TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

More Music Sold Than Ever Before, Despite Piracy

Last week the BPI released their overview of 2010 sales volumes in the UK. As always, their press release was filled with claims that piracy is ruining their industry and most mainstream media was quick to republish this propaganda. However, we can use the very same data to show that more music is being sold than ever before, and argue that piracy is likely to have had very little impact.

elephantThe PR people within the music industry are masters of spin. They can take any type of data and make the public believe that piracy is killing their business. For years they have fought against this imaginary enemy, and every press release issued is filled with complaints about illegal downloading.

We’re not going to argue about the exact impact of piracy in this article, but we do want to balance out the music industry’s propaganda a little bit. By doing so we hope to show that the music industry isn’t doing so badly as they claim. In fact, year after year more music is being sold.

What’s changing is the type of music consumers buy, and this change is driving revenue down. The question, however, is whether piracy has anything to do with this change. We doubt it, and we’re going to show why.

Let’s start off with some key figures published by the BPI last week regarding UK music sales. Unlike some news outlets claimed, these are not revenue figures but actually the number of units sold, counting both digital and physical albums and singles.

In 2010 the BPI reports that there were 281.7 million units sold, which is an all-time record. Never in the history of recorded music have so many pieces of music been sold, but you wont hear the music industry shouting about that. In fact, the music industry is selling more music year after year and today’s figure is up 27% compared to the 221.6 million copies sold in 2006.

But, instead of praising the increasing consumer demand for music, the industry cuts up the numbers and prefers to focus on the evil enemy called piracy. By doing so they spin their message in a way that makes it appear that piracy is cannibalizing music sales. But is it?

In their press release the BPI points out that album sales overall were down by 7%. Although digital album sales were up 30.6%, physical CDs were down by 12.4%. If we believe the music industry, this drop in sales of physical CDs can be solely attributed to piracy. This is an interesting conclusion, because one would expect that piracy would mostly have an effect on digital sales.

We have a different theory.

Could it be that album sales have been declining over recent years because people now have the ability to buy single tracks? If someone likes three tracks from an album he or she no longer has to buy the full album, something that was unimaginable 10 years ago.

This theory would also fit the sales patterns of the last few years, where album sales are down year after year while the number of individual tracks sold is increasing rapidly. In 2010 the UK music industry sold 161.8 million singles (digital and physical) compared to 66.9 million in 2006. Where does piracy fit in here?

Could it possibly be that piracy is only affecting album sales and not single sales? Would that make sense?

Or could it be that the consumption habits of the average music consumer have changed in the last decade? You never hear the music industry talk about the digital music revolution where an entire generation of people have never even owned a CD. To these people the album concept doesn’t mean as much as it does to older generations.

I’d hate to break the news to all the suits in the music business but the CD is dying, and the album is dying with it. Sure, the true music enthusiast will appreciate the art that a well orchestrated album is, but the masses are increasingly spending their money on singles. The album has lost much of it’s appeal and function to the iPod generation.

And that’s the problem.

The digital revolution in music and the consumer shift from albums to singles described above is hurting the industry’s revenue. Despite the fact that more music is being sold, revenue is shrinking because consumers prefer singles over full albums. And if someone buys 6 single tracks instead of a full album, this means usually that less money is coming in.

This change is mostly being felt by the managers and employees at record labels, and not as much by artists. Since album and single sales are just a small fraction of the artists’ yearly income, and with attendances of live performances being up, the artists are doing great.

We’re not here to argue that piracy has no effect on sales at all, positive or negative, but we do want to point out that the music industry might be chasing a ghost while they ignore the big elephant in the room. The music industry isn’t dying, it’s evolving.

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

  • hotdog

    ofcourse not if anything piracy boost sales.the thing is the industry players are not looking at the benefits of file sharing.MOSTLY MADE UP OF OLDER PEOPLE THAT AREN’T TO NET SAAVY.That’s why us the younger generation should start investing and showing the elders we are the future.;)

  • Anonymous

    But yet the media will never write this up. Why? Because it’s not the doom and gloom they normally report.

  • herbert

    surely the impact from piracy is to have made more music available to more people and therefore sales have increased because of it. time and again it has been stated that file sharers buy more because they listen more

  • Anonymous

    Despite the worst recession since the 30s

  • netrjay

    it says 8 singles are less than an album, they must mean 8 singles from different albums, because if you buy songs from an album separetly, the album bundle is cheaper. also, I prefer getting the entire album and owning a physical CD copy but that’s just me.

    • Jazz Ritter

      Yeah, me too. For example, I may hear of an amazing movie or cd from my friends. I wanna see/listen to it, so I download it on thepiratebay.org. If I ENJOY it and want to support the creators, I get a physical copy. I love to be the proud owner of a physical copy of quality media. Pirated media has no pride, but it is convenient for discovering new media. You catch my drift, pappa cheese?

  • Anonymous

    Piracy has been around ever since man could record audio on a tape, decades ago. And the industry was doing fine back then too.

  • Drag0nflamez

    I would buy all of my music – if the Dutch iTunes would accept PayPal (and I don’t feel like getting those gift cards all the time, and C2B sucks)

    But the industry isn’t dying, as said, but evolving. The only people who are losing money are CD factories.

    (also, these kinds of articles never get troll comments)

  • Anonymous

    OK, let me first start off by saying that, while this article had some great data (and great ideas!), the intentional distortion of the numbers takes away all credibility.

    Comparing “unit sales” without breaking down 99 cent singles versus twelve dollar albums is ludicrous.

    If I tell you that I sell whole pizzas for 10 dollars and slices for 2 dollars, and last year I sold 50,000 units but this year I sold 60,000 units, you might buy stock in my pizza company. However, last year it was 40,000 pizzas and 10,000 slices for $420,000. This year it was 12,000 pizzas and 48,000 slices for $216,000. This pretty clearly demonstrates the intentionally misleading stats in the article.

    Look, I know everyone likes to sit around and circle-jerk about how awesome we are and how, by not ever buying our music, we’re somehow giving the industry a big paycheck out of thin air, but this article isn’t even trying. Let’s try some transparency, some real honest financials.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention More Music Sold Than Ever Before, Despite Piracy | TorrentFreak -- Topsy.com

  • Zan

    @8, but it does, more than once, unit sales up but album sales down.

    Did you read the same article?

  • Viking

    @8 Anonymous

    Well if you want to compare albums to pizzas, would you buy a pizza of which only 25% is eatable, for a price of full one? Or would you prefer to buy an eatable part for a 25% price? And do you feel sorry for that pizza company when it goes bankruptcy because customers refuse to buy non eatable parts of their pizzas?

