"Bono calls for control over internet downloads"

[Niceman]

Yes, but the discussion, IMO, revolves around a business model that will work. The current model of Jim rents, Sally buys, Bill steals...is KILLING the business. There will always be the option of owning, but the sub model will be the center of the biz.

So, you predict that I will not be able to buy physical media if I have cash in hand and that's what I want?

EDIT: re-reading you clearly say that model will always exist. Ok, so then what's the debate? I will buy physical media, and you will rent digital media. The biz will have to learn how to adapt to you and I buying different ways....

 

[Niceman]

In fact, I work in the industry

Haha! I knew it! You argue like someone who works for one of the big companies. You think you can tell us how we will buy media and what we will do with it. It is as if you think the consumer takes their orders from the producer and not the other way around.

That hubris won't get you or the industry anywhere.

The reality is not what you want it to be. The industry must adapt to the consumers' habits. The consumers will not adapt to the industry's desires.

 

[BVS]

"if PJ signed today, how do you think they would make a living"

You're right that was suppose to read if PJ started today.

Oh, now we're talking about surviving purely on touring ?

Well that's what most of you are arguing. The majority who are for illegal downloading are saying music will still survive, but they will just make income on touring and not album sales. Where have you been? What else do you think will bring in income?

 

[toscano]

You're right that was suppose to read if PJ started today.






Well that's what most of you are arguing. The majority who are for illegal downloading are saying music will still survive, but they will just make income on touring and not album sales. Where have you been? What else do you think will bring in income?

Is no more music changing hands for money ?


How about about merchandising ?

 

[BVS]

Is no more music changing hands for money ?

Um, that's been the whole point of this conversation is that artist are not getting paid when more and more are turning to illegal downloads.

How about about merchandising ?

Merch works for big bands, but when talking about the types of bands that I've been debating about this whole time merch doesn't make them much. I've talked to a lot of indie bands "big" and small and most do a little better than breaking even on merch, once they divide the money amonst everyone they might be able to pay their electricity bill.

 

[popshopper]

Um, that's been the whole point of this conversation is that artist are not getting paid when more and more are turning to illegal downloads.


Merch works for big bands, but when talking about the types of bands that I've been debating about this whole time merch doesn't make them much. I've talked to a lot of indie bands "big" and small and most do a little better than breaking even on merch, once they divide the money amonst everyone they might be able to pay their electricity bill.

Why exactly are the gross profits of the golden age of the music industry something to be striven for? Musicians historically haven't been ridiculously recompensed, but in the last 50-60 years a great deal of folks have may ridiculous amounts of money, there is no real reason for that to continue.

It could be argued with the wholesale fleecing of the customer with cost of CD's that the recording industry slit their own throat. Why pay £10 pounds for an album with 12 tracks of which I may only really want 2 or 3 tracks, one of the major problems the industry has is that consumers are no longer built into paying for all 12 tracks, I pay £3 for the 3 tracks I want, and throw away the chaff. That's the real problem an industry which built itself up around the hit has given itself, people listen to hits, the crap that populates most albums is ultimately disposable to a great many folks, especially when they have alternative sources to hear the songs.

No one has given a decent answer as to why consumers should pay a tariff on internet access to fund record companies profit. If I don't steal, why should I pay to pad for profit companies bottom line without being granted access to the content which is what Bono is basically suggesting. The problems of the music industry are being passed on the ISP's because the music industry is worried about the bottom line. If musician's become poorer then boo-hoo, that's life.

 

[BVS]

Why exactly are the gross profits of the golden age of the music industry something to be striven for? Musicians historically haven't been ridiculously recompensed, but in the last 50-60 years a great deal of folks have may ridiculous amounts of money, there is no real reason for that to continue.

No one is saying anything about "ridiculous amounts of money". It's been the last 50 or 60 years when recorded music has been sold and affordable to play. You get paid for your job, right? Well part of their job is recording music, yet you feel entightled to that aspect of their occupation for free. What do you do? I want part of it for free. Give it to me.

