To avoid spending endless hours debating illegal downloading we decided to write this.
First of all everyone must accept as fact that illegal downloading, bloggers that upload entire albums for people to download for free and torrents doing what they refer to as "sharing music" is really a disaster for the artists financially.
There is a direct link between the increased illegal "free" downloading and the decreasing amount of music being sold. That is a fact. No matter what arguments downloader's like to use to justify what they are doing, the facts are there.
Here are some typical arguments from those who think it is a good thing to offer other's music for free (not many have thought about the fact that it is other's music - they created it). Under these you will find our response.
1) We are only doing the bands a favour, making them more known.Well, in a way, yes. They are more known to people who don't pay for
the pleasure of listening. They are not getting better known to the people who buy the music. These are usually not visiting these places - blogs, torrents etc -
where the stolen music is found. They have other ways to find out about new music they want to buy and listen to.
2) It is only the evil record companies who lose money.Hmmm. Let's think some about that statement. Let's see. Most record companies pay the artists an agreed royalty per sold CD, so if the music is given away for free then it must be that the artists will get paid less. So therefore it is also the artists who lose money from this.
And let us think some more. If the record companies don't get any money from CD sales they can not afford much promotion, so, hmmm let's see...oh, then the bands will not get exposure to their potential audience, they won't know about the artists work. This must lead to the fact that if people buy the CD's they are helping the artists to get better known.
This maybe leads to: So, if the record companies work to make the artists better known and pay them for their work...can it then be that they are actually helping the artists? Could it actually be that the artists like to work with the record companies? Could it even be that most of the people running these evil record companies are doing it because they love the music and want to do something good for the artists by making to possible for them to have their music released
without needing to take care about all the administration work? Can it also be that the artists are happy about the fact that the record companies invest money - and thereby are taking financial risks - in their music? Well, it seems that the record companies working this way are not so evil after all, but we do recognize that there has been abuse in the past by the large and established labels, this isn't true typically with the smaller labels, however this is still no justification, it is for the courts to decide.
3) The record companies are stealing my money when they charge me $18
for a CD. It only cost them $1 to produce a CD.Is that so? Is that the actual cost for a music album? Let's have a look at the costs.
The CD does cost about $1-$2 to press.
But there is some thing's that must be done before one can press the CD.
Something called "Glass master" costs about $800.
The mastering session normally costs between $1000 and $2000.
Creating the artwork for the booklet and CD can easily cost $2,000 to $5,000
Mixing costs from $5,000 to $10,000
What about the recordings?
To rent a high quality studio with a professional sound engineer is what all artists dream of.This gives them the opportunity to focus on the performance.
Here the costs can be between $5000 up to $100000...or more.
So, therefore many bands buy their own equipment and do it by themselves.
Sometimes with a very good result but most often the end result would
have been even more enjoyable if they could afford to rent a studio and
pay a professional studio technician.
And there are more costs involved. In most countries one must pay for
publishing rights.
And...to pay the bands of course also must be considered as a cost.
Promotion copies being sent out are another cost. Advertising is another cost.
So, what are we looking at here.
Well, for the first pressing it is more like $6 per CD.
And then they are sold to distributors at $7 or $8 + shipping costs.
The distributors then sell them at about $11 - $12 + shipping costs.
So, when retailers sell these at $16 - $18 they do not earn very much per CD.
The band gets some little and the record company earn almost nothing
on the first pressing.
For the second, third etc pressing there is some money coming in, but
many releases do not sell enough to do these pressings. Considering
that the staff at the record companies need to get paid to make a
living these titles are losses, so the ones who do sell a bit more
must make enough to make ends meet.
Where is the greediness? Where are those evil people who run the business?
Can it be that it's the illegal downloaders who have invented these characters to justify their immoral and illegal actions when they are taking the music, getting pleasure from it without giving anything in return for it? Because this is what they do! They enjoy the work of the artists, who are helped by their record company, without giving anything in return! Is that being a fan? Is that a good way to show appreciation?
Oh, and a CD costs less now in real dollars than they did 20 years ago, if you adjust for inflation, they cost a lot less.
4) How shall I know what to buy if I can not download and listen to it first?Well, this makes some sense. There are a few out there who use free downloads for this purpose and that is of course perfectly ok, but also a slippery slope. However these people make up about 1% of the people downloading, so we are forced to say:
"Sorry, there are too many people out there stealing the artists
work so we can not allow it".
On the other hand, there are plenty of opportunities to find some of the songs from the albums available as legal free downloads on the artists and record companies websites. Labels and artists are trying to let you try before you buy in as reasonable manner as possible, but to give away entire albums does not work, people just are not likely to pay for something that they've already gotten for free.
Former IQ keyboardist Martin Orford says: "Just imagine going into a supermarket and eating whatever food you like as you go round. If challenged
you can just say that you're trying before you buy and if any of the products
appeal to you then you might consider spending money on them one day.
Of course the supermarket would quite rightly take you to court."
The same must apply to music.
5) I live in a poor country and can not afford buying CD'sThe world is far from perfect. Life is not fair. Most of us on this planet wish it was differently. But it can not be right that the record companies should be the one's
responsible for changing the future of this planet. The arguments for "giving something back to the artists for enjoying the music" can in this case be applied as: Even if you live in a country with a bad economy, please at least do what you can, after all, you're paying for your internet connection so it can't be that bad. Buy at least a couple of downloads and take the music that is put up legally. These two things together should give you many hours of music pleasure. The
artists would very much appreciate if you do what you can to support them. And perhaps you would feel good about it yourself, knowing that you are a true fan. Artists and fans should work together.
6) It's just data, I'm not stealing a physical CDWell, let's say that I electronically get in to your bank account and empty so I can use the money to buy things I can't afford. It's a similar principal again, I didn't actually steal your wallet or purse and the money in it, I just moved some data out of your account and in to mine, which is only fair because I can't afford all the things I want, so you should help me. Pirates like to say this isn’t a fair argument, but it is exactly the same, you’re being deprived, electronically, of money/income.
7) Oh yea? Well what about when people taped albums and shared them?There is a significant difference in ability and cost to make a cassette copy of an album and give that to some friends, you’re going to be limited in how many you could realistically do, let’s call it 20 copies. If those people make copies and hand them out, the quality degrades with each generation, you can only go a few times. With a digital copy and the internet, you make a perfect copy (more and more people are using CD quality fidelity now, which also destroys the “I’m just checking it out” argument) which can be downloaded millions of times by millions of people, if only 1% of those people are prevented from purchasing because they were able to get it this way for free, that’s a lot of sales.
To sum up, we don’t want you to put our material up for “sharing” without our permission
