What is Digg?315 Comments
- AlexisP, on 10/10/2007, -1/+159"I really don't care, it's not my problem..." - Isn't that a kid's response to almost everything? It was for me...
- 4degrees, on 11/13/2007, -5/+88"your failed business model is not my problem"
you dont blame the consumer when your business fails. - directsun, on 10/10/2007, -1/+83this made me laugh:
"...concern the children have for downloading a virus. Indeed this is their major concern, although a 9-10 year old boys group from Slovakia had a solution:
'… Just download anti-virus software.'" - tehbored, on 11/13/2007, -2/+68File sharing is here to stay. The music industry is just going to have to adapt.
- MassiveTaTas, on 10/10/2007, -3/+58Hopefully the kids will learn to hate the RIAA too.
- Bdog2g2, on 10/10/2007, -4/+42Well more to the point, its not my fault you don't know how to adjust your business to keep making money. If you keep sucking the same tit you'll eventually run out of milk. You need to be diverse in the ***** you suck.
I know bad analogy, but if the publishers were intelligent, they would quickly switch to a download model, charge less, sell more, and do it at a fraction of the cost of packaging, distributing, and marketing.
If you can't, won't, don't innovate in business, you'll eventually fail. A company that moves with the times, is one that is always in the times. Now that doesn't say that innovation is guaranteed, see Betamax. - Falldog, on 10/10/2007, -2/+37Pfft, it's still mine.
- jakewho, on 10/10/2007, -0/+33"and the musician will lose incentive to produce content."
anyone who loses incentive to make music when the money runs out shouldnt be making music in the first place. it was the blood sucking business men that exploited musicians that started this ***** industry in the first place.
real musicians make music because they have to, not because it makes money.
in short, cant wait till this industry collapses under the weight of its own greed. - hove, on 10/10/2007, -2/+30So you are saying that artists are only motivated by money?
- Daniel591992, on 10/10/2007, -9/+33whoops....they're*
- jmpeagle, on 10/10/2007, -2/+24except copyrights, patents, and trademarks are actually anti-capitalistic and pro-government regulation as they are government enforced laws. Artists make most of their money from concerts, there was not some huge jump in artistic creativity when copyrights became legal. Eliminating copyrights will only improve efficiency as eliminating any government monopoly would.
Also, why do we value the money earned from a song more than money earned from an invention? one only gets 17 years protection whereas the other gets the life of the artsist plus 50 years. - FyreGoddess, on 10/10/2007, -3/+25For me, there's a huge distinction that a lot of people don't make, and that really comes down to the independent artists/labels. The major labels are the ones fighting tooth and nail against downloads, often both legal and illegal, but the indie labels are the ones fighting for cheap, available, legal downloads. They're the ones offering more of their music or videos free online and they're the ones that deserve the most support.
That's why I won't burn copies of CDs from indie artists/labels for other people or, if they have an mp3 player, I won't loan out my CD because that's where the worst theft is going on. I let people listen and then say "Hey, buy their album, support the indie labels".
Sadly, I am often mocked for this particular brand of idealism. - borninda818, on 10/10/2007, -12/+32So instead of selling CDs the artist gives his/her music away for free (OMG) and makes loads of cash off of live concerts...Why should they work a few days a month and make millions while sleeping in their mansion? They should work for a living too.
- FatherG, on 10/10/2007, -0/+19Exactly what system is falling apart? Corporate whoring of musicians? Music was written, performed and enjoyed for hundreds of years for little or no cost. Paying to attend a performance at the theater, commissioning a /custom/ piece of music and private performances/tutoring sure but paying to own the music itself?
You just know wandering minstrels were loaded /sarcasm - BillGod, on 10/10/2007, -0/+19The system will fall apart and people will quit making music?? My band has been together for 4 years. we have 3 cd's that we paid for and give out for free. the last club we played out paid us $36. We still practice regularly and make new songs all the time. It has NOTHING to do with it.
