Mephisto2

Interesting article, care of the BBC, on what is really affecting CD sales.

File swapping? I think not...


<<<<<<<<START QUOTE>>>>>>>>>
Stopping the pop-swappers
DOT.LIFE - the weekly guide to changing technology
By Mark Ward
BBC News Online technology correspondent

They used to say "home taping" was killing music, now it's meant to be internet downloaders. But the real pirates these days are crime bosses - and the rewards are plentiful.

The net has given rise to many novel ways of doing business but the methods of the Recording Industry Association of America has got every twisted e-commerce scheme beaten.

Last month, the association began suing hundreds of its customers. For the RIAA - which represents the major US recording companies - this makes perfect sense.

The people being sued are sharing music with millions of others via peer-to-peer networks such as Kazaa, Grokster and Morpheus.

This tidal wave of subpoenas is the latest in a series of steps the RIAA has taken to stop "file-sharing" which, it believes, is causing CD sales to fall through the floor.

According to the RIAA, CD sales dropped by 10% in 2001 and a further 6.8% last year, largely because of file sharing.

But the figures tell a different story.

In America and the rest of the world the biggest culprit in falling music sales is large-scale CD piracy by organised crime.

In just three years, sales of pirate CDs have more than doubled, according to the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI).

Every third CD sold is a pirate copy, says the federation.

The IFPI's Commercial Music Piracy 2003 report, produced in early July, reveals pirate CD sales rose 14% in 2002 and exceeded one billion units for the first time.

Not least in the East

The pirate CD market is now so big, $4.6bn (£2.86bn), it is "of greater value than the legitimate music market of every country in the world, except the USA and Japan".

In some countries it is hard to find legitimately produced CDs. Ninety percent of CDs in China, for instance, are pirate copies.

Counterfeiters have forced the price of a fake CD down to about $4, which only makes CDs in the music shops look even pricier.

Embarrassingly major record labels and distributors have been fined twice by the US Federal Trade Commission for price fixing their products.

However, pirates are not solely responsible for the crisis in the music industry. After all, it is actually producing CD titles.

Replacing vinyl

According to the RIAA's own figures, over the last two years the US music industry has produced 25% fewer CDs.

The peak of production was in 1999 when 38,900 individual titles were released. But by 2001 this was down to 27,000. Releases grew again in 2002 but were still below the previous high.

Musician George Ziemann says if only 3,000 copies of each of the "missing" CDs were sold, the fall in sales would be wiped out.

For Mark Mulligan, an analyst with Jupiter Research, the music is weathering a hangover after the 80s and 90s boom, when everyone was buying CD versions of their old vinyl records.

"Now the CD replacement cycle has drawn to a close," he says.

Also the global decline in CD sales is taking place against the background of a general economic recession that is depressing sales of almost everything.

After piracy and the production of fewer CDs comes the changing dynamics of the music industry.

Many of the people using file-sharing systems are looking for singles. By contrast the music industry is focussed on shifting albums.

This is reflected in sales figures. In the US sales of CD singles generate only a few percent of the total market. In the UK, it's 10% of all revenues.

Typically, singles are used to drum up support for an album, being hyped weeks in advance and played heavily on radio and TV long before they go on sale.

With nowhere to get these singles and no desire to buy an expensive CD album just for one song, it is no wonder many fans turn to file-sharing systems.

Finally, music just isn't as important to young people as it used to be. There is more competition than ever for the cash in a teenager's pocket.

"Youths are no longer defining themselves by music in the same way they used to," says Mr Mulligan.

New markets springing up

Now, he says, brands, clothing and lifestyle are as important as music.

Added to this is the rise of the mobile phone, the increasing popularity of computer games and DVDs.

In the past the music industry had young fans almost to itself. Now it has to compete for the limited cash in a young person's pocket like never before.

The music industry cannot hope to sue everyone using file sharing to find music as that would take hundreds of years and already the US legal system is complaining about the work the RIAA is heaping upon it.

