RIAA is a joke!

W

white knight

Registered
Stealing music...many people bring it into an ethical debate. Me, I don't sweat the details because music should be free to begin with. Only artists like Metallica or Dr. Dre have good enough contracts with their respective labels to make any money of the sell of their albums. (Metallica is actually guilty of copyright infringment because inside the cd liner of "Garage Inc" they talk about sitting around their houses copying music onto blank tapes) Most artists (95% if not higher) make the majority of their money from merchandise sells and from tours. Bottom line is that when you buy a cd at the store you are lining the pockets of hegemon record labels. Money doesn't really have all that much to do with music guys! If its all about the money then it probably isn't the kind of music anyone should listen to anyways.
Lets stop and think here for a second....with millions and millions of users on multiple p2p platforms i theorize that it might take an awefully long time for the RIAA to "get you". The American legal system is already so backed up now, can you imagine how long its going to take the RIAA, using their current tactics, to make an impact on music piracy? I'll give you a hint....you'll probably be dead. New programs are already in the works to hide the identities and ip addresses of those who participate in file sharing. I wonder if it is possible that the think tanks at the RIAA think that by announcing war against file sharers, they will be able to stop piracy. Probably not. I love and use Apple products but i still don't use iTunes music store. Why? you might ask, well its just simply because i don't have to pay. If the artists were getting the money from cd sells it would be a different story. As a musician myself I am painfully aware that while record companies make some things easier, most of the time they just make things harder. Don't let their sobs trick you into paying them money. The artists are making the music, not the record labels. PAY THEM! So i guess the answer to the original question is NO. No i don't think i will stop downloading music. After all, if its good enough for Metallica, its good enough for me
 
This is an arguable topic but ill give what i believe is right.


It all began when you could record your tracks onto tapes, and consumer stereo players had the ability to record those tapes - it should have been left for PRO's and pro systems only. In that sence i agree music did begin to dig its own grave. There should have been some kind of legal analogue transfer service with record stores at least.


Next it will most probably be illegal to hide ip address identities. The legal system is quite new for internet and is still in development. so if RIAA is smart thay WILL do that. Try and get a drivers licence/passport without any proof/evidence of who you are....or..... telling them you have a home but no address....sounds very dodgy hey..

The reason record companies make money is to promote there artists eg: tv, print, magazine, etc. 1) so that you recognise an artist. 2) you purchase the artists song. kind of like its own economic system.

So how is an artist going to be promoted if nobody knows who they are? Nobody will buy there songs. They start with barly anything and need money right? and even if artists did start a download service them selves it wouldnt work, because it would end up capitalising on one artist and the little guys (other artists) would be having trouble catching up - This is why we need record companies to splash around many flavours of talent in many forms of music types, and to start up those bands/groups/artists to have world wide recognition..

thus i welcome the iTunes music store

Well done Apple, and Thankyou..........
 
Quicksilver, your praise has one flaw, which you, yourself, pointed out. They use some of the money on making us hear about the artist. Now, you'll probably agree that instead of promoting 5 bands and putting out 5 different CDs, they would make more money on promoting one band, to sell five times as many of that CD.
This, ALSO, makes it very hard for the new/little guys...and it is exactly what they are doing.
 
Well - if no one knew who Shakira or Ricky Martin (or just ANY musician) was, no one would buy their music.

As the cassette recorders exist, RIAA should have ALL the RADIO stations closed. Radios share their music FREE with thousand of listeners they don't know. So you can get your copy of music from the radio to a cassette, or to a cd or dvd or as am mp3 too.

The reasons for shutting down p2p apply to closing radios too. But if you wouldn't listen to your music in the radio, once more you didn't know who you want to buy.

White Knight - how do you suggest to pay directly to the artist? Not all artists make concerts (assuming they get a higher percentage of concert income than of record sale).

Interesting legislations btw - in Italy they rose the taxes on cds, dvds, hard drives (thus computers) earlier this year. Why? The logic behnd it: they think EVERYBODY uses cds, dvds and their hard drives to store illegal mp3s, warez (and porn?). Thus you ae considered guilty as default. At least that makes it so much easier to choose what to bring as souvenirs (cds, blank dvds etc).

The money rosen with that piracy-cd tax - i wonder how they are going to use it? that for sure does not go to the artist as no one knows who the artist is. My favorite artist for sure will not get any of it - he died in the 1990s.