It could be argued with the wholesale fleecing of the customer with cost of CD's that the recording industry slit their own throat. Why pay £10 pounds for an album with 12 tracks of which I may only really want 2 or 3 tracks, one of the major problems the industry has is that consumers are no longer built into paying for all 12 tracks, I pay £3 for the 3 tracks I want, and throw away the chaff. That's the real problem an industry which built itself up around the hit has given itself, people listen to hits, the crap that populates most albums is ultimately disposable to a great many folks, especially when they have alternative sources to hear the songs.

You pay for the whole meal but may not eat every side. You pay for the whole movie but might get up for a restroom break...

I pay about the same amount of an inexpensive meal with a drink and I have an album that I will listen to for years... Maybe you should quit buying crap, or use iTunes and just buy the ones you want.

No one has given a decent answer as to why consumers should pay a tariff on internet access to fund record companies profit. If I don't steal, why should I pay to pad for profit companies bottom line without being granted access to the content which is what Bono is basically suggesting. The problems of the music industry are being passed on the ISP's because the music industry is worried about the bottom line. If musician's become poorer then boo-hoo, that's life.

When I can steal your job, I hope you have the same mentality, boo hoo...

I don't think the "tariff" is a perfect answer, but I do think package deals for folks who do download a lot might be worth it. If you don't download, then buy the basic package. Everyone wins.

 

[Niceman]

Should there be a tariff for other industries that have trouble making money in the 21st century???

I saw a guy from Vivid video on tv last night talking about how his industry has been hurt by video piracy, should the government subsidize them?

 

[popshopper]

No one is saying anything about "ridiculous amounts of money". It's been the last 50 or 60 years when recorded music has been sold and affordable to play. You get paid for your job, right? Well part of their job is recording music, yet you feel entightled to that aspect of their occupation for free. What do you do? I want part of it for free. Give it to me.

You pay for the whole meal but may not eat every side. You pay for the whole movie but might get up for a restroom break...

I pay about the same amount of an inexpensive meal with a drink and I have an album that I will listen to for years... Maybe you should quit buying crap, or use iTunes and just buy the ones you want.


When I can steal your job, I hope you have the same mentality, boo hoo...

I don't think the "tariff" is a perfect answer, but I do think package deals for folks who do download a lot might be worth it. If you don't download, then buy the basic package. Everyone wins.

I'll get another job. Few people are down coal mines anymore, technology moved on. How are typewriter manufacturers doing these days? Or telegraph operators.

People are still making money in music, not as much as they were, they want the rest of us to make it up to them without providing a product in return. That's theft, it might be legal once they buy enough politicians but its still theft. ISP's generally don't make that much money, it's a pretty competitive industry any cost enforced on them by the music industry will be passed on the customer who will receive absolutely nothing in return but the knowledge that rock stars are still buying cocaine with their money.

And just how are you going to enforce the download/no download package? By bandwidth? I have a 50mb/s package which I use for gaming, work and legal downloads and don't illegally download why should I pay an industry money when I get nothing in return

The music industry has no inherent right to exist, let alone to maintain its current form, adapt or die.

 

[mama cass]

I'll get another job. Few people are down coal mines anymore, technology moved on. How are typewriter manufacturers doing these days? Or telegraph operators.

People are still making money in music, not as much as they were, they want the rest of us to make it up to them without providing a product in return. That's theft, it might be legal once they buy enough politicians but its still theft. ISP's generally don't make that much money, it's a pretty competitive industry any cost enforced on them by the music industry will be passed on the customer who will receive absolutely nothing in return but the knowledge that rock stars are still buying cocaine with their money.

And just how are you going to enforce the download/no download package? By bandwidth? I have a 50mb/s package which I use for gaming, work and legal downloads and don't illegally download why should I pay an industry money when I get nothing in return

The music industry has no inherent right to exist, let alone to maintain its current form, adapt or die.

