So, how do you all reconcile the fact...

[Cursed Lemon]

...That music piracy has undeniably demonstrated that either a) music today is not worth supporting, or b) the populace at large just doesn't really care about this industry whatsoever? That music, in general, is just a fashion statement that people can seemingly forgo if need be? I think it's fair to assume that if someone is passionate enough about something, they will support it monetarily. All forms of media have been hit by piracy, so really, what does this suggest? Either popular multimedia is just not very intriguing these days on the whole, or people simply don't have a spark for it.

You can say it's the economy, you can say that it's the counter-cultural attitude of this generation, but the fact remains, what we do in this business apparently lacks value when we're talking about the general public's wallet priorities. As far as music goes, I don't think we'll ever see a resurgence of sales comparable to what they used to be, even if record companies find a way to enforce DRM almost completely, because I think this generation has left a bad taste in the mouths of consumers.

I don't know, it kind of unsettles me that the main goal of this industry, as of present, is forcing people to buy something they don't particularly even care about.

But, that's how consumerism works, now isn't it.

[Dirty Halo]

Originally Posted by Cursed Lemon

...That music piracy has undeniably demonstrated that either a) music today is not worth supporting, or b) the populace at large just doesn't really care about this industry whatsoever? That music, in general, is just a fashion statement that people can seemingly forgo if need be? I think it's fair to assume that if someone is passionate enough about something, they will support it monetarily. All forms of media have been hit by piracy, so really, what does this suggest? Either popular multimedia is just not very intriguing these days on the whole, or people simply don't have a spark for it.

You can say it's the economy, you can say that it's the counter-cultural attitude of this generation, but the fact remains, what we do in this business apparently lacks value when we're talking about the general public's wallet priorities. As far as music goes, I don't think we'll ever see a resurgence of sales comparable to what they used to be, even if record companies find a way to enforce DRM almost completely, because I think this generation has left a bad taste in the mouths of consumers.

I don't know, it kind of unsettles me that the main goal of this industry, as of present, is forcing people to buy something they don't particularly even care about.

But, that's how consumerism works, now isn't it.

Your entire post is based on building blocks of fallacy on top of erroneous fallacy.

1. People are consuming more music than ANY previous generation. Fact.

2. People NEVER cared about the industry, why should they? I don't care about the toilet paper-making industry, but I like their product. It has NOTHING to do with piracy (until a pirate uses the "industry" as justification for stealing).

3. Paying for something versus stealing something is any kind of accurate barometer for "value." It's not. It's a barometer on theft. Ease of theft. Culture of theft. Nothing more.

And lastly...

4. An industry forcing people to buy their products... uh, really? Didn't know I was legally obligated to buy music!


Nice. try.

Next.

[Studio Addict]

I reconcile it by knowing that if human beings can get something they desire for free, then they will.

[mobius.media]

Originally Posted by Cursed Lemon

...That music piracy has undeniably demonstrated that either a) music today is not worth supporting, or b) the populace at large just doesn't really care about this industry whatsoever? That music, in general, is just a fashion statement that people can seemingly forgo if need be? I think it's fair to assume that if someone is passionate enough about something, they will support it monetarily. All forms of media have been hit by piracy, so really, what does this suggest? Either popular multimedia is just not very intriguing these days on the whole, or people simply don't have a spark for it.

You're missing major portions of the truth in your attempts to rationalize this.

Internet piracy hit audio hard FIRST of the digital IP industries, and continues to hit it hardest, due to the small file sizes and the early availability of portable players (like iPods).

A song can be downloaded for 4 MB, vs. 700 MB for a movie, or 5 GB or more for a modern console game. In the late 90s, PC games were smaller, but still far, far bigger than a song and larger than was comfortable on a 56 K modem.

When smaller file sized PC games are now released without "call home" licensing DRM via multiplayer, we can see the piracy rates are roughly equivalent to music:

Machinarium suffers 90% piracy rate, offers $5 amnesty sale
World of Goo has 90% piracy rate | Joystiq

Similarly, Android apps (which have proven easier to pirate than iPhone), have been registering a 66% average piracy rate, with some 'advanced' countries like Australia, Spain, and Italy pirating at rates around 90% and up.