As porn is one of the other industries that are harmed (???) by p2p things - why hasn't the porn business started similar cases against the p2ps claiming that people don't anymore buy as much porn as they did before the rise of p2p?

Enough polemics of me today ... don't take the above text as straight opinions - i'm just trying to undo the logic riaa uses. Then - what if everyone would even forget their radios and just buy a guitar or a piano or a marranzanu and start to play music for the pleasure of it? You don't have to OWN a piece of note or paper or cd to play that with your guitar. ;)
 
they are just greedy, i though music was about speaking your mind and getting a point across, not making money. And if if someone is not going to buy your music, wouldn't you want the exposure of allowing to get it for free?
 
Originally posted by blastic
i though music was about speaking your mind and getting a point across, not making money.
Click to expand...

Yes. When the Boston Pops performed the Jurrasic Park theme song the other day, they were really trying to "say" something :rolleyes:
 
I'll say my 2 cents here - if you own high quality audio equipment (hint - not anything from Best Buy) you will instantly notice that MP3s are really quite lousy. There is no comparison to a well recorded CD (and even CDs come up short to LPs, but let's not go there now). I have about 8 grand into my audio equipment and I know I am nuts (though there are some who spend far far more), but there is really good audio equipment out there for less. I enjoy purchasing new and used CDs and LPs for music first and for the sound quality too.

Musicans should make money for their work, just like authors of books should make money for their work, but prices are absurd. 20 bucks for a CD - and with some old jazz reissues and other music, the artist is DEAD. The recording industry is screweing it all up themselves. They failed to be creative (like so many of their "artists") in finding ways to use new technology. They could be making plenty of fast nickels when they are stuck on trying to make slow dimes. Still, I hate to say it, but if there was a better high res format than MP3, I would find it hard not to be downloading all day! :)
 
Me, I don't sweat the details because music should be free to begin with.
Click to expand...

You really think that? Do you think that someone else is entitled to whatever artistic output you put forth and offer no compensation in return? Do you understand what Capitalism is?

Musicians deserve to get paid for their works. The problem is the record companies are outdated middlemen who needlessly rape the profits from album sales, and the artist usually gets screwed. Hopefully, the day will come soon, when artists can deal directly with Apple and the other digital delivery services, and bypass the greedy, useless record making machine.
 
Originally posted by karavite
I hate to say it, but if there was a better high res format than MP3, I would find it hard not to be downloading all day! :)
Click to expand...

i am not an audio nut, but I thought that mpeg4 AAC is a higher quality format. Maybe not true cd quality, but better sound at less size.

http://www.apple.com/mpeg4/aac/
 
Originally posted by dave17lax
i am not an audio nut, but I thought that mpeg4 AAC is a higher quality format. Maybe not true cd quality, but better sound at less size.

http://www.apple.com/mpeg4/aac/
Click to expand...
Yeah. There's ogg vorbis, aac, wm9 (or whatever) and countless others. Are you old enough to remember the VHS vs Beta battle? Beta was superior, but VHS won because more people supported it. Just like mp3.
And besides, there's not much of a difference between them to change Dave's, or any audiophile's mind.
 
what about the fact that you would never have heard of these bands without record companies. like them or not the record folks are who get the music to you!

so the artists dont get the money. they are definately getting something from the deal otherwise they wouldnt sign would they?

think about it. your local bands may be alright, and every now and then one makes it big on their own. but if you can honestly say that the music industry doesnt need the record companies you are fooling yourself.

i welcome anyone to give an argument that is anything new. i understand you dont want to pay. congrats. i dont want to pay either. but i'm not going to sit around and bitch because the people who get the music to me want to make some money.

you riaa haters are amazing. for some reason its all about you. its not.
 
Here's an interesting analogy. Artists are like farmers, and music is like the crops they produce. Now, what people like Serpico are suggesting is that the farmers should sell their produce directly to us, the consumers.

However, have you ever tried getting oh, maybe a million people to distribute food to over 300 million people? (I live in the US, therefore I use numbers for the US)? It's damn near impossible for them to do it on their own. The middleman in this case is the plethora of grocery stores spanning the nation (and world).