  • Anonymous

    I haven’t bought a lot of albums on iTunes in awhile either. I have other things I want to buy and I usually just listen to songs on YouTube if I want to hear something.

  • hotdog

    @8
    let me clarify something for you the consumer/customer/fan is what makes the industry money.This is not something forced out of people that say “YOU HAVE TO BUY”cd’s as I mentioned on another post its a part of evolution.
    There used to be 8-tracks.Then there were cassettes.Then these huge disc that were called laser disc, vhs, etc etc.As far as albums when the big-BOOM! rush came out for cds/dvds the records died of for a bit!
    Then they made a comeback because Artist/Dj’s realised that dj’ing isn’t djing without a record.Next came mp3 etc.
    You see the future and evolution changes.Trends die off people no longer use cd’s except for a select few.
    We have other options like ipods zunes etc we have sd cards and computerized technology.We can carry around, yet this takes us back to the record industry.In our minds we’re told we must buy the cd!
    But if we don’t like all the songs. Should we be forced to pay anywhere from 10 to 30 bucks?
    I think not!!So what is wrong with $.99 cd’s?? DO THE MATH $.99 X’S 10 MILLION SALES. I highly doubt the industry will die go broke etc etc.Corporate dinosaurs need to get into the 21st century and stop thinking in the stone age’s get with the trends etc.
    Last but not least artist have to think like businessmen and women you are doing sales. don’t just sign some contract be smart know how to deal with contract or get a manager to help you out because if you think these major label honestly care think twice.
    They are all about money.Best regards to all.

    I’ve yet to see a major label that is honest with their artist.

  • Anonymous

    We don’t get “Fooled” by the “”Big Boys”" bulshit marketing. (any more )

    So instead of wasting cash on stuff we DON’T want or need..
    We buy ONLY what we want.

    Guess what “”big boy Major labels”" ?
    You can waste 1 million dollars on a Single + video , to sell us an Albumn.

    BUT we will not buy the rest of the shit albumn music , if it is shit.

    Good riddance OLD , “con men” style business model.

    Hello , NEW , just buy good music business model.
    Doesn’t matter WHO the label is.

    .

    Piracy..sorry , SHARING.. boosts sales of GOOD music.

    Sucks to be a producer of shit music nowdays. :)

    BYE BYE

    N’ don’t let the pirates hit you on your way to Bankrupcy : )

  • RIAAtarded

    The stats show a shift in market trends #8 which all of us already know but the dinosaurs at the Music Labels refuse to embrace and blame on piracy. I’m Old enough to have seen several shifts. As a kid I had records, the tape, hell Crazy Nights I bought 4 times because I wore the damn thing out. Then I moved to CDs and now digital. Through all those purchases however I generally had 1 or 2 songs I wanted then the rest was filler. Where do you think the mixed tape came into being. With digital I now have the ability to buy the song that i want and leave the other tracks I got no interest in. Plus digital is just better. No more piles or racks of CD. No one putting it back in the wrong case at a party so you can’t find it and go buy another only to find the original at the next event. Now everything has no footprint in my house. Gone are the bookcases full of media. Yeah i said bookcases. Now it all sits on a server. Easy to access and pick what I want. Simple to load on any player and just more accessible. Digitally it sees more use. Physical media is cumbersome and time consuming to use.

    Digital gives the consumer the choices. Which in the end is why piracy started in the first place. End users wanted choices that weren’t being provided until now. No more mixed tape for me I can get everything I want off itunes.

    Now if they’d spend their energy on trying to get more delivery methods out there for legal downloads of content rather then chasing those that aren’t I’d consider that a better use or resources and time. The only thing they are doing now with the restrictions on usage and DRM is alienating their end consumer.

  • Ruinyourlife

    The numbers count individual tracks too?

  • Disingenuous?

    I think this might be a little intellectually dishonest. Greater accessibility and potential customers could be the cause of sales growth. A more honest statistic would be sales as a percentage of potential customers, which is particularly difficult to figure. Perhaps sales as a percentage of population would be a decent enough substitute, though it seems like we ought to still have some sort of metric for average unit price.

    At any rate, raw number of units sold does not necessarily give a good indicator of market health. The industry could still be losing market share to piracy, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing. The industry needs to be made aware that its business model is inefficient.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention More Music Sold Than Ever Before, Despite Piracy | TorrentFreak -- Topsy.com

  • pirate

    I pirate stuff because it’s free. Before I pirated, I bought about 500-600 CDs. They certainly lost my sales!

  • Chris Rich

    This argument is most applicable to Pop song forms. That corner of the industry was always the money maker but it is in decline when compared with it’s peak.

    I am a jazz advocate along with other instrumental forms that were never very popular in the first place. These idioms don’t fit your model.

    How would Beethoven’s Ninth work with it or an extended work by say, Matthew Shipp?

    These forms have real shelf life. Monk still sells decades after he recorded and probably will into the future. The album is a more useful model in these idioms. If you like Art Blakey it isn’t because he writes songs.

    These instrumental legacy things whether Dufay or the Art Ensemble of Chicago never enjoyed sales commensurate with pop and are much more vulnerable to certain kinds of piracy.

    The model is weird for them. An XTC tune is generally a 3 minute thing, maybe 6 minutes if it’s really ambitious. A Love Supreme is a suite that takes up two sides of an old vinyl format more than 40 minutes.

    How does I tunes define it. Is ‘A Love Supreme’ a ‘tune’. Is Apple supposed to sell it for 99 cents for that reason? I haven’t checked as I don’t use I tunes.

  • Caller of doom

    Ernesto, I love the way you conclude the article: “The music industry isn’t dying, it’s evolving.”

    Evolution is indeed the key word here!

    Evolution means that things are going to chance and that change is unstoppable. Trying to stop evolution is like trying to keep the sun from rising every morning, it’s a fight they can’t win!

    So now we must ask the question as to why someone would even try to stop evolution… I find it very hard not to link the fight against change to the fact that STILL TODAY a lot of people doubt the validity of Darwin’s theory of evolution… Somehow, some people dislike change, some “doctrine” preaches against chance. Conservative policies try to fight change. They will all lose because change is inevitable.

    The big wigs of the music industry have to seize the opportunities presented by chance instead of trying to stop it, they have to adapt if they want to survive!

    Great article! Thanks a lot Ernesto!

  • Caller of doom

    Double post, sorry!

  • lol

    i buy tunes that i like i’m not gonna pay for something that’s a piece of shit who doesn’t agree?

  • x

    @16
    yeah… try to manipulate the data to FiT your own opinion or agenda.
    .

    FACT iS…

    IN UK 2010 …

    281.7 million units sold == all-time record.