There is no doubt that some piracy is going on via peer-to-peer systems but maybe not to the extent the RIAA fears. Perhaps it is about time they sang a different song.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/h...gy/3117505.stm

Published: 2003/08/04 10:46:15 GMT

<<<<<<<<<<END QUOTE>>>>>>>>>

Mephisto2

For the record, I don't file swap at all. I always buy CDs. But the actions and price fixing of the industry just pisses me off...

Mr Mephisto

Pragma

I do a small amount of file sharing, but I own a very large collection of CDs - though in recent years, very very few of them have been RIAA artists. I absolutely refuse to pay 20$ for a 10-track CD where I may like less than half the songs.

As for the "true reason for decline of sales", that's debateable. In foreign markets, especially Asia, yes, this will cause a massive drop, but I don't think that bootleg sales are large enough to be noticeable in the US. I think it's mostly that (a) the companies have stopped selling singles, (b) the economy is in a depression, and (c) they're filing tons of lawsuits against P2P companies and pissing off customers.

__________________
Eat antimatter, Posleen-boy!

juanvaldes

you forgot (d) nothing new is good (see new Metallica for evidence)

mepitans

Filesharing does nothing but promote CD buying for me. If I download a song and like it, then get a few more from the same CD and like them I will most definetly get the CD. If I get one song and like it, then download more and they suck, the music industry can fuck off for trying to charge me $20 for a shitty CD.

Pragma

juanvaldes, good catch. Definitely can't forgot about (d). I've been really disappointed with the last year or two's music (in the past year, less than 10 songs that I really enjoyed enough to debate buying. Unfortunately, not two songs were from the same artist, let alone album).

__________________
Eat antimatter, Posleen-boy!

billyball2

I bought a lot of CD's in the 90's to replace my collection of favorite stuff, but the prices of CD's have kept me away from newer releases. If I hear a song on the radio that I like I'll download it. I'll then download a few more by the same artist which are usually shit, so I delete them. It's rare that one album will contain more than 2 songs that I like. I guess I'm the guy that the RCIAA hates?

Jesus Pimp

I always try before I buy a CD. I used to buy a ton of cds back in the 90s, but now music has gotten so bad that I have to research my music before going out and spending my money.

__________________
Never date anyone who doesn't make your dick hard.

DEI37

The RIAA is killing CD sales. It's that simple. Just look at the price gouging, and music that they make the artists produce. If the bands could do what they wanted, we'd have less bands, I think, but far more good music.

__________________
Generally speaking, if you were to get what you really deserve, you might be unpleasantly surprised.

Mephisto2

To be honest, all these replies sound like the bleating excuses of pirates.

Nothing has changed since most of you "used to buy CDs in the 90's"...

Come on!

If you pirate music, because you're too cheap to buy it or are worried that you might only like one track, then don't come up with some lame excuse.

Like I said in my original post. I don't pirate. Same way as I don't steal from shops. It's illegal and it's wrong.

However, I'm intelligent enough to realise that the actions of the industry in price fixing just exacerbates this problem.

And, pirated CDs (not file-swapping) are the major reason sales have decreased. Just because it's not as rampant in the US as it is overseas doesn't mean it doesn't happen, or has little affect.

There's more to the world (and therefore, obviously, the global market) than North America.

Mr Mephisto

Pragma

I don't defend the fact that when I pirate songs, I'm infringing on copyrights. I know it's illegal. However, I don't feel remorse, for the reasons stated above (price fixing, poor quality of recent music, relatively small number of "good" songs per album, etc.)

And I understand very well that the global market is more than NA, but I was commenting on only US sales (which I believe I've seen cited in an RIAA anti-P2P document somewhere) that blamed the drop in NA sales directly on P2P.

__________________
Eat antimatter, Posleen-boy!

Mephisto2

Good. Then don't bitch when the law comes after you.




Well, if you don't feel remorse because the prices are fixed too high and there is some poor quality, then do you assign the same criteria to other products?

How about stealing some clothes from the Abercrombie & Fitch. They're overpriced...

Or Nike? They're WAY overpriced and they exploit 3rd world workers.

