| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Music: unauthorized downloads now 90% of market | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Feb 2 2010, 10:17 PM (826 Views) | |
| kenny | Feb 2 2010, 10:17 PM Post #1 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Shame on the thieves! ![]() partial snip In the time between Napster's shuttering and iTunes' debut, many of Napster's 60 million users found other online file sharing techniques to get music for free. Even after iTunes got people buying music tracks for just 99 cents, it wasn't as attractive as free. "That four-year lag is where the music industry lost the battle," said Sonal Gandhi, music analyst with Forrester Research. "They lost an opportunity to take consumers' new behavior and really monetize it in a way that nipped the free music expectation in the bud." Now just 44% of U.S. Internet users and 64% of Americans who buy digital music think that that music is worth paying for, according to Forrester. The volume of unauthorized downloads continues to represent about 90% of the market, according to online download tracker BigChampagne Media Measurement. "People will steal music regardless, so it's not worth trying to fight against something where the fight's already over," said Dan Ingala, founder and lead singer of the band Plushgun. When Plushgun released its album "Pins and Panzers," it was the most downloaded album on the popular peer-to-peer Web site What.cd with 100,000 illegal downloads. "That's 100,000 CDs we would have sold," said Ingala. "At the same time, it's helping us create an audience. It's just a matter of adjusting." http://money.cnn.com/2010/02/02/news/companies/napster_music_industry/index.htm?hpt=C2 |
![]() |
|
| Aqua Letifer | Feb 2 2010, 10:29 PM Post #2 |
|
ZOOOOOM!
|
Too bad the thieves are the ones who are buying the most music. Factcheck: ur doin it rong. |
| I cite irreconcilable differences. | |
![]() |
|
| Aqua Letifer | Feb 2 2010, 10:33 PM Post #3 |
|
ZOOOOOM!
|
Oh and P.S.:
This guy is hilarious if he thinks that file sharing (especially music file sharing) started with Napster. |
| I cite irreconcilable differences. | |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Feb 2 2010, 10:49 PM Post #4 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
IT, does the Catholic church condemn this ubiquitous criminal activity? Dewey, what you you teach your congregation? Do Jews hear anything about this from their religion? I thought crime was a sin. Maybe times have changed, or something and they teach only obeys laws when you are likely to get caught. Is it up to homosexual atheists to stand for character, values, ethics and morality these days?
|
![]() |
|
| Aqua Letifer | Feb 2 2010, 10:54 PM Post #5 |
|
ZOOOOOM!
|
I don't think you understand some of the words you're using. |
| I cite irreconcilable differences. | |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Feb 2 2010, 11:10 PM Post #6 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Don't religions teach not breaking laws? I surely hope religious, and non-religious, parents here are not just turning their heads, because it is the easier. |
![]() |
|
| Aqua Letifer | Feb 2 2010, 11:18 PM Post #7 |
|
ZOOOOOM!
|
No, the times have changed, or something. They now teach you how to consolidate your debt into easy-to-handle monthly payments, how to earn your Associate's or Bachelor's degree online and how to cheat on your taxes. |
| I cite irreconcilable differences. | |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Feb 2 2010, 11:21 PM Post #8 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Oh, "They teach you." Not your fault. Responsibility is for nerds. I get it. |
![]() |
|
| Aqua Letifer | Feb 2 2010, 11:29 PM Post #9 |
|
ZOOOOOM!