- meshman, on 10/10/2007, -7/+25Meanwhile, kids from Canada say, "Downloading music is illegal? Not here it isn't."
- Tyr7BE, on 10/10/2007, -1/+18So simply use another metric in addition to tracking CD sales. Guage the artist's relative popularity by google hits, by prominence on file sharing networks, and by number of recent hits. The live show is still where the real bacon is brought in. A good musician playing live shows can pull in more than most people in professional careers (and I know, my brother is a professional jazz musician and I'm an engineer, and there are months where he can pull in double what I do if he gets high-paying concerts).
- Yatti420, on 10/10/2007, -0/+17Agreed, but don't we all teach our parents these days?!
- spriggig, on 10/10/2007, -0/+16Musicians really are the victims in all this, always have been. They are talented artists with zero business training, ripe for the picking.
Also, how many effing times do I have to buy the same friggin' song? I bought it on vinyl, I bought it on CD, I bought it on MP3 and the artist is long dead and gone so where is my money going? Not to him.
We need a much flatter system: music comes out, money goes in the musicians pocket. Throw out the no-talent, grinning scum-bags in the middle. - idivine, on 10/10/2007, -2/+18ha ha that was funny :-) exactly how i feel.
- canewediggit, on 10/10/2007, -9/+2599% of artists aren't millionaires, they're broke. and do you know how concert venues book musicians? by tracking sales in their city. that's how they get an idea of the demand size and what venue can be filled. why don't you give away whatever product your company sells for free and find some other way to make a living?
- spyd3rweb, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15if the artists only incentive is dollar signs, then hes making art for the wrong reason, and the world would be better off without them.
- borninda818, on 10/10/2007, -1/+16no...he didn't
- TheHydrogens, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1799% of artists are also talentless hacks. Also, vendors could track downloads. If a product of mine could be distributed at no cost to myself and I could make money by just getting up on stage and performing, I certainly would. Especially considering the alternative is just bitching about it because people are obviously not going to stop downloading.
- MarkDykeman, on 10/10/2007, -30/+44At some point the system falls apart if people don't buy products through traditional channels, or at least pay for the music. Eventually the publisher, the writer, and the musician will lose incentive to produce content.
- canewediggit, on 10/10/2007, -6/+19i challenge any of you to release all of your company's ip and see how long you have a job for. should apple release all of the ip involved w/ the iphone? should ferrari release all of their design and engineering know-how? i hate the riaa as much as the next guy, but at least i'm not deluded enough to not know the difference between stealing someone's work and protesting a corrupt industry.
go buy some music from independent artists and act like a true music fan. - aadnk, on 10/10/2007, -1/+14Most of those medias existed before copyright. so I don't think we'll see the end of them, even if the money incentive (and frankly, it's the publisher, not the creator, that gets the most) is diminished. Besides, "Techno brega", among other things, shows that music can exist without care for copyright and still pay off.
- nepawoods, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12"At some point the system falls apart if people don't buy products through traditional channels ... Eventually the publisher, the writer, and the musician will lose incentive to produce content."
What is "traditional" changes, and when one system falls apart, another takes its place. The world certainly saw a lot of truly great music written and played long before our current traditional system was in place. Let it fall apart. There will always be great music. Maybe there will be less crap. - Langford, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12In this case, maybe it's better if the system does fall apart. It's kind of a bad system, so there is no reason to continue to destroy the rights and freedom of the world so that they can ruin art in a profitable way.
- Nosferatu05, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13i believe that's how the bloggers do it. Then they just put up advertising to make any money. sometimes change isnt an option
- wholly2b, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12The good Clear Channel Top 40 musicians? Good riddance.
- esbern1, on 10/10/2007, -2/+13what?
- realdeal83, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11Just dont use Symantec and you'll be fine....
- mikerand, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11Bands don't make much, if any, off their album sales anyway. Once they can bypass the labels and still get exposure it won't be a problem. They will still make their money off concert sales like they do now. The main thing is to be able to sell large amounts of $100+ tickets.
