I've seen a lot of pirates point to articles from 6 years ago to try and support their point that illegal downloads aren't affecting sales, and maybe 6 years ago it wasn't as bad. I've been saying that 98% of the people that illegally download and keep it, don't buy it, well I was wrong, it is 95%. Here are two new stories on the subject that you should read.
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article3247758.ece
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c6a63ed2-cae7-11dc-a960-000077b07658.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
29 comments:
Cold hard facts but i am sure the "downloading"-crowd will flame these figures too.
Another fact i found out today. The cd-story were we mostly go for those days we want to dig and and check cd's/vinyl said over last year they were down with 40% in sales. Even their regular customers often say it "No i don't want that album, downloaded it which is enough"
I know this is just one shop but i am pretty sure that more shops have the same problem.
Gert
Ouch - how can we possibly compete with such well thought out arguments.
Anonymous:
I would say that a person who owns a cd shop for many many years knows what he is talking about. If such a person tells me that he lost 40% in one year time on sales and blames it on downloading i believe him.
fact1: The guy knows over all these years about the fluctuation in sales. Could be change of demographics, maybe the opening of another cd-shop in the same area or even a bad year with new releases.
fact2: He knows from regular customers that some are downloading and because of that don't buy cd's which they would have been buying without the downloading. Matter of fact it's pretty scary to me that such people speak openly about it as if it's a normal thing to do.
So if that means that someone comes up with an insult without even trying to build up an argument it simply shows that either you are trolling and seeking attention or you just don't care at all in what this website tries to discuss.
Have you even read the articles from the links given?
Gert
The majority of the sites you're railing against are offering OOP music as a way for people to discover artists that aren't being currently supported by the record industry (or else their music would be available and in print for a reasonable price). How is paying $100 for an OOP record or CD, where none of the profits will go to the people who made the record, helping the artists make money?
Before you give me any stealing/organ transplant/taking art from the Louvre arguments, I own over 500+ CDs and have supported musicians for decades by buying their records and purchasing tickets to see them perform live.
I heard that there were also some very important posts regarding the sites on your recommended list that stock pirate CDs, which obviously does not support the people who helped create them, that were either ignored or deleted. Please respond to that as well.
This is the point you people keep missing. We're only dealing with our material, a blog that is hosting OOP material as well could easily get shut down because of the complaints we've filed on our material.
People will pay what the market allows for something. How is a rare album different than a rare comic book or baseball card? You don't see people demanding free copies of those because they are too hard to get or too expensive.
Some kook is running around claiming some of these resellers are selling pirate disks. I don't believe it's true, but I also don't have an in depth knowledge of everything they sell, I know they sell our material and have been good partners. I also know that there are near perfect copies being produced in Russia and put out in to the market, I've gotten copies of some of our own releases that this has been done too. It is nearly impossible to tell the difference, so I imagine there is a possibility they've gotten pirate stock and not been aware of it, but as far as I'm concerned, those are baseless accusations because they haven't provided any back up to support it. We're simply pointing to resellers we know carry our catalogs.
"People will pay what the market allows for something. How is a rare album different than a rare comic book or baseball card?"
I don't bother with buying rare comics or baseball cards, so I can't comment on that. Either way, that doesn't address the fact that the producer of the material doesn't get paid when such a transaction takes place.
"You don't see people demanding free copies of those because they are too hard to get or too expensive."
What if someone scanned a rare baseball card on their blog? Should they be fined or serve jail time?
I realize you're doing everything possible to avoid the actual subject, but if someone were to create a duplicate of the baseball card that was the same as the original, then that is counterfitting and they would go to jail if they put those on the market.
Selling something used is another topic and also one that pirates always try to deflect to. The artist got paid their agreed upon amount on the original purchase, as long as there is still just one copy and the seller didn't make a copy and then sell it, there is no problem. The fact that it became rare and expensive isn't something anyone can predict, it's part of a free market economy not a communistic one where everyone shares.
a.g.,
You are not discussing the issue here. We are against people who upload, download, share music without paying for it. The reason we are against it is that we think that the bands are entitled to decide about their own work.
If they decide that their music shall not be given away for free then that should be respected.
It does not matter if they released their music on their own or if they have choosen to co-operate with record label.