    That’s the data.. Get over it.
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    You wan’t to try and hide that fact , of Statistical significance , by pairing the data with another set.

    That basically is Statistical FRAUD..

    Ignore the data..wrap it up as something else.
    Disingenuous

  • Anonymous

    Excellent article.

    The reason why I think CDs are declining in comparison to digital media is due to lack of a physical disc. When I buy a CD, the first thing I do is rip it and put it on my ipod. I can plug my ipod into the auxillary port on my car stereo so what’s the point of carrying physical discs around? I have CDs at home which have been collecting dust because there is simply no use when I have a digital copy

  • dude

    Who still pay for music?

    You can listen music free from spotify and download it from free also using spotify ripper. You can listen free music any streaming services. All fully legal.

    You can also download all music free from piratebay or using google. :) again fully legal :)

    I never pay for music.

  • Anonymous

    I think 8 as it right, kinda.
    They are fiddling the stats to make a story and cry, but so is this article.
    for example, you have said nothing about the change in rate of sales, so while the industry is still growing, it may not be as big as it should have been.
    you need to see and understand all the statistics and other information before you can make analysis.
    another flaw is the continuous use of emotive language (propaganda, spin, suits ect.) rather than solid arguments. i know the other side of the argument is guilty of the same thing but if you are claiming to give a balanced argument then give a balanced argument.

    that said, the article does raise interesting and valid points, it’s just that some have been exaggerated and could be misleading to an audience that is seeking the answers they want.

  • Pingback: More Music Sold Than Ever Before, Despite Piracy | Systema

  • Me

    Nobody wants to buy music on a circle of easily lost or damaged plastic that has to be opened up and physically inserted into a music player every time you want to listen to it.
    The very idea of music on a cd will be laughed at in 10 – 15 years time the same way we today laugh at the old brick sized mobile phones from a few years back.

    However you can bet your ass that they will keep trying to sell them to us for as long as they possibly can.

  • xx

    The record industry had long predicted that the availability of LEGAL digital singles downloads would severely cannibalize sales of (higher-profit) albums, and that is precisely why they had to be dragged by the neck into the digital age kicking and screaming.

  • Anonymous

    8 didn’t even read the article.

    His complaint is that it compared “unit sales” without breaking down 99 cent singles versus twelve dollar albums.

    Except, oh wait, it did compare “unit sales” while breaking down 99 cent singles versus twelve dollar albums.

    Instant fail.

  • Anonymous

    The word you are looking for is…disingenuous

    Or TF copies the industry: Lies, damned lies, and STATISTICS

  • Johnny

    This is a TF article of the style that I like, uncovering corporate BS.

    @26 xx
    >The record industry had long predicted that the availability
    > of LEGAL digital singles downloads would severely cannibalize sales
    > of (higher-profit) albums

    Erm, those album sales would have headed south anyway. Legally downloading digital singles partially compensated an otherwise inevitable loss.

  • ANONYMOUS

    http://anonymousfilesharing.blogspot.com/

    Try the anonymous file sharing with StealthNet

    FREE AND OPEN SOURCE

  • angryfinland

    I download music from the internet for free and am not afraid to admit it. I have not bought music for nearly 20 years, and when I did used to buy music I still got most of my music for free by borrowing from friends and libraries and copying it! All that the computer age has meant to me is that there is much more available for me to get hold of and listen to. I tend to mostly download music by smaller and non mainstream artists, most of whose work is not available on the pay sites, and even if they were, many of the sites are not available in Finland anyway!

    We also have a system here in Finland that whenever you buy a memory device (external hard drive, mp3 player, memory stick, cd, dvd etc) you pay a premium which is then given to the music industry. This as far as I am concerned means that I am well within my rights to download as much music as I want.

    I do spend money on music by paying to go and see bands perform live, which is how artists have traditionally made their money anyway!

    Grow up music industry and get with the times!

  • Paolo

    There are a lot of idiots commenting here. If you read the article carefully you will see that the author is making no guesses as to the effect piracy is having. What he is pointing out is the fact that the music industry is trying their best to ignore the obvious statistic that the purchase of singles is rising while albums are falling. All of his conclusions make perfect sense when looked at in the context of the available data.

  • Pingback: BPI: Music sales strong, but piracy still a problem | MyCE – My Consumer Electronics

  • Benni

    Wow a fantastic article Ernesto.

    Obviously some thought has gone into this article and it has paid off.

    The problem with statistics is they only really work for those who worte them, however you offer a great alternative.

    Let’s face it Piracy HAS to affect Music sales, be it albums or singles, but if as you suggest the BPI and others wake up to the fact that the music industry is indeed evolving , then maybe a different approach would be taken.

    However 10/10 for this article

    Cheers

  • x

    exactly @ 32…

    The facts should not be ignored.

    too many industry trolls.. tring to rationalise their extreme AniShare policy.

    Fact is.

  • Album v Single

    So if album unit sales are declining because people prefer to buy singles ditigally instead – that means that more people are buying the single product instead. That does not equate to more music being sold than ever before, just more single units.

    3 out of 4 downloads of music are illegally downloaded. To say that piracy does not impact artists/songwriters/musicians and all associated music support personnel or employees is a fairytale.

    To say that pirates buy more music is a fairytale as why if you have obtained the product for free would you bother then buying it if you already have it on your devices without cost to you.

  • klockwerk

    A big part of it came when vinyl album artwork when to the size of a CD.

    I long for the day of Tangerine Dream style graphic packaging (on Virgin), but I’m not paying $40.00+ for it.

  • This guy

    @36

    3 out of 4 eh?

    Wheres your evidence?

    Oh wait, you don’t have any.

  • Anonymous

    @36 think of it like this, I have not heard of a band and hear them. I like them. I want to support them so I decide they do great work and buy a product licensed by them/etc.

  • Anonymous

    What I want to know is who really buys cd’s anymore? Why do stores still waste floor space on cd’s if they are not selling?

    While the death of the CD is a forgone conclusion where are we going to get lossless or flac copies of music if no cd exists to rip it off?

    If the music industry wanted to put a big dent in piracy why don’t they just stop making cd’s. If th only thing available was a crappy mp3 then file sharing of music would slow way down.

    Seriously there is not one legal digital site that offers lossless copies that I am aware of.

    I think in about two years cd’s will disappear from most retail stores. Some sites will appear that offer high quality lossless digital downloads. The problem is they will want to charge $4 to $5 per track and this will encourage file sharing more than ever.

    When the industry sells quality music at a price that makes searching for a download a waste of time. Then and only then will the majority of consumers return to purchasing music.

