Do music artists fare better in a world with illegal file-sharing?

[Subversounds]

Some pretty good articles and arguments around.

My opinion I've posted in a similar thread a while ago...



For centuries musicians (and all people involved) earned their money playing, not selling records. I think this is the way again.

From my perspective, the piracy issue is much more a scream of a dying industry than any other thing.

- never before i've seen so many music shows around town (Rio de Janeiro) from cheap 'guy-next-door' shows to U$300 Madonna shows.

- never before i've seen so many new good artists making music (i'm 27).

- never before was so cheap and easy to make the world listen to your songs. And well, to record them as well.

Artists should keep playing and charging for it.

Producers should keep producing and charging for it.

Engineers should keep recording and charging for it.

Distribuition should keep distributing music and charging for it.

Copyrights from a finished work (playing, producing, engineering, distribuiting) is like GM or Volkwagen charging the cabdriver a share of his earnings. Just silly. No writer gets money share when someone cite his work in another book, not even if the whole book is a compilation of citations of many writers.

Everyone seems ok if the guy who designed an album cover gets no % of the sells even when his art is in a million copy album. His task is really important to the business as well. But no one seems to care, and why? He was paid by the service. That is the way it will be, but now, for all parts involved in the process of making that sound.

The music industry was created with bad habits, policies that no other industry have.

More and more the recorded media will get back to the status of 'a good way to make people go to concerts' (as it was until the mass production/consumption Era of the 50-60s).

[rack gear]

Originally Posted by Subversounds

Some pretty good articles and arguments around.

My opinion I've posted in a similar thread a while ago...

For centuries musicians (and all people involved) earned their money playing, not selling records. I think this is the way again.

From my perspective, the piracy issue is much more a scream of a dying industry than any other thing.

- never before i've seen so many music shows around town (Rio de Janeiro) from cheap 'guy-next-door' shows to U$300 Madonna shows.

- never before i've seen so many new good artists making music (i'm 27).

- never before was so cheap and easy to make the world listen to your songs. And well, to record them as well.

Artists should keep playing and charging for it.

Producers should keep producing and charging for it.

Engineers should keep recording and charging for it.

Distribuition should keep distributing music and charging for it.

Copyrights from a finished work (playing, producing, engineering, distribuiting) is like GM or Volkwagen charging the cabdriver a share of his earnings. Just silly. No writer gets money share when someone cite his work in another book, not even if the whole book is a compilation of citations of many writers.

Everyone seems ok if the guy who designed an album cover gets no % of the sells even when his art is in a million copy album. His task is really important to the business as well. But no one seems to care, and why? He was paid by the service. That is the way it will be, but now, for all parts involved in the process of making that sound.

The music industry was created with bad habits, policies that no other industry have.

More and more the recorded media will get back to the status of 'a good way to make people go to concerts' (as it was until the mass production/consumption Era of the 50-60s).

what about non-performance based digitally distributed copyrighted works? software, videogames, tv shows, etc...

[dualflip]

It doesnt matter how many awareness organisations are out there trying to combat piracy, ppl dont understand the argument about buying music, it doesnt matter what you tell the general population, in the end you are still saying "pay for something that you could get for free", so for me thats not the solution.

Sadly the only solution as some ppl mentioned earlier, is goverment regulations against piracy, were the argument becomes "pay for something that you could get for free, or go to jail", now thats a little bit more convincing dont you think?

[Dean Roddey]

Originally Posted by lagavulin16

I agree with you. Dean seems to think that if there is no financial incentive, there would be no innovation. But I think without scarcity we'd live in a wonderful world where people would pursue their interests, including creating new products or improving existing ones.

It's an interesting question because although we aren't there with physical products, we are there with virtual ones. Dean and others seem to think if this continues we'll find a world with no music, no movies, and no books. I think people will still create all three regardless.

It's got nothing to do with whether people will innovate or not. The problem is that innovation becomes more and more expensive as we go. You can't just set in your bedroom and create a new cancer drug, or design a new aircraft. These things require massive amounts of investment to do. You cannot raise that amount of invsetment if it can't be made back.

Just because you can create i-beams they aren't going to automatically put themselves into a building. That requires people doing work, and they aren't going to do that for fun, because it's hard work.

Some types of intellectual property are of the sort that you can create in your bedroom, but some of it is just like buildings and airplanes. Those types of IP will go away because no one can afford to do them without the financial incentives to get people to invest in those efforts. You cannot create LOTRs in a world where it's impossible to make a big return on investment. You cannot create large scale software and support it.

I mean, have you guys just never read ANY history at all? Have you not looked at what happened in the communist countries of the previous century? They failed, and they failed because communism is not practical, for the same reasons that your theories are not practical. People will work hard when they are incentivized to work hard. The western world completely out innovated and out produced the communist world.

[rack gear]

Originally Posted by Id Ridden

http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/index.p.../rza-responds/

This is a little blurb from RZA which should be a little more on topic...Of course as always you need to come to your own conclusions. There is just so much information out there it all needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

Cheers!

lefsetz gig is to wind people up and keep them talking about him, if he doesn't, he's out of a gig.

[Id Ridden]

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

lefsetz gig is to wind people up and keep them talking about him, if he doesn't, he's out of a gig.

No doubt. He says some shit that is completely ridiculous. He does make some good points though every once and awhile.

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally Posted by Subversounds

...The music industry was created with bad habits, policies that no other industry have...

Many, if not most other industries make the music industry look like saints.

There was an attempt by the majors and some right wingers to derail rock and roll during the 1950s by claiming the independent music industry was corrupt. That mythology lives on whenever people can use it to further their own goals.

[Subversounds]

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

what about non-performance based digitally distributed copyrighted works? software, videogames, tv shows, etc...

I'm talking about music. Software should not follow those arguments i've told. nor can i think about than right now. And neither have i told that they should follow that order i've wrote. Video Games too, but despite of the piracy the game instustry is bigger than in nintendo time. Tv shows? tv and cinema will never loose their money, is that even talked about?

but specifically about non-performance based digitally distributed copyrighted works... well, are there any significant numbers of those to represent a 'visible minority' that would influence the industry? I dont think so, but i might be wrong. Before the digital age of easy-recording they would hardly get recorded, i think. Like bands from the 70s as "The Cosmic Jojers"... or "Grobbschnit". Dont know, i might be foolish.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by dualflip

goverment regulations against piracy, were the argument becomes "pay for something that you could get for free, or go to jail", now thats a little bit more convincing dont you think?

That would get my attention.....

[rack gear]

Originally Posted by Subversounds

I'm talking about music.

so am I, and why should it be treated or protected any different than any other copyrighted digitally distributed works?