the future of the music industry...
and where does it go from here folks?
last week, sony bmg announced that they have "...quietly slipped about a million discs by 10 different artists -- whom they won't name -- into the market featuring anti-piracy technology from some United Kingdom company called First4Internet. This new technology totally stops you from making more than a few copies of a disc, and it also stops your friend from making a copy of his copy." (tiny mix tapes news) this technology is also NOT COMPATABLE WITH IPODS. what a mistake. warner and universal have avoided this technology because they fear the backlash of the thousands of ipod owners. i dont blame them.
and then just a couple days ago, the riaa won a case against grokster in a major p2p suit, making it legal for corporations to sue the inventors of p2p services.
but really the best thing for the industry to do is to EMBRACE the technology that millions of people are using, instead of shunning it. either that or go back to vinyl....
last week, sony bmg announced that they have "...quietly slipped about a million discs by 10 different artists -- whom they won't name -- into the market featuring anti-piracy technology from some United Kingdom company called First4Internet. This new technology totally stops you from making more than a few copies of a disc, and it also stops your friend from making a copy of his copy." (tiny mix tapes news) this technology is also NOT COMPATABLE WITH IPODS. what a mistake. warner and universal have avoided this technology because they fear the backlash of the thousands of ipod owners. i dont blame them.
and then just a couple days ago, the riaa won a case against grokster in a major p2p suit, making it legal for corporations to sue the inventors of p2p services.
but really the best thing for the industry to do is to EMBRACE the technology that millions of people are using, instead of shunning it. either that or go back to vinyl....
Labels: Music
posted by Tim at 10:27 AM
9 Comments:
You beat me, Tim! I was going to make a post about this. There is an unsteady future in the works now.
Soulseek, the program I use to download, is run by one guy out of his living room. I wouldn't be surprised if he takes the whole thing down in the next few days to avoid being raided/sued/arrested (who knows?).
I agree with you. There needs to be a compromise, because we - music listeners - love this "taste test" thing. I've bought more CD's since I started heavily downloading two years ago than my whole life probably. And I couldn't be happier with ALL the music I have these days. I can't imagine suddenly being cut off from that supply.
And with low paychecks and high living expenses, people our age who NEED music can't afford to buy a huge amount of CD's. What will we do?!
I think Sony's combustible mp3 idea is good - this is the first i've heard of it. Where can I read more about it?
All I hope for is that some super internet software person creates a program to break the code that stops the files from being shared. That person will be my personal hero :)
check out tinymixtapes.com they have had some good stories run about this recently.
I guess in a way programs like Itunes are trying to embrace new technology -- while still trying to make a buck.
I can't blame musicians for wanting to make money -- but this is more a push from the labels who make millions to begin with.
this is such a dicey subject. i read the TMT article (ps. i forgot how much i like that site) and it has all these things about how the Supreme Court ruling could actually be a good thing for non-coporate p2p services like Soulseek. And then how even if they come up with a way to attack p2p services, the smartass programmers will just find a quick runaround and instigate another three years of court stuff.
And, you're right, Shawn, it's the major labels making the most noise. Indie labels barely break even to begin with, they WANT more people to be able to hear their music. But, still, a band like The Arcade Fire were so huge last year and probably could have sold thousands more records. A lot of young indie musicians still have dayjobs and those guys want to make money. So, it's tough.
I, for one, believe with the insane capitalism in our country, art (read: music, literature) should at least be paritally free. Because it's art. It's not gas or food or clothes, it's something made from the heart, for the heart. How can you put a price on that? I've published stories online now and made zero dollars but am SO happy that people can finally read my work. But I wouldn't deny a check for a novel or a story.
You all should read this village voice article -- it will make you feel much better.
http://www.villagevoice.com/blogs/riffraff/archives/2005/06/the_supreme_cou_1.php
i do feel better. thanks, shawn.
lots of yummy links in that article, too. will read more after work.
this is really interesting to me b/c i work for a trade association that represents all video game companies. we viewed grokster as a big triumph. i'm torn, on the one hand, i think it would be wonderful to be able to "taste-test". and i do think that bloated record labels need to tone it down a bit with their whining. however, at the same time, the IP law student part of me balks at the idea of people freely downloading copyrighted material and sharing it with their friends for free, at the expense of the artists (and yes, the labels) who are entitled to reap the profits from their popularity.
after reading the grokster opinion and concurrences, i think the supreme court came to the right decision. it's not a blow for technological advancement across the board. it's a warning to entrepreneurs who market their software as a means to infringe intellectual property. a company that creates some software that has a legitimate, non-infringing use should not be afraid as long as the company does not encourage/advocate/promote infringement. i think that's just fair to all parties.
Julie -- in a way my law student side definetly agrees with you. The court has to protect the copyright interests. i guess that is the whole point of the copyright.
And now a new loop hole - fake that you don't intend to promote file sharing and you should have no problems (until the next supreme court ruiling). Or just base your company outside the US and the lack of jurisdiction can save you.
Maybe artists should be promoting the free taste test on their own. On their own websites they can provide downloads that expire after 15 days. If you want to hear it again - go buy the album. Of course my cheap ass wouldnt buy the album. And again I bet there is going to be someone who can break that 15 day code. hmmmm
Post a Comment
<< Home