"adapt or die"

yep, that's right, just like the rest of us...

 

[BVS]

I'll get another job. Few people are down coal mines anymore, technology moved on. How are typewriter manufacturers doing these days? Or telegraph operators.

And this is what will happen, and we'll lose a lot of quality music in the future. Get ready for nothing but Lady Gagas and bands willing to place their image or song on everything. You asked for it.

People are still making money in music, not as much as they were, they want the rest of us to make it up to them without providing a product in return. That's theft, it might be legal once they buy enough politicians but its still theft. ISP's generally don't make that much money, it's a pretty competitive industry any cost enforced on them by the music industry will be passed on the customer who will receive absolutely nothing in return but the knowledge that rock stars are still buying cocaine with their money.

This is just ignorance. Quit thinking about the overbloated bands of the 80's and 90's. Think about the bands that will start 5 years from now, your ignorance will make it impossible for them to ever get started.

And just how are you going to enforce the download/no download package? By bandwidth? I have a 50mb/s package which I use for gaming, work and legal downloads and don't illegally download why should I pay an industry money when I get nothing in return

Why do you still pay for music if you don't believe the artist should be getting paid for that portion of their work? You're either lying or you really don't believe in what you are saying. And what exactly are you legally downloading?

The music industry has no inherent right to exist, let alone to maintain its current form, adapt or die.

They have no right to exist? That's one of the stupidest things I've ever read. Why are you so willing to let music just fade away?

Tell me, how do you propose they "adapt"?

 

[BVS]

Should there be a tariff for other industries that have trouble making money in the 21st century???

I saw a guy from Vivid video on tv last night talking about how his industry has been hurt by video piracy, should the government subsidize them?

Do you think Porn is vital to a society?

 

[popshopper]

Do you think Porn is vital to a society?

Do you think the music industry is? Note I don't say music, I say music industry you seem to have real trouble seperating the two. Music has been around from the dawn of time, it isn't going anywhere, the money might not be the same but people will still make music. Arguably it is easier now than any time in history to write, record and widely distribute music, the problem is sticking out from the crowd. The music industry on the other hand has barely been around a for a century.

Have a look at myspace or youtube, music itself is in fine health, there are thousands of bands competing to get noticed. Some will make careers out of it, most won't. Perhaps music will become a little more localized, the cream of the crop will stick out and gain wider acceptance, but music itself isn't going anywhere, it's just getting seperated from the parasite which has been feeding off of it for years.

 

[popshopper]

And this is what will happen, and we'll lose a lot of quality music in the future. Get ready for nothing but Lady Gagas and bands willing to place their image or song on everything. You asked for it.

That's the music industries choice, it'll speed up their doom.

This is just ignorance. Quit thinking about the overbloated bands of the 80's and 90's. Think about the bands that will start 5 years from now, your ignorance will make it impossible for them to ever get started.

Have a look at myspace and youtube, plenty of folks making music. Some will make it, most won't. Some will continue as a hobby, some will try make a career out of it by selling music online and performing live. The only thing now is it's not some A&R man and PR budget which is the arbiter of who makes and who doesn't. At least the bands that don't make won't be in hock for hundreds of thousands of pounds the record company loaned them.

Why do you still pay for music if you don't believe the artist should be getting paid for that portion of their work? You're either lying or you really don't believe in what you are saying. And what exactly are you legally downloading?

I believe in paying for what I receive. I use itunes, spotify, and occasionally amazon. What I do not believe in is paying a profit making enterprise from services not rendered. I don't believe in treating everyone with an internet connection as a criminal and financially penalizing them as such to fund record company profits, which is essentially what is being proposed. The main proposal is a tariff on the internet connections, much like the tariff Spain has on electronic equipment such as usb keys which can be used for copying music, it is

They have no right to exist? That's one of the stupidest things I've ever read. Why are you so willing to let music just fade away?

