Music Business Articles
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Articles - Music Business Articles
XHipHop 8th August 2009 12:41 AM
Quote:




i need sugar; Article: A conversation on the music industry.

Best part:

Quote:
At which point, you have to ask yourself, why is it a consumer issue that producers aren't working to monetize their program in an age of digital distribution. The answer is, it shouldn't be the consumer's issue. But because the distribution model is broken and they don't know how to fix it, they're putting this on the consumer, masquerading content access as "theft" and "stealing". Sadly, you're appearing to drink the Kool-Aid that the RIAA and other content lobbyists are spewing forth. It's all weak-minded hogwash from a bunch of old school industry buffoons who have been caught with their pants down as their closed distribution model has opened up with new technology.

The people with brains who understand the failure of the distribution model are getting my money because they're creating new distribution models and value for their art. The people who are blaming consumers for their incompetence while they put the screws to the artists are not getting my money and are getting an earful from me. And the artists that I support are making more money than they've ever made from me because I'm working outside of a distribution model that would otherwise have me buying used CDs which, again, gets the artist nothing even thought it's technically not stealing (but by your logic surely more moral than downloading, which nets the artist the exact same amount of money. Which consequently must make buying used less moral than buying a new CD, since the artist theoretically gets money from each CD sold, even though I would consider it amoral to buy a CD because of the environmental waste it creates).

Again, this is not a black and white issue. If you take your moral argument to its logical conclusion, you simply cannot buy music right now because every method is stealing from someone in the distribution chain. Buy digitally and the artist may get nothing. Buy at a concert and the artist is circumventing the retail and warehousing distribution chain. Buy a CD from a retail store and the artist is getting less while you're contributing even more to the destruction of the planet (granted, that doesn't affect the artist directly, but it's one heck of a reason to not buy CDs and more important and destructive and amoral to me than a conveniently limited view of what stealing is).

rack gear 6th August 2009 05:32 PM
Quote:




Chart Evolution: BigChampagne Expands the Game... — Digital Music News

Chart Evolution: BigChampagne Expands the Game...

The music industry has been undergoing massive disruption for more than a decade, and measuring chaos is never a simple task. In 2009, a top-charting single or album still means something, but what about everything else going on? BigChampagne has been attempting to address that riddle, and starting Wednesday, the company is giving its clients a far broader canvass of chart activity - online or off.



That means a greatly expanded menu of platforms, spanning YouTube, iTunes, Last.fm, terrestrial radio (Mediabase), file-swapping networks, online radio, subscription services, and other outlets. The "BC Dash" is now out of beta, and clients can tap the real-time, breathing database to check song activity up to the hour. "We're rebooting the charts," BigChampagne CEO Eric Garland told Digital Music News. "The new BC Dash is a platform for managing information in the real-time age and turning data into actionable insight."


The data has steadily been incorporated into daily Digital Music News coverage, part of a broader partnership between the two companies. Others can now dive into the same dataset. BigChampagne data subscribers include major media companies, retailers, advertising agencies, analysts, broadcasters, managers, artists, and others.
But wait, there's more.



BigChampagne has also created a news and data portal for the industry, including some interesting Twitter concepts. A freshly-launched BigChampagne Media Measurement features aggregated news feeds covering industry developments, as well as a curated 'TwitterStream'. "The world's aglow with Twitter, but very few know how to use it well," Garland relayed. "How do you separate the 'waiting at Starbucks' tweets from the essential-to-your-business tweets? We curate and edit out the noise, leaving the real, pertinent conversation."

audioguynyc 5th August 2009 11:55 AM
Quote:
A VC: Streaming Kills Piracy



Yesterday morning I was talking to my 13 year old son Josh. He's currently obsessed with the TV show Friday Night Lights. He's going back and watching all the old seasons. I asked him how he is doing that, expecting...
Streaming Kills Piracy
Quote:
Streaming Kills Piracy

Yesterday morning I was talking to my 13 year old son Josh. He's currently obsessed with the TV show Friday Night Lights. He's going back and watching all the old seasons. I asked him how he is doing that, expecting to hear "bit torrent". But instead he said "Netflix Watch Instantly". I was so happy to hear that and asked him why. He said, "bit torrent takes too long."
And then this morning, I came across this story in The Guardian which talks about a collapse in illegal sharing and a commensurate increase in legal streaming. The story says 26% of 14 to 18 year olds shared music illegally last month compared to 42% in December of 2007. The story also says 65% of teens stream music regularly.
I've been talking about this trend for a long time. In my post about The Free Music Business a couple summers ago, I said this about file-based music versus streamed music:
Streaming music is better because it's abundant. I don't own all the music in the world on my server. But almost every song ever recorded is on the Internet somewhere.

I am not a fan of file-based media business models. They lead to piracy and they put transactional friction into a system that doesn't require it. Streaming is much better. Unfortunately, we don't have a good mobile broadband system to make streaming possible everywhere. And until that happens, we will have files and we will have piracy.
But the good news is that as the media business wakes up and puts all the media we want out there in streams available on the Internet (paid or free - this is not about free), we see people streaming more and stealing less.
We used to wonder if we could "untrain" a generation to steal. The answer is yes. Just make it easier to get the content they want and they'll stop stealing. It makes my day to read that

rack gear 4th August 2009 10:00 PM
Quote:




looks like music isn't free afterall...

Post-Tenenbaum, A Pair of Settled Cases Surface... — Digital Music News

Post-Tenenbaum, A Pair of Settled Cases Surface...

A pair of file-swapping cases triggered by the RIAA have suddenly been settled, with prejudice. Industry attorney Ray Beckerman tipped the settlements of both Atlantic v. Raleigh and Sony v. Simms on Monday evening, though the terms of the resolutions were not disclosed. The case against Jenna Raleigh first started 2006, while the action against Lindsey Simms started late last year. Both involved pro se, or self-represented, litigants, and both are being quietly tucked away.


The obvious question is whether the recent, $675,000 award in Sony v. Tenenbaum encouraged the settlements, though the resolutions appear to predate that heavy fine. The Simms settlement was signed by the court on July 20th, and the Raleigh resolution appears to be dated July 15th. The Tenenbaum fine is just days old, though the RIAA plundered hapless defendant Jammie Thomas-Rasset to the tune of $1.6 million in June.
rack gear 4th August 2009 07:20 AM
Quote:




Popkomm 2009 Cancelled

One of Europe's largest music conferences Popkomm will not be held this year. "The digital crisis is fully on the music industry by. Many companies maybe due to the theft on the Internet no longer afford to participate in the Popkomm," organizer Dieter Gorny told the German media.

Attendance the the annual convention which is held in Germany each September was projected to be down 40-50% from the 14,000 who attended in 2008. Organizers hope to reintroduce the gathering in 2010 with more government support.
orangeoctane 1st August 2009 06:21 PM
Quote:




I just got this e-mail from Pandora. Looks like the advertising model isn't a sustainable one.
-----------------------------------------------

We're very sorry about limiting your listening last month - I'm writing to let you know that, starting today you can listen to the free version of Pandora again. We hope you'll come back!
Sorry if this limit is driving you nuts - it's the last thing we want to do, but it's the economic reality of streaming. We pay royalties for every song we play, which we feel good about, but it means that for our most consistent listeners, like you, advertising revenues don't cover the costs. If you want to listen more than 40 hours a month, we've come up with two options:
  • For unlimited, ad-free listening, along with a bunch of other cool features, you can upgrade to Pandora One.
OR...
  • If you run out of hours in any given month, you can pay $.99 to listen for the rest of the month (you'll still have advertising). This is a one-time fee: we won't charge your credit card again.
We really hope one of these options works for you. To check on how many hours you have remaining, just click the 'account' link above the Pandora tuner. There's also more information on our blog.
Thanks again for listening and, I hope, welcome back!
mobilemozart 1st August 2009 11:24 AM
from Mozart & Friends Blog - Three Ground Rules For Pop Songwriters

Tweet me: www.twitter.com/marcmozart
Add Marc Mozart on myspace!

I've been putting down a few thoughts last night. Please let me know your thoughts!

