Illegal downloading, file-sharing and what i think- what do you think?

[skankdelvar]

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1361440117' post='1985877']
no one picked up on my point about file sharers being the ones that spend around 10x more on music than non-sharers.[/quote]

Frankly, I is desolated.

[url="http://basschat.co.uk/topic/199907-illegal-downloading-file-sharing-and-what-i-think-what-do-you-think/page__view__findpost__p__1985631"]http://basschat.co.uk/topic/199907-illegal-downloading-file-sharing-and-what-i-think-what-do-you-think/page__view__findpost__p__1985631[/url]

[Big_Stu]

[quote name='heminder' timestamp='1361411011' post='1985694']The same is true for visual artists: they don't have people pay them to build their portfolio of drawings so they can find work, and then get royalties every time someone glances at their work. They all get paid on commission per drawing.[/quote]

Some get the former; it does happen if the person is so impressed as to "invest" - and also wants a cut, same as a band manager/agent would. I have some pieces which I get a royalty on, but in the main it's the latter.

Just like music nothing is either/or or cut/dried.

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='icastle' timestamp='1361415857' post='1985729']
However, to be perfectly realistic, there's no way that the large established labels are going to be able, or indeed willing, to adopt that same business model that only exists because of current legal vagaries.
[/quote]

Gutted for them. Central heating, electricity and child labour laws really wrecked the chimney sweeping business, probably need banning. Or at least morally, should keep burning coal in your house, otherwise you are a bad person who doens't want children to have gainful employment.

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1361440117' post='1985877']
I have to say, though, that I'm rather disappointed that, amongst all the moral wrangling, no one picked up on my point about file sharers being the ones that spend around 10x more on music than non-sharers.
[/quote]

That cigarette industry, it doesn't rely on people who've never been offered a fag by their mate. Doesn't seem to fussed by people rolling their own either.

Edited February 21, 2013 by Mr. Foxen

[Big_Stu]

[Gust0o]

I'd always viewed illegal file sharing as a market response, enabled by technology - another vector, if you will, for development. With the advent of the technology required to support the file-sharing, dispersed distribution model, people voted with their feet against the current market and it's monopolies, as people have often done when things don't work for them. Some debate about what drove it, the technology or the failure of the existing market for music - if record companies had been more savvy, more progressive, would we have seen the same outcomes? Or was this always going to be the case, once the technology enabled it?

That had allowed me to bypass some of the moral debate, around is it theft, etc - which can be a distraction when looking for a root cause, and certainly (as this thread shows) adds an emotive element which is not always welcome. It's been a huge mental barrier for some of the major players in this issue, and has stopped many of them from realistically addressing the issue.

I'm not always a fan of "what" as a probing question. Try "why" to help cut through - why has illegal downloading taken off? Why has the record industry been slow to change from physical distribution? It's a good RCA technique, and dead simple - just ask five whys

[discreet]

'Why?' is a great question - why did Kodak (for example), who had a near-monopoly in the photography industry, fail to capitalise on new technology? The fact that they practically ignored the digital camera breakthrough brought them to the very brink of bankruptcy. They now focus (no pun intended) on printers and clinical diagnostic supplies...

Edited February 21, 2013 by discreet

[Gust0o]

A really good example, and perhaps not too far from our example here in some of it's dimensions - that, when we follow the "whys", Kodak most likely felt their prestige and bulk were some shield against sudden market developments; that they exercised some control in the market; that people would continue with old patterns of behaviour - and people didn't, the market didn't.

Not too dissimilar from our record companies in many respects, I would suggest.

"Why" can be very powerful. Each time you hit a reason or an issue, just ask "why" - repeat five times and you shouldn't be far off a decent root cause.

[Big_Stu]

[quote name='Gust0o' timestamp='1361456844' post='1985948']Why has the record industry been slow to change from physical distribution?[/quote]

Not as much scope for profit.

[icastle]

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1361455869' post='1985928']
Gutted for them. Central heating, electricity and child labour laws really wrecked the chimney sweeping business, probably need banning. Or at least morally, should keep burning coal in your house, otherwise you are a bad person who doens't want children to have gainful employment.
[/quote]

It really doesn't matter how many analgous semantic kids you get climbing up chimneys, the industry will only change if and when it can see a tangible benefit in doing so - that's not an opinion or an argument, that's a fact.

[Mr. Foxen]

It is more it will go if it doesn't change, or it will change because of the massive downside of not doing so. The music industry is already too bloated to sustain itself, that's clear enough.

[Big_Stu]

[quote name='icastle' timestamp='1361460881' post='1986031']the industry will only change if and when it can see a tangible benefit in doing so - that's not an opinion or an argument, that's a fact.[/quote]

That is true, but the "tangible benefit" right now & in the near future is whether it's a loss cutter benefit or an actual benefit in excess of where they are now. There's not much "added value" (the trendy new must have) to something that doesn't physically exist, part from giving something extra away for nothing (like the "bonus tracks" on a 12" single), which doesn't gain profit as such. Once CDs, DVDs & Games are download only where else can they go?