|
Eh, nevermind. It's late. |
| I cite irreconcilable differences. | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Feb 2 2010, 11:33 PM Post #10 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Uh, yeah, Kenny -- the Catholic Church teaches that stealing anything is wrong. Did you really not know that? |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Klaus | Feb 3 2010, 01:39 AM Post #11 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
This figures are quite misleading. Only a very small percentage of those who download a CD would buy it if they could not download it for free. Also, often many albums are put together in a single download on these sites. So if you want to listen to, say, the Bach Goldberg variations you may encounter a 100+CD download of the complete Bach work. It is just a click to download 100 CDs, but very few people would actually buy the full set if they'd have to pay. All numbers which say something about "money lost due to illegal downloads" are hence inherently dubious. I for one think that listening to music has just become quite unfashionable, compared to the 70s, 80s and early 90s. At these times teenagers would identify with the music they listen to. Nowadays teenagers spend their money and time on cell phones, computer games, and social networks. It is just a shift of priorities. |
| Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman | |
![]() |
|
| JoeB | Feb 3 2010, 01:59 AM Post #12 |
|
Senior Carp
|
Speaking of thieves (from paidContent.org )
So the RIAA has been abetting price-fixing (whooda thunkit?) and people aren't paying for all the songs they download. Illegal uploading of copyrighted content is clearly a financial problem for record companies and they are actively pursuing uploaders with significant wins. In one case the judgment against the uploader was $220,000. Source This is all very interesting stuff until you try to equate morality and legality. Sometimes an illegal act is an immoral act, sometimes not. Is it immoral for big corporations to attempt to maximize profits by breaking anti-trust laws? Does the concept of morality even make sense when applied to a corporation? Maybe the immorality (if any) is an act of people who work for the corporation. Is it immoral to upload music for others to download freely? Is it immoral to download music? I think each person must answer each question for themselves. For me I do think the people working for the labels and the people working for RIAA acted immorally. The reason their acts were immoral is because they hurt (financially) people who purchased music. I do think music uploaders are acting immorally for the same reason, that is, their acts hurt (financially) the shareholders of the previously mentioned corporations. It probably makes very little difference to the actual musicians who have been so completely raped by the record companies that they wouldn't get any money one way or the other. The last case, the person who downloads music, is a little more interesting. I say it is NOT immoral to download music because it does not financially injure anyone. I would also say the act itself is not illegal and will eventually be a protected activity (fair use) under a Supreme Court ruling if the record companies are stupid enough to ever actually try to sue anyone for downloading (unlikely, they have been slapped down before e.g. 464 U.S. 417 (1984) the Betamax case). |
| "There are many ingredients in the stew of annoyance." - Bucky Katt | |
![]() |
|
| Riley | Feb 3 2010, 05:26 AM Post #13 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
How often do you see a teenager walking down the street without headphones in their ears? |
![]() |
|
| apple | Feb 3 2010, 05:39 AM Post #14 |
|
one of the angels
|
interesting and timely (from WSJ) By JOHN JURGENSEN Pay attention to that woman opening the Grammys. At Sunday's awards show, Lady Gaga is expected to play a duet on a single piano with Elton John. She is nominated for five awards, including record of the year, but that's less important than her broader impact on music culture in the space of a year, which has been seismic. Her debut album has generated four No. 1 songs. She topped the digital sales chart for 2009 with 15.3 million tracks sold. Her dance hits, including "Poker Face" and "Paparazzi," recalibrated the sound of pop radio with a spacey Euro vibe that's crept into songs by rock and rap artists. She grabbed attention beyond the music world with outfits that make her look like a refugee from a sci-fi film. In concert, on video and at past awards shows she has sported full facial masks, worn planetary rings around her head, and framed her face in what looked like a bird's nest. "She's very vaudevillian," says an admiring Alice Cooper, the rocker whose history of stage theatrics includes simulated decapitations. But he says Gaga's antics only work because "she can really sing." Stars like Beyoncé will face off against newcomers such as Lady Gaga at the 52nd annual Grammy Awards on Jan. 31. Who will take home the prize? Cast your vote. WSJ's John Jurgensen joins the News Hub and tells Simon Constable why the music industry loves Lady Gaga. He discusses how the singer is a case study in how the business has changed. Gaga may turn out to be yet another fleeting pop novelty, but many other industry veterans see her as the real deal, and her ambitions and skill at navigating the turbulent industry may make her a durable star. Born Stefani Germanotta, she graduated from Manhattan's Convent of the Sacred Heart school, then left a music program at New York University to chase a music career. She was signed and dropped from one label, Def Jam, before