THREE GROUND RULES FOR POP SONGWRITERS
(BY MARC MOZART)

1. Working after briefs from record labels is for loosers.
Why?
Label will get a ton of similar things that all sound similar. Label gets really bored and hates you for boring them.
Possible solution:
What they really want is a unique hit-single with a sound that defines their artists next record. They don't know how it sounds. If they knew they were producers.
Unfortunately you don't have the solution. You bore them with dated music.

2. The best producers and writers in the world are your competitors. And they kill you.
Why?
They kill you because they write hits and you don't. Their sounds are always a step ahead, the hooks and song titles easy to remember, the mixes punchy as hell.
People like Max Martin, Dr. Luke, Danja, etc. just write hits. 5 secs into the song you know its a hit. Tells a story every kid and housewife can relate to. Riffs and melodies are simple but artful, the sound and the message couldn't be more direct and the beat is driving like hell.
Possible solution:
Write a damn hit. Play it to 10 people. If 9 love the song after 5 secs, you're on the right path. If not, go back to start. But hurry, you need to recoupe your publishing advance!

3. You don't need 100 good songs. You need one hit-song that makes a million.
Possible solution?
By all means, try a lot of things, record ideas, hooks, sounds. However, understand that only one of your 300 crappy hooks is worth working out a full song, lyrics and production. When you really know you have a hit-single idea, take your time and produce that thing for at least a week. 10 days are even better. Or two weeks. Or more. One international hit-single a year pays the rent and more.
Michael Jackson took 3-5 years for an album and boy, was it worth it! Each of his kids' kids will still make 10 million each a year from his songs 50 years from now.
Get the best singer, edit the hell out of the vocals. Anything under two days of vocal editing doesn't sound like a record. When you're done, get the singer in again. It's always worth doing a second vocal session for a more refined vocal arrangement, "composed adlibs", harmonies, etc...
Next few days try different arrangement ideas, search for the best sounds, try 50 different kicks and 3000 different bass sounds until you found sounds that have punch and personality. Do plenty of rough mixes, play them to people. See how they react. Refine and rework, don't stop until it's finished and sounds absolutely amazing. When it sounds amazing, give it to somebody who makes great mixes. A great mix improves it even more. When you finalize the mix, hear it on many different systems. Make sure it sounds great on all systems.
Give the world one hit-song that they will play and remember forever. Everything else is wasted time.

Additional remarks:
A. Know which area you're NOT good at and partner with people who are.
Few people if any excel in all areas. A hit song requires a lot of specialized knowledge:
- melodies
- chords
- arrangement
- production / sound design
- vocal arranging
- vocals (singing)
- vocal editing
- mixing
Form partnerships where a team of 2 - 4 people bring top quality in all these areas to the table. Share your income with them on a song-by-song basis. If any of the above mentioned qualities are not in a song-demo, the competition will eat you alive.

B. When collaborating, give all you can give.
When you write with others, be the very best you can be. Be a nice, loving and positive person even if you're usually an asshole. Listen to what your collaborators have to say. Offer them tea, coffee and cookies.

C. Get your music to the all right people. Get a partner to support you with that.
Placing even a perfect song is a numbers game. I've spoken to Dido's manager recently who had been shopping her record to hundreds of people for more than two years until he finally found somebody willing to support. "It's a numbers game" he said to me.
Hundred people don't offer you a deal. Fine. If number 101 is Clive Davis and he loves your song the world is good! If you stopped at number 99 it's your fault. If you believe you have an undeniable hit-record, make sure the right people get to hear it.
Partner with someone who supports you in pitching your songs. Find a publisher and/or management who can get your song to the right people. Make sure they really send your songs out, follow up for feedback and keep fighting until it's placed. If not, do it yourself. And please stop whining!

D. E-Mail Mozart & Friends - Changing the Face of Music Management - Award-winning Music Producers, Songwriters and Artists
If all the above makes sense and you're ready to go for it, get in contact with us.

Thanks and good luck writing a worldhit!
Marc Mozart
Director Mozart & Friends Limited
Mozart & Friends - Changing the Face of Music Management - Award-winning Music Producers, Songwriters and Artists
rack gear 30th July 2009 08:01 PM
Quote:
Tenenbaum lawyer admits liability; damages now main issue | Ars Technica



The second-ever P2P file-sharing case to go to trial has been anything but …
Tenenbaum lawyer admits liability; damages now main issue - Ars Technica

I think is is a really good win/win.

He admitted guilt. This immediately puts sharers and downloaders on notice - you are stealing, it is illegal, there is a cost if you get caught.

If the judgment stands it is a clear announcement to file "SHARERS" that you can and will be caught, and there is a price to pay.

I actually support Neeson on this - the damages are disproportionate to the crime. He's taking on the reality gap between the crime and the fines.

Either way, even if the damages were reduced by 90% (to $200k) which is unlikely, but even so - it would not be worth the risk, and a large enough deterrent to put an end to this nonsense, "but it's not stealing".

It would pave the way as a precedent - which in practice would make it easy for labels to collect on these types of infringements and deter the average citizen from taking the risk.

A cottage industry of collection agencies, founded by lawyers, taking a cut on fines - would pop up overnight.

There is no loosing for the record industry in the case, from this point forward.
gsilbers 30th July 2009 12:03 AM
Quote:
Congress: File sharing leaks sensitive data | Politics and Law - CNET News

[img]/i/bto/20090729/060224_fileswap.jpg[/img]

Sensitive files like Secret Service safehouse locations, military rosters, and IRS tax returns can still be found on file-sharing networks, according to new report. Read this blog post by Declan McCullagh on Politics and Law.
so they only care if it happens to them... hope they see that it affects musicians and artists alike.

Congress: File sharing leaks sensitive data | Politics and Law - CNET News
3rd&4thT 28th July 2009 09:23 PM
Quote:
The three biggest reasons music magazines like Vibe and Blender are dying. - Slate Magazine



To the varied signs of the economic collapse we can now add a small but notable subspecies of urbanite: You'll recognize him (or her) by the ear buds burrowing into his head, the freebie SXSW tote bag slung over his shoulder, and the unintelligible mutterings about "melisma" and "twee-core" crossing...
The three biggest reasons music magazines like Vibe and Blender are dying. - By Jonah Weiner - Slate Magazine

Cheers,
3rd&4thT
XHipHop 27th July 2009 09:13 PM
Quote:
Apple joins forces with record labels - FT.com



Apple is working with the four largest record labels to stimulate digital sales of albums by bundling a new interactive booklet, sleeve notes and other interactive features with music downloads, in a move it hopes will change buying trends on its
FT.com / UK - Apple joins forces with record labels

Wow - imagine that..."adding value" to the music. This is the business model I've been talking about from day 1.

Take notes, boys
XHipHop 27th July 2009 08:59 PM
Quote:
How it feels to be sued for $4.5m | Music | guardian.co.uk



When I contemplate the above sum, I have to remind myself what I'm being charged with. Investment fraud? An attack against the government? No. I shared music. And refused to cave
How it feels to be sued for $4.5m | Music | guardian.co.uk

Quote:
How it feels to be sued for $4.5m
When I contemplate the above sum, I have to remind myself what I'm being charged with. Investment fraud? An attack against the government? No. I shared music. And refused to cave
Those pesky Harvard law students. How dare they.

You can follow Joe's twitter here:

http://twitter.com/joelfightsback

Website:

Joel Fights Back - It’s about more than just music.
rack gear 26th July 2009 07:19 PM
I think Moses can get pretty fired up and out there. I think what he's saying here is that the Tech Industry is conspiring to devalue the music/entertainment industries... maybe he's right...

###
TRUSTED SOURCES
==================

How Facts Can Get In The Way Of A Great “Dying Music Biz” News Story. Moses Avalon I think I’ve really let down my readers. How could I, the Duke of de-bunking, the Secretary of scam-outers, miss the biggest scam that allows most other scams to proceed?

Well, all I can say is, sometimes you don’t see the forest through the trees. Focusing on the minutia we can forget the bigger issues that lay at the foundation of our vulnerability. What am I talking about? The news. Is the news a scam? Well, when it’s agenda-driven PR disguised as news the answer is, yes. And when certain news articles are so well positioned with such a biased message that they can effect the choices you make in your career and the way you think about the future of music, then yes, you’re on my turf and I’m gonna bite back.