The music industry itself as I stated above is completely seperate from music. The industry relies on making money, there's nothing noble of self-sacrificing about that, so yes the industry has no right to exist. You seem to think that removing or reducing the industry ends the making of music.

Tell me, how do you propose they "adapt"?

Personally, the middle man model is unsustainable. Record companies used to exist to press and distribute physical records, the infrastructure is there to do so without them.

 

[BVS]

Do you think the music industry is? Note I don't say music, I say music industry you seem to have real trouble seperating the two. Music has been around from the dawn of time, it isn't going anywhere, the money might not be the same but people will still make music. Arguably it is easier now than any time in history to write, record and widely distribute music, the problem is sticking out from the crowd. The music industry on the other hand has barely been around a for a century.

Of course music will always be around, but you've seemed to miss the point of my last hundred posts. No matter how much you stick out, no matter how quality you are, you might be able to get a great precence on youtube and myspace, but if you can't generate enough money to get yourself through that first tour then you're dead. So then all you have are talented musicians who are working at restaurants in order to fund their music. You seem to keep ignoring this fact. The recording part and getting your name out is easy, but if no one is buying anymore than you can't live, if you can't live you can't tour. Is this what you want?

 

[BVS]

Some will continue as a hobby, some will try make a career out of it by selling music online and performing live.

And I'm telling you the day of the indie band being able to tour is dead. I've seen it, and it's only going to get worse. Labels were a necessary evil for this... Just like every other fucking industry out there, I'm sure yours has them too.

I believe in paying for what I receive. I use itunes, spotify, and occasionally amazon.

Well then forget about the "tariff" and stand up for artist and find a way to get them paid for their music, instead of making them suffer for your disdain for the "industry".

Personally, the middle man model is unsustainable. Record companies used to exist to press and distribute physical records, the infrastructure is there to do so without them.

This is a very naive definition of the record companies purpose, but it doesn't suprise me.

 

[Niceman]

Do you think Porn is vital to a society?

I think the society wants it. Are you suggesting that the government should decide what artwork is vital or useful or allowed? We're getting to a scary place in the logic of your argument......

I wouldn't suggest that 90% of the music the industry is releasing is more vital than porn. Most of it is crap to begin with....

 

[Niceman]

Some seem to think be arguing on this board as if others are actually arguing that piracy is a GOOD thing, as if we are in favor of it.

Piracy is a fact. Arguing for it or against it is as pointless as arguing against winter right now.

 

[BVS]

I think the society wants it. Are you suggesting that the government should decide what artwork is vital or useful or allowed? We're getting to a scary place in the logic of your argument......

I wouldn't suggest that 90% of the music the industry is releasing is more vital than porn. Most of it is crap to begin with....

Well like it or not, governments have always helped out the arts.

My point was more along the lines of if it's vital then it will always exist.

Music and porn will always exist, the quality is in question.

Do I see a government trying to improve the quality of porn for generations to come? No... and yes I spelled it correctly

But do I see a government trying to help the quality of music for generations to come? I don't know the answer, but I do think something has to be done or we will have an era of nothing but manufactured pop and nothing else.

 

[BVS]

Some seem to think be arguing on this board as if others are actually arguing that piracy is a GOOD thing, as if we are in favor of it.

Um, some are...

Piracy is a fact. Arguing for it or against it is as pointless as arguing against winter right now.

Winter is a fact, but people come up with solutions as to how to deal with winter conditions: road hazards, homes without heat, etc...

Some of you are arguing the do nothing and the roads won't get icy and poor elders will just have to die argument. That's what I don't get.

 

[Niceman]

Well like it or not, governments have always helped out the arts.

My point was more along the lines of if it's vital then it will always exist.

Music and porn will always exist, the quality is in question.