Android Piracy Heat Map | AndroidGuys

Does that mean "no one cares about games" or "no one cares about Android apps"?

I think not. I think, like with music, people will take whatever they want for "free" so long as it is easy to do so and there are no consequences.

Other industries will continue to be affected as technology opens the gates. e-Books have been spared until now due to the lack of cheap e-Readers. That is changing. And games makers have largely been able to skirt the damage by using consoles as DRM and illegalizing mods to 'jailbreak' them. But this too will likely change as PC's become faster still and consoles harder to justify.

To me, there is little mystery about the piracy of MP3's. The evidence indicates people would pirate games/movies/books at equal rates if it was as convenient. And I think that is exactly where we will end up, if appropriate checks and balances are not put in place.

[Cursed Lemon]

Originally Posted by Dirty Halo

Your entire post is based on building blocks of fallacy on top of erroneous fallacy.

1. People are consuming more music than ANY previous generation. Fact.

2. People NEVER cared about the industry, why should they? I don't care about the toilet paper-making industry, but I like their product. It has NOTHING to do with piracy (until a pirate uses the "industry" as justification for stealing).

3. Paying for something versus stealing something is any kind of accurate barometer for "value." It's not. It's a barometer on theft. Ease of theft. Culture of theft. Nothing more.

And lastly...

4. An industry forcing people to buy their products... uh, really? Didn't know I was legally obligated to buy music!


Nice. try.

Next.

Please try not to respond while in the throes of an emotional fit.

Anyway, you guys are missing the point. If you truly have respect for something (or in the toilet paper example, respect for your personal need of it), you will contribute to it monentarily because you want to see it continue to prosper. If you simply download someone's music or some other form of digital labor, without compensating them for it, you are essentially saying to the producers of the material, "I don't think you are worth perpetuating." Obviously, not purchasing someone's music at all is a perfect demonstration of that, but when you acquire someone's music illegally and still refuse to support them, that's basically a kick in the face. It means that if these people can't acquire your material legally, that it's basically completely expendable and of no real value.

I simply find it confounding that the entire music industry plays to people like this, who have obviously demonstrated a severe lack of passion for the art.

[mobius.media]

Originally Posted by Cursed Lemon

Anyway, you guys are missing the point. If you truly have respect for something (or in the toilet paper example, respect for your personal need of it), you will contribute to it monentarily because you want to see it continue to prosper. If you simply download someone's music or some other form of digital labor, without compensating them for it, you are essentially saying to the producers of the material, "I don't think you are worth perpetuating." Obviously, not purchasing someone's music at all is a perfect demonstration of that, but when you acquire someone's music illegally and still refuse to support them, that's basically a kick in the face. It means that if these people can't acquire your material legally, that it's basically completely expendable and of no real value.

I simply find it confounding that the entire music industry plays to people like this, who have obviously demonstrated a severe lack of passion for the art.

If that's how you want to look at it, sure, but then evidence suggests the same could then be said for all digital IP.

And I don't believe that's true, since people are spending more and more time engaged with their digital IP than ever.

People are just exploiting a loop hole in the law/technology/enforcement, having a blast knowing they can get (almost) anything they want online without paying a cent.

[theGeek]

I disagree with the premise that just because people want something that they are willing to buy it... if that were the case then piracy and theft wouldn't exist.

Piracy is nothing new and I'd like to see how "modern piracy" is any different than me taping a song off the radio or dubbing a tape (and I'm not trying to condone those behaviors at all).

I suppose its in the availability of it all... the internet just makes it too easy.

Personally, I'm tired of the piracy discussion. I know that I don't have the answer but I can tell you that the answer will not be found in arguing this to death nor will it be found through prosecution of the "pirates". Too many people are doing it.

I think the way that music is received needs to be changed... its sad to see CD and record stores go away but I suppose someone was sad to see the local blacksmith go out of business as well... does that mean we stop progress? Of course not.

