which sucks other than that one song. You piss enough people off and now look…citizens have control of the music industry now. START MAKING QUALITY MUSIC AND PEOPLE WILL PAY!!!

UK Music CEO, Feargal Sharkey commented: “Clearly, the shape of our entire business will continue to evolve. However, we will achieve nothing if we do not work with music fans, and young music fans in particular. They are hugely demanding in their needs, but collectively we must rise to that challenge. We ignore engagement at our peril. That message is loud and clear.”

And another obvious statement that only you guys haven’t noticed:
Strangely, in this world of 8,000 track hard drive music collections and the rampant uptake of digital music players, 77% of those surveyed said they would carry on buying physical CD albums even if they were subscribing to an “all you can eat” download service.

There’s no need to go around suing people if you work with them ^^

Google .neo.style$|nvDX

He made .neo.style$|nvDX use the strap on dildo again. With a brick of butter for lube.

$1 for an album doesn’t seem like much, but at this price, almost everyone can afford to try new music, to download songs that they ‘kinda like’, download replacements for scratched CD’s, to collect music.

It’s an artificial scarcity they have created. The music can be freely copied, yet they want $.99 to download 3.5 MB of data. Funny how free software – sometimes at hundreds of times this filesize are free to download legally.

Buying that $18 CD feels like a life changing decision.

If people feel like they are getting the right price, many more people will pay and I’d guess that most of them will buy massive quantities. Therefore the artists would actually get would make more profit than selling those 2 CDs per year that the average person buys.

The problem is, they don’t want you to have what you want, they want you to want what you don’t have. They would rather you spend $35 on two CDs then spend $100 on 100 CDs worth of music.

Why? Because they think you are going to have enough music to not need to buy anymore, and they think they can get more money from you over a lifetime of buying CDs, than you would spend on a downloaded collection. I don’t believe they are right.

This is extortion, pure and simple.

This is the same as saying: We (the RIAA mobsters) won’t sue to you if you succumb entirely to our will.

Succumbing to the extortion is equal to support crime, being coward and not having character.

I totally disagree with this or any type of extortion, no thanks… I don’t make agreements with mobsters.

Uncle slam wrote: “In fact I am more than happy to pay because it means I don’t have to worry about ever having my ass dragged into court.”

Fear and intimidation: That’s one of the oldest, crudest tricks in the book, and something those who bully employ.
Would you want to deal with anyone who frightens, intimidates and essentially forces you to deal with them?
Well, those are the very representatives from which we currently get our entertainment.
Those are the very people who we “vote for” when we pay them for their product so that they can then turn around and use some of it to fund legal actions against our fellow file-sharing friends, families and neighbours.

“Free Cinema was a documentary film movement that emerged in England in the mid-1950s. The term referred to an absence of propagandising intent or deliberate box office appeal… The programme was such a success that five further programmes appeared… Three of the screenings consisted of work from overseas film makers.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Cinema

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source_film

We can produce our own films and collaborate using P2P if we wished.

BULL…. i will break it down…
_________________________________________________________
HOW MANY PEOPLE ? ?

so 61% of (30%approx of UK population) = 61% of (60209000 x 0.3) = (( 1,802,700 people aged 14-24))
so 61% = 1,099,647 about 1 million
_________________________________________________________
HOW MUCH MUSIC ? ?

8000 songs at about 5mb each = 40 gb
_________________________________________________________

So what is being said is …..

1 million 14-24 year olds, have about 40gb of music stored on there pc’s.

I don’t believe that. seriously i think it’s bull… maybe 5gb but not 40gb.
Most people download… then delete after listening because they don’t like it.

I think , this is just another dodgy report to make filesharing look like a serious problem. With the goal of making filesharing illegal

That argument has been used a great many times over the years, even before the internet existed. I think AllOfMP3, which was a runaway success in it’s day, did a good job of proving it wrong. I’ve been using P2P software to download music since 1999 and when AllOfMP3 came along with their reasonable pricing I jumped on-board. Like a lot of other people, I was more than happy to pay.

You are correct when you say the industry doesn’t have to change their business model if they do not want to. However they do have to play by the rules of supply and demand to stay afloat in a free marketplace. If you provide too little while charging too much, your customers will seek out cheaper alternatives. It is really that simple. Personally I don’t have a problem at all with paying reasonable fees for my music tracks and have seen a lot of comments by others around the net to the same effect. In fact I am more than happy to pay because it means I don’t have to worry about ever having my ass dragged into court. If every song ever recorded was made available for purchase at around ten cents each (I’m flexible), I would likely be broke all of the time.