The scam of the day is a term used in journalism, “Trusted Source.” A news story relies on “facts” to build its point of view.

Journalists are not required to be experts in anything except gathering facts and so, Trusted Sources give journalists the ability to write with authority. It’s for this reason that journalists have a love/hate relationship with many of their sources. They need the cooperation of the very people they are vetting. S&P The standard and practice for journalism used to be two independent Trusted Sources to confirm a single fact. Blogging, which is not technically journalism, but editorial/commentary, has no standard. And why should they? As you’ll read in a moment, even the New York Times, the “paper of record” doesn’t seem to care about facts when it comes to our industry.

So why should gadflys, opinionists, bloggers and bloggests. These days you can not go a single week without exposure to a story about the “dying music biz.” They are often backed by statistics like, “10% drop in sales this year,” “30% drop since 2004” etc, etc. Where are writers getting their “facts” from? Would it surprise you to find out that almost ALL MUSIC BIZ “facts” that you read about in today’s main-stream news come from just three Trusted Sources AND that all of these sources have a vested interest in misrepresentation of these facts? No, it probably does not surprise you, but I think we need to put a spotlight on these Trusted Sources so that you can decide for yourself if they are worth trusting. Indeed, I too have an agenda.

My agenda is that with this article we put a bit of pressure on those singing the perils of the music business when reporting. Maybe, then we can get them to be a bit less complacent when assuming “facts” Let’s drill down. WIKI WORLD A large percentage of the music biz Armageddon articles use Wikipedia as a Trusted Source for music biz data.

I have not done exhaustive surveys to confirm this “fact” as it would take years, but it’s not hard to see that it’s true because of the hyper links embedded in their blogs. (Anyone who can build a webpage can find them.) Here it is: Music industry - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia What does Wiki say? “The downward trend is expected to continue for the foreseeable future… this dramatic decline in revenue has caused large scale layoffs inside the industry, driven music retailers out of business (such as Tower Records) and forced record companies, record producers, studios, recording engineers and musicians to seek new business models.” Really? I could spend about 100 pages de-bunking just about every word of what Wiki has above, but that will have to wait for another article (or series of them.) So where does Wikipedia get this “”downward trend” information?

The link above uses only ONE source: Forrester Research. Who is Forrester Research? A market research firm whose clients are the tech-industry. They purchased Jupiter Communication in 2008. Jupiter was one of the first high-level internet research firms. Their clients are almost exclusively Silicon Valleyites.. To keep the Valley-people happy and keep their fees flowing, the god Forrester needs to please is the one that wants to hear that content companies are losing ground both legally and in public support.

The net result, they hope, is that record companies yield and just give away all their content to create a “greater consumer experience.” No record company, film/TV production company that I know of supports or hires Forrester Research to analyze their market data. (If I’m wrong on this I’d like to see proof or at least some form of testimony to the contrary.) So in essence, although they do not see themselves in this position, Forrester has become a Ministry of Information/propaganda agent of the tech industry’s war on copyright holders.

With Forrester as a Trusted Source content companies will always come off looking like luddite a-holes. So much for the Wiki-source. ECONOMIST – ECHOS Many a main-stream journalist likes to mine data from the website of the conservative periodical, The Economist as a Trusted Source. The Economist has a high-income earning demographic.

Most of their readership are investors and for the past ten years most of their readers have been investing in… tech stocks!! Why this connection is not obvious to the writers who trust them as a source of “objective” data is a mystery. The articles about technology have out-paced all other subjects in The Economist’s archives, and not surprisingly so has tech related ad-revenue. So where does The Economist get their information?

Get ready for this… The Economist gets its statistics from the IFPI and the RIAA. (The IFPI is the international version of the RIAA.) Recorded-music sales: Digital divide | The Economist If you’ve been on the Moses Supposes list for more than a year you know I’ve already written exhaustively about why one can not use the RIAA as a Trusted Source of un-biased record biz statistics. The short version is because they define “sales” as units shipped, not units actually passed through the entire retail process.

While it might seem that there is direct correlation between the two, there really isn’t, as was revealed in a much re-printed article I did a couple of years back.

In it, SoundScan reported that sales were up while the RIAA reported that sales were down-- for the same time period. (Google “RIAA soundscan sales moses avalon” for roughly 3000 hits of this eye-opening article or just read it off of MusicDish directly. And for a review of why I don’t use the RIAA or the IFPI as a Trusted Source for “sales” data, go here.) Interestingly enough, The Economist only likes to take RIAA/IFPI data that deals with “declining sales” but it prefers to ignore the RIAA’s articles about artists’ rights.

The net result is very one-sided reporting to an audience of people who enjoy learning about ISP market cap and prefer to ignore the plight of authors. Shame on you Economist. You purport to be such fine journalists. But the real shame is upon those who use them as a Trusted Source and pass it off as “news.” THE PAPER OF RECORD A recent NY Times piece really got me boiling. Using data from all the usual Trusted Sources it tells the story of bands going the indi route and forgoing major labels. While on the surface it suggests that bands are doing fine going this route, what it’s really saying is that majors are lost and have their heads up their asses to the point where they can’t even get bands to sign with them anymore. Of course this is far from the truth.

While signings have gone down as a result of the economy, the number of submissions hasn’t. (Roughly 10,000 a year per major.) Meanwhile, any single major sells more units than all indies combined. (Except EMI, which is barley a major anymore.) Regardless, this article makes all the people who invested in (floundering) tech companies feel good about the deluge of litigation from the RIAA against their pet stocks and it coddles the companies buying the lion’s share of the Times’ advertising-- computer and IT companies. Great propaganda piece: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/22/te...er=rss&emc=rss THE RIAA So, since everyone trusts the RIAA/IFPI, where do they get their information? Not sure.

We hope record companies report to them honestly, but they are not legally required to tell them the truth. Only what they want the public to know. Why would they want the public to think that the industry is in bad shape? Lots of great reasons that I’ve covered in other articles. Even Wikipedia doubts their veracity.

And if Wiki says it… I hope that this article helps everyone who invests emotionally in these doom-and-gloom pieces to realize that they are not reading first rate journalism, but merely commentary on the opinions of people with an agenda—mostly the RIAA/tech-industry agenda. Reporting from the front so you don’t take it in the rear, Moses Avalon Care to comment? Don’t send me an email.

Go to the blog page and let everyone know what you think. TRUSTED SOURCES: How Facts Get In The Way Of A Great “Dying Music Biz” News Story. | The Future of Music: Moses Supposes Announcement

============

Bands want to meet film directors? Directors want to meet composers? Music Placement agents want to meet editors who are responsible for a lot of the music that makes it into a project? Come one come all. It is a meeting of the creative minds in film, television, commercials, videogames, and music.

This is a quarterly Film Meets Music Mixer for an opportunity for directors, writers, editors, and filmmakers to meet composers, musicians, managers, publishers, music placement agents, and music makers.

$10 at the door www.twitter.com/visionworksmusic Rock N Roll Adventure club Presents: Los Angeles Film Meets Music Mixer Tweet Up Hotel Cafe 1623 Cahuenga Blvd Los Angeles, California 90069 Saturday, July 25th, 2009 9:45pm

Indie artist AM has had 75 song placements in movies and television shows and will be playing at 10pm. Signed to CAA this week!

Have stuff you want to give out, share?? Bring it along.
email info@visionworksmusic.com to coordinate.

You are subscribed to Moses Avalon's LA Music List using the following email:_@_.com

You may automatically unsubscribe from this list at any time. Simply hit “reply” and type “remove” in the subject banner. If you're still having trouble, please contact the list owner at:

Mailing List Powered by Dada Mail
JDN 25th July 2009 12:24 AM
Quote:
'Downloading has cheapened music'



Jack White talks exclusively about his new internet invention, downloading and the current state of music.
Great Article with Jack White talking about the downloading experience verses the old days. Interesting hearing a philosophical take on it as opposed to the usual financial take. It's funny, i remember hearing similar arguments when CD's first came around...(the small art, the ability to easily skip tracks, etc)

BBC - Newsbeat - 'Downloading has cheapened music'


'Downloading has cheapened music'
By Damian Jones
Newsbeat music reporter (BBC Radio 1 News Programme)

Jack White, The White Stripes linchpin and all round busiest man in rock 'n' roll, has launched a special subscription service. He's doing it because he's unhappy with the way downloading is affecting music experiences. He explains how he came up with the idea for the Vault.