Again, I don't have any answers or suggestions...

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by Cursed Lemon

Anyway, you guys are missing the point. If you truly have respect for something (or in the toilet paper example, respect for your personal need of it), you will contribute to it monentarily because you want to see it continue to prosper.

I don't think you are grasping on to reality, although I wish what you said were true. Studio Addict hit the nail on the head.
If you give people something for free, they'll take it.
Most people don't know what goes into making a record. They see a vast choice of new music every week and can't conceive it'll ever end.
If my local dairy gave milk away, people would take it, and they probably wouldn't wonder how the dairy was surviving with no income.

[joelpatterson]

Originally Posted by Cursed Lemon

... you are essentially saying to the producers of the material, "I don't think you are worth perpetuating." ...

I personally don't live my life as a discerning patron who lavishes my largesse on the objects of my favor, like it was all a big chess game. Outside of the emotional boundaries of my family and friends, I don't think anyone or anything is worth perpetuating. I leave their perpetuation up to them.

[tommyd123]

Originally Posted by Cursed Lemon

Please try not to respond while in the throes of an emotional fit.

Anyway, you guys are missing the point. If you truly have respect for something (or in the toilet paper example, respect for your personal need of it), you will contribute to it monentarily because you want to see it continue to prosper. If you simply download someone's music or some other form of digital labor, without compensating them for it, you are essentially saying to the producers of the material, "I don't think you are worth perpetuating." Obviously, not purchasing someone's music at all is a perfect demonstration of that, but when you acquire someone's music illegally and still refuse to support them, that's basically a kick in the face. It means that if these people can't acquire your material legally, that it's basically completely expendable and of no real value.

I simply find it confounding that the entire music industry plays to people like this, who have obviously demonstrated a severe lack of passion for the art.

I couldn't disagree more with this whole premise. If I don't like, need or support something why would I acquire it for free just because I can, or worse yet, as a statement of my disapproval. This makes no sense.
Kids who are downloading for free, are downloading music they like and want to listen to. The reason they do it it is because there is a moral disconnect between music piracy and other forms of stealing. Perhaps another discussion.
The idea that the industry is putting out garbage and people rebel against that garbage by pirating the garbage is total nonsense in my view.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by Cursed Lemon

I don't know, it kind of unsettles me that the main goal of this industry, as of present, is forcing people to buy something they don't particularly even care about.

Nobody's forcing anyone to buy anything. If they don't want to buy it they shouldn't. But that doesn't give them the right to take it for free. If they don't want it they shouldn't take it. But they do want it so they do take it - they just don't want to pay, because they can get away with being cheap bastards.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by Cursed Lemon

Anyway, you guys are missing the point. If you truly have respect for something (or in the toilet paper example, respect for your personal need of it), you will contribute to it monentarily because you want to see it continue to prosper. If you simply download someone's music or some other form of digital labor, without compensating them for it, you are essentially saying to the producers of the material, "I don't think you are worth perpetuating." Obviously, not purchasing someone's music at all is a perfect demonstration of that, but when you acquire someone's music illegally and still refuse to support them, that's basically a kick in the face. It means that if these people can't acquire your material legally, that it's basically completely expendable and of no real value.

The Ant and the Grasshopper
If I steal a bicycle, does a bicycle have no value to me?

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by joelpatterson

I personally don't live my life as a discerning patron who lavishes my largesse on the objects of my favor, like it was all a big chess game. Outside of the emotional boundaries of my family and friends, I don't think anyone or anything is worth perpetuating. I leave their perpetuation up to them.

Which is germane to this discussion exactly how?

Are you condoning piracy? It certainly sounds like it. Frankly I'm amazed that even a wise-ass like you would say such a thing.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by tommyd123

Kids who are downloading for free, are downloading music they like and want to listen to. The reason they do it it is because there is a moral disconnect between music piracy and other forms of stealing. Perhaps another discussion.
The idea that the industry is putting out garbage and people rebel against that garbage by pirating the garbage is total nonsense in my view.

