What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Give a Genuine Gibson Guitar for $99 (Price, Not a Typo) view!
bestbuy.com - World-class starter guitar--sweet sound, killer craftsmanship and yeah, you read that price right.
371 Comments
- jdutil, on 04/21/2009, -10/+555More people would like to buy music they know they like than for people to buy music they have never heard. ***** You RIAA. I support my artists, but not their extortionists.
- jparkinson, on 04/21/2009, -3/+318Personally, I always buy albums that I enjoy.. I just don't trust artists enough to risk $20 on music I might absolutely hate.
My CD collection was about 13 CD's 8 years ago when I started pirating music, today I own over 400 purchased albums... simply because I have found a huge number of bands I love because I pirated their albums first. - abbathdoom, on 04/21/2009, -3/+229I want a business model where musicians don't have labels, but instead hire marketing companies that work for them. The artists choose what business model they want to use be it CC or whatever, but the key part is all the money generated goes to the artist, who then pays off his employees like his tour manager and whatnot. Once its like this I will be more likely to pay for music as I'd feel like I am directly contributing to the artists income, not keeping a broken business model afloat that extorts everyone, consumers and musicians alike.
- Soval, on 04/21/2009, -28/+179Correlation isn't causation. This only shows that people who like music will use different methods to obtain it. It does not show that downloading music over P2P networks causes more CD sales or the other way around. They are just to effects of the same cause: fondness for music.
- non00b, on 04/21/2009, -2/+112Wait wait.. are they saying that people who listen to more music buy MORE music? Fascinating.
*Looks are pile of vinyl records originally sampled as mp3 files before purchase* - kingofthisnight, on 04/21/2009, -3/+89I usually "borrow" a CD from a torrent site, decide whether or not I like it, and go out and buy it based off how good the CD was. I am a sucker for album artwork, the lyrics book, and anything that might come with it.
- inactive, on 04/21/2009, -0/+73there used to be a time when radio preformed that function. they did it to themselves with payola.
- 0tis, on 04/21/2009, -2/+63Because they think it's worth paying the artist for their work?
- FearlessFreep, on 04/21/2009, -3/+63"..they go out and pay for something they already have."
Integrity? - donte, on 04/21/2009, -14/+72Sorry guys, I'm with the record companies on this one. Why are we going to let things like "data" and "statistical analysis" and "reasonable conclusions" get in the way of making money the good old fashioned way -- in court!
- BooLag, on 04/23/2009, -0/+55Nor was that the argument made...
- secrity, on 04/21/2009, -0/+55The ability to hear new, non-top 40 music on radio has gone away with the demise of independant and college radio stations. In the 1970's there were TONS of independant radio stations, many of which played a very eclectic mix of music; there are virually none now.
- shutaro, on 04/21/2009, -6/+60***** THE RIAA!
- runningraleigh, on 04/21/2009, -2/+52Artists deserve to get paid...I just wish I could pay the artists without paying the labels...
- QuadraticMan, on 04/21/2009, -0/+47I pirate music to test it it, so to speak. If I like it, I buy it. If it sucks, I delete it.
I bought about $230 on iTunes in the past year. - diemunkiesdie, on 04/21/2009, -3/+48Truthfully, I am shocked. People here always said that downloading music has led to them buying more music, but I never really believed them!
- dhughes, on 04/21/2009, -0/+39 Traditional Somali music sales are up 10,000% since last year.
- inactive, on 04/21/2009, -2/+40I bought so much music off Amazon and iTunes after I graduated college... I was thinking... a few cents isn't that much for one song... but it all adds up tho, at an affordable rate, but still adds up to a lot of money.
I mean a part of me still want to just open that DC++ or some Torrent program and download by the albums... but there's another voice that says "don't be a cheap bastard, you're working now, just buy that *****." - inactive, on 04/21/2009, -6/+43^stop calling it "stealing". It's not stealing, it's copyright infringement.
- inactive, on 04/21/2009, -2/+38@Gguillorn
It's simple economics. If you don't support a band you like, they'll stop making music. Do you really think people are too stupid to figure that out? - BenTheTank, on 04/21/2009, -2/+37This is absolutely true in my case. Downloading music has always led me to discover and appreciate new music I would have never heard otherwise. Which in turn resulted in me buying more CDs and concert tickets; as well as recommending the music to friends.
- Novagenesis, on 04/21/2009, -1/+34Agreed.
Nor was it necessary.
Simple correlation is circumstantial (or more) evidence that music piracy isn't a simple issue where piracy directly contributes to lost sales.
The magic number, of course, is what percent of music sales are purchased by someone who has already pirated that album. That would be an almost undeniable causation. - Keegsta, on 04/21/2009, -3/+32"Try before you buy" is the way i see it......
- astrotrain, on 04/21/2009, -2/+29Yeah the labels seemt o take 98% of the profit, and give the pennies to the artist.
