localzuk Posted March 17, 2010 Posted March 17, 2010 The law is poorly conceived, poorly written and, as with most laws in the UK of late, will be executed poorly.
Edu-IT Posted March 17, 2010 Posted March 17, 2010 I had to laugh at this program, or more so at the professionals, who seem to come up with only screengrabs of torrents. Oh, wow, so much investigating there! Kids should have made it more difficult by deleting the stuff from the uTorrent, at least they would have had to do some work then.
Jon Posted March 17, 2010 Posted March 17, 2010 The music industry are never happy it seems, For as long as I can remember (1970's) they have been banging on about how piracy is ruining their income. At first it was the increase in sales of blank cassette tapes (remember those?) they were convinced that these were going to sap all income from record sales, either by people recording the top 40 from the radio on a Sunday afternoon, or simple recording their LP's and sharing them with their mates. They were so paranoid about this that they lobbied government for a tax to be levied on each blank cassette sale. The next thing was DAT this was only invented, they said, to enable people to pirate music. After that it was of course the recordable CD that was to bring forward their downfall. And so it goes on now with illegal MP3 downloading ... Despite all of this for the last 40 years the music industry has done pretty well for itself. I think that the current crisis is brought about my music industry figures such as Simon Cowell and his ilk. It seems that at the moment to become a successful artist you have to be "discovered" by one of them on some reality TV show ... If they spent more time, as used to happen, scouting out raw talent from small gigs in pubs etc. and then promoting them I feel that the music industry would once again become as relevant and essential as it used to be back in the day. 1
jamesb Posted March 17, 2010 Posted March 17, 2010 Just had a thought. Streaming doesn't work since they can't get enough money for it. A subscription service for the hardcore fans doesn't work as most fans don't care about the extra content they get from this. So, what about a service whereby you could charge £1 a month, or £12 a year, or some similar amount, to 'sponsor' a band. In return you get their music sent to you on release. You could also get a discount (small) on bandwear and similar as well as access to video footage of their shows (streamed from the site, and set up to only be available to those users who are subscribed, not downloadable). This wouldn't be a be-all and end-all, but would offer the following benefits for bands: - 10 000 subscribers becomes viable financially. You're getting £120 000 a year at that many users. For a small, amateur band who might have 1000 'fans' (still generous, but plausible) you're getting £12 000 a year, plus any money from live shows, merchandise and so forth. Its just an outlandish thought, but people might be willing to pay £1 a month for quite a few bands purely for the convenience of having the music sent to them directly (or downloadable easily from a legit site with no risks of malicious payloads attached to the file), along with the extra benefits. It dodges the current issue of subscription services, since you're subscribing directly to the band and funding the band, so there's no iffiness with splitting the revenues between lots of different people. Still far from ideal, but possibly a starting point for amateur bands at least. Someone's probably already set it up.
Guest theeldergeek Posted March 17, 2010 Posted March 17, 2010 And with that whiney moron Jeremy Vine... I cannot STAND that bloke! I refuse to watch Panorama all the time he is involved, and re-tune my radio to anything but Radio 2 when he is on.
Guest theeldergeek Posted March 17, 2010 Posted March 17, 2010 If the music industry is in such dire straits financially, then how come Sony Music have managed to stump up £133million for rights to Michael Jackson's music and memorabilia? That is an obscene amount of money.
Guest Guest Posted March 17, 2010 Posted March 17, 2010 I think that the current crisis is brought about my music industry figures such as Simon Cowell and his ilk. It seems that at the moment to become a successful artist you have to be "discovered" by one of them on some reality TV show ... If they spent more time, as used to happen, scouting out raw talent from small gigs in pubs etc. and then promoting them I feel that the music industry would once again become as relevant and essential as it used to be back in the day. No no, thats how its always worked. Look at the beatles or led zeppelin. No wait thats not right It seems now that you have to be "instant success", ie the record companies can milk you for a year or 2, and then get rid. Theres no loyalty to the bands, from record companies and fans. Look at the Kaiser cheifs and the Arctic monkeys. Both got 2 years of "success" and then 2 more years of Top100, now they are all but gone.
jamesb Posted March 17, 2010 Posted March 17, 2010 If the music industry is in such dire straits financially, then how come Sony Music have managed to stump up £133million for rights to Michael Jackson's music and memorabilia? That is an obscene amount of money. Well, the banks are being encouraged to loan money...
Jon Posted March 17, 2010 Posted March 17, 2010 How about ... They make ALL music freely downloadable BUT tag a 5 second ad on to the begining and end of every track. This would allow people to download whatever they wanted, and in the process discover new talent, that they would otherwise never dream of buying or listening to, plus, it would generate income at the same time. If you then wanted the music without the ad you could buy it as you currently do.
webman Posted March 17, 2010 Posted March 17, 2010 How about ... They make ALL music freely downloadable BUT tag a 5 second ad on to the begining and end of every track. This would allow people to download whatever they wanted, and in the process discover new talent, that they would otherwise never dream of buying or listening to, plus, it would generate income at the same time. If you then wanted the music without the ad you could buy it as you currently do. Or instead of paying, I could create a script that uses freely-available tools to strip the first and last 5 seconds of every track I download.
Jon Posted March 17, 2010 Posted March 17, 2010 Or instead of paying, I could create a script that uses freely-available tools to strip the first and last 5 seconds of every track I download. You could do that, but, not everybody could, plus income has already been generated from the ad
somabc Posted March 17, 2010 Posted March 17, 2010 These articles from Courtney Love & Steve Albini sum up the problem with record companies Courtney Love does the math - Music News: Artists. Songs. Videos - Salon.com The Problem With Music
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now