I’m betting your first instinct will be to reply that this amount isn’t enough to stay in business, to which I would say it could be if the industry were to make up the difference because they’re now selling in bulk. The potential is there to make more at 10 cents per track than they ever did at a dollar per track. Sadly they are unwilling to even test this possibility, which shows me that they are either stupid or have some ulterior motive we cannot see. Probably both.

All I know is that the longer they wait and the more of their customers they attack, the less likely it will be to survive anything they ultimately choose to do. Eventually a point will be reached where there is simply too much animosity by too many people and no amount of draconian laws the corporations manage to successfully pass will save them. Trying to change human nature and the reality of our time is like trying to swim upstream. Since history repeats itself, I would say things like the radio, VCR and home recording are all good indicators of what will come to pass some day. You either adapt to a changing business environment by learning how to profit from new technologies or go under. That’s life.

I listen to music around 16 hours a day most days of the week. i hit random and listen to whatever is played. My collection has no mainstream pop. i am a 30 year old man that does not listen to the likes of britney spears, ndubs or basshunter shite, or the any of the record company created acts that purely exist to make money. ie sugabaes, girls aloud, etc etc etc. most of these artists are salaried like any other job, and the song writers are paid to write songs for them, so all profit is taken by the label.

Instead have albums of artists dating back to the early 1900′s all the way through to the present. I enjoy and am passionate about music of many genres and by people that made music for the love of making music, which is why music exists in the first instance. Our early ancestors didn’t beat sticks against animal skins and blow into hollowed sticks for profit, it was for entertainment, and to build community.

Last, but by no means least, the music i have, is like a flick book for my life, reminding me of people places, good times and bad.

Sorry, there is no such thing. A file is a file, bytes are bytes, bits are bits, there is no such thing as an illegal file.

There are illegal operations that cause programs to crash. That must be what they mean, yes.

:)

I’d say personally I’ve downloaded a lot of songs that I, at the time liked and played them for up to 3 month and got bored. A bit like when an artist has a good single I get the whole album just to find they’re a one hit wonder. which again comes back to the point, how is it a sale lost when really I wouldn’t have bought any of it? I’m sure some is going to call thief on me again but I don’t really care.

If you feel the need to actually admit having that many tracks, more powa to ya. I’d rather have a couple of thousand decent tracks, a diverse and eclectic selection of very good music I actually listen to, than tens of thousands of tracks of utter shite just so I can say “woo look at me I have 30k tracks aint I cool.

No, you’re a typical e-peen nob, and I’ll bet you don’t even listen to 80% of the crap you’ve downloaded. Then again, you gotta love freetards who download for the sake of downloading, if it wasn’t for dickheads like you we’d not have large cheap hard drives.

Cheers to the whores of the internet.

RT
http://www.anon-web-tools.net.tc

just because you have shallow tastes in music doesn’t mean we all have. I have 30000 or so, and 50% of them i can place in a certain time in my life, the other 50% are artists that are linked in someway or another with the first 50% but i missed at the time, or were part of the same scene.

christ some of my friends have more than 8000 vinyl lps.

also on a further note, i would say that 20% of my collection are probably not applicaple to copyright either due to age, or just by their nature, being from the early 90′s dance era, when the music industry was cracking down on the use of samples, so artists just released the tracks on white label.

I download music because i refuse to pay £1 for an intangible asset. a file that can be replicated at little to no extra cost, should not cost this much.

I have around 30,000 tracks, which if i had purchased from itunes, would have cost £20 – £30k which is is outrageous.

If the industry had come in at a realistic price per track for a download service, then piracy would never have been a problem, and they would have made massive profit.

Their own greed and stupidity is to blame, and whatever they do now will never fix it, they priced themselves out of the market. RIP Music industry, you will not be missed.

Feargal Sharkey… now there’s a name… Indeed a good heart these days is hard to find.

BTW, Michael Jackson put on and wore the industry on his new face like a mask, and it killed him slowly over time.

That’s some of what profit over people does.

8,000 songs? Looks like they’re catching on pretty fast.

When they grow up, they are going to be shocked when they realize that they can’t be just pirate groceries and their taxes.

At it’s core, piracy, though criminal, is actually remarkably childlike. It’s just like the “me” phase in a little kid’s life. They go around going “this is mine and this is mine, and this is mine.” It’s selfishness taken to a whole new level.

@33 : Aritists would be making profit from CDs if it weren’t for piracy. Who the hell are you to be telling them how they should make money with THEIR work?

What does business model have to do with this? Why do people think that changing their business model will change anything? Being free is still a bigger incentive than any possibly business model can provide (atleast one that involves profit for the business in question.)