    In my opinion for most music that price would be in the neighborhood of .05 to .25 cents per track for 98% of music out there. Obviously .99 is too high or everyone would just buy music now instead of bother to pirate. Even file sharing is not free it takes time and extra band with and disk space and vpn costs and/or premium data locker costs so when you claim you can download for free don’t forget all the costs associated with that.

  • x

    @36

    So if album unit sales are declining because people prefer to buy singles ditigally instead – that means that more people are buying the single product instead. That does not equate to more music being sold than ever before, just more single units.

    BEFORE… people didn’t have a choice.
    If they liked a song , bought it , they also got other songs that they MAY NOT have wanted.

    You ASSUME that in the past , people who bought singles (sometimes containing 6 tracks) or an Albumn , wanted EVERY track.

    YOUR assumption has been PROVEN wrong by todays buying habits.

    ha ha.. we won’t be conned into buying shit we don’t want.

    You ovbiously don’t like that… tough shit.

    3 out of 4 downloads of music are illegally downloaded.

    Where is your proof ?

    To say that piracy does not impact artists/songwriters/musicians and all associated music support personnel or employees is a fairytale.

    Your comment is the real fairytale.

    Big lables can NO longer spend millions promoting/making videos/producing ect…
    For ONE song (single) … then package that song with 12 other shit songs.. then sell for £15 / $20.

    If they sell millions of units and CAN’T turn over a profit … IT’s their own fault.

    Their business model , stinks like the OLD PEOPLE WHO USE iT.

    oh.. ffs..

    People who download for free…

    20 years ago … listened to the radio for free.. copied from friends for free.

    The cd/dvd distribution model is the only real loser from todays download culture.

    As people who CAN’T afford to buy and download a copy from friends…
    Where never going to buy anyway.

    So NO loss there.

    You are an industry troll… like it or not.

    Maybe you are misled into believing that SHARiNG is loosing you profit.

    All I ask… is for you to look a little closer at the FACTS.
    Ignore your ideology.. not the facts.

  • x

    srry dble post…. prev didn’t have proper quotes.

    @36

    So if album unit sales are declining because people prefer to buy singles ditigally instead – that means that more people are buying the single product instead. That does not equate to more music being sold than ever before, just more single units.

    BEFORE… people didn’t have a choice.
    If they liked a song , bought it , they also got other songs that they MAY NOT have wanted.

    You ASSUME that in the past , people who bought singles (sometimes containing 6 tracks) or an Albumn , wanted EVERY track.

    YOUR assumption has been PROVEN wrong by todays buying habits.

    ha ha.. we won’t be conned into buying shit we don’t want.

    You ovbiously don’t like that… tough shit.

    3 out of 4 downloads of music are illegally downloaded.

    Where is your proof ?

    To say that piracy does not impact artists/songwriters/musicians and all associated music support personnel or employees is a fairytale.

    Your comment is the real fairytale.

    Big lables can NO longer spend millions promoting/making videos/producing ect…
    For ONE song (single) … then package that song with 12 other shit songs.. then sell for £15 / $20.

    If they sell millions of units and CAN’T turn over a profit … IT’s their own fault.

    Their business model , stinks like the OLD PEOPLE WHO USE iT.

    oh.. ffs..

    People who download for free…

    20 years ago … listened to the radio for free.. copied from friends for free.

    The cd/dvd distribution model is the only real loser from todays download culture.

    As people who CAN’T afford to buy and download a copy from friends…
    Where never going to buy anyway.

    So NO loss there.

    You are an industry troll… like it or not.

    Maybe you are misled into believing that SHARiNG is loosing you profit.

    All I ask… is for you to look a little closer at the FACTS.
    Ignore your ideology.. not the facts.

  • Need Work

    Pretty accurate. I worked for a record label, lost job due to incoming money. Single tracks are a huge percentage of sales, don’t have the exact number but its a majority.

    One track cost 99 cents, about 60 percent of that goes to the distribution company, they take around 20 percent of that, about 12 cents. the artist get about 80 percent of 60 cents.
    This is not always the case.

    Labels make more money on CDs but also have to invest upfront capitol for manufacturing. This is why the artist doesn’t make that much money from CDs. The money from producing CDs needs to be paid back before the artist gets any real amount of money but.. the record label still makes about double from CD sales where as the artist dos make as much.

    What does all this mean. musicians generally suck at business and usually have no social skills, that’s why they hire others to do it for them.

    I wasn’t getting rich from the artist but I made decent money. BUT, the artist no longer has my services and that’s something they have to deal with now instead of the record label taking care of it for them. This means the artist will have to take care of more business. I’ve been an artist in that situation and once you are burdened with business, stressful business sometimes, your creativity starts to go away and playing music is not fun.

    so what does all this mean.. I don’t know

  • Pingback: Record Labels To Pay $45 Million for Pirating Artists’ Music – Clonevideos Official Blog

  • Pingback: Record Labels To Pay $45 Million for Pirating Artists’ Music | PornDL News

  • elduka

    i have actually come to the same conclusion myself a few months ago, because i dont think ive bought a whole album in a long time (probably 3 in the last 5 years) compared to many single songs over itunes and the likes

  • digi

    well, in theory if you can get the song you really like as a digital single and don’t have to spend £7 to £15 on a CD you are:
    a) more likely to buy that single (less thought involved in spending 30p – 99p, than £7 to £15, and you really have to like that song to pay that much for it) and
    b) you have money left to buy other music.

    What I am really interested in is the difference between music tracks/albums sold and income. Music prices have gone down in the past years, I believe the BPI has confirmed that.

    The other thing I am really interested in is average spend by consumer – do we all consume more/less music, or do spend more/less on music. Are less people buying more, or more people buying less.

  • Shvedka

    I am old enough to remember having to buy a whole CD to get just one track – in pre MP3 times.
    Sometimes you had to buy an actual RECORD because the old record had not been made into a CD.

    what a waste of my money that was!!! Particularly as a young and broke kid. Waste of time too, since the single track you wanted eventually ended up on some kind of mix tape or similar with the rest of the tracks rarely listened to.

    Just they way the parasites in the music industry want it. Pay for ten things you didn’t want, in orer to get one thing you want. Nothing but capitalist bloodsuckers getting rich on doing very little work.

    Let’s cut them out and get the profits for the music to the artists. Enough to live well, on but not to get filthy rich – a state which doesn’t even bring happiness.

  • normloman

    I argued the same reasoning in an article I wrote this November.

    http://www.neverheardof.me/2010/11/are-you-as-stupid-as-the-riaa-thinks-you-are.html

    The spike in music sales coincides with the decline of singles after CDs replaced vinyl. On the other hand, music sales dropped after Napster became widespread. Some say piracy killed the music industry, while others say the return of singles (in digital form) burst the CD bubble. Sales data supports both conclusions. A little more investigating, and singles stand out as the true cause of decline.