I was interested to hear on a radio report last week that they have again reduced the qualifying amount of sales needed to acheive Silver, Gold & Platinum status. When I was a kid a platinum album had sold a million copies, now it's half that IIRC.

[flyfisher]

[quote name='skankdelvar' timestamp='1361455540' post='1985921']
Frankly, I is desolated.

[url="http://basschat.co.uk/topic/199907-illegal-downloading-file-sharing-and-what-i-think-what-do-you-think/page__view__findpost__p__1985631"]http://basschat.co.u...ost__p__1985631[/url]
[/quote]

Oh dear. Oh dearie dear. My humblest apologies for rushing through the back-posts and missing your comment. It would be bad enough if I'd only read them through once but I actually read them twice because I was sure someone would have picked up on it. Of course, when I say "read" I'm obviously fooling myself as I clearly didn't 'read' anything at all. Must have been too early for the old brain to register.

Frankly, I share your desolation, though for different reasons.

[skankdelvar]

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1361463898' post='1986101']
Oh dear. Oh dearie dear. My humblest apologies [/quote]

Entirely unnecessary, old fruit.

I liked your point about 10x etc and you're right. Thing is, I like inverting perfectly valid stats and prodding them into an absurd shape. Call it a hobby.

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1361463898' post='1986101']
Must have been too early for the old brain to register. Frankly, I share your desolation, though for different reasons.
[/quote]

Join me here in the day room. The carers come by with a nice cup of tea on an hourly basis. Meds at 8, 12 and 6pm.

[color=#ffffff].[/color]

Edited February 21, 2013 by skankdelvar

[icastle]

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1361461579' post='1986048']
It is more it will go if it doesn't change, or it will change because of the massive downside of not doing so. The music industry is already too bloated to sustain itself, that's clear enough.
[/quote]

It's not clear though is it?

All I'm really seeing here are loads of unsubstantiated claims cunningly(ish) disguised as fact and flying in the face of commercial reality.

[Gust0o]

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1361460036' post='1986016']
Not as much scope for profit.
[/quote]

Absolutely, Stu - and, certainly, less [i]control[/i] of what we would call the value-stream.

In terms of 'tangible benefit', I don't think it could have been clearer - how many examples have we had? Kodak? Jessops? Game? HMV? All running to the wall, for the wont of a new business model.

We're still on the why, though. We could see it. So, with our record company example, even with the change to digital media apparent - why didn't they change?

Not as much scope for profit? Yeah, very likely. But, if the market is changing you still need to adapt to it or fail - I mean, if you were making a 10% margin and had to drop to 5%, it's still better than 0% and the abyss.

And this is where I think the why could be telling - why didn't they adapt? Did they think, in hypotheses, that they could exercise a level of control on the market, to the extent that they could control production and thus stave off the need for change?

[skankdelvar]

[quote name='icastle' timestamp='1361469422' post='1986236']
All I'm really seeing here are loads of unsubstantiated claims cunningly(ish) disguised as fact and flying in the face of [s]commercial[/s] reality.
[/quote]

Welcome to off-topic, where the shrine of Saint Bollocks is garlanded with fresh flowers every day.
[color=#ffffff].[/color]

Edited February 21, 2013 by skankdelvar

[Big_Stu]

[quote name='Gust0o' timestamp='1361469883' post='1986253']And this is where I think the why could be telling - why didn't they adapt? Did they think, in hypotheses, that they could exercise a level of control on the market, to the extent that they could control production and thus stave off the need for change?[/quote]

They're working on the assumption (sorry that should be "market research projection") that by the time hard copy is the negligible minority sale security procedures will have made illegal downloads less of an option.
+ there's less job security in the business so they're a bit more of a "meh" consideration of the future.

[discreet]

[quote name='skankdelvar' timestamp='1361470172' post='1986262']
Welcome to off-topic, where the shrine of Saint Bollocks is garlanded with fresh flowers every day.
[/quote]

(Chants) The bollocks! The bollocks! Praise be to Saint Bollocks! *does little votive dance - falls over*

[oggiesnr]

Doesn't matter how cheap you make it, some people will always prefer "free" and that is the conundrum for the business and one to which I don't see a ready answer. The creation of music has a cost, unless we want a world where all musicians are hobbyists, then that cost has to be covered. In an ideal world the answer might be more gigging but elsewhere on BC I read about music venues shutting, pay to play etc that suggests that that's not going to be the answer.

Steve

[icastle]

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1361462996' post='1986084']
That is true, but the "tangible benefit" right now & in the near future is whether it's a loss cutter benefit or an actual benefit in excess of where they are now. There's not much "added value" (the trendy new must have) to something that doesn't physically exist, part from giving something extra away for nothing (like the "bonus tracks" on a 12" single), which doesn't gain profit as such. Once CDs, DVDs & Games are download only where else can they go?
[/quote]

Yep that's what I was trying to explain earlier.

If something is available free of charge then it's market value is essentially zero.
The only real 'value added' route would be to give people who pay, something extra - 'extra' equating to 'free'.
That free portion then gets shared - your 'value add' is then worth zero and now you have to add some more freebies and the cycle continues.

