Why music file sharing & pirating hasn’t impacted the music business… makes sense to me. As a DJ / audiophile (not aggro), “stealing”music is of no use to me. Most of what I listen to is rare or out of print, or just weird, or just…. not normal. This stuff isn’t out there being downloaded, it’s being bought on records. Napster never did anything for me. This quote was good, in the comments section after all the data and reports:
“When Napster came out, I tried it, and within a couple of days, I found that it wasn’t worth my time. On the other hand, once Sony started infecting computers with malware from music CDs, I stopped buying music at all.”
For me…
Has anyone mentioned Louis CK and, now, Jim Gaffigan’s successful $5 sales from their own websites? I think we see the future….
The middle man is the middle man as needed, but technology creates efficiencies. Online Travel Agents were good for hotels when distribution was a problem, but now, distribution is not the same problem and they are quickly becoming dinosaurs in lieu of new technology to create a simpler path to booking. Just the same, distributors of music were a necessary middle man, and like so many, retarded the process and made it inefficient.
Record labels are dinosaurs. As soon as bands start selling direct, and “fame” is less about marketing dollars vs tried and true, grinding it out for a decade on tour, in a van, and building a real fanbase (instead of buying it)…. it will be a warm and wonderful world of art and music, instead of commodification of art, and industry for profit.
The labels did it to themselves by not following logic or data. The lies and secrets didn’t help. I really hope they are paying attention to this. Slashdot article after the jump… make sure to read the comments –
——-from Slashdot – studies galore ——- (click this link to read the AWESOME comments on the site)
Dangerous_Minds writes“Drew Wilson of ZeroPaid has an interesting look at file-sharing. It all started with a review of a Phoenix study that was used to promote SOPA. Wilson says that the study was long on wild claims and short on fact. While most writers would simply criticize the study and move on, Wilson took it a step further and looked in to what file-sharing studies have really been saying throughout the years. What he found was an impressive 19 of 20 studies not getting any coverage. He launched a large series detailing what these studies have to say on file-sharing. The first study suggests that file-sharing litigation was a failure. The second study said that p2p has no effect on music sales. The third study found that the RIAA suppresses innovation. The fourth study says that the MPAA has simply been trying to preserve its oligopoly. The fifth study says that even when one uses the methodology of one download means one lost sale, the losses amount to less than $2 per album. The studies, so far, are being posted on a daily basis and are certainly worth the read.”
One Reply to “Ancient Middlemen & Commodification of Art.”