    I think the music industry has learned lessons from the last decade. Many record industry people now see the internet as a business opportunity and not as a threat. But I won’t be satisfied until they stop suing innocent people.

  • Pingback: Ruling Imagination: Law and Creativity » Blog Archive » The negative impact of the internet on music sales has been greatly exaggerated. I’m shocked, shocked.

  • Pingback: More Music Sold Than Ever Before, Despite Piracy - Torrent Invites - Get your free private torrent tracker invites!

  • Anonymous

    This reminds me of an documentry i saw. “As seen on TV” I think it was.

    Basicly The record companies were selling albums of artists ripping them off. the company hired these artists when they were out of contract and got them to rerecord there famous tracks Then they would make a compilation album and sell them, And because of this they would constantly have higher sales then the record labels as the consumers were preferring to buy 1 compilation album with all the songs they wanted rather then buy 5-7 other albums to get the same songs.

  • Pingback: UK Recording Industry Says Piracy Killing Music, Despite Record Sales

  • ps

    Agree with everythign except “Since album and single sales are just a small fraction of the artists’ yearly income, and with attendances of live performances being up, the artists are doing great.” Loads of artists don’t perform live.

  • Hey

    Don’t call them the ipod generation. it should be the mp3 generation. f**k apple, taking everyones credit….

  • okokok
  • okokok
  • Anonymous

    Propaganda works.

  • johnny

    Your article, quite correctly suggests that artists are not particularly hurt by the changing pattern in sales of music (from album on a physical disk, to digital single tracks).

    I disagree … when you buy a CD the artist gets his contract rate, which industry-wide amounts to roughly 5c per song, or $1.00 per typical 20-song CD. The label gets the rest, about $7 for a $16 CD, after accounting for the cost to make the physical product and paying out the artist.

    For digital files, let’s use iTunes as an example … the label gets 70c per song (this is in the contract with Apple) and the artist gets perhaps 3.5 cents (the labels managed to force artists to accept a lower royalty rate for digital downloads compared to physical sales, about 5 years ago).

    So, the label now gets 19x the artist’s royalty each time music is sold, has nothing to pay for manufacturing or even distribution … Apple pays for that out of it’s 29 cents … for digital files; versus 7x the artist’s royalty for CD sales.

    Even though total music sales volume is down, the label’s share has increased almost threefold versus the artists royalty. The artist gets much less today than 20 years ago, the labels a bit less with zero manufacturing overhead to deal with (the advantage of zero manufacturing can be seen where any song can sell in any volume, and no logistical problems are in the way … no shortages when the artist is hot, no unsold CDs to dump in the remainder bin.

    Note also that any CD you buy for less than full price … eg from the remainder bin … the artist gets zero royalty on those sales. So if all your physical disks come from the $5 bin at Wall-Mart, you gave nothing to the artist ever in your life.

  • Anonymous

    Consumers: Why?

    British Pornographic Industry: No comment, no comment, erm… sorry *shoving thru crowd* no comment

  • music lover

    thank you Johnny for clearing that up

    so artists are screwed by labels and pirates – double whammy!

    two wrongs don’t make a right!

    Who would create music in this day and age when the distributor and consumer places no value on your music – just saying….

  • Anonymous

    @54 Jan 11, 2011 at 04:34 by johnny

    That is not a piracy issue that is a contractual issue, further that is a managerial issue.
    Musicians could just make their own, go to Jamendo that is a record label also but some keep going to the big 4 that are know arse rapists.

    Ask these guy’s here if they pay those absurd rates.

    There is also Flattr and Bandcamp.

    You people keep doing business with real thieves and don’t want to get robbed?
    Today people have a choice is not like you need them anymore Bieber was born on Youtube, Lady Gaga also, and more and more people keep finding success on such platforms.

  • Anonymous

    @49 Jan 11, 2011 at 02:37 by ps

    Loads of artists don’t perform live.

    Sell merch then, or music, the only thing piracy really takes away is “exclusive” distribution it doesn’t take away the artists capability to perform live, to sell merch, to sell his image, to charge for talks, to get paid for endorsements and so forth.

  • Anonymous

    Don’t forget people don’t ever pay those creeps from the MAFIAA, people “buying” stuff from them are the ones that keep them alive, don’t do it or you be sorry in the end.

  • General Snus

    “If someone likes three tracks from an album he or she no longer has to buy the full album, something that was unimaginable 10 years ago.”

    That’s a crazy statement. I bought quite a few CD singles in my life… can’t remember exactly when they stopped selling them, sometime around 10 years ago tho… so I’m pretty sure someone would have to have a very very poor imagination to not imagine something that was reality not much longer before.

    Hell, I even still have some casette singles…

  • Ettore

    Wait until HMV goes under in a few years, watch those profit numbers whittle down to nothing. Same with Blockbuster; I will be so happy when those 2 die.

  • Ben

    Would anyone care to explain the stagnating growth of the United States record industry then?

    http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/amplifier/70991/2010-album-sales-way-worse-than-2009-album-sales/

    “The lone good news seems to come on the digital front, where single track downloads were actually up one percent compared to last year’s totals. That’s what we call “growth.” (However, total overall music sales — digital and physical albums, music videos, singles, everything — were down 2.4 percent, the first time ever in the SoundScan era that the number decreased from the previous year, so ignore that growth thing.) A recent Pew study involving Internet users revealed that a third of respondents said they purchased digital music legally, but doesn’t mention how the other two-thirds are getting their music, but given this year’s SoundScan numbers we can assume they aren’t paying for it.”

    It’s great that in Britain they had such a massive increase in digital sales, but what will make up the losses in the much larger digital marketplace of the US?

  • George W. Bush

    CORRECTION!:
    MORE music sold than ever before BECAUSE of FILE SHARING!!!

  • Ettore

    @59 You bought a single with only one song on it? I have been alive for 41 years and I am fairly certain I have “NEVER” seen that. What “I” remember are albums with 3-4 copies of that song; 1 “good” one and 3 remixes … and a few crappy addons … for 75% of what the album cost.

  • Anonymous

    If cry baby artists don’t like file sharing then they can quit making music and get a job at mcdonalds or walmart.

    I have had to change jobs several times so f them f them.

    The mafiaa can also suck my d#ck being poor sucks and if file sharing makes it a little more bearable then f the mafiaa all those moral sucking trolls and their ilk.

    When will artists start thinking with their heads instead of other parts of their anatomy and stop signing up with labels. In the digital world they don’t need to.

