Music Bullshit of the Highest Order
[ rakaur on Fri Mar 28 at 11:25 AM // category: music, technology // comments: 1 ]
So, a while ago, someone thought “Hey, this whole suing everyone thing isn’t going so well. How about we just make ISPs charge everyone $5 per month, because everyone is stealing!” This is evil and bullshit of the highest order. However, apparently this has caught on, and people are actually considering it now.
[The music industry] has shrunk to a $10 billion business from $15 billion in almost a decade. Compact disc sales are plummeting as online music sales skyrocket.
Oh god, how can they live on that? Seriously? They expect us to feel bad because they went from “just an ungodly amount of money” to “just a shitload of money.” CD sales are going down because CDs are a pain in the ass. Online sales are going up because they’re cheaper—you don’t have to pay for the medium. Also, last time I checked, online music sales are still sales. (Update: This is the way the article used to read, but they’ve changed “music sales” to “music downloads.” How nice of them.)
“If I tell you to go listen to this band, you could pay, or you might not. It’s pretty much up to you. So the music business has become a big tip jar.”
Yeah, a tip jar that collects more tips in one day than money I’ll make in my entire life.
Nothing provokes sheer terror in the recording industry more than the rise of peer-to-peer file-sharing networks.
Which, when translated, means “Guys, we know our business model doesn’t work out anymore. At first we just ignored it but then we thought ‘Oh shit, which way does time go?’ So instead of spending some money and changing to keep up with the times, we’d rather bitch and moan and sue everyone, and if that doesn’t work, force everyone with an internet connection to pay us.”
According to Internet World Stats, there are 215,935,529 Internet subscribers in the U.S. At $5 per month, that’s $1,079,677,645 or over a billion dollars per month. Yeah, I can see why they like this idea. Even if it’s opt-in, and only 1/4 of people choose this option, that’s still nearly $270 million per month.
The plan—the boldest move yet to keep the wounded entertainment industry giants afloat—is simple: Consumers will pay a monthly fee, bundled into an internet-service bill in exchange for unfettered access to a database of all known music.
In reality, building a database of “all known music” really means “all music owned and/or controlled by the RIAA.” Fuck you guys, really.
-- rakaur // 2008.03.28 @ 11:25 AM
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://mt.ericw.org/mt-tb.cgi/297
1 Comments
Comment #8
[ sycobuny on Fri Mar 28 at 12:34 PM ]
So, as someone who absolutely detests the way the music industry is handling itself, I have to say that unfortunately this is probably the best deal anyone might get out of it. Naturally, I’m referring to the option of having the service be opt-out.
Unfortunately, at some point the costs of producing and advertising the music will have to reach the consumer, or the industry will consume itself. I think the way they’ve gone about suing the pants off their customer base is completely without merit or redeeming qualities. But, from their perspective, you may as well be grabbing the CDs from the store and walking out without paying. I don’t mean that to sound like a defense of their actions; as I said they are reprehensible.
I know there are examples of artists putting up CDs on the Internet and just asking for donations. Radiohead and Nine Inch Nails spring to mind as the shining examples. The problem? Everyone already knew Radiohead and Nine Inch Nails. Radiohead and Nine Inch Nails are already rich and can afford their own production of high-quality work. Jim, Jack and Johnny from the local tavern who’ve been working at being the best local band ever (The Frumpy Daints) are known to some local fans. Until a record company from the despised establishment finds them and gives them a big deal to make a CD, they could offer up their music on their rinky-dink site for free and ask for donations. Their good buddy Sam and his girlfriend might make some donations and that would net them enough to pay for the site. It won’t make them $5 million.
The RIAA is a lumbering beast that, after being smacked down on the PR front for years due to its own bungling, is finally coming around to the realization that you can’t beat the consumers until they buy your product. It may seem like coercion, but in all honesty paying for a huge library of music as a service is not much different than paying an Internet service to use their connection to get the web. We’d all love for the industry to be like libraries: free and public. Unfortunately, music’s rebirth in the past century as a medium you can actually purchase and own rather than a performance art, has given rise to a capitalist leech known as the RIAA. You can either deal with it or not; but trying to wag your finger at the RIAA for not realizing the truth of their situation seems not to be as good of an idea when you can’t realize that self-same truth from the other side.
-- sycobuny // 2008.03.28 @ 12:34 PM
