Favorite Files

No favorite files added yet

Recent Posts

1. Comment - UK law firm looks to begin prosecuting file sharers

   (Sep 4, 2008 - 6:17 AM)

   The largest digital music download retailer in the world is iTunes. They charge 79p for single track downloads in the UK. They charge 99 cents EUR for single track downloads in Europe.
   
   When I ask Google ".79 gbp in eur", I get this response: ".79 British pounds = 0.967153496 Euros", which is 97p for tracks in Europe at today's exchange rate. That's 2p difference.
   
   In the US, people pay 56p for a track, though. That's 23p difference. They say it's because doing business in the US is much cheaper for them than doing business in Europe and the UK.

2. Comment - UK law firm looks to begin prosecuting file sharers

   (Sep 4, 2008 - 6:05 AM)

   Ed: Thanks for your comments. I agree that there has to be a middle ground and I hope that many other independent labels are contributing towards finding it. Our label allows listeners to download free songs off of nearly every album we release, but that doesn't appear to be enough for some people, who want everything for "free". But of course nothing is really free. I imagine that some people are unaware that even the least-cost scenario for releasing music to the world requires time, space, recording equipment, servers, and skilled people at all levels to make it possible.

3. Comment - UK law firm looks to begin prosecuting file sharers

   (Aug 22, 2008 - 9:59 AM)

   Dear Ed,
   
   I've been running across a lot of talk of "the music industry" and I wanted to remind you that the music industry is a very diverse place. I feel that many journalists and bloggers tend to conflate the independents with the major labels, much to the detriment of the independent music sector, who are generally anti-major and resent the tools of control the majors use to keep competition down and, erm, "influence" consumers. Their tools are organisations like the RIAA.
   
   And even among independent labels there is a divide between those with the culture and attitude of the corporate giants who dominate the industry (and would act just like the majors if they had the market share) and what I consider to be the true independents, who have a culture that is much more artist- and consumer-focussed. Let's just say that independents like the one I work for weren't involved in these lawsuits. At the same time we don't deserve to suffer from illegal downloads. These days, most of us are barely scraping along as it is.
   
   Part of the problem is that the people who are downloading all our music for free don't see the distinction between the companies fuelled by corporate greed and the ones who merely wish to make a livelihood for themselves and the artists they represent. How are the artists supposed to be able to make their music if they can't live off of the fruits of their labour?
   
   I recently attended an event where independent labels were able to talk to a panel of 18-25 year-olds about their music listening and purchasing. The panel was pretty much unanimous in their opinion that the music should be free and that labels and artists should make their money off of merchandising (t-s***s and ringtones) and synchronisation licence sales. It's hard to imagine artists who sell at most 5,000-10,000 albums gaining the stature required to make a living off of merchandising and synchronisation--that's the domain of the really big artists who have major financial backing and that "influence" I mentioned.
   
   My point is that if bloggers and journalists conflate the independents and the majors, regular people will, too. And we're definitely *not* the same.
   
   Regards,
   
   Damon