What are your thoughts on the dominance of the internet on the music industry generally these days?

It’s taken a lot of the romance out of the experiences of music. This is what we're trying to manipulate to the advantage of the fan/listener and the artist as well, to find ways to have beautiful experiences that have a longer lasting impact. Sometimes things you have complete easy access to, like a reality show, or an online purchase at the click of a mouse, can become forgetable and invisible. A trip to a record store to get the album you've been waiting months for on the other hand, can be cherished for a lifetime. We are trying to find those bridges between the tangible worlds and the cyber/digital worlds.

As an artist who has embraced vinyl, what do you think about download culture?

A quick look at sales figures for albums will show anyone with a brain that there's no doubt the world has collectively decided that there is nothing wrong with taking music for free and feeling no moral conundrum about it. Oh well, that's the individuals personal battle to think about really. People say, "Bad for the artist, great for the fan," but that's not necessarily true I don't think. Download culture isn't a very romantic experience for the fan regarding art, it cheapens it and makes it fast forwardable, and disposable, and a lot of times ignorable. That's a shame for a lot of art and music that isn't getting the chance that it would if people just left the needle on the record till the end of the side or what have you. I'm not telling people not to listen to MP3s, we sell them for all of our records and I wouldn't say to them don't share with their friends or whatever, but if you're asking me my opinion on what I prefer, or what I think is the best way to enjoy music, I would take a tangible, moving piece of machinery to listen to, as it expands the imagination. The physical attachment and the experience is more reverential to the art form.
chrisso 23rd July 2009 04:51 AM
Quote:
Why the pirates are on the rise in Sweden



Newsnight's Matt Prodger visits Sweden's Peace and Love festival in Borl?nge to investigate what it is about Swedes that has put them at the heart of a raging debate about internet freedom.
Interesting article from the BBC:
BBC NEWS | Programmes | Newsnight | Why the pirates are on the rise in Sweden
Silver Sonya 22nd July 2009 01:35 PM
Quote:
Musicians Find New Backers as Labels Lose Power - NYTimes.com



Companies are planning to invest in artists who lack record deals and help them find audiences online.
The New York Times has been doing a pretty good job of documenting the long, slow slide off the cliff.

How much of your studio work is funded by record labels?

How many artists do you know who are arranging alternative funding or thinking about it?

I'm curious to see if a New Way emerges or if it will remain the somewhat Wild West scenario that exists right now.

- c
Guilty J 17th July 2009 03:46 PM
Ask any independent musician why the music industry has been taking a beating, and he is sure to give you an answer.

“Record labels are putting out too much crappy, disposable pop.” “The price of albums is too high.” “Illegal downloading.”

The traditional music industry tends to concentrate on the last reason as an explanation for falling sales. On July 10th, record label plaintiffs in Sony v. Tenenbaum filed an expert witness report that pointed to unauthorized file-sharing as the primary culprit for the industry’s woes.

Despite the expert testimony, several studies and analyists support alternative theories. Debating and studying these theories is certainly fun (or depressing, if you’re suffering the effects).

Today, however, we’re not going to look at “why” the traditional music industry has been in a decline, but rather “how” it happened to begin with.

The traditional music industry is made up of just four companies: four major record labels that together account for over 70% of global music sales. Drawing an analogy from agriculture, this global concentration of music sales in just four companies can be deemed a “monoculture.” Much like the fields upon fields of the same variety of crop in agricultural monoculture, the music industry has been geared toward selling the majority of its product from just a handful of blockbuster artists - with little musical variety between those artists.

Continue reading at GrindEFX.com...
hankdrummer 17th July 2009 07:46 AM
Quote:
SUPERPRODUCER E01 D.O.V.E. - Vidéo Dailymotion



Superproducer est une nouvelle web-série comique parodiant l'univers de la musique. Un nouvel épisode en exclusivité tous les vendredis sur dailymotion. Retrouvez les chansons sur http://myspace.com/officialsuperproducer Superproducer is a new web series satirizing the music industry. Check out a new episode every friday exclusively on dailymotion. You can find the complete songs on http://myspace.com/officialsuperproducer
Dailymotion - SUPERPRODUCER E01 D.O.V.E. - a Music video

Dailymotion - SUPERPRODUCER E02 Jérrôme - a Funny video

Dailymotion - SUPERPRODUCER E03 TOMMY - a Funny video
gsilbers 2nd July 2009 07:52 PM
Quote:
When your phone rings, the copyright police may come calling | Macworld



A digital rights group is contesting a U.S. music industry association's assertion that royalties are due each time a mobile phone ringtone is played in public.
Interesting little article...

also read the comments from the poeple

When your phone rings, the copyright police may come calling | Entertainment & HDTV | iPhone Central | Macworld

excerpt:

'A digital rights group is contesting a U.S. music industry association's assertion that royalties are due each time a mobile phone ringtone is played in public.

The American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP) filed suit against AT&T asserting that ringtones qualify as a public performance under the Copyright Act. ASCAP, which has 350,000 members, collects royalties and licenses public performances of works under copyright...."
HobbyCore 30th June 2009 04:46 PM
Quote:
The Pirate Bay Will Decentralize Its Operations (Updated) | TorrentFreak



Alongside the news that The Pirate Bay will sell shares on the Swedish stock market come some other significant changes. The site itself will decentralize and stop hosting and tracking torrents. Instead, The Pirate Bay will use a third party tracker and torrent hosting service to serve its users.
TPB will live on despite being bought by a private company, and in fact will now become more robust and expansive.

The Pirate Bay Will Decentralize Its Operations (Updated) | TorrentFreak

Precisely what I've said in the past. Make a better lock and there will be better locksmiths.
author 30th June 2009 01:03 PM
Quote:
Pirate Bay Unveils YouTube-Like Site | Threat Level | Wired.com



This is not your parents' YouTube. This is VideoBay, a YouTube-like service without the worries and hassles of those annoying copyright takedown notices
Piratebay launches illegal site to stream stolen movies.

That's not interesting. BUT the stolen property will probably be hosted on Piratebay's own servers, at least according to the fanboys:

Pirate Bay Unveils YouTube-Like Site | Threat Level | Wired.com

Now, THAT will please a few lawyers!

In any event, a self destructive move. If Hollywood weren't pissed before, they will be now!
rack gear 30th June 2009 08:32 AM
everyone might just want to read these before returning to the PB/RIAA discussions... this might hopefully limit some of the nonsense in the debates, and provide a balanced footing for the conversations, both pro & con.

Intellectual_Property @ Wikipedia
Intellectual property - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

...and for more fun education on IP and Copyrights:
Intellectual Property Law: Why Should I Care?
212121 28th June 2009 09:17 AM
Quote:
Researchers conclude piracy not stifling content creation | Ars Technica



Some researchers review the literature on the impact of file sharing, and …
Researchers conclude piracy not stifling content creation - Ars Technica

Some researchers review the literature on the impact of file sharing, and determine that, although it may be harming the music business, it's not putting much of a dent in creative output.