That'd leave the music industry with the same size bills they have now, but without the returns and, I suspect, even a break even possibility.

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1361462996' post='1986084']
I was interested to hear on a radio report last week that they have again reduced the qualifying amount of sales needed to acheive Silver, Gold & Platinum status. When I was a kid a platinum album had sold a million copies, now it's half that IIRC.
[/quote]

Back in the 80's I used to be dead impressed if someone told me they had a single in the charts.
Nowadays, even if I work my hardest to seem impressed, the best I can muster is 'hmmm, that's nice'.

[bigjohn]

[quote name='Gust0o' timestamp='1361469883' post='1986253']
Absolutely, Stu - and, certainly, less [i]control[/i] of what we would call the value-stream.

In terms of 'tangible benefit', I don't think it could have been clearer - how many examples have we had? Kodak? Jessops? Game? HMV? All running to the wall, for the wont of a new business model.

We're still on the why, though. We could see it. So, with our record company example, even with the change to digital media apparent - why didn't they change?

Not as much scope for profit? Yeah, very likely. But, if the market is changing you still need to adapt to it or fail - I mean, if you were making a 10% margin and had to drop to 5%, it's still better than 0% and the abyss.

And this is where I think the why could be telling - why didn't they adapt? Did they think, in hypotheses, that they could exercise a level of control on the market, to the extent that they could control production and thus stave off the need for change?
[/quote]

They should have all read "[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Moved_My_Cheese"]Who Moved my Cheese?[/url]"

[b]Change Happens[/b] [i]They Keep Moving The Cheese[/i] [b]Anticipate Change[/b] [i]Get Ready For The Cheese To Move[/i] [b]Monitor Change[/b] [i]Smell The Cheese Often So You Know When It Is Getting Old[/i] [b]Adapt To Change Quickly[/b] [i]The Quicker You Let Go Of Old Cheese, The Sooner You Can Enjoy New Cheese[/i] [b]Change[/b] [i]Move With The Cheese[/i] [b]Enjoy Change![/b] [i]Savor The Adventure And Enjoy The Taste Of New Cheese![/i] [b]Be Ready To Change Quickly And Enjoy It Again[/b] [i]They Keep Moving The Cheese.[/i]

[xilddx]

This is interesting . . .


[b] [size=4]Then vs. Now: The Path to Success for Artists[/size][/b]

[b]George Howard[/b] is the Executive Vice President of Wolfgang’s Vault. Wolfgang’s Vault is the parent company of Concert Vault, Paste Magazine, and Daytrotter. Mr. Howard is an Associate Professor of Management at Berklee College of Music

http://blog.tunecore.com/2012/06/then-v-now-the-path-to-success-for-artists.html

[skankdelvar]

[quote name='icastle' timestamp='1361470408' post='1986273']
The only real 'value added' route would be to give people who pay, something extra - 'extra' equating to 'free'.[/quote]

Another added value might be some 'good' music. Lots of demand for that, these days.

I mean, giving away three crappy 'bonus' tracks with the other 16 crappy 'paid-for' tracks doesn't really float anyone's boat, does it?

[quote name='bigjohn' timestamp='1361470465' post='1986276']
They should have all read "[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Moved_My_Cheese"]Who Moved my Cheese?[/url]"[/quote]

Here's a taster:

[quote]Meanwhile, Sniff and Scurry have found "Cheese Station N", new cheese. Back at Cheese Station C, Hem and Haw are affected by their lack of cheese and blame each other for their problem. Hoping to change, Haw again proposes a search for new cheese. However, Hem is comforted by his old routine and is frightened about the unknown. He knocks the idea again. After a while of being in denial, the humans remain without cheese.

One day, having discovered his debilitating fears, Haw begins to chuckle at the situation and stops taking himself so seriously. Realizing he should simply move on, Haw enters the maze, but not before chiseling "If You Do Not Change, You Can Become Extinct" on the wall of Cheese Station C for his friend to ponder.[/quote]

Definitely my kind of book. Totally out there.

Edited February 21, 2013 by skankdelvar

[Gust0o]

bigjohn you're a total don!

Coming back to Stu's point about hanging in for security measures - perhaps, yeah. I'm not totally convinced, but it's perhaps part of it. Thinking it through, did we see any significant investment in security before the genie of piracy was out of the bottle? It felt to me like they simply tried to ignore the channel

The very public response was, of course, to threaten or take legal action against anyone who challenged their own supremacy. Which fanned as many fires as it fought.

[icastle]

[quote name='skankdelvar' timestamp='1361470806' post='1986283']
Another added value might be some 'good' music. Lots of demand for that, these days.

I mean, giving away three crappy 'bonus' tracks with the other 16 crappy 'paid-for' tracks doesn't really float anyone's boat, does it?
[/quote]

Ah, but that's opening up a different container of wriggly things.

What I consider to be 'good', whilst appealing to those adorned in beige cardigans with leather elbow patches, probably wouldn't go down quite so well with a less discerning listener.