Swedish Record Labels See Filesharing as Virtue
While the RIAA sues its customers, and blames filesharing for the decrease in record sales, a coalition of seven independent Swedish record labels explores alternatives that make use of the Internet and filesharing technology.
The increase in music piracy is a signal that customers want something that is simply not available. High quality, DRM-free music that they can buy online for a reasonable price. Filesharing is a virtue, and the coalition of Swedish record labels understands this, as they introduce The Swedish Model. They write:
We in the music industry have shown ourselves unable to follow in this change. Some of us have even waged war against those the music is recorded for – the listeners. The rift between producers and consumers has never been bigger. “The truth is that Internet has provided us with a fantastic grey scale of possibilities! Instead of fighting back we ought to obtain learning from the daily newspaper and the computer game industries. They early realized the superiority of the internet and developed new services there.
This sounds like music to our ears. We’ve said it over and over again here at TorrentFreak, The Internet has changed the way people interact with music. Music is more accessible, more popular and cheaper to distribute. Record labels should embrace filesharing and compete with piracy instead of fighting it, and it seems like that these Swedish labels understand that.
TorrentFreak spoke with Henrik von Euler of Flora & Fauna, one of the labels participating in the initiative. We asked him what he thinks the greatest benefits of filesharing are: “Well the first thing is pretty obvious, that you can reach much larger audiences more quickly,” he said. “You bypass many of the existing power-structures and communicate directly with the listeners. It is also a very direct medium where the step from production to consumption is extremely short which is good for creativity I think. In the old days you could have an album ready and have to wait like a year or so to have it released and now you can have your music up online the same day you get the master.”
Henrik told us that he has “no beef” with The Pirate Bay, but he admits that filesharing also has its downsides. “On a personal note I find it hard to choose what to listen to”, he told us “The vast number of sites, bands etc makes me feel stressed out, like I’m always missing something. Speed and accessibility is good because it is fast and accessible but also bad because everything turns more superficial and volatile.”
Henrik was also quite clear about the lawsuits that the RIAA has started agianst music fans: “It’s insane. It can only have bad consequences. I don’t see how they can think antagonizing the listeners will help them secure any of their much desired income.”
“This is great”, says Rick Falkvinge, leader of the Swedish Pirate Party Piratpartiet. “There are creative people who think ahead. These are labels constructing a new business model. The old dinosaurs lobby politicians, sue to the left and to the right and try to control the internet. There is room for the services of a label, few musicians want to do everything themselves. But the labels must serve their musicians and their fans, not the other way around. These new labels have understood that. The future belongs to them.”
The role of the record labels will change in the future, but not entirely according to Henrik von Euler, “I think the role of the label has started to change long ago. It moves towards a more creative role much more like the art curator or such like. And also, just because artists CAN do everything themselves from production to promotion, administration etc doesn’t mean that they actually want to.”
“On another note,” says Henrik “I must add that this is hopefully the last time I will answer questions about filesharing, good or bad. It is there! Live with it. Love it, hate it, I don’t care. But please don’t for a second think that it will go away or that you can solve it like it is a problem.
Previously: MediaDefender Parent Company Facing Liquidation
Next: RIAA Keeps Settlement Money, Artists May Sue
113 Responses (Add yours or TrackBack)
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 » Show All
Agreed completly.
Maybe the music industry will realise that us consumers already have enough coasters to last us a lifetime.
Yeah obviously file sharing is beneficial as far as convenience and paying distributors to get your music out there. You can cut out a lot.
But I want to see any of the coming 70 comments or so tell me a way to utilize file sharing in a profitable way to make it WORTH making music…
Nice read. Things are slowly shifting…
Totally agreed. If only there were more level-headed and sensible people like this!
I have often wondered when most of us have to work (that is get our hands dirty so to speak) in return for cash, and musicians can record an album then sit back and collect royalties.
When a carpenter makes a chair, he (or she) doesn’t get paid every time someone sits on it!
Sorry this is a little out of context here, but it needs saying!
you guys do relize that if the music labels make a new business plan that includes p2p that we might not be able to get free things from p2p in the future
[quote comment="299450"]you guys do relize that if the music labels make a new business plan that includes p2p that we might not be able to get free things from p2p in the future[/quote]
sure, but the money goes to the artist and they can hopefully see that we appreciate them and they will make more and better music
music can’t be compared to carpentry. the process is 100% different unless it’s some kid making ‘phat beats’ with fruity loops trying to get his music out there.
artists need to work with studios (which is a business in itself) along with buying their own gear, etc.
being a musician is a huge investment and if you aren’t getting paid for your work, which no one is, then why would anyone continue on?
someone propose a model.