Quote:
File-sharing, to the (very large) extent that it involves copyright infringement, has affected the music business. But, as a pair of academic researchers happily point out in a working paper they've posted online, copyright law was never meant to protect the music business in the first place—instead, it is intended to foster creative production in the arts, which happen to include music. As such, they argue it's worth analyzing the deeper question of whether file sharing is putting a damper on music creation. Their conclusion is that this is a much more complicated question, but the answer seems to be "probably not."
Some academic fields rely on the use of working papers—complete drafts of potential publications—to solicit feedback on the basic arguments and analyses used in the work-in-progress. These days, that simply involves posting it on the Internet for all to see; you can have a look at the document yourself. There are clearly a few places where the authors could polish up their arguments, but the paper makes a compelling case that the relationship between file-sharing and copyright law is a complex one.
The authors construct a bit of a causal chain between file sharing and the intent of copyright law to foster creative works. First, you'd need to know that file sharing was harming music sales, and that the music industry wasn't finding alternative ways of generating income. Then you'd need to show that the loss of income provided a disincentive to musical creativity. They recognize that this calculus might seem a bit heartless, though: "It might seem curious to some of our readers that we do not consider the welfare of artists and entertainment companies in our calculus. Our approach, however, reflects the original intent of copyright protection, which was conceived not as a welfare program for authors but to encourage the creation of new works."
None of these questions, however, turn out to be easy to answer. The authors point out that the decline in music sales came at a time where the replacement of vinyl with CDs was tailing off. The actual piracy of a copyrighted song may not represent a lost sale, either: in some cases, the individual would never have paid for the music anyway, while many studies have shown that file sharing can act as a prelude to legitimate sales. In the end, they join many of their academic peers in deciding that the role of file sharing in the music industry's woes is overblown, noting, "many studies conclude that music piracy can perhaps explain as much as one fifth of the recent decline in industry sales."
So there is some damage, which handles the first link in their logical chain. This leads us to the question of whether there's offsetting revenue. "File sharing also influences the markets for concerts, electronics and communications infrastructure," the authors argue. "For example, the technology increased concert prices, enticing artists to tour more often and, ultimately, raising their overall income." In support of that argument, they note that, to generate $20 in concert income, artists used to have to book sales of about 8.5 CDs; that figure has dropped to under 6.4 in more recent years. Adding in total concert revenue to record sales actually shows the industry grew a bit between 1997 and 2007.
The authors get a bit clumsy with their arguments here, as they consider how piracy might have fostered revenue streams that don't go to the music industry, specifically iPod sales. If you tack those sales on top, the growth in that decade shoots to 66 percent. But it's pretty obvious that iPods were displacing other forms of portable music players, so that revenue clearly came at a price elsewhere.
If the first two links in the chain are tenuous, the last one pretty much gets demolished. There's essentially no indication that the more challenging economics are slowing down creative content production. In the five years prior to 2007, film production is up 30 percent, album releases have doubled, and book releases are up by two-thirds.
The authors also cite statistics that suggest that finances aren't (or at least, shouldn't be) the primary motivator for creative musical works. Because of the structure of the music business, even a gold record doesn't guarantee a windfall to artists, and the ratio of gold records to all records suggest that success is distributed by a system that most resembles a lottery. People clearly seem willing to put time into producing music even if it's not paying off, as the authors note, "even among those who spent at least thirty hours a week on music-related activities, only 22 percent derived at least four-fifths of their income from music."
Given that all the links in the causal chain are, at best, tenuous, the authors conclude that, while copyright infringement may be hurting the music business, that shouldn't be taken as an indication that it's affecting the theoretical basis of copyright law, the fostering of creative works.
It will be interesting to go back to see how the work evolves once the authors receive community feedback, as there are some interesting bits of trivia that the authors don't develop well. For example, a random survey of over 5,000 consumers showed that, although their iPods contained an average of 3,500 songs, over half of these had never been played. They also cite statistics that show some songs that leak to file sharing sites ahead of their release don't see many downloads until record company promotions start, leading them to conclude that "unless the industry drums up support for a new release, it is apparently difficult to give it away for free."
More generally, the authors seem to suggest that file sharing may be an inevitable outgrowth of the fact that copyright restrictions have been a one-way street. "Over the past 200 years, most countries evolved their copyright regimes in one direction only: lawmakers repeatedly strengthened the legal protections of authors and publishers, raising prices for the general public and discouraging consumption."
These points aren't directly relevant to the main thrust of the authors' argument, but it's possible that the community will help them develop them a bit better, since they do appear to be relevant to the overall question of why we grant copyright protection in the first place.

ryst 25th June 2009 06:29 PM
Quote:




Twitter users buy more music: report - Yahoo! News

Twitter users buy more music: report

By Antony Bruno – Wed Jun 24, 12:01 am ET
DENVER (Billboard) – A new NPD Group study finds that active Twitter users buy 77 percent more digital music downloads on average than non-users. Additionally, 12 percent of those who have bought music in the last three months also report having used Twitter, versus 8 percent of overall Web users.
"Based on their music-purchasing history, active Twitter users are simply worth more to record labels and music retailers than those who are not using Twitter," says NPD entertainment analyst Russ Crupnick.
A third of all Twitter user reported buying a CD in the prior three months, and 34 percent reported buying music digitally, compared to 23 percent and 16 percent for overall Web users. Another one-third of Twitter users listened to music on a social networking site, 41 percent via online radio and 39 percent watched music videos online. Overall, they are twice as likely than average Web users to visit MySpace Music and Pandora.
"Twitter has the potential to help foster the discovery of new music, and improve targeted marketing of music to groups of highly-involved and technologically savvy consumers, but it has to be done right," Crupnick said. "There must be a careful balance struck between entertainment and direct conversation on one hand, and marketing on the other. Used properly Twitter has the power to entertain -- and to motivate music fans to purchase more new albums, downloads, merchandise, and concert tickets."
(Editing by Dean Gooodman at Reuters)
santibanks 25th June 2009 03:22 PM
This is pretty sad I think (i'm sorry to don't have any english newsposts but a recap can be found below)

SpitsNieuws : Thuiskopie gaat Staat aanklagen

What happens is that the Dutch anti piracy organisation is going to sue the government because they want a tax on mediaplayers and harddisk drives. The general assumption is that there is a great potential that the medium would be used for illegal content.



And that's the saddest part. Because one industry dies, organisations like this already make every potential customer a criminal. A tax like this actually fuels the argument to download (we already payed a tax for it) for end-users.
XHipHop 20th June 2009 11:50 PM
Quote:




Topspin » NARM’d and Dangerous

Great stuff!
rectifier 20th June 2009 10:11 PM
Quote:
Moby: The RIAA Needs to be Disbanded | TorrentFreak



The two million dollar fine handed out to Jammie Thomas by a Minnesota jury this week hasn't done the music industry's image much good. While lawyers and high level managers at the major labels cracked open the Champagne, artists such as Moby and Radiohead shook their heads in shame at what the music world has become.
The two million dollar fine handed out to Jammie Thomas by a Minnesota jury this week hasn’t done the music industry’s image much good. While lawyers and high level managers at the major labels cracked open the Champagne, artists such as Moby and Radiohead shook their heads in shame at what the music world has become.

Earlier this week the case of Jammie Thomas versus the RIAA went up for re-trial before a new jury. She was found guilty of sharing 24 songs using Kazaa and ordered to pay $80,000 per infringement, which all mounted to a total of $1.92 million in fines.

High ranking people at the record labels soon declared victory claiming that justice had been served. However, many of the artists to which the record label executives owe their well paid salaries are disgusted by the outcome of the case and the witch-hunt on their fans.

One of the artists that has shared his disappointment at the disproportionate fines is the American musician Moby. “Argh. what utter nonsense,” he writes on his website. “This is how the record companies want to protect themselves? Suing suburban moms for listening to music? Charging $80,000 per song?” he questions.

“I don’t know, but ‘it’s better to be feared than respected’ doesn’t seem like such a sustainable business model when it comes to consumer choice. How about a new model of ‘it’s better to be loved for helping artists make good records and giving consumers great records at reasonable prices’?”

Moby is right that the sue and scare tactics of the RIAA are not the ideal business model in the long run. However, thus far they have made millions from all the settled cases alone. In recent years over 30,000 people have allegedly settled with the RIAA for an average of $3500 dollars. This means that the RIAA have raked in more than 10 million dollars without even having to go to court.

In the UK, a coalition of top artists have spoken out against the actions of a music industry that chooses to criminalize their fans, and expressed their growing discomfort with record labels abusing copyrights for their own benefit.

Radiohead, who are also part of the coalition, even showed interest in testifying against the RIAA in the case of a Boston University student also accused of sharing several music recordings. Tenenbaum’s troubles started in 2003 when he rejected an offer to settle with the RIAA for $500. After a few more settlement attempts and legal quibbles, the case eventually went to court.

