YOUR SAY
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
Should music be free? How should the music industry and ISPs respond to the trend of downloading tracks from the internet?
WHAT'S NEW...
- Video - Watch Online
-
-
- World News Australia Stories
- Your Say
-
-
Are we doing enough to stop climate change?
"With regard to efficient house design, lofts were not mentioned. They use significantly less mate..."
-
Are we doing enough to stop climate change?
"I have submitted my comments TWICE and would like to see them published IN THEIR ENTIRETY. Wheth..."
-
Are we doing enough to stop climate change?
"I don't tighter regulation that adds to the cost of residential buildings is necessarily a good t..."
-
I really don't think the show had the right balance of people onboard, and didn't really tackle the issue before solving it. The fact is that kids download music illegally (I'm 15) because it is free and easy. Emphasize FREE. iTunes is just as easy, probably even more so, because it ties directly into the dominant MP3 player on the market: the iPod. The problem with pay for services is that they cost money, and while this may seem obvious, kids don't pay for music because they either don't have the disposable income to pay on something from iTunes that is of lower quality (128kbps AAC), is restricted to one system without jumping through hoops, and could be listened to as many times as they wish for free, completely legally through official YouTube channels. Mainstream music these days is so generic and terrible that most kids don't feel obligated to pay for it because they know that they will like it for a day, or a week, then drop it and move on to the next number one. When "I kissed a girl and I liked it" is number 1 on charts all over the world, something is very wrong. For example, if I liked that song, or simply wanted it for my collection, because I don't value the song, that would be one I would, in this case download for free. Thank goodness I don't, because it is a terrible example of music. If I genuinely enjoyed a song, that I personally will listen to, and believe in the artist, I will buy their record, on conditions. I will buy a song or an album online through iTunes if it is part of the iTunes Plus program. This provides the songs you download and pay for without the Digital Rights Management that was talked about on the show. It also provides higher quality (256kbps AAC) to you. If not, next time I'm in a shopping centre, I'll drop by to the record store and pick it up for an exorbitant amount, because even though albums are $9.99 in the US, apparently $34.99 in Australia is reasonable. If tracks where 10ยข, and kids had more knowledge about music, and knew what downloading was doing to the artists they really liked, there would be 10 times as many tracks sold, and that way, the people who like your music are going to get it in high quality, and the people who truly don't like "I kissed a girl and I liked it" are going to pass. The record labels have to remember that a high percentage of downloads, the 1,000,000,000 tracks in Australia per year number thrown around so often wouldn't have been sales, and I very much doubt it's even one in five. Good show, thought provoking, but very frustrating at times, especially at the host who really had no clue at all. Adam
Books are free to virtually anyone in any developed country that has a public library system so it is logical that recorded music should be free.
I would willingly pay for music non-drm mp3 format. But where can I do that? Nowhere. Sites like Amazon only offer non-drm mp3s for people in the US. iTunes is a joke because it locks you into using an iPod. I don't use an iPod and have no intention on using one ever. How about the music industry chiefs get off their backwards thinking butts and offer a facility for people in AU to by non-drm mp3s ...instead of trying to sue everybody in existence.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7459796.stm Like Kid Rock or not this is an interesting article. "And I go: 'Wait a second, you've been stealing from the artists for years. Now you want me to stand up for you?'".Was kids response to his record label asking him to speak out about downloading. The internet should remain neutral. I don't like the idea of paying an extra fee aside to my normal ISP fee, to download music. That direction will end up with the internet being like pay tv. Its is not a right for a business model to be protected especially if it is resistant to change.
No. Music should be paid for, but not the rediculous prices they charge. I used to buy heaps of albums back when they sold for $17.99. With the introduction of CD's they went to $25 then to $33 in a matter of weeks. I stopped buying records or CD's then and taped friends CD's. The robbers forced me to steal music. I hated paying for crappy tracks. Today, there is no excuse. The record companies could sell music per track over the net, with no need for packaging and distribution etc, they could make serious money. We, the music loving public, could save money and afford to buy entre sets of musc from a favourite artist, buy whole collections of wanted tracks, and even try music we wouldn't gamble on otherwise. They may even discourage theft.
This is hard for me as I have a lot of unpaid for songs. and the answer is not the saame for all. I can only say I am humbled in the presence of great musicians. I often sit and listen to their music and enjoy same and privately thank them in lew of payment. I have a family of three and wold have no way of affording this indulgence. I do a little free work from time to time and I see apreciation as results please extend my apreciation to the many valued artists. I am sorry that I do not pay!