Then when the artists say "wheres me money mr big record label punk!?" the labels look around for a scape goat, and blame piracy, and then try to be "buddy buddy" with the artist/group and go suing the so called "pirates". - Aleman360, on 04/21/2009, -1/+24I've found that the subscription services (I use Zune Pass) give the best of both worlds: legal all you can eat music, very convenient downloading and search services, quality encodings, easy discovery of new stuff, etc.
And it's only $15 per month, so I really have no excuse whatsoever to pirate anything. I also use Pandora for when I forget my player.
Now if only all of the subscription services settled on a standard format that was cross-compatible with all hardware... - lyonsban, on 04/21/2009, -1/+23@Gguillorn
It happens all the time.
In the last 3 months -
I don't like music, but the only reason I went out and bought the Firefly series is because I liked the Serenity movie I downloaded. I also bought the collectors edition Serenity movie. I bought the full Stargate 1 and Atlantis series, only after downloading them. I will only watch Stargate Universal when it comes out because I downloaded the first season of SG1 and SGA. I originally thought those series sucked based on the 15 minutes or so I watched on television, so it is -only- because I downloaded them that I am now an interested "fan". - Platypus3333, on 04/21/2009, -5/+27When someone creates something, they have the right to determine, no matter how inefficiently, how it is distributed and who gets to copy it. The only reason this is up for debate is because, in this situation, the actual creators have sold their rights to third parties which have proven abusive.
It seems to me the debate is then whether a creator has the right to sell off his rights in his creation. - Ender008, on 04/21/2009, -0/+21/facepalm
- zizzybaloobah, on 04/21/2009, -0/+20As stated in the article - it's consumers cherry picking the single tracks the want vs. buying entire albums that is sending sales into the toilet -- not the illegal downloaders.
I worked for a company once that refused to open their the eyes to reality of the market changes they were facing. That company no longer exists. It can't come soon enough for the record companies IMHO. - inactive, on 04/21/2009, -0/+19Best and the most direct way to support your artist, and to find out if they're real performers or just a bunch of sound editing flakes, go to their live concerts!
- uberchaoslord, on 04/21/2009, -1/+19Thats because their audience is using the interwebs now.
- lyonsban, on 04/21/2009, -0/+18Not to mention the "ripped off" feeling that never goes away when you lay out good money for crap. It can ruin you on a band (or author in my case) forever. When you download it and it's crap, somehow it's not as irritating, you just delete it and move on. Because it's not on your shelf looking at you every time you look for some entertainment, you'll give the band (or author) another chance one day. There are maybe 3-4 authors that are on my "purchase on sight" list only because I downloaded them first.
- DanBoodro, on 04/21/2009, -1/+19Agreed. Anytime I find a new band, I usually tend to pirate a couple albums and then if I life them I go out and purchase their CD's and merch. I don't purchase too often with iTunes, only because I don't care much for the system they have in place. I buy music, stores on my computer, and then I reformat my computer every couple months, don't back up my music and lose it all. It'd be nice if iTunes had a system somewhat like what Valve uses with Steam. Buy it once, download it for life without having to go through hoops and ***** with Apple to get your damn music back.
- inactive, on 04/21/2009, -0/+17I, despite radio.
That's deep man - Hexxagonal, on 04/21/2009, -1/+17Vilago, you forgot about wanting pigs to fly.
- BrutePhysics, on 04/21/2009, -1/+17As much as pirating seems easy as hell it can be a pain to find exactly what you want. I've downloaded my fair share but in the end, if I have the cash, I prefer to buy the music because many times you get extras, you know exactly what your getting (no weak sound or skips), the format generally includes title, band name, genre, length and all that coding that helps you organize things in iTunes and whatnot.
Plus, if I like a band, I want them to succeed. I don't like the music industry cut though, if I could I'd just send the band and $10 check straight to their home lol. - inactive, on 04/21/2009, -3/+19people have to get a sample of new music for free because the radio does not do that any more. they only play what they are told to by clearchannel. (who is paid by RIAA Members) they only play crap.
- jos22, on 04/21/2009, -4/+20correction copyright laws WERE there for a good reason. but then IFPI, MPAA, RIAA got them changed to suite their needs and their needs only.
- MikeSD34, on 04/21/2009, -3/+176minuteabs may be wrong about the title of the act (and there by the nature of the act), but his intent is right. Just because you disagree with a products value, does not give you free license to not pay for it at all. If you think it costs more than you want to pay for it, you go with out. You don't have a right to the music/files/software. It's not yours to do whatever you want with.
You may not be depriving them of the money (if you wouldn't have paid for it anyway), or the product (because you're not stealing it, they're not without their copy), but you ARE taking ownership of something you did not pay for and doing it in a way that is morally and legally wrong.
Don't hold yourself on some high horse because you think their product costs too much. It's their product, and they can charge as much or as little as they'd like. If they lose customers or money because of that, it's their fault, but that does not give you the right to own their product without paying for it. - diggymow, on 04/21/2009, -3/+17And where do the artists get the money to pay these marketing companies exactly? People keep forgetting that without labels artists would still need to get a loan from somewhere and your local bank sure as hell isn't going to do it. Something like a label will always exist. I'm not saying the ones we've got now aren't abusing the artists they have but they are somewhat needed.