uniting with a core team of advisers. She then stormed the media in a year when Michael Jackson's death reminded us how few new music stars transcend narrow genres anymore. Underneath Gaga's haystack wigs is a case study of what it takes to succeed in the music business today. Gaga, 23 years old, has made shrewd use of new digital platforms, while still leveraging the clout of a major label, an institution deemed obsolete by many proponents of DIY culture. She is a product of a new kind of recording contract which goes beyond just selling records to encompass everything from touring, merchandise–even her make-up deal. Though she writes her own material, she is as focused on visual theatrics, fashion, and global appeal as she is on the music. Gaga's actual odds in the Grammy race are uncertain. For instance, the best-album award typically goes to nominees with a long record of achievement, including recent winners Robert Plant, Alison Krauss and Herbie Hancock. This year, the senior slot is represented by Dave Matthews. Another strong contender: Beyoncé Knowles, who at just 28 is a veteran who leads the pack with 10 nominations. The Black Eyed Peas are reliable hitmakers with a bevy of corporate sponsors including BlackBerry. Newcomer Taylor Swift, the 20-year-old country singer, also has a strong shot at awards. This year, expect the cameras to hover around Gaga, who will be challenged to top the six different costumes she donned at the MTV Video Music Awards. Divining fashion trends from her outfits would be fruitless. Instead, here are three things Gaga can tell us about how the music industry works now. She's a digital phenomenon Lady Gaga's towering digital sales, almost all of them iTunes downloads, only tell part of the story. In fact, much of Gaga's audience got her music for free, and legally. They have listened to free streams—by the hundreds of millions—on YouTube and the other online services that Gaga currently leads, according to research firm BigChampagne. On MySpace, Gaga has had 321.5 million plays. By contrast, singer Susan Boyle tallied only 133,000 plays, despite scoring the No. 2 selling album of 2009. A difference (among many) between Gaga and the dowdy Scotswoman discovered on a British talent show: Ms. Boyle's material, including "Amazing Grace," was traditional—and so were most of her buyers. Some 97% of her albums were sold on compact disc. More "That tells you how pronounced the generational divide is," says BigChampagne founder Eric Garland. When it comes to the free streams that dwarf her still-impressive sales, Gaga isn't giving it away for nothing—musicians typically earn fractions of a penny each time a song is streamed on Yahoo, for instance. While most artists stand to profit more from high-margin CD sales, being embedded across the Web can pay dividends in exposure and the loyalty of fans. She's got a 360-degree view The business needs more Gagas. The upheaval of the last decade has forced the major record companies to cut their work force by 60%, according to a recent report by the Recording Industry Association of America. Within the last week, dozens of Universal Music Group employees were laid off. (Gaga's own publicist took a buyout; his job won't be filled.) Labels have had to change their relationship with artists and lean on new partners, including the talent managers they often squabbled with in the past. Without the budget and staff to support their once overloaded artist stables, labels have slashed their rosters and doubled down on acts expected to drive hits. They're also going after the money artists generate outside the labels' traditional business of selling music. This has given rise to, in industry parlance, the 360 deal, in which a label invests more money up front (for marketing, for example) in exchange for a piece of merchandise sales, touring revenue and other earnings that artists had long kept for themselves. The 360 model hasn't launched big stars yet—with a few exceptions, including Gaga. From concerts, including four sold-out nights at Radio City Music Hall this month, a percentage of her take goes to her label, Universal's Interscope Records. The label also gets a cut of her revenue from Polaroid, Estée Lauder's MAC and other corporate partners. Does Gaga validate the 360 model for other artists? While she pockets relatively less money on tour, Interscope puts more muscle behind her than it would have in the old days. "Would she be in the position to play in front of 20,000 people a night if the record company had not put up the marketing dollars?" says Gaga's manager Troy Carter. She could be the next Madonna On the song "Bad Romance," Gaga chants "I want your ugly, I want your disease." She lovingly refers to her fans as "monsters." On stage, she bleeds from simulated stab wounds. Despite these dark theatrics, she's become a darling of mainstream radio by drawing from Madonna's playbook, with thumping dance beats, a shape-shifting image and a playful obsession with celebrity. While Ms. Swift represents the pretty (but friendly!) girl next door, Gaga's allure is that of a misfit run amok in the system, a role that has helped her cut across disparate subcultures, including teens, finicky hipsters and gays, to whom she sends frequent shout-outs. While Gaga's bared skin and professed androgyny have raised the eyebrows of interviewers like Oprah Winfrey and Barbara Walters, she isn't shocking, per se. "That's a tool that's no longer available to pop artists," says Danny Goldberg, the longtime manager and former label head. Since rap music, he adds, "those taboos have been removed and that, to me, makes her that much more impressive. She doesn't have