The Beeb gives Cory a nod.

http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/289508/402242.jpg

Great discussion. I think it demonstrates how powerful (and positive) the internet can be when we aren’t resorting to snipes and name-calling. Take care guys and (one last plug) please pass on my article to anyone you think would be interested:

So I’ll say something about the Edge instead.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/musictv/guitars/video/billbailey/2/

The Edge, phhhht.

“And what about artists that *can’t* perform live as their music consists of multi-tracking themselves, electronic modification, etc.?”

Have you seen an Animal Collective show? Or Grizzly Bear? Or Dirty Projectors? Most of the answer is “get a macbook and give some programmer a little groupie action.”

I’d say what we really need is infrastructure. We need venues that aren’t the Nokia Theatre or the McDonald’sDome, or otherwise tied up in big, insane acts. We need something small that people can go to, and an audience willing to experiment to fill seats. In the future, there is no mass market, just millions of niches.

the simple point has to be made that labels aren’t exploiting artists

If labels aren’t exploiting artists then why do the vast majority of bands that get signed to major labels leave their deals with huge amounts of debt? Why do so many older artists (usually the one’s that are famous but not uber-rich) state it’s good that the old business model is failing? Why do artists like Ben Folds write songs like One Down? Why was Factory Records so revolutionary at the time?

I have absolutely no problem with distribution deals, but record deals, by far and large are pure exploitation and major record labels exploit artists ruthlessly. They’ll pray on young artists with a ton of talent and no business mind at all, they’ll pray on poor artists and lure a $10,000 cheque in their face, every cent of which will need to be paid for, not out of total profits but the artists cut (sometimes as low as 20cents per cd) sold (50,000 thousand sales before the artist sees 1 cent of return). Meanwhile the record label has pocketed tens of thousands already.

This is a good article looking at the profits of record labels, artists, promoters and live venues since the rise of file sharing
.

Yes, but what if Americans could easily steal your kerosene engines in mass, with virtually zero chance of being caught?

You’d be singing a different tune. Pun intended.

I live in Sonny Bono’s district. If he were alive today, he’d be trying to legislate the death penalty for file-sharing.

Ignore it’s Bono talking, what he’s saying is true. You spoil upcoming artists chance to get in the business.
Music is a business like everything else and musicians should earn money on the stuff they make. Simple.

However Bono has nothing to fear from me. I promise never to illegally download any U2 songs. In fact, if one comes on the radio I promise switch stations.

And I also feel that just because something is easy to steal/break into doesnt make it right, and the owners of these properties have every right to prosecute the offenders.

But I dont support government spying/policing either. Again, I dont have the solution, just a lot of questions and the hope people will make the morally correct decision. But I can see Im barking up the wrong tree…

@Stephen , omitting logical steps from an argument because the medium is limited to 140 characters makes no-one a 4th-grader. The point is that Internet piracy can’t buy you a ticket to a concert, and that’s where the money’s at, so Internet piracy is not destroying the industry.

Who are you to set the conditions for how others share their art and make a living? If you don’t want to pay the price they’re asking, don’t consume the media.

A more scientific study would be: 1) the correlation of playcount to purchased content. 2) correlation of unshuffled playcount (music that was consciously selected) to purchased content, aggregated by artist.

I recall a claim, several years ago, that people who shared files also had more more purchased content. In my case, I have 400 purchased CDs. Most of my new purchases are new artists found an previewed on Mixtapes and downloads. My iPhone now takes the place of radio for “try before you buy”. A lot of the content on my iPhone is equivalent to what would be playing on the radio, just before I change stations.

Here’s a use case: last night I downloaded “Coraline” for free. I missed it in the theaters as I thought it was a kid’s movie. Tonight, I will be renting any movie of Henry Selick that I can lay my hands on. If Coraline reappears in 3D theaters, I will pay to see it again. Plus, I am guaranteed to see Selick’s new production “Here Be Monsters”

Why do we listen to these guys?

Yes, I agree it isnt a problem now (though we are already seeing inklings of it). Its my position (and Bono’s, I guess) that the film industry COULD, and most probably WILL run into the same problems when the technology catches up. Its still not very easy to find/download an HD/3D version of a film and play it, but in 3-5 years it likely will.

And making music or doing street art is VASTLY less complicated than making a film. Films (and Im only talking major blockbusters here) can only be made by dozens, if not hundreds of people with financial backing over the course of several years. If theres less of a revenue flow in the future, we’ll see much less big budget films and much more smaller films. Now, to some of you, thats a good thing (and hey, I like the whole gamut of films too) but I’d hate to see large films go away because studios think they’re too risky to invest in anymore.

This is all speculative, and Im sure it will work out eventually.

Thanks for the lively discussion

Cory, you are doing well because you embrace the openness. You would help your cause better by falsifying his statements by own example (or the example of Jonathan Coulton, who is much more talented than Bono) in profiting from freedom.

Apart from that, I agree that the copyright is really not sufficient in the digital age. But I am currently in two minds on whether the solution lies in its extension or limiting. Those pro extension of copyrights to fight filesharing are not making a good case, since mostly their motivation is seen as greed. Their opponents aren’t making a good case either, since their motivation is all too unclear.

Greetings, LX