I think some cars are far too expensive. Guess (using your argument) I can go out and make off with them because, ye know, they're not really up to scratch...

That's a fair point.

But the discussion was based around the BBC article that specifically stated 1 in 3 CDs sold is now pirated globally.

Mr Mephisto

Pragma

Should I get a subpoena (which I won't, as I haven't ever used Kazaa, Morpheus, or Gnutella), I won't complain about how I didn't deserve it.

Depends on the product, really. I've got a very loose set of morals. Copyright infringement on music isn't physically stealing any items.

Don't wear A&F - can't abide by it. Fuck Nike, Adidas forever!

Not trying to be argumentative, just presenting my views. If CDs were cheaper, I'd buy a lot more (already I own several hundred - just none from the past 3 or 4 years that are owned by RIAA labels).

__________________
Eat antimatter, Posleen-boy!

Mephisto2

Addidas?!!

Man, Old Skool!!... hahah

No problem. Neither am I.

I'm provoking a discussion.

But it's true. I can't stand whinning teeny-boppers stealing, not accepting it and then coming out with silly arguments when they don't understand the issues.

You hit the nail on the head. If the prices were not so high, or "fixed", then demand would increase.

Mr Mephisto

Pragma

I'd say that the larger issue with everyone screaming that the sky is falling with the P2P lawsuits is that they refuse to take responsibility as it is - "I had to cheat to meet expectations", "Well, everyone does it, why don't they get in trouble, not me?", "The system made me do it!"

Fact of the matter is that everyone (who's sane) knows that at some level there is no such thing as a free lunch, so P2P file swapping had to hurt someone. Now that they're suddenly getting sued, they can't accept that and so are searching for any excuse in the book.

I'm sure that there's a large portion of users who'd continue using P2P apps, even if prices for CDs were dropped to 10$ a pop, but it's something that the RIAA should try, just to see how much their revenue improves.

__________________
Eat antimatter, Posleen-boy!

frankx

Four words:

crappy music

exhorbitant prices

__________________
Louisiana: We're Not ALL Drunken Cajun Wackos, But That's Our Tourism Campaign

Mephisto2

That's fine frankx.

So I presume that means you don't download pirated music then?

Mr Mephisto

MacGnG

yay, they sue "us" because "they" cant deal with their own shit!

too bad that article wont be on the front page of every newspaper and on every evening news broadcast. funny that its a BBC article tho.

nor will it be acceptable to use that in any of those court cases.

Achernar

I prefer to buy CDs and then to rip them for archival and general listening purposes.

The real source of the problem with music is that the music industry is learning that they can't ALWAYS tell people what is popular - which is the way it's been for a long time.

hobo

I don't listen to a lot of music. There are only really a few songs that I like, and they are old songs from a few years ago. I downloaded those because I don't know where else to get them. If I want to hear something new, I just turn on one of the many music TV stations I have and crank up the volume. We pay for cable, might as well use it.

I have downloaded a few newer songs though, but not to the extreme that people seem to be doing it now. I have like 30 mp3s maybe. That is like 2 CDs worth (but it is from assorted artists that I wouldn't get on 2 CDs). I'm fine with a really small collection because I don't like many songs and don't listen to music that often.

I too have found that music hasn't been that good lately. There aren't as many good songs and artists out there, or maybe it's because they are all manufactured by record labels to be exactly the same.

Locobot

Personally I support music and artists, not the Recording Industry. In fact I wish the Recording Industry ill. Pragma brought up some real and documented reasons for disliking the record industry: price fixing, stable thinning (fewer and fewer artists pushed more and more), and customer-hostile lawsuits but there are others. The major record labels (now all owned by 5 corporations) are bloated dinosaur fluff businesses especially in our multimedia age where anyone with a G4 could have their own record label.