Do I see a government trying to improve the quality of porn for generations to come? No... and yes I spelled it correctly

But do I see a government trying to help the quality of music for generations to come? I don't know the answer, but I do think something has to be done or we will have an era of nothing but manufactured pop and nothing else.

Did I misspell something?
Well, the US does very little funding of the arts. I don't personally think that that's a good thing, but that's how it is. What little funding they do is directly to artists, and not to corporations. While I would like to see the government supporting more artists, I don't really think Warner Brothers or Universal need or deserve hand outs...

 

[Niceman]

Um, some are...



Winter is a fact, but people come up with solutions as to how to deal with winter conditions: road hazards, homes without heat, etc...

Some of you are arguing the do nothing and the roads won't get icy and poor elders will just have to die argument. That's what I don't get.

Agreed. There is nothing wrong with discussing what we should do in a post-piracy market. But the pro-and anti- piracy arguments are moot.

For myself, and pro-piracy arguments I made were not intended to say that piracy is actually a good thing, just that we can find a few silver linings in a bad situation.

 

[BVS]

Did I misspell something?

Don't worry it was a bad pun regarding the use of "porn" and "come" in the same sentence...

Well, the US does very little funding of the arts. I don't personally think that that's a good thing, but that's how it is. What little funding they do is directly to artists, and not to corporations. While I would like to see the government supporting more artists, I don't really think Warner Brothers or Universal need or deserve hand outs...

I agree, and like I said I don't think it's a perfect solution. But I do think it's one to explore, with the government not involved and maybe some type of volunteer premium bandwith package.

 

[BVS]

Agreed. There is nothing wrong with discussing what we should do in a post-piracy market. But the pro-and anti- piracy arguments are moot.

For myself, and pro-piracy arguments I made were not intended to say that piracy is actually a good thing, just that we can find a few silver linings in a bad situation.

I agree to a certain point, but I really do think you are underestimating how many are actually arguing that piracy is a good thing.

 

[toscano]

I agree to a certain point, but I really do think you are underestimating how many are actually arguing that piracy is a good thing.

I've spent more money on music than I would have if I couldn't try before I buy. I'm sure I'm not alone in that. Note, I'm not saying piracy is a good thing per se, but it's not ALL bad either.

 

[BVS]

I've spent more money on music than I would have if I couldn't try before I buy. I'm sure I'm not alone in that. Note, I'm not saying piracy is a good thing per se, but it's not ALL bad either.

Fair enough, but some of you are pretending that this is the norm, and unfortunately the norm is try, keep and not buy... and the numbers and logic say it's only going to get worse.

 

[sue4u2]

Well that's what most of you are arguing. The majority who are for illegal downloading are saying music will still survive, but they will just make income on touring and not album sales. Where have you been? What else do you think will bring in income?

ou chime in,

Why exactly are the gross profits of the golden age of the music industry something to be striven for? Musicians historically haven't been ridiculously recompensed, but in the last 50-60 years a great deal of folks have may ridiculous amounts of money, there is no real reason for that to continue.

It could be argued with the wholesale fleecing of the customer with cost of CD's that the recording industry slit their own throat. Why pay £10 pounds for an album with 12 tracks of which I may only really want 2 or 3 tracks, one of the major problems the industry has is that consumers are no longer built into paying for all 12 tracks, I pay £3 for the 3 tracks I want, and throw away the chaff. That's the real problem an industry which built itself up around the hit has given itself, people listen to hits, the crap that populates most albums is ultimately disposable to a great many folks, especially when they have alternative sources to hear the songs.

No one has given a decent answer as to why consumers should pay a tariff on internet access to fund record companies profit. If I don't steal, why should I pay to pad for profit companies bottom line without being granted access to the content which is what Bono is basically suggesting. The problems of the music industry are being passed on the ISP's because the music industry is worried about the bottom line. If musician's become poorer then boo-hoo, that's life.