that easy ticket to notoriety." She's also determined not to be niche. Last year, the Recording Academy's nominating committees received a record 17,000 Grammy submissions. Many of those hopefuls hailed from what could be called music's growing middle class—made up of acts that carve out niche audiences within subgenres such as indie rock. Only a few artists, including Ms. Swift, have defied that trend as newly minted superstars. While some acts try to get there with experimental strategies, such as giving music away free, Gaga used an old technique: cementing her image in music videos such as "Paparazzi," in which she hobbles on crutches. RedOne, Gaga's primary producer, hails from Morocco and has an outsider's take on American music. "The songs have to be lyrically simple and easy to sing along to, even for people in the world who don't speak English," he says. Studio pros like Grammy-winning mixing engineer Manny Marroquin are being hired to replicate her chopping synths and densely-layered sound. "Everybody's saying, 'Make it like Gaga,' " he says. Such a now-trendy sound won't last forever. Gaga's longevity will hinge on evolving before its expiration date. Alice Cooper suggests softening things up: "I'd love to hear her sing a Karen Carpenter song." In fact, before she was Lady Gaga, Ms. Germanotta was a piano-playing singer-songwriter who haunted open mics in New York. Rather than attempt to outdo her own outlandish antics, Gaga may dial back toward that former persona. Next month, for instance, she'll begin pushing the single "Speechless," a stormy piano ballad in the mode of Sir Elton. Says Tom Corson, executive vice president and general manager of RCA Music Group, a rival to Gaga's label: "It's not just about great songs. In the best-case scenario, it's a full multimedia package." Write to John Jurgensen at john.jurgensen@wsj.com. Edited by apple, Feb 3 2010, 05:41 AM.
|
| it behooves me to behold | |
![]() |
|
| Klaus | Feb 3 2010, 06:04 AM Post #15 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
The average budget of teenagers has not changed much in the last two decades. Nowadays they spend a substantial part of their budget for their cell phones and other gadgets. In former times these gadgets did not exist and the budget was more likely to be spend for music. Hence, by basic arithmetic, less money is spend on music. |
| Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman | |
![]() |
|
| Riley | Feb 3 2010, 06:21 AM Post #16 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
You could make the argument that they spend less money on music, but probably not less time. Free music, both legal or illegal, is widely available. |
![]() |
|
| Klaus | Feb 3 2010, 06:40 AM Post #17 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Maybe, but I'd still make the point that the identification with music is much less nowadays. In the 70s and 80s, the music teenagers listened to was a political statement and stood for their way of and look on life. I believe nowadays music plays a much more modest role for most teenagers. |
| Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman | |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Feb 3 2010, 06:46 AM Post #18 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
The average Nowadays they spend a substantial part of their In former times these gadgets did not exist and the Hence, by basic arithmetic, less The basic argument would probably still apply in time domain.
|
![]() |
|
| bachophile | Feb 3 2010, 06:59 AM Post #19 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
i think u probably meant the 60's and early 70's. by the time disco came out, (would that be marked by the release of sat night fever?) i think popular music became much more.....superficial? |
| "I don't know much about classical music. For years I thought the Goldberg Variations were something Mr. and Mrs. Goldberg did on their wedding night." Woody Allen | |
![]() |
|
| Klaus | Feb 3 2010, 07:01 AM Post #20 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Punk rock become popular in the 80s, and it definitely falls into this category. |
| Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman | |
![]() |
|
| schindler | Feb 3 2010, 07:44 AM Post #21 |
![]()
Fulla-Carp
|
Check the indie scene, dude. There are people who would rather die than be caught listening to pop singers like Lady Gaga. However, considering that I didn't start listening to music until the late 90s, I have nothing against which to compare my experiences. |
| We're all mad here! | |
![]() |
|
| Aqua Letifer | Feb 3 2010, 07:53 AM Post #22 |
|
ZOOOOOM!
|
Few and far between, man. Not too many these days take music very seriously. For most it's just something to use to kill awkward silences or keep you occupied walking to the store. |
| I cite irreconcilable differences. | |
![]() |
|
| schindler | Feb 3 2010, 08:11 AM Post #23 |
![]()
Fulla-Carp
|
Yeah, I suppose you're right. Unfortunately. However, most of my friends take music very seriously. But it must be the people I hang out with. . . we're special.
|
| We're all mad here! | |
![]() |
|
| apple | Feb 3 2010, 08:14 AM Post #24 |
|
one of the angels
|
my kids constantly listen |
| it behooves me to behold | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Feb 3 2010, 08:35 AM Post #25 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Now you're just sounding like an old fart. "Back in my day, sonny...."
|
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
![]() ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community. Learn More · Sign-up for Free |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |










4:54 PM Jul 10