The only thing about a record label that is intrinsically valuable is the talent: the musicians, writers, producers, and in some cases the recording engineers. A label can have all the executives, promo-people, paper pushers, marketers, accountants etc. but if it lacks the artists mentioned above its not worth, well, shit. Yet despite this, who takes the first biggest piece of the cd-price-tag pie? The execs and the people who make the cd "magic" happen. For every successful artist/group there are 100 (no exaggeration) who are swindled by the label ending up unpromoted and 100K+ in debt. The labels sign their artists early in their careers to binding contracts.

The system is unfair, harmful to artists, and limits diversity. That said, I do try to support smaller independant labels/artists, in cases where I know the money is getting to the artist. I buy independant cds from an independant record store. Major label cds I will buy used, copy from a friend, buy at an extreme discount direct from factory (a perk when you live 1 hour from where 25% of all cds are made), buy cheap pirated versions, steal, and download for free. I consider my choice a moral one. The question of copywright is moot as all major label artists sign their intellectual property rights over to the label.

Mr.Deflok

The decline in spirograph and the decline in the music industries profits have a direct correlation.

Speed_Gibson

all but 10 or so tracks of the 20+ GBs I have DLed is from Emusic - usually just buy LPs now (goodwill or other sources) or a very rare CD.
My biggest reason not to touch the P2P files is the overall shoddy quality - I am very picky when it comes to formats and quality. I find it much easier to buy the CD - or borrow it from a friend for a short while - and rip to flac or ape for archiving. If it is good I will buy it myself first before ripping. The last time I paid for music (last month) was for a live concert from livephish.com in the glorious flac format.

wwcd101

I think declining CD sales is actually a useful tool for the RIAA.

Regardless of the "real reason vs. stated reason" debate, at some point in time the recording industry had to deal with downloads.

And when that happened, we all had a pretty good idea it wasn't going to be nice.

Thanks for listening.

a2k

Rules are made by those in power to keep themselves in power. The RIAA is in power and has created a warped system that serves themselves and protects themselves. There's no reason to have musicians making hundreds of millions of dollars off of a slightly catchy hit that someone else wrote and they spent two weeks in a studio recording. There's even less reason to have record exec's making hundreds of millions because they own the promotion and distribution channels and have tweaked the market so that it is no longer free.

Arguments like "if nobody paid for music, artists would stop recording" are total BS. I'm a musician (dare I say "recording artist") and the most I've ever made in a year off of record sales and royalties was about $7000. I was psyched, but it brought no change in the ammount of music I produced. When the money dried up, the music didn't.

Downloading is stealing IF you buy into their system.

giblfiz

Wow, Deja Vu to slashdot. but I guess that's to be expected in the computers forum.

I'm going to to be straight with everyone, I am a flaming pirate. I have a large mp3 collection and I have never bought many CDs. before fileshareing I just didn't listen to much music.

As Mr M pointed out copyright violation is illegal, but it is not actually a crime. It is a breach of contract, there is a rather significant difference. In this particular case I feel little to no guilt over my breach of contract because I feel that I was bamboozled in the first place. Further since the RIAA has been found guilty of price fixing on more than one occasion, something which, more than a breach of contract is actually a crime, and they have never been punished for it, or prevented from doing it again, (which they are clearly doing) I feel that downloading music is a little closer to vigilantly justice than anything else.

On a Larger scale the Intellectual Property laws in this country have gone way out of whack. In particular the advent of the Internet truly requires a massive and realistic reassessment of IP law which is quite impossible. As it stands right now the IP law reflects neither reality nor justice. In a world where printing and distribution are difficult the IP laws as they stand were sane (if with the incessant copyright extensions a bit unfair) but with the advent of digital reproduction your looking at a different situation.

Regardless of the law the music industry is going to need to change their business model a bit. Quite honestly I don't know what they are thinking at the moment anyway, a CD sale has almost no overhead per sale (though there is a significant amount of overhead per title) so they should want to drop there prices quite low in order to sell a whole lot of CDs. Instead CD prices are insane I was in a store about 3 weeks ago and saw a DVD selling for $14.75 and its soundtrack selling for $21.50. That sort of thing simply isn't rational. If they dropped there prices to $3 an album they would make a killing.