It does not matter if you personally think that you are doing the bands a favour.
If they don't agree to have their music "shared" it is illegal to do so.
We are many here who also feel that it is unethical or immoral to do it against the will of the artist.
Do you understand?
- counterfitting money ---> you end up in jail
- counterfitting cd's --> pirates say it's allowed...yet it's the same crime imo.
A.g. :
My wife and i own over 5000 cd's/vinyls and even tapes yet if we donwload 1 album it should be seen as a crime since we broke the law with just that one album.
No matter how much someone buys from artists/labels if they download 1 album, keep it and don't want to buy the original they should be punished for it.
Hansi,
Pretty much 100% of the blogs I've visited say on their front page that if an artist doesn't approve of their material being posted, they will take it down with no questions asked. Having the entire blog shut down disrespects the artists who do agree to have their material posted online to get a sample of their music heard by a larger audience and gain more fans.
anonymous (if that is your real name...),
"No matter how much someone buys from artists/labels if they download 1 album, keep it and don't want to buy the original they should be punished for it."
In a world of libraries, free television and radio, free mp3s from musician and record label websites, etc. I guess I don't understand this viewpoint.
We shouldn't have to go around and tell people to take it down, they should ask for permission before they post it, they know what they are doing is illegal, that's why they go to such lengths to obfuscate the links, and despite what might be on a few sites (very few have that notice), we haven't had a single site actually pull something when requested, so we stopped asking, we just file complaints with blogger.com and if they get too many complaints, they shut down the site - not our fault, many of these guys will go and post even more albums after they get a warning, that is how Rare N Vintage got shut down when Blackwatchplaid decided to get cute and put a final post as a 'fuck you' to us, and put a half dozen of our albums in it.
As a matter of fact, here is the notice on a blog we recently discovered:
This blog brings links to foreign sites, we don't own any kind of server. Let's remember that any person with an original CD has the right to own a security copy por personal or private use. We don't comercialize the music posted here, so we can't be charged of piracy, so you gotta know that any request of deleting the stuff we have in here will be ignored and if anything is banned we will upload it again. All Hell Can't Stop Us Now!!!
"In a world of libraries, free television and radio, free mp3s from musician and record label websites, etc. I guess I don't understand this viewpoint."
It's really pretty simple, one is legal and sanctioned and one isn't. Really, how many times does it have to be said? If you have permission it is fine, if you don't, you're breaking the law. There are plenty of legal ways to sample music, so why steal it?
"Hansi,
Pretty much 100% of the blogs I've visited say on their front page that if an artist doesn't approve of their material being posted, they will take it down with no questions asked."
It's not right that the artists or labels should have to put their energy into searching for blogs that put up their work against their will, and then have to send them an e-mail about it.
It should be the over way around.
The blogs should the artists if they can do it. Do you understand that?
"Having the entire blog shut down disrespects the artists who do agree to have their material posted online to get a sample of their music heard by a larger audience and gain more fans"
The disrespect is coming from the blog owners who put up music without asking for permission.
If the blogs ask for permission and do not put up anything without an agreement their blogs would not be closed.
It's very simple.
any band or label i see on this site is one that won't be in my record collection !!!!
and i spread the word to my friend's as well so we can boycott any of your views by hitting you in your fatass wallet.
Ah, so you're proving our point, you aren't interested in spreading information about the bands or in purchasing their CD's, you're only interested in stealing their material. A boycott from someone who is stealing the material is wholly welcome, we don't need "fans" like you.
anonymous (if that is your real name...),
"No matter how much someone buys from artists/labels if they download 1 album, keep it and don't want to buy the original they should be punished for it."
In a world of libraries, free television and radio, free mp3s from musician and record label websites, etc. I guess I don't understand this viewpoint.
a.g. Sorry i normally always put my name under a post i have written. Forgot to do it underneath this post.
I ment "illegal download". I have no problem with people who offer downloads from artists which agreed their music can be shared. But even when someone does 500 albums the "legal" way and decide to put up 1 or 2 albums from artists who didnt agreeon the sharing, it's a criminal offence.
People really should do a "legal" blog and keep it 100% legal. If you really do a blog because of your passion for the music there is no other way. Also it gives nice treats:
1. Had the luxury to have email conversations with people from bands from which i call myself fan
2. Already had the luxury too listen too two sneak previews of tracks a band at the moment is recording. Meaning they trusted me that it would be just that, sneak preview.