This reminds me of the other night - I was at a Thai restaurant and the kid at the next table was loudly complaining about the price of a bowl of white rice. Intrigued, I asked the waitress how much the rice cost and she answered "$1.50", to which I said, "That's not much". At this point the kid (who was out with his girlfriend) hollered "Do you KNOW how much rice costs in the store?" I asked him if he understood the the restaurant needed to pay the cook, waitresses, and other staff and to pay rent to the landlord and he looked at me like I was crazy.

[joelpatterson]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

... Frankly I'm amazed that even a wise-ass like you would say such a thing.

That sounds like new signature material, right there!!!

What I'm saying is that the brave souls that embark with eyes wide open onto the stormy seas of audio production or opening a gas station or seeking a cure for cancer in 2010 are responsible for their own health and welfare and pursuing their happiness. If my interests intersect with them-- great! I'll pay what they ask to get what they're offering.

And the better they do it and the more value they offer for the price, me and millions just like me will respond. That's some law of thermodynamics, I think.

[Cursed Lemon]

Originally Posted by chrisso

I don't think you are grasping on to reality, although I wish what you said were true. Studio Addict hit the nail on the head.
If you give people something for free, they'll take it.
Most people don't know what goes into making a record. They see a vast choice of new music every week and can't conceive it'll ever end.
If my local dairy gave milk away, people would take it, and they probably wouldn't wonder how the dairy was surviving with no income.

The question that is begging here is that would people start caring if dairy was no longer available to them since dairy producers could no longer run their business? I think that they would, because dairy is somewhat of a necessity. Music, however, isn't - it's far more expendable.

Anyway, you guys need to stop straw-manning me. I know full well that the music industry isn't "forcing" anyone to do anything, please try to assume the most obvious context instead of one that's easy to craft an emotional reply to.

This isn't an economic argument, it's a philosophical one.

If I steal a bicycle, does a bicycle have no value to me?

First of all, a bicycle is a) a far more permanent thing, b) a physical entity (as opposed to copied data), and c) possibly a necessity depending on a person's situation. That's hardly a good analogy.

But, if I were to address it anyway, if you don't monetarily support the makers of the bicycle, then perhaps around the time you need a new bicycle, you'll find yourself without one, since bicycle makers went out of business due to stolen products. If, however, you stole the bicycle and sold it (most people don't sell downloaded music, I wouldn't think, so...), or you own a car, then no, the bicycle really isn't worth anything to you at all as far as being the hard labor of a group of people, so when the time comes for you to possibly acquire a new bicycle, you won't give a rat's behind if you can't get one.

[Id Ridden]

Originally Posted by Cursed Lemon

The question that is begging here is that would people start caring if dairy was no longer available to them since dairy producers could no longer run their business? I think that they would, because dairy is somewhat of a necessity. Music, however, isn't - it's far more expendable.

Dairy is terrible, isn't healthy and should no longer be available...I find music more a necessity then dairy and to be honest it seems to be one of those things that really isn't expendable in peoples lives. Even when free and possibly glutted people still have an innate need to consume music, there is a never breaking emotional attachment in which music speaks to people on so many levels. Dairy is replaceable, music is not.

You probably should have said fruits, greens and vegetables...

[terryhart]

Generally speaking, people tend to seek to obtain goods at the lowest cost - costs including price, labor/time, and risks. It follows that since pirated music is available for free online, many people will obtain it that way, especially those who (1) don't realize it is illegal or (2) have deduced that the risk of being caught is not significant.

This explanation of piracy does not by itself support your claim that those who pirate do not "value" the music.

***

Using your definition of value - one "values" a good only if one monetarily supports the producer of the good - then anyone who purchases used goods don't "value" them.

[Cursed Lemon]

Originally Posted by Id Ridden

Dairy is terrible, isn't healthy and should no longer be available...I find music more a necessity then dairy and to be honest it seems to be one of those things that really isn't expendable in peoples lives. Even when free and possibly glutted people still have an innate need to consume music, there is a never breaking emotional attachment in which music speaks to people on so many levels. Dairy is replaceable, music is not.