However, who do you think makes profit off the groceries you buy? The farmers? Hardly. They barely make enough to plant new crops and live on their own. The grocery stores, the companies like Raley's and Ralph's (and all the others, because every region has its own grocery stores) buy and distribute the food, and they profit off it immensely. However, I see little fervor to get farmers to sell you food directly, aside from small ventures like Farmer's Market or produce stands. The majority comes from the grocery stores.

The problem with this model and with the record industry is that the distributors suck the profits down and the people who create the product, the artists and farmers, get shafted by a cornstalk. What the record industry should do is charge, for a CD, the cost of production, a dollar profit for the artist, a dollar profit for the label, and a dollar profit for the retail store (I haven't seen any Warner, Universal, or BMG stores, have you?). That should come out to, at the extreme, $7 for a CD. Does that sound reasonable to you?
 
An artist gets less than a dollar. If a CD is 20 $ .. calculate 1-2 % of that for the artist. That sucks. (Cents!!!)


I like the independent supermarkets. Caputo's, and some mexican stores. Now I get 20 limes for 1 $ .. I don't even want to think what the artist .. err, farmer, gets from the purchase!
 
Originally posted by MikeXpop
Are you old enough to remember the VHS vs Beta battle?
Click to expand...

I look to the simpsons, "Oh No...Beta".

Originally posted by cf25
i dont want to pay either. but i'm not going to sit around and bitch because the people who get the music to me want to make some money.

Click to expand...

My favorite band is a local (well, TX) band and the reason they are well known around here is that they did a snoop dog cover (they are an alternative country band). Once you are hooked by that song, they really reel you in with their real stuff.
The first record company they were with actually went under, and another picked them up. I learned of them only through the internet, since it was very hard to find their cd's in Sherman, where I was in school at the time, or in Dallas, the closest big town. Recently, they have become big enough that their cd's are sold in stores in the major TX markets. This is the kind of music that is not only a joy to be a fan of, it is a joy to discover.
I ran a decent carracho server of their music for a few months (RIAA come and get me) because I felt like I should provide the same service to those out there that may be interested in the real music that they make...not just snoop covers. I have bought about half of their albums because I really want to support them, and was able to "hang" with them a few weeks ago in San Francisco after a show.
This is the type of thing that makes me dislike the RIAA. I am actually helping them grow their niche, yet they would nab me for what I have done/been doing.

wtg, arden, I might double my CD purchases!



www.thegourds.com ...Music for the unwashed and wellread.

PS could someone from the Apple Music Store puleez add The Gourds to the inventory?

Edit: fixed cf25's name to....cf25
 
Well, EMI just released its projections for the year and cd sales are expected to be down by 5-8%. There is speculation that the big five will end up being the big 3 and maybe even the big 2.

What will undoubtedly happen is that they will sign fewer bands and those bands looking for a label will start to search out smaller labels. The costs of production have dropped substantially in the last few years and producers don't carry the weight they once did. The big 5 will continue to pay their executives bloated salaries and promote bands less and less and the small guys along with iTMS and other digital distribution companies will take over the market. The record companies will start to sell their libraries to raise cash and they will be forced to jump on the bandwagon or go under.

Napster changed the world and the record companies circled the wagons and started shooting everything in sight until Apple came along. Whose fault is it that they resisted new technology to the point of their own demise?
 
Originally posted by voice-
Quicksilver, your praise has one flaw, which you, yourself, pointed out. They use some of the money on making us hear about the artist. Now, you'll probably agree that instead of promoting 5 bands and putting out 5 different CDs, they would make more money on promoting one band, to sell five times as many of that CD.
This, ALSO, makes it very hard for the new/little guys...and it is exactly what they are doing.
Click to expand...

An idea for the little guys
lets see what happens if we put a couple of unknown bands from wherever on the iTunes music store, i think thats a good idea for the little guys to get a bit of exposure...... mabey a subscription fee would apply but at least they might sell a couple of songs or if there lucky apple could promote a good song online...Mabey they could hit it BIG at no: 1
 
Maybe Apple could have a Song of the Week feature, with different bands every week. Or Band of the Week... or Album of the Week.....
 
what about the fact that you would never have heard of these bands without record companies. like them or not the record folks are who get the music to you!
Click to expand...

I don't listen to pop music (which is banal trash nowadays anyway), so I'm not the poster boy for this, but...

