Agree and disagree.

Post #284,949 by Another Scott 5/19/07 8:59:17 PM Reply	Agree and disagree. If the industry for paying for music was so bad, how could Apple make so much money on iTunes? How could Napster have re-invented? People will pay. But $2 per track (even for the garbage) is too high...and thats what you get with a 20$ cd. And they don't even market the 3$ cd single anymore...which people used to buy (because the latest Timberlake disk has 1 maybe 2 solid tracks)...so they force you to the 20 on an item that has the same cost basis. iTunes? Want one track. Gimme a buck. And guess what. It works. Is Apple making money at the iTunes store? I seem to recall that they weren't making much money at all there - they were, instead, making boatloads of money on the iPods. But some have recently argued that they do actually make some money on each sale - e.g. [link\|http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2007/04/23/apple-turns-out-itunes-makes-money-pacific-crest-says-subscription-service-seems-inevitable/\|this] Barron's article. BestBuy supposedly has put many of the record store chains out of business. Most of the new music stuff they're pushing seems to be around $15. I don't know of anyone who is selling CDs at list price. I think you and Andrew are both right. Andrew's right that too many people think that copying MP3s is fine and that there's noting wrong with having a 20,000 song music collection without having paid for any of the music in any format. You're right that the RIAA and record companies are looking excuses for falling sales rather than considering their own business practices. As for how someone could sell millions of albums and have nothing to show for it, if they were adults when they signed the contracts, and if the contracts had a limited timespan, and if the contract was not misrepresented to the artists, well, they're adults and should know what they're doing. People have known since the early 1960s that the record companies rarely pay the artists much at all (witness the Beatles). People these days should know better. If the contracts were misrepresented, then perhaps a class-action suit is in order. I wonder if someone like the late Johnny Cochran's [link\|http://www.cochranfirm.com/\|firm] would be interested. Cheers, Scott.
Post #284,950 by folkert 5/19/07 10:06:37 PM Reply	Agree and disagree. I have nearly 800 CDs. I have about 300 "current" music and 500 Classical/Opera/Orchestral/etc CDs too. So, paying for "none of it in any form", I call BS I also have about 300 DVDs and VHS tapes. so as far as stealing those... ba-ba-ba-bah. -- [link\|mailto:greg@gregfolkert.net\|greg], [link\|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry\|REMEMBER ED CURRY!] @ *i_wethey* `PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05 Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0 2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74 E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0`
Post #284,951 by Another Scott 5/19/07 10:26:19 PM Reply	I wasn't including you (or Bill). Please read it again. :-) I'm sure we've all seen kids who seem to enjoy getting as much as they can without having to work for or pay for it. Those are the people I was talking about. Not people who have bought 3 copies of "Dark Side of the Moon" over the years and want one on an iPod, too. Not people who get a few songs from friends. "Legally" there may not be much difference between those groups, at least if we believe the RIAA's interpretation. I think Fair Use should come into play far more often than the RIAA does, but if someone has paid for almost none of their collection, then something's wrong. Just my $0.02. Cheers, Scott.