Moby, a proponent of Net Neutrality - another topic dear to most file-sharers - is equally dissatisfied with the RIAA’s tactics. In his view, it would be better for both artists and fans to end all the legal quibbles and focus on the art of music instead.

“I’m so sorry that any music fan anywhere is ever made to feel bad for making the effort to listen to music,” Moby writes, ending his blog post with some solid advice for the record labels that pump millions of dollars into the non-profit organization.

“The RIAA needs to be disbanded,” he writes.

Moby: The RIAA Needs to be Disbanded | TorrentFreak

the riaa have sued Jammie Thomas-Rasset of minnesota for $2,000,000 for illegally downloading music. | moby.com
rectifier 15th June 2009 12:45 PM
Quote:
Anti-piracy music deal for Virgin



Virgin has pledged to tackle pirates as part of a deal to offer music to its broadband customers.
Virgin and Universal have signed a deal that will give the ISP's customers access to "unlimited" music.

For a monthly fee, Virgin's broadband customers will be able to download or stream as many MP3 files as they want.

As part of the deal, Virgin has pledged to aggressively police use to stop the MP3 tracks turning up on file-sharing networks.

Virgin said it was in talks to add other music firms' back catalogues to the service.

The service is due to be launched before Christmas 2009. Virgin has not said how much the service will cost every month. But it said it could be comparable to the cost of a couple of albums a month.

Those signing up will be able to put the tracks on any music player and keep the music they have downloaded even if they stop paying the monthly fee.

Artists such as Amy Winehouse, Girls Aloud, La Roux and Just Jack are signed to Universal.

Virgin said it had vowed to try a range of anti-piracy measures as part of the deal. The last resort would be a temporary suspension of a customer's internet connection if that person consistently ignored warnings about their activity.

The deal was announced the day before the UK government releases the final version of the Digital Britain report put together by Lord Carter.

The report is widely expected to bestow new powers on communications watchdog Ofcom that will let it compel ISPs to do more to tackle file-sharing.

It is thought that one favoured solution to discourage persistent pirates will be to dial down their internet connection speed.

BBC NEWS | Technology | Anti-piracy music deal for Virgin
XHipHop 15th June 2009 05:06 AM
Quote:




Public Domain Donor

BRILLIANT!
rectifier 8th June 2009 12:09 AM
Quote:
Pirate Party Wins and Enters The European Parliament | TorrentFreak



The Pirate Party has won a huge victory in the Swedish elections and is marching on to Brussels. After months of campaigning against well established parties, the Pirate Party has gathered enough votes to be guaranteed a seat in the European Parliament.
Pirate Party Wins and Enters The European Parliament | TorrentFreak
StereoAtLast 29th May 2009 10:35 PM
Quote:




I was just browsing the musicians section of the Austin Criaglist and I found this gem...

enjoy!

Pro****infessional Drummer Available
johnnycox 26th May 2009 11:26 PM
Quote:
Update Your Browser | Facebook



Facebook is a social utility that connects people with friends and others who work, study and live around them. People use Facebook to keep up with friends, upload an unlimited number of photos, post links and videos, and learn more about the people they meet.
Theres all kinds of studios out here in PH City. Its best to look at the good studios in town. Heres a link to a tight studio.
Blue Dolphins Studios- Professional Recording (Audio and Video) | Facebook
CISUM 26th May 2009 12:34 AM
Quote:




Hey everyone, just read right now that Liberty Devittos, Billy Joels drummer has filled a lawsuit against him for stiffing him out of money from royalties.

Billy Joel Lawsuit
HobbyCore 22nd May 2009 01:41 PM
Quote:
Nya domare i Pirate Bay-målet | Inrikes | SvD



Efter uppgifter om att den nytillsatta hovrättsdomaren i Pirate Baymålet tidigare varit medlem i samma upphovsrättsförening som den jävsanklagade...
Source: Nya domare i Pirate Bay-målet | Inrikes | SvD

in a nutshell...

Ulrika Ihrfelt was assigned to determine if a judge, Tomas Norström, in the original trial was biased. It turns out the Ihrfelt was a member of the same organization that Norström was a member of. Ihrfelt was removed due to that.

Does not bode well for Norström.
Mike Brown 18th May 2009 10:22 PM
Quote:
Harvard prof tells judge that P2P filesharing is “fair use” | Ars Technica



Harvard Law professor Charles Nesson is headed to federal court this summer to …
Harvard prof tells judge that P2P filesharing is "fair use" - Ars Technica

Discuss

I am against piracy & stealing.... but its stupid to try and prosecute the pirates.... I propose a subscription system. Check my other posts in this sub-forum for details.
rack gear 17th May 2009 06:40 AM
Quote:
SF MusicTech Summit | music. people. tech.



The SF MusicTech Summit brings together visionaries in the evolving music/business/technology ecosystem, along with the best and brightest developers, entrepreneurs, investors, service providers, journalists, musicians, and the organizations who work with them at the convergence of culture and commerce. We meet to do business and discuss, in a proactive, conducive to dealmaking environment.
SanFran MusicTech Summit
SanFran MusicTech Summit - Home (CrowdVine)

All it takes is ONE good idea to change EVERYTHING... and this could all be BS...

Hotel Kabuki
1625 Post Street
San Francisco, CA 94118
Monday, May 18 2009
9am - 6pm + cocktail party!

The SanFran MusicTech Summit will bring together the best and brightest developers in the Music/Technology Space, along with the musicians, entrepreneurial business people, press, investors, service providers, and organizations who work with them at the convergence of culture and commerce. We will meet to discuss the evolving music/business/technology ecosystem in a proactive, conducive to dealmaking environment.

We are only planning one Summit in 2009, but are working hard to make it the best yet!

View a partial list of summit attendees on our registration page.

The Summit will provide 2 hours of Continuing Legal Education credit (approval pending) for attorneys from 9:20 am - 11:30 am.


9:00AM
- 9:10AM

WELCOME & OPENING REMARKS
Brian Zisk - SanFran MusicTech Summit, Adam Zbar - Zannel, CEO

9:20AM
- 10:20AM

MUSIC IN AUDIO-VISUAL WORKS
Zahavah Levine Esq. - YouTube, David Leibowitz Esq. - Gotuit / CH Potomac, Iain Scholnick - ImageSpan, Joshua Wattles Esq. - deviantART (Moderator)

ELEVATOR PITCHES
YOU!!!

REACHING FANS
Sean O'Connell - Music Allies, Dave DeVore - FanMail Marketing, Panos Panay - SonicBids, Aaron Clark - Mozes, Jeremy Welt - Warner Brothers Records, Dave Champine - Local Music Vibe

10:20AM
- 10:30AM

COFFEE BREAK

10:30AM
- 11:30AM

DOING DEALS
Larry Kenswil Esq. - Loeb & Loeb, Leron Rodgers Esq. - Hewitt & Rogers, Cecily Mak Esq. - Rhapsody / RealNetworks, Gregor Pryor - ReedSmith (UK)

WEBCASTING ISSUES
Joe Kennedy - Pandora, Bill Goldsmith - Radio Paradise, Mike Huppe, Esq. - SoundExchange, Drew Hilles - Goom Radio, Kurt Hanson - RAIN Radio & Internet Newsletter (moderator)

EFFICIENT DIGITAL DELIVERY
Dean Hudson - SubPop Records, David Barrett - Expensify, Eric Wahlforss - Sound Cloud, Lucas Gonze - XSPF, Tom Conrad - Pandora (Moderator), Adam Fisk - LittleShoot

11:30AM
- 12:00PM

JUSTIN TIMBERLAKE'S TENNMAN RECORDS SHOWCASE, FEATURING RECORDING ARTIST "MATT MORRIS"
Matt Morris - exclusive private performance

12:00PM
- 1:00PM

LUNCH BREAK

1:00PM
- 2:00PM

DEMOS BY NEW TECHNOLOGY COMPANIES

MUSICIANS AS ACTIVE PARTICIPANTS IN THEIR OWN CAREERS
Layne Fox - DJ 40 Thieves / IRIS / Smash Hit Music, Francis Ten - West Indian Girl, John McDermott - Stroke 9 / ImageSpan, Jean Cook - Future of Music Coalition / Violinist for Jon Langford, Waco Brothers, and Ida (Moderator)