Anyway, I'm rambling ranting, and leaving my argument open to a lot of counter attacks. But then, thats sort of the spirit of debate, now isn't it.

__________________
Use the star one and you'll be fighting off the old ones with your bare hands
-A Shoggoth on the Roof

Pragma

Just the other day, I saw a really cool trance album that I wanted to buy (but unfortunately had another album that had higher priority, and I only had enough to buy one).

20$ for 2 CDs, each of which had about 15 tracks, and both CDs had high quality MP3s of (a) all of the tracks on the CD and (b) about 10 or so other tracks that they wanted to put on the album but didn't have the room.

That's the way shit should be. Not this 20$ for a single album that has 10 songs, only some of which are good.

__________________
Eat antimatter, Posleen-boy!

Stare At The Sun

*Shrugs* I am running a pirated version of Windows 2k Pro, later, i will play a pirated version of warcraft 3(single player though ) followed shortly there after, by listening to a few hours of downloaded MP3, of cd's that i dont own. Then, a little later, im going to go to sleep with a very clear conscious. Main reason being, the price for shit is to high. I am NOT working 4 hours at a shithole job(being 18 sucks), to go buy a cd, and i am NOT spending half of my paycheck on some god damn video game, and i am not gunna pay 200 bucks for an OS that is still vunerable to virsus.

Bill gates, the RIAA, and blizzard can suckem. However, if a game is really good, i will buy it(halo, Knights of the old republic, starcraft), or if i really like the cd, i will buy it,(disturbed, evanescence, fear factroy), but the majority of the stuff out there is crap, and im not going to spend my money on it, when i can get ahold of it rather easy online.

Also, one last point, i'd say 90 percent of the people that have photoshop did NOT pay for it...so dont act innocent if you say mp3 swapping is bad.

*shrugs* in conclusion, if the product merits me buying it, and the quality is there, i will plunk down my cash, otherwise, im gunna get a pirated copy, and not loose a wink of sleep over the poor CEO's that im harming...

GremlinDelirium

UnlikedOne, totaly with you on that one. Hit it right on for me. I buy what is good and get for free what still has problems. My money is better spent on other things. The products i pirate are less than perfect in many respects... Oh and to bring this back to the point of the fourm, the people really killing the CD sales are the people putting out the CD's, the RIAA, they shot themselves in the foot when they shut down napster and are just poking at the wound getting it infected as they sue consumers who do have the large mp3 collections and share them on p2p networks.

__________________
Go Cougs!
~WSU~

Fallen

Anyone who thinks P2P is killing music sales is not being realistic. You may think that saying "music is crap these days and I'm not paying for it" is just a pirate's cop out, but you're wrong.

See, I used to buy a ton of CD's back in the early through late nineties. My CD collection counts into the hundreds. However, only a couple CD's are from the last few years. I simply cannot find anything good these days.

You want to know the sorry state that music is in right now? I've got a 1 mega bit internet connection, an 80 gig HD, and 3 P2P programs on my computer. I can have any song I want for free. Yet, I can't think of a single song or CD I don't already own that I would bother to download. That's how crappy music is right now. I can have it for free and I don't want it.

So yeah, keep thinking that P2P is killing the music industry.

__________________
Overdosed on Apathy

twister002

See, I don't d/l music that I don't own. I do d/l some songs that I know I own in some form or another. I recently d/led some old hair band music but I know I have the cassette tape sitting at home in my parents basement, I just don't have access to it right now. The RIAA may have an issue with that, but I'm willing to bet that if I stand up in front of a judge with the cassette and say "But I DO own it your honor, I d/led those songs in good faith." things would work out in the end for me.

Luckily I'm into Jazz and Surf music, and some Lounge, so my cd's usually cost around $7 instead of $15 or $20. Plus I belong to a music club (BMG) and I've had none of the problems usually associated with joining a music club. So I'm happy to buy cd's on the cheap and rip them to my jukebox.