3. These so often called "evil, stealing" labels gave (yes gave...you know for free!!)me a chance to listen to music and in one occasion already agreed that i can put up 1 or 2 tracks of an album for people who visit the blog.
gorehound13
You and your friends are in no way a "fan". A fan loves the music from a band and buys their stuff so these band can continue with making more music.
Gert
Yo im not saying downloading isnt wrong but trying to shut down a site with 60's 70's music is kinda lame cus most of those records are hard to find or they are being sold for ridiculous money on ebay. downloading a cd and not buying it in this age is wrong but if you cant find it fuck it.
Most money for the early 60's or 70's doesnt even go to the artists anymore . Record labels dont need our money. im sure they can live with their billions of dollars.
As for Shawn Gordon...nobody knows you and you cant stop pirating bitch arghhh
You're regurgitating the same lie that the rest of the pirates are about what we are doing. These sites that claim to just have rare and OOP material are full of shit, they have current and available material that is being put out by our members as well, and that is why they are getting shut down, because of the complaints on that material.
Since you don't know the contract agreement between the artist and the label, how do you know you aren't screwing him over?
I don't care if you know who I am, although I must say a lot more people do than did 2 months ago, at the end of the day, I'm concerned with my material, don't pirate it and you won't have a problem, and don't make lame comments like "oh, your stuff sucks, I'd never pirate it", I'm only in this because I saw a lot of our stuff being pirated. Now there is little to none of it available, and anyone that thinks that statement is a challenge and decides to start pirating it, then you're going to have a problem and waste a lot of time because I'll make sure that it is gone, no matter what.
"Yo im not saying downloading isnt wrong but trying to shut down a site with 60's 70's music is kinda lame cus most of those records are hard to find or they are being sold for ridiculous money on ebay. downloading a cd and not buying it in this age is wrong but if you cant find it fuck it."
As far as my law-knowledge goes can Shawn or Hansi only ask to remove stuff which falls under their label. Hansi and Shawn are the vocal ones but my guess is that tons of people don't een bother trying to communicate. And why should they, remarks like:
"suck a cock you prog faggots"
already tell me enough
Gert
"Yo im not saying downloading isnt wrong but trying to shut down a site with 60's 70's music is kinda lame cus most of those records are hard to find or they are being sold for ridiculous money on ebay. downloading a cd and not buying it in this age is wrong but if you cant find it fuck it."
If blogs only post rare and vintage, not copy written material, no one would make complaints against them.
I understand that you are under the impression that some blogs are working this way. It's of course not that easy for you to know which albums are copywritten and which are not.
So, I hope this info straighten thing's out.
Many blogs claim that they are only posting deleted albums, not copywritten material etc. Ok?
But...it is in almost all cases not true. One blog for example which said they only posted "rare and vintage albums that is out of print" had on it's first page 3 newly released albums. Two of these was 70's albums that was re-mastered and recently released by Musea. And one was a brand new album recorded in 2006 and released in 2007. I would not say that an album released three months ago can be cathegorized as either vintage or rare.
In this case complaints were made on these 3 albums and the blog was shut down.
You see?
The reason was simply that the blogs was spreading material which was far from "out of print" and in one case it had nothing to do with being a "vintage" album.
So, the blogs told you a lie.
And they really did not give a humpf about checking it out, asking for permission or anything that showed that they respect the artists.
"Most money for the early 60's or 70's doesnt even go to the artists anymore ."
To be blunt, You don't know anything about that. I guess your info is based on rumours. In some cases you might be right. In these cases the artist once upon a time might have agreed upon, for instance, selling the rights for an amount of money. Maybe it proved to be bad business, yet it was their own decision at that point.
"Record labels dont need our money. im sure they can live with their billions of dollars."
If you want record labels to put out fine (and maybe somewhat obscure) old albums, remaster these etc, then they of course need your money. And you should also know that in most cases the artists are getting paid by the labels who re-issue old stuff.
And...the billions of dollars are only in the minds of the downloaders. People who invest in these re-issued albums have no billions of any currency. They do it for the love of music, and they would be happy if you bought the albums instead of downloading it for free, so that they can put out another one.