You probably should have said fruits, greens and vegetables...

Fine, replace dairy with coffee.

[Cursed Lemon]

Originally Posted by terryhart

Generally speaking, people tend to seek to obtain goods at the lowest cost - costs including price, labor/time, and risks. It follows that since pirated music is available for free online, many people will obtain it that way, especially those who (1) don't realize it is illegal or (2) have deduced that the risk of being caught is not significant.

This explanation of piracy does not by itself support your claim that those who pirate do not "value" the music.

***

Using your definition of value - one "values" a good only if one monetarily supports the producer of the good - then anyone who purchases used goods don't "value" them.

Goods that are offered at the lowest cost are still profitable to the business that offers them, thus they can continue to be available.

The point is that everyone who pirates music (that would originally have gone and purchased the music) knows full well that they are contributing to the financial decline of the entire chain of individuals that make that music happen and make it available. When that music is no longer made because the producers and distributors can no longer afford to offer it, will the pirates mourn the loss of the music, or will they even care?

To claim that you value the artists you pirate and don't support is to be a complete and utter hypocrite.

This is more about the fact that music is an art and a passion, not just a consumable good.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by Cursed Lemon

This isn't an economic argument, it's a philosophical one.

Wrong. You're talking about my income - specifically not paying me for my work.

If you did this crap in person you'd wake up in the hospital. But you don't, because you can hide behind the internet.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by Cursed Lemon

First of all, a bicycle is a) a far more permanent thing, b) a physical entity (as opposed to copied data), and c) possibly a necessity depending on a person's situation. That's hardly a good analogy.
.

A bicycle is the product of work. A song is the product of work - often much more than what goes into a bicycle if it's a good song.

Are you telling me that my work as a songwriter, musician and engineer is not worth anything, while the work of some guy with basic welding skills is? Are you REALLY gonna say that? Come tell me that in person, I dare you.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by Cursed Lemon

Goods that are offered at the lowest cost are still profitable to the business that offers them, thus they can continue to be available.

And goods that are stolen are free. I HATE using the word "stolen", but you force me into it.

Stolen goods are only profitable to thieves.

If a commodity is continually stolen until those who produce it can no longer stay in business it will cease to be available.

That's the future of music if those of your wont prevail. The only music left will be low quality, amateurish (in the worst sense of the word) crap.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by Cursed Lemon

Goods that are offered at the lowest cost are still profitable to the business that offers them, thus they can continue to be available.

Going back to the dairy analogy.
It's absolutely a fact that supermarkets wedge dairies into selling their milk too cheaply. In many cases the farmer either barely breaks even or loses money.
Farmers sell up and move on, now some milk products come in from China.
A pint of milk is a loss leader for the store. They get you in the shop with their unrealistically cheap milk (yes... a necessity), then fill your nostrils with bakery smells, enticing you to pick up an expensive croissant or donut.
So to cut a long story short, people don't really care if dairy farmers go broke because of supermarket price pressures. They just don't want to pay the real price that milk costs to produce.
They don't want to pay the real price music costs to produce, they'd rather have it free.

[Cursed Lemon]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

Wrong. You're talking about my income - specifically not paying me for my work.

If you did this crap in person you'd wake up in the hospital. But you don't, because you can hide behind the internet.

Are you...threatening to physically harm me because of my opinion?

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

And goods that are stolen are free. I HATE using the word "stolen", but you force me into it.

Stolen goods are only profitable to thieves.

If a commodity is continually stolen until those who produce it can no longer stay in business it will cease to be available.

That's the future of music if those of your wont prevail. The only music left will be low quality, amateurish (in the worst sense of the word) crap.

How is this contrary to what I've been saying? It's actually exactly what I've been saying.

A bicycle is the product of work. A song is the product of work - often much more than what goes into a bicycle if it's a good song.

Are you telling me that my work as a songwriter, musician and engineer is not worth anything, while the work of some guy with basic welding skills is? Are you REALLY gonna say that? Come tell me that in person, I dare you.

