I mean, it’s not like contemporary musicians, or even their soulless executives, are the people who invented the means to share the information in bulk — that was the geeks. This isn’t poetic justice. (It might be poetic justice if we were talking about software piracy, but that seems not to be as big an industry because the geeks are also really good at protecting the stuff.)

In any case, the “It’s only music” argument, from my perspective, is exactly why people shouldn’t make grandiose liberty-or-death for their right to free music. How exactly did my generation get this spoiled?

What a rip off, I spend less on my internet connection and i can download as much as i want.

-Anon

Correct. And in classical piracy, on the high seas, what is enshrined in law is the ability to take a shotgun to said pirates wherever and whenever you like with impunity.

The market worked that out and it’s been a workable solution ever since.

Who the hell do you think buys your BS about “piracy is the new way” and producers must “adapt to the new” ?

What lesson has every major producer of goods learned about this “new market” from chinese pirates producing inferior copies ?
When Ping produces a set of golf clubs using the finest metals on earth and some Chinese asshole knocks out a replica set using aluminium, what lesson should they take away about this “new market” ?

That if they want to compete with criminals ripping them off they should screw over the consumer too ?

What ? Tell us you intellectual fraud.

Once again I agree. So many people have an overly romanticized concept of reality.

The truth of the matter is, the worm turned a good long while ago.

I’ve always maintained that the danger associated with crushing citizen’s liberties for something so obviously trite as music is shameful. And there are a lot of artists who are really a bunch of greedy hypocrites, looking for an elite, cool, cash-rich lifestyle. Hold on while I grab my wallet…

If I don’t believe in Jesus, why the hell am I going to elevate some “star-wanabe’s” myth status when I can do what he/she does at home, on my own, for free? It’s work, but it’s not labour. Playing live is labour. And should be rewarded as such.

It has always been possible to freely reproduce works at no cost to the original author. This is precisely why copyright law was devised (back in the 1600s, believe it or not). The only difference now is that piracy now costs nothing to the pirates either.

I agree with the original author: Recorded music will eventually be an add-on service for your cell phone or ISP.

The average brain surgeon makes a lot more money than the average musician. In fact, the average brain surgeon probably makes more money than the average rock star. The guy you see standing behind the counter at 7-11 makes more money than the average musician.

The only truly rich rockstars are the ones are wrote and recorded many albums over many years that were consistently bought by millions of people. One-hit-wonders and contemporary pop stars eventually have to get day jobs, or end up on “Celebrity Mole.”

http://pluking.blogspot.com

$0.17 Musicians’ unions
$0.80 Packaging/manufacturing
$0.82 Publishing royalties
$0.80 Retail profit
$0.90 Distribution
$1.60 Artists’ royalties
$1.70 Label profit
$2.40 Marketing/promotion
$2.91 Label overhead
$3.89 Retail overhead[/quote]
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/6558540/walmart_wants_10_cds/quote

Ok so where do they get off charging $35-$40 (25-27 Euros) then? The greedy leeches can shove their crap where it belongs!!

Aside from those considerations, while there are ongoing inconsistent legalities, that isn’t my problem, and I’ll do what I think is right and fair.

From what I’ve read even of US law there are plenty of legal justifications to do so, and I believe that when it’s all sorted out I’ll be too old to care anymore, but it will be legal everywhere, and not just in some countries as it is now.

Anyhow I wouldn’t know who I’m downloading from and if it’s all ok in their country, and neither should I have to be concerned. The Internet is multinational while the cartels want to maintain price fixing, boundaries, and nationalistic propaganda

99% of music I want is either unavailable in my area, “deleted”, or has an exorbitant markup. Have they ever heard of market pricing one wonders. Jacking the price up through the roof may seem nasty and profitable, but in reality doesn’t sell. Pricing fairly (about 10% of current retail) is what will drive up sales despite file sharing, and reap the big profits. But they are too arrogant and up themselves to do that, and so they pay for their own greed.

Btw when are Heroes and Terminator coming back ???

Right.

So this means we can no longer sell:

Seeds
Animals
Movies
Software

Bummer. I’ll let everyone know. Thanks for clearing that up.[/quote]

Specious logic, thanks for trying.

Seeds and animals have inherent costs in the reproduction formula. While on the other hand, digital media has none. One digital copy to another costs nothing to perform, assuming a local disc transfer, and nothing more than the costs of bandwidth for a remote one.

In the New Media you are able to sell service and experience, but you will not be able to sell media itself, at least not in any significant way from a corporate-perspective. As music and movies are so easily copied and the production chain is so large, it is impossible to secure and prevent duplication before the product reaches market. Once the majors are forced to accept this reality and embrace digital downloads it will already be to late for them, as we all know – the genie is out of the bottle – and the majority of the world is not going to pay the studios a dime for digital downloads. But by selling the cinema experience and increasing the quality of the products they bring to market, Hollywood will survive. Ditto the music business, although I believe the Major labels will find themselves left in the dust of history as home recording technologies become increasingly cheaper and musicians are able to share their songs without having to sell their souls for market access – because the market is free and open to anyone, you just have give it away. And if it’s any good, you’ll get gigs and the people will come and buy your merch; and I believe artists will find a more meaningful connection and relationship with their audiences, and fans will feel all the more closer to the music they love and that moves their lives…

I don’t make any assumptions about how the industry will act in the long term, you’re right, it probably will become corrupt again. This generation’s pirates will become legitimized, form a new establishment and almost certainly become corrupted sometime in the future. I don’t see why this wouldn’t happen, it always has in the past.

But that doesn’t exclude the possibility of the majors and the file sharers coming to an understanding of some kind in the near future, in fact that has to happen for this current period of chaos to be replaced with a new order, which is then corrupted.

I think we agree on this. The great thing about the presence of pirates is they keep the markets in check, they are the market’s subconscious, and when there is a problem, a market failure of some kind, the pirates begin acting up until the situation is rectified.

Sorry Matt; I disagree. You did an earlier story, actually, fairly well done but with a few crucial failings on the rise of piracy and the need to compete rather than stifle.

The same core failing is in your argument here: you assume that if for even one instant pirates and mafIAA can negotiate a ceasefire / bff business plan, then forever and ever the dinosaur mafIAA will stay true to the deal, never again over-restricting their products, GROSSLY overcharging for their products, or abusing their customers.

This is where you are mistaken.

Its unfortunate, too, because I was very impressed with your presentation on piracy, and you made the point repeatedly – British radio, British record companies, American record companies, Fox studios, Hollywood – so many examples of outlaws opposing the system, then within less than one generation becoming even more corrupt than the system they once fought. And this will happen with piracy.

Honestly, I mean no offense, but did you not see the trend? That every successful outlaw/pirate person or company or country ended up being more oppressive than the original oppressor?

That is exactly what will happen to the so-called “successful” venture that legalizes/”legitimizes” piracy!!!

I agree that the current mainstream digital media business model needs to change; I agree that it needs to be better; I agree that it cannot compete (although it is economically possible) with piracy; but I COMPLETELY disagree that if the business world ever comes to its senses, it will be the end of the need for piracy.

Piracy is the competition, the thorn-in-the-side, that spurs these dinosaur mafIAA of all shapes and sectors to be better (more productive, high quality, contributing to society rather than taking from it) competitors.

In closing, the argument is philosophical; you do see much of the economic, but miss all of the long term and philosophical meaning behind the movement.