There is no true reason why you should be angry with the labels. They are investing their lives in making it possible for you to experience the best possible sounding versions of these forgotten gems.
What you can do is to work WITH them instead of AGAINST them.
You will not achieve what you want by insulting them.
just when you think somebody may have solution, qtrax, its a no-starter. so if they had gone live w/ their purported multi-million song library, man imagine being the lawyer getting a third of that award.
the broadband tax is on its way is my conclusion. the artists have finally figured it out who is making $$ off their content. i can't see the isp's shutting off a major reason why folks pay for broadband so they'll charge a surcharge and let the copyright holders figure it out.
In interesting speech can be found here:
http://slashdot.org/articles/08/01/29/1524216.shtml
Interesting read to say the least.
I found this one:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071125-the-insanity-and-genius-of-frances-anti-file-sharing-plan.html
Gert
but i think that this is much interesting...
"Hi, I just wanted to comment on the ridiculous claims that these people think they can make..
ALL independent scientific research done proves that downloads have absolutely no impact on CD sales.
I'll post you some links.. there are plenty of links in the articles I will post.
Studies: music industry overstating threat of P2P piracy
Canadian report finds P2P might sell more CDs
Piracy losses fabricated
The Effect of File Sharing on Record Sales: An Empirical Analysis (pdf file with the full study is still available on some of the links)
Yet another study suggests file sharing has no impact on CD sales
Piracy stats don't add up
There is plenty more available if you do some targeted searching on
http://arstechnica.com
http://www.theregister.co.uk
http://www.zeropaid.com
These people are no better than the lying creeps in the White House and Congress, all they care about is their own self-interest. All they have is campaigns of lies and misinformation.
Feel free to spread this information to all other prog blogs to stop the bullshit of these self-righteous pricks.
There is NO independent scientific evidence for the RIAA claim that downloading would hurt CD sales.
Of course the studies bought by the RIAA will fraudulently try to "prove" the opposite.
What do you expect? The truth from the maffia?
And Again...
here is another great link
Steve Albini, a music insider, producer and musician and his thoughts about file sharing...
http://www.myinlandempire.co.uk/?p=70
Anybody in the music industry claiming they're protecting artists is like the maffia claiming they're protecting family values.
Their business model is as outdated as any relic from the stone age and all they have left is their evangelising moral and ethical crusades. "Thou shalt not steal" is the first rule in their own "Honour amongst thieves". Nobody has ever ripped off the artists any more than all the parasites in the industry, and labels come first in line. progrockrecords is no better.
It's corporate fascism at work. If they don't want to, or can not, adjust to the new situation as it is, they should just go extinct. And they will. The sooner the better."
You to ask before 10 or 20 years asked???? Why the conversion sinks........ You since nevertheless nothing different one than a mafia, profit profit it stink nevertheless up to the sky.You always talk about those!!!!! One artist each had himself about this problem weighted?????That is in each case the industry
You have not my respect
First, I've got to comment that you pirates are obsessed with dicks, balls, fascism and the mafia, I can't tell you how many of you manage to fit some or all of those in to your posts, and shows a distinct lack of understanding.
Now to your points. You're wrong, as evidenced by the links that make up this post, and even if in some reality you were right, it still doesn't matter because you are violating the artists copyright against their will. Everyone on this list is an artist, even the label owners, and we don't want people pirating our stuff. Now before you make the same tired comment "well, I've never heard of any of you and even if I did, your stuff sucks anyway so I'd never download it", we're here because our stuff IS being downloaded and posted.
no....... before 25 years, there we do not have our records (LP`s) of befriend overacted, the one those bought the other one these and before 25 years have for it in demand......... and do not come ourselves not with that stupidly, that were at that time already illegal. Because I am artist, you go nevertheless only the ass due to, because you cannot finance yourself no more your house or your cars!!!! How much people must I a hand chop off because it fish to eat of to be become extinct briefly is??????You since nevertheless those, which run only with a hand
and not the artist
I am addressing the anonymous whose posts are marked as of 6:54am and 8:03am:
Learn some frickin' English before you try to type it.
Yeesh. How many times did you run those posts through Babelfish? Five or six?
Post a Comment