People who download music are always saying “that the music is crap and not worth paying for”. Well for something that’s so damn shitty, people must like something about it or else they wouldn’t download it in the first place.
Secondly, I don’t care how cheap something is, if there’s a free alternative then the free alternative will always win.
People need to get their heads out of their asses. Piracy is stealing and there’s no way to justify it. I’m not like most people that sit around and make petty excuses for why I download games, movies, music, etc. I download it because I don’t want to pay for it. And yes I am stealing what I’m downloading. Do I care? Not at all. Fuck em. Get it while the gettin is good is what I say. I figure that there will always be enough people buying a game, movie, or album that the makers will see some sort of profit. The profit might be less (and in some cases A LOT less) than what it could have been if P2P wasn’t in the picture but again I don’t care about their profits they still have a lot more money than I do. Yes I realize that in the long run that lower profits mean less of a reason for game/music/and movie publishers to produce a large quantiy of quality material, but again I don’t care. Live for today baby. Nobody is guaranteed tomorrow.
And finally, with the exception of a few albums and a few games, 99% of the shit I download I wouldn’t have paid for anyway so I don’t feel as though I’m hurting the industry by downloading. It’s nice to have all my favorite hit’s from the 80’s in my music collection but there’s no way in a million years that I would have bought all those songs/albums. Had P2P not been there to make them available to me then I guess I’d just live without it.
The only exception to all this is sheet music. I do download a lot of sheet music for the piano through P2P. Had P2P not been there then I guess I would have bought most of it. It’s either buy it or learn it by ear.
The moral of this story is that people need to quit justifying P2P use. It is what it is. Stealing. And all your excuses and rhetoric will never change that fact. At least admit it and quit playing games.
[quote comment="299453"]music can’t be compared to carpentry. the process is 100% different[...]
artists need to work with studios (which is a business in itself) along with buying their own gear, etc.
being a musician is a huge investment” [...][/quote]
Yeah, right tell that to a furniture capenter. I bet you the education, “studio” and “gear” cost is vastly greater than that of a musician. And guess what the skill and creativity needed is probably at the same levels or higher than for the average musician.
I’d say your remark is bordering on ignorant.
okay try living as a musician with the state of the industry
a guitar that will sound good: at least 1k
microphone that will sound good: at least 1k
drums: multiple Ks
bass: at least 1k
a lot of pop artists don’t write their own music (no that’s not a bad thing.) but they have to get paid.
ONLY assistant engineers are $35/hour. at least. that’s the ASSISTANT. you also have the main engineer, the producer, studio manager, receptionist, and interns to pay.
you also have to pay for use of the million dollar consoles and hifi monitors.
I’m not downgrading the carpenter. if you make a chair, people aren’t going to copy it and then give them away for free.
if you make a song (which will prob take a week or so), it will get copied and distributed for free
so why continue?
[quote comment="299453"][...]someone propose a model.[/quote]
1) Spread you music.
2) Get fans. (if you deserve them)
3) Sell the fans what they want to buy.
I can’t understand why they always have to ask. It’s kinda obvious isn’t it?
It’s almost identical to the existing model only the net to catch fans is huuuughely more vast and there are less middlemen using p2p, torrents and such on the internet.
[quote comment="299474"][quote comment="299453"]
1) Spread you music.
2) Get fans. (if you deserve them)
3) Sell the fans what they want to buy.
[/quote]
what?
more like
spread music
maybe get fans
fans distribute your music for free.
even my FRIENDS who got my music distributed it for free. why would strangers pay and then not distribute it
All the good artists now a days arent interested in making money - they just want people to enjoy their music. Now that home recording and p2p have made it possible for these artists to bypass the labels, I don’t think labels are necessary any more. In the future, musicians will release their on material for little cost, and accept voluntary donations from downloaders.
As the cost of home recording continues to drop, I expect labels o eventually disappear.
@ comment #3: I think the industry could actually make money from giving away free music in torrents. By placing a small amount of advertising in the torrents income could be generated.
On the more radical side, an artistdirect torrent site could be set up, with advertising generating all the money… although it really would never get as much revenue as cds…
[quote comment="299471"]
I’m not downgrading the carpenter. if you make a chair, people aren’t going to copy it and then give them away for free.[/quote]
On the other hand, the carpenter actually has to put in the hours for every copy he makes, and musicians want to get paid for copies they can make for free. So maybe your point actually supports the notion that musicians expect to sit back and get paid, as opposed to the carpenter?