I download the occasional song, but I don't think this is wrong. Since I wouldn't buy the songs/albums anyway, I'm not really depriving the artist of any money, because if downloading wasn't available I wouldn't buy the album.
Do people watch TV for free? Do they pay the TV producers for their shows? Ads pay for TV, right? Do you watch all the ads when watching TV? Or do you change channel, or go to the kitchen, or use fast forward for recorded shows? If I downloaded a TV show with the ads taken out, does this constitute stealing? I think the producers of music and TV have got to realise that many people are going to download music and TV and it's pointless saying, 'oh stop it, you're ruining our business, you're a thief, would you steal a car?'. What they have got to do is find other ways to sell their product, ways that people are prepared to do. As an analogy, if I set up a shop that sells lollies on the street, but to cut costs I decide not to have a clerk. I instead put a sign saying "Please place your money in the box provided. Take only the exact change." And then in the future discover that all my product is gone and there is no money, could I really say "People are dishonest! You are stealing from me! Would you steal a car?" Of course I couldn't. The smart thing to do would be to realise that this selling method isn't working. Same applies to the music industry. I don't know the answer, but I'm not being paid to figure it out. I'm sure there's plenty of rich music execs out there. They should think of a solution.
this issue is too complex to simply sum up in such black and white terms. but a few points i would like to make. the music industry currently puts almost zero value on music. I can hear it on the radio (and even tape it off the radio. or with todays technology save it off digital radio im just time shifting..its all perfectly legal), i can watch and hear it on youtube or the artists myspace etc. everywhere i can listen to it legit for free on the net. the second i put it on my mp3 its suddenly evil and stealing ??? i dont buy that. what if i wire my whole house to be online and access legit sites for all songs all the time? stupid method to achieve the same thing as a download. the music industry also tells us on one hand we are merely buying the right to listen to the music when we want..but then we RE-buy it when we upgrade to CD etc. and then they say we are buying a single copy of it in a certain form. Well which is it. Im sorry if i buy a cd im going to rip it to my MP3 etc all i want. Im going to lend it jsut as a do a book and if i buy the RIGHTS to listen to a song im going to expect those rights to extend to infinity. so u should be giving me the cd or digital version of something i own for free?? face it MOST musicians gain IMMENSELY from so called illegal downloads. The herd guys understood this as do many others. i tend not to DL music. but i do burn friends cds sometimes. and if i like it i then often buy the original, i almost always will then see them live and also buy a t-shirt or similar at the gig (and certainly their next cd and the speed value ahs been added to the product by need to have it asap). now if i had not burnt that original cd i would certainly not have invested a further couple of hundred dollars in them so it may be a small up front loss for a potentially large gain. the chocolate bar in the supermarket analogy is not even comparable. one deprives the owner of his product. the download merely deprives him of a POTENTIAL sale...thats the key...if i seriously dont like it why would i ever buy it?? its merely an extended 'sit in the cd shop and give it a listen' another sentiment i have heard about all forms of media are those who pirate for no other reason are never going to buy your product anyways. punishing all to ATTEMPT to punish them doesn't really benefit you. it only annoys the real fans. a real fan will always support those he enjoys and those who wouldn't..wont under any business model. So get over it and deal with it. accept it and move on. stop wasting money and resources trying to punish some at a greater cost than the lost revenue. the music industry (and many others) need to seriously look at their business models. the need to embrace new technology and deliver it in a form we the consumer deem appropriate. at the end of the day someone can only make money etc in ways a society allows. if we don't like the way something works we demand change. one method is by forcing change through market forces. an aside but equally valid point. Television shows. almost all are legal and online free from the producer as soon as they are shown on tv. they deem the show has ZERO economic value once it has first been aired. yet they see the MASSIVE potential of retaining fans and making them happy by offering it online in case they miss an episode. or wish to show a friend etc etc etc. the music industry needs to wake up. make it more affordable, make it more easily accessible. add value to the legit product etc etc. there are a number of things they could try. prosecution of the fans will NEVER work and shows how out of touch they are. and forcing ISPs to be police is opposite to all our current laws. innocent until proven guilty.... well plenty of people have had their net shut down when they in fact did nothing wrong in other countries. so this model obviously doesn't work. Yeah the rapper on insight may be a bit miffed at how much lost revenue he has from his possible cd sales. but how many of those people now go to his gigs?. its all very grey. the sooner they make it more consumer friendly and value added the sooner they see a proper market develop online.
If my entire music collection consisted of bookmarked Youtube links, would that be considered stealing?