A band signed to a label will get their first record and tour loaned to them basically and they still sign for it because no one else out there will front the cash. They can't afford a marketing company when they have no money to start with. This whole concept of free records and make the money off tours and merch won't work because the band will never get the money to make and promote the album in the first place. I hate the labels as well but there will always be something like it out there. - coldkill3r, on 04/21/2009, -1/+15I always find the mp3 version of an album on google. If I like the album, I'll purchase it off of amazon and rip into flac.
- adnoiseam, on 04/21/2009, -0/+13I run a small music label. Nothing related to EMI, rather the kind that works 24/7 to promote artists and gigs, pay the musician, and have nothing to do with major labels, the RIAA or whatever.
I can speak only from my own experience and data: the sales of music on my label (all format put together: CD, vinyl and digital) seem to be inversely proportional to the amount of illegal downloads. Assuming that most piracy takes place in eastern Europe and China (that's the countries where the blogs linking to torrents come from), the most a release is pirated, the less it sells. The artists on my label sell more music (and play more gigs) in the countries where piracy seem less prevalent.
I was at a gig last year in Russia, where people told me that they were pirating tracks of vinyl EPs because the 8 or 9 Euro price mark was too high for these people. Shortly after that, I made the same releases available (legally) online for 2.50 Euro and went to russian blogs to ask people to support the music and the artists. Guess what, to this day I haven't sold one digital release to anybody in Russia. :(
So, yes, some people check the music by downloading it illegaly, then purchase it to support artists or small labels such as mine. But they are an exception. The availability of music online for free has created a generation that just doesn't care at all. I wish more people were ethical about this but, again, just speaking from experience, most aren't. - inactive, on 04/21/2009, -2/+14Did they actually monitor the buying habits or did they simply have them fill out a questionnaire?
- Memnochxx, on 04/21/2009, -0/+12Stop using limewire, get a good source of music.
- shadus, on 04/21/2009, -0/+12The article mentions it, but I think there's a lot of the concept people aren't buying the filler tracks they're not interested in.
They go download an album somewhere (or listen to the previews), they listen to it, decide what tracks they like and purchase only those tracks... where you used to be forced to copy off a friend or buy a full tape/cd... they made a ton of money off filler, in the online model they don't make any... revenue decreased? Duh, we're not buying 14/15 songs per cd most popular artists put out.
Big difference in revenue between $0.99-1.99 and ~$20. - dmbohn, on 04/21/2009, -1/+12go to their show
- astrotrain, on 04/21/2009, -0/+11I have no issues paying for music, its just when I pay for a song I want to be able to play it on what ever player I want, and no ***** DRM licensing that months or years down the line I loose my tunes to due to the company decides to "shut off their drm servers" one day (aka Yahoo and Walmart).
This is why I keep to AmazonMP3 for its non DRM *****, and also look for and pay for music from organizations that I know will go directly to the Artists such as from CD baby, Jamendo, OurStage, etc. - ToastPop, on 04/21/2009, -3/+14So instead you pay no money and leech from the artist entirely! I can't believe so many people think this argument is actually valid, you don't like the label so you take all the artist's work entirely. Just so you know, the artist would rather you pay for their music than not, so if that's your reasoning feel free to start paying.
- lasko, on 04/21/2009, -2/+13i'm guessing you've never been in a band, or a working band anyways. If you have you would understand that bands have to tour to make any money at all before they even think about recording a cd. with or without a label. even if the tour(s) are just weekend runs across your home state, it's building on your brand and establishing a fan base. you save the money from the horrible door split and decent merch night(except gas and food) and you do the same thing. you play 3-6 local shows a month with other locals bands month after month. soon enough, you have a $2,000 saved up. you can get a pretty damn good sounding ep for $2000 if you spend a week on it. bands have all the time in the world to make the money they need, it just takes persistance. bands don't need labels. labels need bands.
and why go through marketing companies? i feel like i'm the only one on digg that remembers the DIY days where you had to go to every show in your area and pass out fliers, give out tapes or cd's, do whatever you could to get kids to come to your show. now we have the internet where you can do all of that in your underwear but instead people say they need a marketing company. what you need is a good work ethic. to many people want the fame of being a rockstar without actually putting in any of the work. - shark72, on 04/21/2009, -0/+11@vilago: Amazon has about 150,000 MP3 albums for $5 or less:
http://www.amazon.com/499-Music/b/ref=amb_link_585 ...
...and another 36,000 albums for $5 - $6. All DRM-free.
I'm not sure I understand your logic about wanting the artist to be paid more; thus you pirate. If you buy the album for $5.00, the artists will get something (at least $0.80 in mechanical royalties; that's defined by law and the record label can't take that away). If you pirate it, the artist gets zero. -
Show 51 - 100 of 379 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is