TECHNOLOGIES TO IMPROVE MUSIC WEBSITE MONETIZATION
Ted Cohen - TAG Strategic, Josh Hofmann - Vertical Acuity, Peter Yared - iWidgets, James Lamberti - Topspin

2:00PM
- 3:00PM

RECORDING STUDIO OF THE FUTURE
David Gibbons - Avid, Mark Ethier - iZotope, Bill Putnam Jr. - Universal Audio, Mark Wherry - Remote Control Productions, Martin Kloiber - Euphonix, Justin Frankel - Cockos

SOCIAL NETWORKING & MUSIC
Geoff Ralston - LaLa, Ali Partovi - iLike, Anthony Batt - Buzz Media, Dave Allen - Pampelmoose / Nemo Design / (former) Gang of Four, Chuck Fishman - Cisco

MUSIC ACTIVISM AS A CATALYST FOR POSITIVE CHANGE
Bear Kittay - Music for Democracy, Zac Matthews - Musician (former) Hot Buttered Rum, Maureen Herman - Project Noise, Joyce Williams - Zazzle / Music National Service / MIN Entertainment

3:00PM
- 3:30PM

AFTERNOON SNACK BREAK

3:30PM
- 4:30PM

THE FUTURE OF THE MUSIC INDUSTRY
Terry McBride - Nettwerk Music Group, Bob Kohn - RoyaltyShare, Robb McDaniels - INgrooves, Antony Randall - Tour Pro, Kristin Thomson - Future of Music Coalition, Heather Rafter - RafterMarsh USA

MUSIC RECOMMENDATION SERVICES
Michael Papish - Media Unbound, Stephen White - Gracenote, James Miao - The Sixty One, Paul Lamere - The Echo Nest (Moderator), Alex Loscos - BMAT

MOBILE APPS
Ge Wang - Smule, Darryl Ballantyne - LyricFind, Jeff Annison - UndergroundLabs, Rob Pegoraro - Washington Post, Bart Decrem - Tapulous

4:30PM
- 4:45PM

SCHMOOZE BREAK

4:45PM
- 5:45PM

MONETIZATION - IDEALISM IN PRACTICE
Ian Rogers - Topspin, Jim Griffin - Choruss, Tony Van Veen - Disc Makers, Fred Von Lohmann - EFF, Celia Hirshman - One Little Indian / KCRW (Moderator)

BRANDS & BANDS: THE EVOLUTION OF MUSIC MARKETING
Heidi Richman - HRMP Lifestyle Marketing, Rick Farman - Superfly Presents, Jeff Daniel - Rock River Music, Robbie Lloyd - Silva Artist Management, Charlie Moran - AdAge

6:00PM
- 8:00PM

COCKTAIL PARTY - Sponsored by LyricFind
TheRealRoach 17th May 2009 06:37 AM
Quote:




Download Decade - The Globe and Mail

A pretty exhaustive interactive discussion and chronology of the download age. Lots of audio clips, video interviews/shorts, and text to read.
PlatinumSamples 12th May 2009 06:50 PM
Quote:
French net piracy bill signed off



France passes a law to combat copyright piracy by disconnecting people who illegally download films and music.
BBC NEWS | Technology | French 'net piracy' bill passed

France has passed their piracy bill....
chrisso 12th May 2009 01:52 AM
Quote:
Call to 'disconnect file-sharers'



Persistent illegal file-sharers should be cut off from the net, says an alliance of the UK's creative industries.
BBC NEWS | Technology | Call to 'disconnect file-sharers'
LAstudio 11th May 2009 01:22 PM
Quote:
H.R.4789: Performance Rights Act - U.S. Congress - OpenCongress



Official government data, breaking news and blog coverage, public comments and user community for H.R.4789 Performance Rights Act
Hi all,

Here's my letter to the President and my representatives urging their support of the Performance Rights Act. A vote on it is imminent. If you support it as well, please write to the President and your representatives... and please share your letter here as well!!!!

==========


Dear President Obama, Senators Boxer and Feinstein, and Represetative Berman,

I am writing you to strongly urge your support of the Performance Rights Act.

I am a California-based performing and recording artist, as well as a co-founder of a burgeoning record label focusing on new artist development. Surely you are aware of the very difficult challenges facing recording artists and their record labels. We are at a critical juncture where the very future of music -- particularly from independent artists and labels -- is at stake.

Consider the fact that consumers are increasingly moving towards individual downloads -- whether obtained legally or otherwise -- in lieu of traditional full-length albums of material. Also consider the detereriorating state of brick-and-mortar music retail. Finally, consider the consolidation of radio broadcasters. All of these make for "the perfect storm" in the music industry for performers and rights-holders.

With fewer and fewer opportunities for new (and legacy) artists to sustain their livelihood, and with mounting challenges to the survival of the record labels who support those artists, we have reached a point where it has become almost insurmountably difficult to bring new music into the world. And without new music, from where will the next "soundtrack of our lives" come?

Without enabling new artistic expression to extend its voice into our admittedly uncertain future, from where will the songs that reflect the pains and hopes of this and future generations come -- songs to give us a shoulder to cry upon when days look dark... songs that unite us in hope and solidarity... songs that grace us with a glimpse of what bright day is yet to come?

In this spirit, I urge you to support the Performance Rights Act to give our recording artists and rights-holders a fair share of the fruit of their labor, thus sustaining artists' unique gift of reflecting ourselves to ourselves at a time when we need this perhaps more than ever in our history. Indeed, to "know thyself" is the chariot of that bright day yet to come.

Respectfully,

[Me]
spaceman 9th May 2009 03:52 PM
Quote:
Radiohead's management advised them to split | Music | guardian.co.uk



The band's manager admits he encouraged them to call it quits while making In Rainbows, one of their most successful albums
Somebody made a thread about this already, but it was kind of confused so there's wasn't many reactions to it. I'm reopening the case..

The Blanket Fee Tax (called Licence Globale in France) is the MOST advocated solution to piracy here. It's pushed by many people, including some in the government. There have been numerous and constant discussions about it, but it's also higly controversial, and heavily criticised by a lot of people (me included).
For some reason, very few people outside of France know about this concept.

I have serious doubts about it (wich i will explain later), yet sometimes i wonder if it's not the only pragmatic and rational solution to piracy. The only one that makes piracy totally useless. I feel it's important that it gets discussed, especially by people outside of France, as this concept is supposed to work everywhere.

So here we go. I will use France as an example for the calculations , but you can adapt it to your respective country.

A- a compulsory small sum, say 6 euros per month , will be slapped on every internet subscription in the country. It will be either be payed by the internet subscriber , or absorbed by the ISP themselves.

B- This monthly tax is multiplied by the number of Internet subscribers in the country. In 2008, France had around 18 millions internet subscribers. So this tax will generate an annual sum of 1,296,000,000 euros . So that's a bit more than a Billion euros annualy (or a thousand million if you prefer)

C- In 2008, the annual total sales of music in France was 1,049,000,000 euros (digital and physical sales). So it's a Billion euros annualy too.
Therefore the annual blanket fee tax generates more than what the industry makes annualy.

D- Music downloads on P2P will become legal. No more chasing pirates.

E- This annual generated sum will be split among copyright holders and artists based on the pro-rata of their downloads. So let's say your album represented 20% of all downloads in that year, then you will get 20% of the annual sum of money generated that year by this tax.

F- Who will be in charge of this ? A neutral entity. Either your government, or an already existing society of authors and composers, like SACEM in France or ASCAP/BMI in the US, etc... (Or even a brand new organisation)

G- How will the number of downloads be measured ? Now this is one of the MOST controversial aspects of this concept. I will simply list the ones that have been proposed at this time. :
* 1 : By a limited panel, like the way they measure television audiences (and radio ?) , It could be a panel of a few thousands people.
* 2 : By measuring all music downloads in said country, like companies like BigChampagne does (a file swapping monitoring site that measures what and how much is being downloaded on p2p networks)). How precise are they, i don't know...
* 3 : By creating an "official" p2p network and tracker. This will lead to very precise counting of what track is downloaded and how many times. People will be encouraged (or forced ?) to download on this official p2p.
* 4 : By a combination of all the above.