Post #284,956 by bepatient 5/20/07 2:34:35 AM Reply	Big box retailers The independent music store's days were numbered. Circuit City, Best Buy, Walmart etc...could afford a smaller margin and make it up on volume. Theres still Sam Goody around here..but I don't know how much longer they'll last. And those folks with the 20k music collection were the same one's in the 70s with boxes of cassettes taped from all their friends albums...and they are still the minority. Don't misunderstand. There is room for enforcement in internet space...but it is not at all the reason why the music industry is imploding. Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry._{Adrian Belew}
Post #284,965 by Andrew Grygus 5/20/07 11:32:40 AM 5/20/07 11:52:40 AM Reply	20k certainly is a minority, but . . . . . every computer I see that's been touched by anyone under 24 has at least a few dozen to a hundred or so "shared" songs on it. Multiply that few dozen by the number of pre-24s who have computers and it comes out a pretty big number. Multiply that number by 5% to get actual lost sales and it's still pretty big. Now I'm not saying those sales should belong to the RIAA, I'm saying that an alternative distribution going around the RIAA and properly rewarding creative talent will not become significant as long as stealing from the RIAA costs nothing. And yeah, iTunes is a new alternate channel, but it's still under the control of a large, greedy corporation - I doubt artists are getting much more from iTunes sales than from RIAA sales. So most music today is junk anyway? perhaps that's because the talent pool is drying up. What intelligent, talented person wants to participate in a marketplace where they'll clearly be ripped off by distributors and end users alike, and by anyone else who can get a finger into the pie. Better to go to law school or drive trucks. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx] Edited by Andrew Grygus May 20, 2007, 11:52:40 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #284,966 by folkert 5/20/07 12:53:05 PM Reply	The one thing I am wondering though. How is it, that the RIAA gets a "media" tax on every blank cassette, CD and NOW DVD, along with the MPAA getting a bigger one for DVDs? Assumptions and payments are far and wide NOT fair. The (RI\|MP)AA have FAR to much power and far to much influence on the "Laws" that surround copyright (and patent for that matter). They are wielding the DMCA and now newer "soon to be" laws much like the Grim Reaper wields his scythe during a nuclear explosion over a populace in a city. They don't care about "what is fair" they care about the money and only the money. Not recovering payments for artists. Artists don't get ANY money from the quick $3700 settlements. Nor do they get any funds from the $750,000 lawsuits they have won. But the Artists pay the "losses" the RIAA has suffered out of the "royalty fund". How is that? Yes, fair? And those less than 24 year old kids, they have been sharing music since they have been able to share. Since the first affordable reel to reel tape machines, to the affordable cassettes, to the affordable CDs, to now the affordable DVDs, and soon affordable HD-DVDs and Blu-Ray. These same "sharing violators" are the same people that (used to) buy HUGE amounts of music later on in life. They (The RIAA) are biting the hand that feeds, later on. They claim they are losing with current pirating... I can see it. But they are tearing up the foundations for many of these same "pirate" that can't afford the music now, that will be able to afford the music later, once they get job and have finances to pay for them. The RIAA are turning off the spigot themselves and the RIAA doesn't see the problem. I've bought (as an example) "Rush - Moving Pictures" so many times, I've really forgotten the true number. But right now, I have an two versions of it in CD form, "Moving Pictures" and "Moving Pictures - The Rush Remasters" in my collection. I know I've bought at least 4 more CDs of it (scratched, broken, driven over) and at least 5 cassettes (maybe more due to wear out and being "borrowed" (stolen) more than once) and I have 3 Vinyls of it, one so worn it is HORRIBLE, One played until I got CDs and another I bought at the same time as it was a "Buy one get one half price" at "Believe in Music" at the time. ("Believe in Music" is dead and gone) So, summary goes like this: The RIAA doesn't want ANYONE to listen to ANY music the RIAA isn't paid for. This includes seed music to get people to buy later in life. They want the money NOW rather than later. This bodes horribly for them, as they are trying to change a phenomena that has been going on since "Reel to Reel" tapes were affordable. They are holding on so tightly they are killing the "for pay" music themselves. If they want to really make the industry right, they need to pay the artists properly and gently guide the channel(s). If they don't they will become (and largely have been already) a non-player in the industry that is seemingly passing them by. -- [link\|mailto:greg@gregfolkert.net\|greg], [link\|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry\|REMEMBER ED CURRY!] @ *i_wethey* `PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05 Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0 2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74 E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0`
Post #284,967 by Andrew Grygus 5/20/07 1:47:52 PM Reply	Yes, they are being stupid, short sighted and greedy. Unfortunately it's hard to fight them effectively when the moral high ground has been lost. No matter how you point out their greed, stupidity and interference with your enjoyment they scream "billions lost to piracy" - that backed with plenty of lobbyist cash and political contributions gets them whatever they want. Piracy works very well for them, just as it did for Microsoft. Not only does it give them political leverage but it makes it difficult for a distribution system that goes around them to thrive. It's hard to compete with "free" downloads. As with all anti-piracy measures, it's the innocents who are hurt while the guilty thrive. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #284,982 by boxley 5/20/07 11:34:13 PM Reply	small labels selling direct, psychopathic records comes to mind. They got hosed by a biggie, got a lawyer aand said fuck you all. They appear to be doing nicely in their market. thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep reach me at [link\|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net\|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]

Welcome to IWETHEY!