|
On December 12 2009 02:01 Catch]22 wrote:
Piracy being legal is fucking stupid, this entire thread fails to deliver sense or logic.
It's just the bandwagon, its just "cool" and "edgy", like you're some sort of rebel standing up to the man, except you're just sitting in your chair in your basement not paying for music.
Did you even read the OP or the thread? The record companies did something bad, so they're going to have to pay. We all agree. What's the problem?
|
Austin10833 Posts
The main problem with this is that the repercussions will most certainly effect the consumer far more than the corporation. We still haven't figured out an effective music dispersal method. Torrents and DLs are great for us, the consumers, but poor for artists as they have to spend an increasing amount of time on the road to subsidize their lifestyles. I'm not talking about the upper echelon of artists that make real bank, but the thousands of bands for whom music is a means to support themselves and their families.
Right now, music is broken, and a lawsuit like this might just make things harder to fix. Overall, a really tough situation for many artists who are in a bad situation but aren't presented with better options.
|
On December 12 2009 19:08 The Storyteller wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2009 02:01 Catch]22 wrote:
Piracy being legal is fucking stupid, this entire thread fails to deliver sense or logic.
It's just the bandwagon, its just "cool" and "edgy", like you're some sort of rebel standing up to the man, except you're just sitting in your chair in your basement not paying for music. Did you even read the OP or the thread? The record companies did something bad, so they're going to have to pay. We all agree. What's the problem?
Ahahaha you sound like my mom, she too used to think that I felt cool and edgy when i didn't do my homework. Who exactly is standing up to the man? Despite piracy, record companies still manage to make huge profits, so i think they can survive if i save my money buying music and spending it on other more worthwhile stuff.
|
this is very appropriate indeed
|
On December 12 2009 19:18 BroOd wrote:
The main problem with this is that the repercussions will most certainly effect the consumer far more than the corporation. We still haven't figured out an effective music dispersal method. Torrents and DLs are great for us, the consumers, but poor for artists as they have to spend an increasing amount of time on the road to subsidize their lifestyles. I'm not talking about the upper echelon of artists that make real bank, but the thousands of bands for whom music is a means to support themselves and their families.
Right now, music is broken, and a lawsuit like this might just make things harder to fix. Overall, a really tough situation for many artists who are in a bad situation but aren't presented with better options.
I couldn't disagree more with this post. You say the consumer will suffer? The consumers suffer when an industry sticks to decades-old technology, stubbornly refusing to adopt better means of distribution. You like a particular song, and want to buy it? Well, you'll have to drive to a store that has it in stock and buy a CD with 10 other songs you don't want.
But what about piracy? Online distribution is no good! It needs more DRM! Like... CDs, which have none?
This lawsuit will do very little harm to fledgling artists because they already get most of their income from live performances. When you say 'to subsidize their lifestyles', you leave me wondering whether you have any idea what a subsidy is.
If you want to help out consumers, you need to put a stop to copyright infringement lawsuits that wreck their lives and move on to a good business model that gives them good music with minimal hassle and cheaply. Kind of like the iTunes Music Store does.
I'm hoping this lawsuit will provide the record labels with a much-needed shakeup. That, or make them go bust. Capitalism is a force of creative destruction, where companies and individuals alike are free to succeed, and free to fail. I for one won't shed a tear if the record labels fail- much like General Motors and Chrysler should have. Those resources (capital and manpower) might be better employed elsewhere. If those record companies fail, better ones are sure to take their place.
|
Heres a new method of music distribution, put it all free online, and earn your money from live performances, which your fans will want to watch since they know your work from searching music for free online.
|
On December 13 2009 04:19 D10 wrote:
Heres a new method of music distribution, put it all free online, and earn your money from live performances, which your fans will want to watch since they know your work from searching music for free online.
You mean with advertisements like hulu?
|
On December 13 2009 04:33 NFL2368 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2009 04:19 D10 wrote:
Heres a new method of music distribution, put it all free online, and earn your money from live performances, which your fans will want to watch since they know your work from searching music for free online. You mean with advertisements like hulu?
Or Spotify.
|
On December 13 2009 04:19 D10 wrote:
Heres a new method of music distribution, put it all free online, and earn your money from live performances, which your fans will want to watch since they know your work from searching music for free online.
It's a brave proposal, but I don't think it would ultimately serve the artists' interests.
It really isn't that hard to have a good business model. Look at the videogames industry, they share a lot of the problematic traits of the music industry:
Item for sale is mostly intellectual property? Check.
Production costs are almost exclusively comprised in the development of the intellectual property and advertisement of the product? Check.
The product exists in digital format and can thus be pirated over the internet? Check.
You could argue that console games require a disc, which you have to purchase anyway. But then again, you still see disc-free, online innovation in consoles: Xbox Live Arcade anyone?
With computer games, you get the same: Steam. Now, Blizzard wised up and is copying those two services, with Battlenet 2.0. There's a huge library of games you can buy right from your couch (or desk chair), no problem. THAT's service. That's a business model that aims to please the consumer.
In the music industry? The only ones who strive to please the consumer are the pirates; the record labels go out of their way to vex them. Sure, pirates are a problem- for the video games and music industries alike- but blaming all their problems on piracy is naive at  BeSt, dishonest at worst.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