That's it.
What do you think about it ? Do you see it possible in your country ? Can this be really the ultimate solution to music piracy ?

EDIT: It seems that other people are warming up to the idea. Radiohead's manager seems to be in favor of a Blanket Fee Tax according to this :Radiohead's management advised them to split | Music | guardian.co.uk
doulos 9th May 2009 06:39 AM
Quote:




this I think will be one of the newest threats and largest to file sharing copyright protection etc.

YouTube - Microsoft Surface - The Possibilities

even in the commerical it shows how easy its going to be to flick mp3s to a new device
chrisso 8th May 2009 02:55 AM
Quote:
Murdoch: Web sites to charge for content - CNN.com



Media tycoon Rupert Murdoch expects News Corporation-owned newspaper Web sites to start charging users for access within a year in a move which analysts say could radically shake-up the culture of freely available content.
I see a parallel between the music industry and the news media.

This week Rupert Murdoch announced a 47% slide in News Corp profits.
A major move by advertisers to the web and away from newspapers, and the popular rise of bloggers over traditional news organisations were both blamed for the dip in profits.
The debate over whether people will continue to pay for quality news, or expect to get their news freely and faster via online blogs, has been raging in the news media for several years already.
Organisations like News Corp are scrambling to come up with a new business model, just as we are batting around new business models for the music industry here.
Murdoch claims the internet free-for-all is over. He plans to charge for access to his websites, and to charge for content:
Murdoch: Web sites to charge for content - CNN.com

On the other hand I picked up this story about an IBM report from 2004.
It seems they think professionally provided content may have had it's day.
In the future the consumer will be both the content provider and the content consumer. In other words, little Johnny from New Jersey will be uploading his home recordings, and will be downloading similar home made recordings made by other web users.
This is in effect what has happened with news.
The pseudo amateur bloggers have become more popular than Barbara Walters and Wolf Blitzer, and advertising revenue has shifted from the traditional news media to online services.

Quote:
"Massive changes in the terrain of media and entertainment over the next five to seven years will force tectonic shifts in the business models of broadcast and film companies, predicts a report from IBM Business Consulting Services (BCS).
The report, Media & Entertainment 2010, unveiled today, says that by 2010, the landscape of the industry will change so dramatically that, in order to survive, media companies will have to move to a truly open environment, allowing consumers around-the-clock access to protected media content for variable fees and the ability to largely control their own media and entertainment experiences. The report recommends that companies convert all content to digital formats and open digital doors to let consumers contribute, produce or author dynamic content."
So do you hang in there with Rupert, or agree with IBM's opposite view?
rack gear 8th May 2009 12:14 AM
Quote:




Good times...

Goldman: Still Lovin' Warner After Last Quarter? — Digital Music News

During an earnings call Thursday, Warner Music Group chairman Edgar Bronfman, Jr. painted a bad picture. Digital sales growth continued, albeit at a slower pace, losses widened to a glaring $46 million (45 cents per share), and investments in both Imeem and LaLa demanded write-downs. Year-ago losses totalled $37 million (25 cents per share).

Specifically, digital sales improved 7 percent year-over-year to $166 million, far lower than year-ago gains of 48 percent. Physical sales tanked 25 percent, dragging the broader music picture southward 18 percent to $537 million.

And the digital investments? The company wrote-down its entire $16 million investment in the beleaguered Imeem, and more than half of its $20 million injecting into in LaLa. "We do not intend to make more digital venture capital investments," Bronfman relayed.
equallyscrewed 7th May 2009 09:28 PM
So, after banging my head against a wall and coming against discrimination that would make any civil rights court shriek in another thread...I'm punting this out there.

Who here still holds the opinion that artists will always lose money from tours and that the only way to "save" the industry worldwide is to stop piracy so the artists can get the whole dollar that they got before from a $17 album.

As i say in all the threads : I'm 100% ANTI piracy, i dont think any one has the right to steal anyone elses art.

I do however see touring as a valuable life line for most bands. Dont take my word for it though...

"The top 10% of artists make money selling records. The rest go on tour," says Scott Welch, who manages singers Alanis Morissette and LeAnn Rimes.


So what do you guys think????

Anyone can post in this thread regardless of position, experience or age. Except Digitar or DrBill untill they e mail me their CV (email address available on PM)

xcx

9th Ward Records 4th May 2009 05:37 AM
Quote:
You may be jailed for spamming



You may be jailed for spamming - New York: Beware! Sending a spam is enough for police to take you to jail. A federal court in Manhattan on Tuesday...
In response to "FREE MUSIC", I'm quadrippling my prices. You heard right, quadrupled! KNOW WHY? Cause I don't think MY music should be free. In fact, I think it's worth $150 an album- and that's the bottom line cause it's MINE and YOU don't set my prices. I DO.

But seriously;

Music has been recorded (on paper) and sold since the 1500's. In the 1800's there were player piano's- and pianists sold rolls of paper. In the 20th century they sold records, tapes, CD's and now it's MP3's...

Do you really think this is going to last long? Remember when the internet started? (It was a huge free for all- people did anything they wanted.) But as each day goes by, new restrictions and laws get passed. Today, you can get jailed for spamming. Now how long do you think it will take until there is a BLANKET LICENSE, that you have to pay to transmit or download files with the .mp3 extension? Seriously, resistance is futile, bitch. (My favorite toy was my ****en firetruck, bitch!)

  1. There's a lot of people that don't like the current system. (musicians, labels, producers, etc...)
  2. There's a lot of people that stand to gain from restrictions. (government agencies, radio stations, night clubs...) You heard me right, bitch, night clubs! There was a day when people were social, way back when it was fun to go to places called night clubs to hear new music.
These people will hire lawyers and pay huge legal fees to make their money. Will you pay legal fees to keep your music free? (That's what I thought.)

Now, I know it's hypocritical, but I'm only human: I pirate movies here and there... Yep, I sure do. (I watched Wolverine yesterday... Good movie, but I sorta feel bad). So how can I justify pirating movies? I can't. I'm a dick. But if I woke up tomorrow and couldn't download a movie off the Pirate Bay, I wouldn't give two shakes. In fact, I'd probably be happy because I could be more productive at work. I simply don't value movies for any artistic value. To me, they're secondary and a waste of my time. IN FACT:

I feel like movies should be free because of all the SPAM they feed you. (That's how weekly newspapers work. They're paid by their advertisers so they can give them away for free). So is the film industry losing out on money? Probably, but not from me, because they got me with their spam even though I would have never gone to see Wolverine in the theater in the first place. I only go to the movies if I'm on a a date. (Theaters are good for blowjobs only.)


WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?!

I'm glad you asked...

The people saying "Music should be free" (and bla bla bla...) simply don't value music like we do. To them, its secondary. They group us in with the spamming film industry. They don't don't give a damn about the years of pain some of us suffer that drives us to make songs. In fact, they feel like we owe them something. We've all heard it- bring up a song or a band in conversation and someone has to try and break it down and reduce it to next than nothing. Everyone's a critic, AS IF th song was written for them and it didn't live up to their expectations.

Why? Well, for the "Download Generation"- they're accustomed to listening to a song, bashing it, and then on to the next. They don't get it. To us, music is an art and, it's the realest substance in the world and and it's all we live for. The reason they got so far with pirating is because we're not as financially obsessed as say, the film industry. So now I'm taking matters into my own hands. I'm raising my album price to $150 and I'm going to start slapping people that say they've pirated mp3's... Starting with myself.

SHOULD MUSIC BE FREE?

Not unless it goes:
"Baby I love you
I know this sounds gay,
but baby I need you
to buy me an iPod today". thumbsup

(in my opinion, that is.)

XHipHop 4th May 2009 05:29 AM
Quote:
Topspin Media



Topspin helps musicians and filmmakers grow their audience and sell their work. Topspin widgets play music and video, give away free downloads and sell stuff in all the places your fans are: YouTube, Facebook, on blogs, your own website and even MTV.
Topspin

Enjoy, friends.
Search Articles

Article Forum v1.9 Copyright by BananaLive