[quote]
if you make a song (which will prob take a week or so), it will get copied and distributed for free[/quote]
Right, and your potential customer base base grows, making the potential for selling them something they actually want to buy from you bigger. With no added cost on your part.
[quote]
so why continue?[/quote]
Yeah… bigger audience more fans… so why continue? Sigh!
…and btw most musicians aren’t mainly motivated by the money… quite obviously. Even though I can’t se why musicians motivated by money will have any real problems either.
@16: a fair idea
but it probably wouldn’t cover all the costs of recording/promotion.
@15: since ‘good’ is amazingly subjective, I don’t know if that will ever happen. home recording works for messing around and people who put loops together to create the entire style of music labeled Electronic. (partially a joke, but partially true.)
I think people don’t know what labels are for. they exist because people CANT promote their own music. they provide a huge service. the internet reaches only 12% of the world’s population. billboards, concerts, stores, tv ads, etc, reach a lot more people. the labels are needed and that’s why people sign to them in the first place.
no I’m not defending them. I’m just eager for a solution and want to hear some ideas.
@17: I’m kind of sick of the carpentry analogy because I’m not so familiar with the practice but my songs which aren’t QUITE professional, but are close, take around 10-12 hours to make per song.
the industry works because once you put in that time, generally speaking, you rely on labels and distributors to sell your work.
just because more people hear your music doesn’t mean they’re going to become a ‘fan’ or even consider buying it. think realistically.
The Carpenter comment intrigues me.
If I were to make my own chair design, and sell it, you can bet there will be limitations out there by the Indians / Chinese if it was a popular chair.
I wouldn’t be paid for every imitation made. Why can a music cd be protected from this exploitation and not anything else?
“High quality, DRM-free music that they can buy online for a reasonable price.” is not a complete sentence.
I love sweden! <3
[quote comment="299476"][quote comment="299474"][quote comment="299453"]
[...
]3) Sell the fans what they want to buy.[/quote]
what?
more like
spread music
maybe get fans
fans distribute your music for free.
even my FRIENDS who got my music distributed it for free. why would strangers pay and then not distribute it[/quote]
Your friends and your fans _HELP_ you distribute you music for free, no cost to you. They want you to get more fans. So that you can sell the fans _WHAT THEY WANT TO BUY_ from you.
Now it’s up to you to figure out what to sell them. (hint: it’s not exactly what they already got for free, but it might be very close to it. Additional hint: the term “added value” might help)
Ohh… and it’s also up to you to actually make music that is good enough to get you fans.
I have a prediction about the music industry. I think it will separate into 2 separate entities. One being the old style “pay or else” label and the new “listen and buy if you like” style. I also predict that the music lawsuits and the RIAA trouble will drag on for many years.
Its nice to think that the change in the air will come swiftly but in reality it will take quite a while before the major record labels manage to alienate enough people to seriously cripple themselves, and even when they do it will just end up with more lawsuits, more budget cuts until they finally die a slow and painful death.
on the bright site the file sharing age has taught me bout bands I never knew of, on record labels who don’t sacrifice quality of music for the almighty dollar. And I buy their albums and see them live as I know the fact I learnt about them from a music download does not make me a criminal in their eyes.
[quote comment="299444"]
But I want to see any of the coming 70 comments or so tell me a way to utilize file sharing in a profitable way to make it WORTH making music…[/quote]
Simple.
Combine a P2P filesharing network with a business model like iTunes.
Let users preview 30(give or take) seconds of a track, and if they choose to download the whole thing, bill them with a $1(give or take) microtransation. Give the majority of the profit directly to the artists, and then, here’s the kicker: divide the remainder evenly between wheoever maintains the P2P network and the user that just shared the track.
That way… If you buy a song, and share it with enough people, not only can it eventually pay for itself, it can actually start turning a profit for you.
Add a layer of(optional) social networking on top of that, like instant messaging, user profiles, chatrooms, and shit… Make the whole thing DRM-free…
You might not end up with the second coming of iTunes, but you’d end up with something that stands a fighting chance of survival against regular P2P.
Of course, your question was loaded and I doubt you were looking for a serious answer, because you seem to imply that the status quo under the RIAA somehow makes it WORTH making music, with is just a laugh and a fucking half, and paints you as a cockgobbling little stooge.
I wish i lived in sweden
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 » Show All
Add your response