  • lostinlodos

    Buy what you like. Sod off what you don’t.
    The internet and sharing
    (no profit so it’s not piracy. PERIOD!)
    is about making informed choices in how to spend your money. We have the NATURAL RIGHT TO KNOW.
    You want my money; give me a sample. That simple

  • Pingback: - Jennifer Hudson On Life, Music and Her Weight

  • Ninja

    My granpa has been predicting his own death for like 20 years now, despite his iron health. Sounds familiar?

    MAFIAA should just shut up and get down to doing business right. Mix ads in the thing, offer free music with less quality and then paid content lossless and with exclusive printed stuff, offer SANE prices. To put it simple: EVOLVE ALREADY.

    You don’t remember ppl for whining all the time about how miserable they are. You remember ppl who actually go and do things that need to be done with creativity and courage. Where do you wanna be MAFIAA? The whining part it seems.

  • Pingback: Music Pirates Aren’t Very Scary « Getting Discovered

  • Lemme Jones

    I am surprised, I cant remember the last time I actually “paid” for a song

    anon-tools.it.tc

  • Chris

    I am sick and tired of reading shed-loads of anti-piracy crap that accuses me of stealing –
    I live in the Middle East and would gladly pay for music except for one thing:
    ITunes? Not Available in the Middle East
    7Music? Not Available in the Middle East
    eMusic? Not Available in the Middle East
    Amazon.com digital downloads? Not Available in the Middle East
    In fact, of all the sites I know about, they are all –
    Not Available in the Middle East
    So you tell me – where the hell am I supposed to buy legal music?
    Cry-baby industry twats can either put up or shut up, I’m off to TPB.

  • Bob

    The music and video industry only lose a little to piracy, the average person looks at the price of an album or video and will not buy it as it to expensive in UK. However if he see it on-line for free or reduced he may download it but he was not going to pay the high price for it in the first place, so it is not lost money. The item would be just sitting on a shelf until a sale of the item later in the year.

  • Anonymous

    @Johnny, great response!!!! Everyone tends to want to blame the artist, but even an indie artist gets hurt by piracy, they still at at the mercy of digital pirates on file sharing services, because they don’t have the legal backing or financial resources that a major does to go after every single violation.

    Sorry but ITunes, Amazon, CD Baby, etc. still charge the artists just like a label does, yes the artists get a larger share of sales, but the total cost of promotions, marketing, manufacturing, merchandising falls on the lap of the artist, and whether or not the artist sells one cd or not, these sites still get an upload fee to their sites, and they make money off artists that have not even sold one single song or very little. So who is getting raped here?

    Ok, what happened to the figures from 2007, 2008 and 2009. Give more meat to your argument than just posting figures that have a 3 to 4 year break between them. Of course sales in most industries may show a growth between a 5 year period, but this argument is mute at best until you post figures for 07, 08, and 09. Then and only then will you be able to argue with validity. So the same trick that you claim the industry is using, you are as well. you never know when true industry professional will come along and find numerous holes in your argument.

    Of course the majors are directly responsible for the digital revolution in a negative way because of their MAPS agreement in the 90′s, and instead of capitalizing off of the digital revolution, they railed against it. They are now attempting to play catch up by shutting down all the competition whether legal or illegal, so I get that one. But this argument over numbers that seem to be inflated only because you negated the years between the numbers you posted here is not a legitimate argument.

    The US music industry has seen numbers fall over the past several years (http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/amplifier/70991/2010-album-sales-way-worse-than-2009-album-sales/) as compared to other countries. File sharing and piracy are not responsible for that? Ok, then who or what is, ghosts?

    Consumers need to pipe down! You can’t get a free car, a free radio component system, a free stove, a free meal at your favorite 5 star restaurant, so why should you not want to pay for music that is “property” as the aforementioned items?? Bottom line, this music belongs to the artists and to the distributors that put them in the marketplace unless the artists are completely independent and not even using a digital distribution service.

    Artists need to learn the business, and then they won’t be signing one sided contracts. It is quite pathetic to say the least when one artist in particular, Michael Jackson owns %50 of the publishing (an artists largest source of income), of some of the world’s major artists through several of his acquisitions of music publishing catalogs. That includes The Beatles, Justine Bieber, Lady Gaga, The Black Eyed Peas, Willie Nelson, Bob Dylan, Eminem, Rick Ross, etc., etc… In 1984 he acquired ATV’s 4000 song publishing catalog and then merged it with SONY’s music publishing wing in 1995, which has generated over a billion dollars since his untimely desmise.

  • Industry Professional

    @Johnny, great response!!!! Everyone tends to want to blame the artist, but even an indie artist gets hurt by piracy, they still at at the mercy of digital pirates on file sharing services, because they don’t have the legal backing or financial resources that a major does to go after every single violation.

    Sorry but ITunes, Amazon, CD Baby, etc. still charge the artists just like a label does, yes the artists get a larger share of sales, but the total cost of promotions, marketing, manufacturing, merchandising falls on the lap of the artist, and whether or not the artist sells one cd or not, these sites still get an upload fee to their sites, and they make money off artists that have not even sold one single song or very little. So who is getting raped here?

    Ok, what happened to the figures from 2007, 2008 and 2009. Give more meat to your argument than just posting figures that have a 3 to 4 year break between them. Of course sales in most industries may show a growth between a 5 year period, but this argument is mute at best until you post figures for 07, 08, and 09. Then and only then will you be able to argue with validity. So the same trick that you claim the industry is using, you are as well. you never know when true industry professional will come along and find numerous holes in your argument.

    Of course the majors are directly responsible for the digital revolution in a negative way because of their MAPS agreement in the 90′s, and instead of capitalizing off of the digital revolution, they railed against it. They are now attempting to play catch up by shutting down all the competition whether legal or illegal, so I get that one. But this argument over numbers that seem to be inflated only because you negated the years between the numbers you posted here is not a legitimate argument.

    The US music industry has seen numbers fall over the past several years (http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/amplifier/70991/2010-album-sales-way-worse-than-2009-album-sales/) as compared to other countries. File sharing and piracy are not responsible for that? Ok, then who or what is, ghosts?

    Consumers need to pipe down! You can’t get a free car, a free radio component system, a free stove, a free meal at your favorite 5 star restaurant, so why should you not want to pay for music that is “property” as the aforementioned items?? Bottom line, this music belongs to the artists and to the distributors that put them in the marketplace unless the artists are completely independent and not even using a digital distribution service.

