Posts by Simon Grigg
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
For example, it is estimated that 19 out of every 20 downloaded songs infringe copyright.
Is a nonsense line that means absolutely nothing beyond the scare factor which doesn't take too kindly to any scrutiny
-
Doesn't Last.fm already do a lot of that but without the cost or the adverts? Pretty sure you can click on artists, albums or get it do you up your own 'sounds like' playlist
The tech buffs will be able to help but I think this is quite a leap forward in terms of caching and delivery.
-
-
suck it up, cut their costs and accept that nobody is going to get rich from recorded music any more
Not even close to true. Do you know how money you can generate simply from the performance fees on a medium sized international track? Or how much someone like Coldplay makes every minute just from radioplay?
A lot of people are still making more money than we can even dream of from recorded music, it's just that the share of the pie that goes to the traditional record labels is increasingly diminished.
That's what this is all about..all of it.
-
The problem I have with it is that it will never be enough for the industry that thinks it is missing out on revenue, and that it doesn't fix the principle problem of the broken business model that will continue to see a downturn in sales.
Bob Lefsetz is unusally good today (it's email only as I type, not yet on his site but there is much more, including something I agree with, that iTunes is a dead end, although we're not there yet):
It's time to stop suing traders (stop the Pirate Bay proceedings post-haste) and recognize that the labels will be saved by the future, which is imminent.
I used to comb Limewire and Rapidshare, adding to my collection of often unlistened to MP3s. But I've just about given up. It's just not worth the time. Not when I've got Spotify.
Once again, everything the pundits said was going to be true is. You don't fight piracy via lawsuits, you just develop a more enticing business proposition. ISP fees? Charging for downloading? Who is going to bother to take the time to steal when you can listen to whatever you want, instantly?
Dunno if Spotify works in NZ (here in SEA it's only a premium service to date) but it has legs as a concept, assuming, and this is a big one for much of the world, that we all have high speed broadband
-
so why don't they just focus on prosecuting these people like they've been able to do under the Copyright Act for a while now (haven't they?) rather than snipping their broadband wires...
Part of the reason is that the industry has talking itself into believing many of the ludicrous claims made by it's spokespeople in recent years and it's an easier way to assault the downturn in sales than working through the other reasons for the malaise.
They did a similar thing a few years back when RIANZ touted the number of blank CDs being sold in NZ every day as lost sales. I sat in a meeting where we were told that at least half the several million blanks sold in NZ every year equated to lost sales until somebody quietly mentioned that the alleged lost figure was more than the total CD sales in NZ in the pre-blanks era.
-
I know it's a flawed, emotional way of thinking, but the reality is that if I"m faced with paying $35 for a CD more or less indistinguishable from the ones that litter the floor of my office, I'd rather download the shit illegally. But if it's on vinyl, well...
well, you I do still buy it, and it's my format of choice but mostly it's a matter of practicality: I'm in Asia where it's hot, my turntables are in storage (weeps), most of the physical stuff I buy I get when travelling, it weights a ton and our bags are always over the limit and we have to get inventive in the how do we con the check in staff game and so on. Apart from anything else, as you say, it just looks right (and still sounds soooooo much better). The vinyl I buy now tends to be the second hand oh I never thought I'd see that again sort of stuff.
But NYC was simply awash with vinyl. It's clearly a very big part of that market again.
-
The change in political interest it is largely due to the CFF efforts in getting the issue noticed by a wider audience.
either way it's welcome.
The funny thing is that I'm going to stand up tomorrow morning in front of a hall full of webby people and say, don't write these music people off and don't be polarised.
The thing is. many of these so called industry stalwarts quietly agree with your position but are tethered by corporate policy dictated from afar. And that policy of course dictates RIANZ's stance. They are paid (very well) to argue a certain way. I doubt many folks at Universal listen to Hip Hop Hits Vol 23 but they'll swear to you it's all pure genius.
And I think that, as Samuel Scott is evidence, the support for S92(A) amongst musicians is at the very best mixed. Mikey was having trouble agreeing with Chris in that sound clip.
-
Cheers, Don, RB
-
In which case, to echo Russell, he is out of touch. Nothing wrong with that but let's kick that particular claim to touch.
I don't know that either way. I value Russell's input and contacts on this, but to be honest, I'm also aware of Chris' network, which is equally deep. I think it's a matter of we really don't know rather than kicking anything into touch.
But that said, I do think that Chris' early comments were ill advised and I'd be surprised if he didn't concur. He ain't a dummy or close to out out of touch.
Great post Simon. I agree completely.
Ta, mate.