So I would second all the voices that say bad music is killing CD sales. I'm willing and able to buy new CD's but I keep buying older artists or not so well known artists. I'm not above buying a used CD either.

punx1325

The last time I bought CD's was when I was a member of BMG, and those were 50 cents each. I will buy CD's again when the RIAA stops inflating the price and a CD is around 5 dollars. Until then the RIAA can kiss my ass.

__________________
If something seems too good to be true, then it probably is....

yotta

This is not an entirly
valid argument. When you steal something the owner no longer has the item. When you infringe copyright, the copyright owner doesn't actualy lose anything tangable, but you HAVE voilated thier rights.

This is a fundemental diffrence. Stealing a car is theft. Copying a CD is not. They are both illegeal, but are two compleatly diffrent crimes, the main diffrence being that copying, by definition only deprives the copyright owner of any money you would have paid had you been forced to either pay or go without.

The penalities for copyright infringement in a not-for-profit sece are far to strong.

That being said, I never have bought a CD, and never will. I am not really a music person, and only ever listent to radio (streaming, usualy)

__________________
I am Jack's signature.

durr286

The reason the record companies are raising prices is because they will make the same amount of money as they did when they were selling a lot of cds. Additionally, they need less manpower, maintenance, promotion costs, ect, so they will save a little money. It's much similar to the gas station in town that charges 20 cents higher than the rest of the pack. Hardly anyone goes there, but a few do. Therefore, less overhead, same profit, and the owner buys a house the same size, or bigger, as the guys who sell gas cheap and sell a lot of it.

It's no doubt that cds aren't as in demand as they used to be. Business isn't brisk anymore, everyone is demanding a new media, and record stores aren't what they used to be. As it is, they aren't going to sell a lot of cds anyway. Why not make the same amount of cash as when they were selling lots of cds? Pretty much what they're doing is raising the demand of their cds by producing less and, therefore, raising the demand of their product. In a capitalist society customers' decide the demand, not the industry. This is what we call a cartel, and as said above, it is illegal. It is the same thing OPEC is doing with oil right now. Getting multiple oil companies together and deciding where the prices will fall to maximize profit. It is unfair to customers; therefore, we don't do this in America. How is this different from the gas station that charges more for their gas? Customers have a choice, they can buy their gas elsewhere if they don't like it. However, if every gas station in your town got together and decided prices, you wouldn't have much of a choice. This is essentially what the music labels are doing: raising or lowering the prices to maximize profit. Meanwhile, customers are getting ripped off and have little alternatives.

Can this be helped? Yes. Write your congressman. Big business will roll over to government, but government can't read your mind. Furthermore, you'll see lower cd prices, the record companies will stop controlling prices, be competitive, and actually work for your business. Not having a band in particular that you like will no longer be an excuse for pirating music. I believe if the record companies started running their business like every other business in America we would want to buy their products even if you could pirate them. For example, what do you get with a cd today? A cd and a small cd insert are about all you get for your money. What did you get with your records back in the 70s? You would get a record, extensive cover art, big inserts with more art, and sometimes a nice big poster to hang on your wall. Rarely do you get such things with cds today. When the record companies start competing with each other we will get all this and more, plus lower prices. Customers' want more bang for their buck and when they find it, they will pull their hard earned money out of their wallets.

phoenix1002

I won't deny that I have downloaded songs on my computer. However, the assumption that I would have bought a CD if I did not have the option of downloading it is completely false. If I couldn't download it, I simply wouldn't listen to it. Or, alternatively, I would have taped it off the radio, or found someone who actually had the CD and borrowed it. I can see why the RIAA dislikes digital music, but it isn't like this is a new problem for them. It's just that now they feel they can finally target people. Honestly, how many people do you know who back in the days before CDs had mix tapes? I suspect those people didn't own all the tapes with those songs. I'm not saying I recognize that music "pirating" is illegal, but how is making a mix on my computer different than borrowing a CD from someone and making a mix tape? Or is the RIAA going to start getting warrents next, to root through people's music collections, and sue them for any mixes?

__________________
I'd rather be climbing...

I approach college much like a recovering alcoholic--one day at a time...