Notice that it's the labels that are freaking out, not most of the bands. - wholly2b, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11You deserve a round of applause for this comment. I wish I could digg you up a hundred times.
- Error601, on 10/10/2007, -4/+14Or just cease to exist. No sustainable market means the products become unavailable. Great for us that actually like to play and listen to live music. No more dumb ***** crowds that only want to hear a duplicate performance of some CD.
- ChromaVita, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9I think he's trying to say that kids don't have a ton of money, so it comes down to the decision of whether to download music, or not download music. Buying the CD isn't an option. In that situation the record label isn't losing a purchase to illegal downloads, they are simply gaining a listener that they wouldn't have had before.
- spyd3rweb, on 10/10/2007, -4/+12well no one else has said it yet...
***** THE RIAA!!! - higB, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9I guess kids these days saw one too many episodes of Cribs and thought "***** that ***** and ***** you" Frankly I can't wait for the overly inflated monetary incentive to make bad pop music to go away. Seriously.. the Ying Yang twins. I rest my case.
- knobtwiddler, on 10/10/2007, -3/+11YOU CAN NOT OWN BINARY NUMBERS
numbers != objects
recognize. - fragsta, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10They make the UK dudes look like idiots: "It wouldn't be on the Internet if it was like really illegal," whereas all the other Europeans gave straightforward and mature-sounding answers such as, from Finland, "Downloading is illegal, it is not punishable whereas sharing the files is punishable."
But I bet their answers weren't originally in English and a Finnish kid would've been understood by a Finnish person to have said something like "D00d illegil? U cnt b bustd 4 dat lol, but u cn b bustd 4 sharin ur war3z. LOL."
Oh and also, my favourite reason is this: “We pay because we are spending megabits!” - TTSkipper, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Hopefully once those music channels do break down, the only people who are still around will be the ones doing it because they enjoy it first and can make some money doing it as a bonus. This is already starting to show through with independent musicians and record labels. There is an amazing amount of complete and utter crap on the public airwaves dominated by the major labels. Concerts will probably be where the money is at for musicians in the future, no matter how good recording/playback technology gets, nothing beats being at a live venue to see a good musician, because the crowd can be as much a part of the show as the musicians are.
- vypergts, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Most of these "hacks" are also one-hit-wonders anyways. Stop focusing on album sales (most of them can't make more than one or two listenable songs) to determine popularity and stick to selling singles. Customers want a la carte shopping anyway.
- borninda818, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7lol...ridiculously true now that I think of it.
- Nodaki, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8I attend live venues/shows. If an artist wants my money then they should tour and put on a show for me. They are barking up the wrong tree if they think I'm going to pay money for recorded music with DRM attached to it. Besides the artist only gets a small sliver of the actual $$ from the sale of a CD.
I have no problem dropping 50-300 dollars on tickets plus an overpriced shirt on my favorite bands. Ditch your labels...go independent...share your recorded tunes with everyone...tour your ass off. There is ways of making money still, but asking the consumer to be ass raped for over-produced crap is not it. - sazai, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10Under the current system? Yes. But if this were the end all be all, do tell me why there's such a thriving indie market? Why hundreds of thousands of musicians are recording music right now, right this instant, for no pay? And why many of those same artists have figured out ways to actually make cash off their work outside of the RIAA, without selling albums, and without international ad campaigns?
Oh. Right. Because you don't need that. - prometheanspark, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7It won't get to that point because live performances will always be in demand.
- jankind, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Real musicians will never stop making "content". It will only further drive the independent spirit and weed out all the whores.
- VeganG, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7"Singers and actors are rich enough"
If we're not talking about the top 1%.... They don't make as much as you think, kids. - bdurkin, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8This was a waste of time. "In other news people look at porno on the internet". No ***** kids are downloading music. WTF?
-
Show 51 - 100 of 301 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is