Do you think the music industry is? Note I don't say music, I say music industry you seem to have real trouble seperating the two. Music has been around from the dawn of time, it isn't going anywhere, the money might not be the same but people will still make music. Arguably it is easier now than any time in history to write, record and widely distribute music, the problem is sticking out from the crowd. The music industry on the other hand has barely been around a for a century.

Have a look at myspace or youtube, music itself is in fine health, there are thousands of bands competing to get noticed. Some will make careers out of it, most won't. Perhaps music will become a little more localized, the cream of the crop will stick out and gain wider acceptance, but music itself isn't going anywhere, it's just getting seperated from the parasite which has been feeding off of it for years.

Of course music will always be around, but you've seemed to miss the point of my last hundred posts. No matter how much you stick out, no matter how quality you are, you might be able to get a great precence on youtube and myspace, but if you can't generate enough money to get yourself through that first tour then you're dead. So then all you have are talented musicians who are working at restaurants in order to fund their music. You seem to keep ignoring this fact. The recording part and getting your name out is easy, but if no one is buying anymore than you can't live, if you can't live you can't tour. Is this what you want?

I've spent more money on music than I would have if I couldn't try before I buy. I'm sure I'm not alone in that. Note, I'm not saying piracy is a good thing per se, but it's not ALL bad either.

Fair enough, but some of you are pretending that this is the norm, and unfortunately the norm is try, keep and not buy... and the numbers and logic say it's only going to get worse.

 

[BGD75]

I think we need to be realistic here: many artists agree with Bono on this issue. The difference is that not many want to speak openly about it. Bono, being Bono, says what he thinks. Do I disagree with him? no. Do I think there are thinks he should speak about? yes... and only because half of the world already hates him as it is.

I myself work in a creative field, and believe me, I also want to be paid for the hours of work I put into it. So what if he is already rich? It doesn't mean that the work he does for the rest of his career should be handed out on the street for free. If you want it, then buy it. Don't want the whole album, then buy a song or two that you like. Music industry has changed a great deal in the last 10+ years and I do think that even though computer technology has given us many useful tools, it has in many ways had a negative impact on music industry from the business aspect. Having said that, it is definitely the responsibility of the music industry big bosses/record companies to do something about it. Because musicians themselves will never will this battle - they will always be accused of being greedy bastards. I just know that Bono's comments would've never drawn this much attention, had it been Taylor Swift who said it.

 

[popshopper]

I think we need to be realistic here: many artists agree with Bono on this issue. The difference is that not many want to speak openly about it. Bono, being Bono, says what he thinks. Do I disagree with him? no. Do I think there are thinks he should speak about? yes... and only because half of the world already hates him as it is.

I myself work in a creative field, and believe me, I also want to be paid for the hours of work I put into it. So what if he is already rich? It doesn't mean that the work he does for the rest of his career should be handed out on the street for free. If you want it, then buy it. Don't want the whole album, then buy a song or two that you like. Music industry has changed a great deal in the last 10+ years and I do think that even though computer technology has given us many useful tools, it has in many ways had a negative impact on music industry from the business aspect. Having said that, it is definitely the responsibility of the music industry big bosses/record companies to do something about it. Because musicians themselves will never will this battle - they will always be accused of being greedy bastards. I just know that Bono's comments would've never drawn this much attention, had it been Taylor Swift who said it.

Bono's right in that something will probably have to be done, but what he's suggesting is fucking ludicrous and is merely the record industry passing the buck on to another industry. It's like blaming someone who lays roads for cars getting stolen. Yes ISPs allow data transfer, yes some people use that bandwidth to steal, why should everyone's data be monitored and everyone charged to fund record companies?

 

[The John Tree]

BVS, I'm glad to see someone who gets it.

I've tried to sum up my feelings towards the record industry and I can never quite get them into words, but you put it perfect: a necessary evil.

Trust me, the record labels will be missed when the next up and coming U2 disbands because they never got the financial backing to move their music beyond playing in cheap bars. Eventually, they'll just get day jobs and other careers.