    Artists need to learn the business, and then they won’t be signing one sided contracts. It is quite pathetic to say the least when one artist in particular, Michael Jackson owns %50 of the publishing (an artists largest source of income), of some of the world’s major artists through several of his acquisitions of music publishing catalogs. That includes The Beatles, Justine Bieber, Lady Gaga, The Black Eyed Peas, Willie Nelson, Bob Dylan, Eminem, Rick Ross, etc., etc… In 1984 he acquired ATV’s 4000 song publishing catalog and then merged it with SONY’s music publishing wing in 1995, which has generated over a billion dollars since his untimely desmise.

  • General Snus

    Okay true… singles always had at least one other song… on records/tapes it was on the other side… on CD singles it was just another track (and yeah sometimes there was a remix or radio version of the same song, etc).

  • Industry Professional

    @Johnny, great response!!!! Everyone tends to want to blame the artist, but even an indie artist gets hurt by piracy, they still at at the mercy of digital pirates on file sharing services, because they don’t have the legal backing or financial resources that a major does to go after every single violation.

    Sorry but ITunes, Amazon, CD Baby, etc. still charge the artists just like a label does, yes the artists get a larger share of sales, but the total cost of promotions, marketing, manufacturing, merchandising falls on the lap of the artist, and whether or not the artist sells one cd or not, these sites still get an upload fee to their sites, and they make money off artists that have not even sold one single song or very little. So who is getting raped here?

    Ok, what happened to the figures from 2007, 2008 and 2009. Give more meat to your argument than just posting figures that have a 3 to 4 year break between them. Of course sales in most industries may show a growth between a 5 year period, but this argument is mute at best until you post figures for 07, 08, and 09. Then and only then will you be able to argue with validity. So the same trick that you claim the industry is using, you are as well. you never know when true industry professional will come along and find numerous holes in your argument.

    Of course the majors are directly responsible for the digital revolution in a negative way because of their MAPS agreement in the 90′s, and instead of capitalizing off of the digital revolution, they railed against it. They are now attempting to play catch up by shutting down all the competition whether legal or illegal, so I get that one. But this argument over numbers that seem to be inflated only because you negated the years between the numbers you posted here is not a legitimate argument.

    The US music industry has seen numbers fall over the past several years (http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/amplifier/70991/2010-album-sales-way-worse-than-2009-album-sales/) as compared to other countries. File sharing and piracy are not responsible for that? Ok, then who or what is, ghosts?

    Consumers need to pipe down! You can’t get a free car, free gas, free bottled water, a free radio component system, a free stove, a free meal at your favorite 5 star restaurant, so why should you not want to pay for music that is “property” as the aforementioned items?? Bottom line, this music belongs to the artists and to the distributors that put them in the marketplace unless the artists are completely independent and not even using a digital distribution service.

    Artists need to learn the business, and then they won’t be signing one sided contracts. It is quite pathetic to say the least when one artist in particular, Michael Jackson owns %50 of the publishing (an artists largest source of income), of some of the world’s major artists through several of his acquisitions of music publishing catalogs. That includes The Beatles, Justine Bieber, Lady Gaga, The Black Eyed Peas, Willie Nelson, Bob Dylan, Eminem, Rick Ross, etc., etc… In 1984 he acquired ATV’s 4000 song publishing catalog and then merged it with SONY’s music publishing wing in 1995, which has generated over a billion dollars since his untimely desmise.

  • Anonymous

    I must say that http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-12137380 and http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-12120789 seem to not be on either side. They do mention that company owners said there was a problem with piracy, but they also state that Jim Killock said :”Record labels are masters of their own fate and need to stop blaming their customers for their industry’s own failures.”

  • Pingback: Record Labels To Pay $45 Million for Pirating Artists’ Music

  • ndmushroom

    @ Industry professional: which industry would that be? The music one or the spam industry? How many times do you think you have to post it to make it sound right? It still doesn’t.
    You say “Everyone tends to want to blame the artist”. Quite the opposite, in fact.
    You say “Ok, what happened to the figures from 2007, 2008 and 2009. Give more meat to your argument than just posting figures that have a 3 to 4 year break between them.”. True. What happened to piracy in 2007, 2008 and 2009? Anything special? Not really. Piracy went on. If data showed a huge increase in 2007 and a huge decrease in 2008, would that have anything to do with piracy? No, because piracy went on. Your argument is pointless, since no year to year change could be attributed to piracy, since nothing special happened to piracy in any specific year.
    You say “But this argument over numbers that seem to be inflated only because you negated the years between the numbers you posted here is not a legitimate argument.” Again, what does that have to do with anything?
    You say “The US music industry has seen numbers fall over the past several years as compared to other countries. File sharing and piracy are not responsible for that? Ok, then who or what is, ghosts?”. Well, the rest of the world’s music industry has seen numbers rise, you admit that in your own post. Who’s responsible for that? Ghostbusters? Piracy is not stronger in the States than in the rest of the world. Quite the opposite, in fact. Where does that leave your argument? In the bin, along with the other ones.
    You say “You can’t get a free car, free gas, free bottled water, a free radio component system, a free stove, a free meal at your favorite 5 star restaurant, so why should you not want to pay for music that is “property” as the aforementioned items?” Well, for a variety of reasons. A. I can’t take an album back because I didn’t like it, whereas I can do that with all the above-mentioned things. B. I can go to a concert of the artist and pay much more than I’d pay to get the album. What’s the stove equivalent of a concert? c. I don’t usually go around wearing “Stove” t-shirts. You’re more likely to see me wearing my favourite group’s merchandise, which I have bought from the official store (and, because I’m a fan, I even bought the limited edition). d. I can share the music I like with thousands of people all across the world, who can buy the album, go to the concert or wear the t-shirt if they also like it. I tried to share my car with my neigbour, but he crashed it and now the remaining thousands of my contacts have to wait for me to get a new one. E. Most of the money I paid for my stove goes to the company that manufactured it. Most of the money I pay for my music goes to some greedy bastard who hasn’t even heard it.
    In other words, there’s tens of ways an artist can actually be rewarded for his art, the sales of his music being the least rewarding one. Stove manufacturers don’t have that luxury.

    Now please crawl back to your hole and stop trying to brainwash us. We’re not Justin Bieber fans, so you can safely conclude we’re immune to brainwashing.

  • nonense

    “In other words, there’s tens of ways an artist can actually be rewarded for his art, the sales of his music being the least rewarding one”

    Least rewarding says you???

    Artists need to make a living and pay the rent, eat that is why they ask for payment of their music if you download it. Simple business formula – you want what I have created, you pay for it like any other retail product that is available to buy.

  • Anonymous

    @77 Jan 11, 2011 at 23:49 by nonense

    And what is stopping artists from that exactly?

    Artists can sell their music, nobody is stopping them, filesharing at most just takes away the “exclusivity” of that distribution channel not the means.