There was a time when signing with a big label meant that they would promote your band/act and you would slowly gain exposure as a result of their push to get you played on radio. Many times they would also front the money (but you would be expected to pay it back) to create a video for your single, if you had one.

That time has long since gone for all but the most marketable bands out there now. Major labels are no longer interested in cultivating new artists. They leave that business to the indie labels. Most acts that get signed nowadays get released from their contracts soon after the first album is released, if they are lucky. The labels use these acts primarily as tax writeoffs.

Flash forward to the year 2003. I don't watch MTV to discover new music because all they show is reality TV progamming aimed at testosterone laiden teenagers, with a one hour request show aimed a 14 year old girls. VH-1 isn't much better these days either. Fuse (formerly MMusic USA) is a ray of hope. I've actually discovered a couple of bands from this channel, but it's still not very groundbreaking.

Radio in general is a complete mess. Through consolidation, only a few companies now own the bulk of the radio market. Everything is pigeon holed now - your 50/60's station, your 70/80's station, your hip-hop R&B station, your "new rock" station that lost it's balls over 10 years ago, and maybe a retro metal station if your lucky (unlucky, depending on your tastes). There are maybe a handful of stations throughout the country today who take a chance on breaking new music. I can think of two - KROQ in LA, and WFNX in Boston.

Most music afficianado's today discover new music through the internet. Amazon's site is a boon in that it allows you to look at an artist you like, and see what other people bought when they bought that artist. They also have the "may we recommend..." option, which groups like minded music together. iTunes Music Store will have similar capabilities, once it's been in use for a while longer and it's database is more mature.

Other avenues like Spinner.com and other internet based radio stations have been influential as well..

But the days of the record company breaking in new acts through radio and video are long over for all but the blandest, easiest to market acts geared towards teens with no taste.

I am now stepping off my soapbox...
 
I'm certain of two things:
1) Gia hates Shakira :p
2) I'll never get arrested for sharing a bunch (define bunch: 50 or so) of albums on a network I won't tell you about. I'm in France, BTW :rolleyes:
 
Originally posted by serpicolugnut
I don't watch MTV to discover new music... Fuse [...] I've actually discovered a couple of bands from this channel, but it's still not very groundbreaking.

Radio in general is a complete mess. Through consolidation, only a few companies now own the bulk of the radio market. Everything is pigeon holed now... There are maybe a handful of stations throughout the country today who take a chance on breaking new music.

Most music afficianado's today discover new music through the internet.

Other avenues like Spinner.com and other internet based radio stations have been influential as well.

But the days of the record company breaking in new acts through radio and video are long over for all but the blandest, easiest to market acts geared towards teens with no taste.
Click to expand...
The biggest boon to my discovering new music in the past ten years has been getting Sirius Satellite Radio (http://www.sirius.com/). In the six months that I've had it I've discovered more "new" artists than I had in the six years preceding it.

First of all there is the huge selection of musical choices presented by 60, nationally available music "stations". Add to that point that all of those 60 are completely free from commercials and ads so you don't have to worry about them only playing the music which is acceptable to their advertisers and promises to pull in the biggest bucks. And something I have discovered in listening to many of their streams is that the DJs they hire actually love the music they are playing and care about the job they do. They aren't just button pushers that activate set playlists put together by one or two programming directors for markets and regions.

My wife works for Clear Channel (one of the few companies that controls all of radio) and she sees how much of a corporate whore-house radio has become. CC owns something like 1,500 radio stations nationwide and a relatively small group of people control what all of those stations play. And of course those people are "suits" who don't actually care about the music, but only about getting the most ad dollars. You can hear them talking about all of the listener polls that they come up with but I promise you that they all go the same place -- a landfill.

So while I agree that the RIAA is guilty of gross crimes against the state of music I think equal guilt must be attributed to their industry accomplices who further agenda and help to put the money behind it. The RIAA is a pack of evil bastards, no doubt, but Clear Channel, Infinity Broadcasting, Viacom, MTV, etc. are all helping them to get rich doing it, and getting rich themselves.

As it happens this is one of the best reasons to choose Sirius as your satellite radio provider rather than XM (if you are considering getting one). One of XM's major stock holders is Clear Channel, so buy using that service you are supporting CC as much as if you were listening to your regular broadcast radio, only with XM you are guaranteeing that they will be getting some of your money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top