If you'd kindly take the time to actually read my posts instead of descending into a barbaric fervor caused by spending way too much time in this section, you might be able to extrapolate the fact that I am a person who supports artists I like by buying their material, and that I think those who pirate their "beloved" groups are complete hypocrites.

Going back to the dairy analogy.
It's absolutely a fact that supermarkets wedge dairies into selling their milk too cheaply. In many cases the farmer either barely breaks even or loses money.
Farmers sell up and move on, now some milk products come in from China.
A pint of milk is a loss leader for the store. They get you in the shop with their unrealistically cheap milk (yes... a necessity), then fill your nostrils with bakery smells, enticing you to pick up an expensive croissant or donut.
So to cut a long story short, people don't really care if dairy farmers go broke because of supermarket price pressures. They just don't want to pay the real price that milk costs to produce.
They don't want to pay the real price music costs to produce, they'd rather have it free.

If dairy farmers could not afford to continue to produce and sell milk, be it to customers or markets, then...wouldn't there be no dairy?

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by Cursed Lemon

If dairy farmers could not afford to continue to produce and sell milk, be it to customers or markets, then...wouldn't there be no dairy?

That's right. As I said, they are closing down.
Of course the supermarkets can source cheaper milk from China to make up the short fall.
It's happening all over. I've seen millions of oranges dumped in land fill because Aussie farmers can't compete with juice concentrate imported from Brazil.
Point being, the bottom line for most people is the $.
They don't care, or more likely don't think about the consequences of paying very little for something in a climate of increased energy costs.
They don't care they're consuming music at virtually no cost to them. They just assume musicians can afford to give it away.
We're back to the old myth about millionaire rock stars and greedy labels.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by Cursed Lemon

Are you...threatening to physically harm me because of my opinion?

Given that this is an internet discussion that's not likely, is it? But are you not harming me by refusing to pay for my work?

I am a person who supports artists I like by buying their material, and that I think those who pirate their "beloved" groups are complete hypocrites.

So if I'm not an artist that you already like (a "beloved" artist) then it's OK to pirate my material? Do I understand you correctly? Because that's what it sounds like you're saying. I guess you've never had the experience of not being utterly thrilled by an album at first listen but having it grow on you until it's one of your favorites. Or maybe you're entitled to listen for free until you like it enough to spend money for what you already have for free?

[Dirty Halo]

This guy is a Troll, you can see he's trying to get a reaction (I mean, no one would freely admit to that level of ignorance on purpose!)

You're going to keep throwing reasonable facts, arguments and lines of thinking and it will never matter because that is not what he's interested in, he's keeps replying that we're threatening him! Ha! (Shows me he's LOOKING to be threatened )

The very argument that piracy is a reflection of value is a fallacy, proven again and AGAIN in both studies and the real world, in fact, MORE music is downloaded/consumed now than ever, both paid and stolen.

This guy wants a fight. Don't bother.

[Id Ridden]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

If you did this crap in person you'd wake up in the hospital. But you don't, because you can hide behind the internet.

[jediworrier]

As a rule, technological innovation is incredibly destabilizing to markets. A new technology emerges and throws older ones 'out of business', radically changing the face of a given industry. Right now the cluster of technological innovations that have rocked our industry (the Internet, iTunes, the iPod, cheaper recording equipment, proliferation of home studios, etc.) are making the market go batshit crazy.

In a perfect world, prices would always perfectly reflect value, but they never exactly do, and particularly not in a moment of crisis and upheaval like this one. So the fact that many people are currently paying $0 for music does not in any way indicate that it holds 'zero' value for them. It indicates that in our destabilized moment price and value have moved very far away from one another.

Those who raise the point about 'hiding' behind the internet are at the crux of it, I think. The downloading of music, the total disembodiment and dephysicalization of music has opened the door for this epidemic of piracy/theft. Illegal downloads ARE theft, plain and simple, but only abstractly so in the minds of the thieves. That's why even very straight-laced law-abiding folks do it all the time. It doesn't FEEL like theft...