    Artists can still sell related merch.
    Artists can still sell their images.
    Artists can still endorse products and companies.
    Artists can still sell seat in a show house.

    What is stopping artists from making money exactly?
    Explain also why artists are making more money today than 10 years ago proved by their higher income taxes?

    Explain the f. ing why?

    Oh that is right you can’t can you?

  • Anonymous

    @77 Jan 11, 2011 at 23:49 by nonense

    Simple business formula – you want what I have created, you pay for it like any other retail product that is available to buy.

    Well then if you used society to create anything we want you to pay for it too, since you draw inspiration from society you need to pay it buddy.

  • Anonymous

    @77 Jan 11, 2011 at 23:49 by nonense

    Simple business formula – you want what I have created, you pay for it like any other retail product that is available to buy.

    Almost forgot, for those of you tired of such whinny bitches complaining all the time and crying fool, just go to a place where people appreciate you and don’t mind your sharing ways.

    Jamendo is a good place to start and if you need more places to find free music that is also good you can try the list on the Dig CCMixter website, where you can find music for your Youtube video, podcast or just simply to enjoy it.

    Live the copytards behind they are not worth your attention, money or respect.

  • Anonymous

    Most artists are not rich!
    All I hear is ridiculous excuses or elaborate justifications for stealing from struggling artists that which you want for free!

  • Anonamoose

    “Most artists are not rich!”

    They shouldn’t expect to be rich, they have easy jobs that they enjoy.

    However, if they are not making much money it is probably their own fault for ageeing to be part of the big music company machine, the labels make all the money from record sales. They just need to gig more.

    OMG that’s almost like a real job…poor them.

  • tosser

    Never saw the appeal of single tracks.

    Albums are like films – each scene has a context.

  • Pingback: More Music Sold Than Ever Before, Despite Piracy « govtslaves.info

  • ndmushroom

    @77
    I said “In other words, there’s tens of ways an artist can actually be rewarded for his art, the sales of his music being the least rewarding one”
    You replied “Least rewarding says you???”

    No. Least rewarding says the music industry.
    http://torrentfreak.com/artists-make-more-money-in-file-sharing-age-than-before-100914/
    Take a look at the graph and see for yourself.

  • ndmushroom

    @77
    I said “In other words, there’s tens of ways an artist can actually be rewarded for his art, the sales of his music being the least rewarding one”
    You replied “Least rewarding says you???”

    No. Least rewarding say the researchers.
    http://torrentfreak.com/artists-make-more-money-in-file-sharing-age-than-before-100914/
    Take a look at the graph and see for yourself.

  • ndmushroom

    Oops, sorry for the double post…

  • Ahab

    Only Torrentfreak and its devout followers can be deluded enough to believe the broken logic of this article. If more units sold is the only relevant statistic then perhaps you can explain why the industry is still shrinking? You were probably not aware that a full half of digital sales are in fact ring tones. Does this not tell you something of the state of things? Meanwhile, you repeat the ridiculous argument that by not paying for your entertainment, you are actually helping. It’s like saying serial killers cause population booms.

  • Chrispy

    I’ve been downloading music and films for over 12 years (probably a lot longer) and anything I download I really like I always end up buying hence I have a collection of over 2000 music cd’s and around 3000 dvd’s. If I hadn’t been able to do this I wouldn’t have bought a third of them so there is something in the try before you buy idea.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t buy music neither movies.

  • Anonymous

    In case anyone wants to know. Artists make the most money from tours/merch. Not from album sales. Their labels take such a large cut.

  • ndmushroom

    @87.
    Well, serial killers killing abortion clinic doctors and Durex employees might actually be responsible for a population boom. I know that, you, much like the rest of your industry, are still seeing the world as black and white, but since you make videoclips in colour for half a century, you might want to see the world in colour as well. :-)

  • MediaFreedom

    Regardless of their ability or failure to recognize that down loaders help them sell more songs, or the suggestion that they are evolving, it doesn’t really matter. At the heart of the issue is the moral implications that I am now faced with when choosing to support them or not. The actions that the RIAA and MPAA have taken to squander culture, and to form a distribution monopoly speaks volumes. I can’t wait for the day to arrive when the RIAA, MPAA and it’s companies cease to operate.

  • Pingback: Online Global Week in Review 14 January 2011 from IP Think Tank

  • Simon

    @Tosser #83, most decent albums have scenes and context, but theyre not the albums were talking about. When Led Zep (for example) released an album, all the songs were great ( if youre into led zep), but nowadays most new albums are just distribution devices for 2 songs at most. most fans only want the two songs which is why they vote with their wallet and buy mostly singles from itunes et al.

    The reason for this is the quick buck mentality shown by the industry. why would they bother getting their artist to write 10 excellent tunes and just sell them once. surely it’s more profitable to wrap those 10 tunes with 40 shite tunes on 5 different cds and sell 5 times the amount. If artists had real scruples, they would not put their name to an album that wasnt 100% excellent instead of the more common 20% excellent/80% filler.

  • Pingback: What Piracy Problem? Music Industry Has Best Year Ever In 2010 : The New Rockstar Philosophy

  • ContentC

    Great example of torrent math.

    Guys who gladly give others property away for free never need to be exact when it comes to calculating profits. Thats why there are only 9 (10 pack) comments to this article. At the market price of four adds per page.

    Seems these days greedy people make money by advertising next to blog posts about other greedy people who want to make money and fail, while art is loosing financial support. Less and less new quality music production is the only real, measurable result of that.

    To be honest, mr E. , you’re nothing but a conveniently anonymous troll, leeching on art and artists. I am disgusted.

  • Pingback: P2PTalk » Piracy Horrors and The Music Industry’s Twisted Reality

  • Pingback: Mihai Vlasceanu » Blog Archive » Piracy Horrors and The Music Industry’s Twisted Reality

  • Pingback: Piracy Horrors and The Music Industry’s Twisted Reality

  • Pingback: More music sold in 2010 than ever before! | ObiAudio

  • Pingback: Piracy Horrors and The Music Industry’s Twisted Reality | TorrentFreak

  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • The Pirate Bay Isn’t Down Completely, Just Having a Few Issues

    Twitter and Facebook, not to mention the TorrentFreak inbox, are currently alive with complaints that The...

  • Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

    Freedom of speech is a highly valued commodity, but should people be allowed to say whatever...

  • Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

    An anti-piracy system present in all official Blu-ray players since 2012 has received a fresh update...

  • Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

    One of the main reasons why people turn to piracy is the lack of legal alternatives....

  • UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

    Last year an Internet user known as El Nomeo leaked version 3.70 of Sony’s Playstation3 SDK...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.