So the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry says that music downloading happens too much. Why am I much less than shocked?

Last I checked an overwhelming majority of the revenue doesn't make it to the artist. For that reason alone I refuse to pay for music.

There was a proposal a while back my another member here I would be in strong support of. Something like paying a monthly premium for downloading, with most of the money going directly to the artist.

Unfortunately the corporate side of the music industry will never let that happen. They are posed to lose too much money that way.

I'm so sad to see that soon Madonna will need to sell one of her 100 Castle.


Oh Dear !


I'm so sad for Nazi RIAA who continue spy everybody so Music Companies continue to make billion.

I'm so sad to see Music Companies sell their song more than $1 each when we know their value is less than 1 cent.

Poor Poor billionnaire.
I'm so sad to see this year they will make just 10 billion of profit at least of 11.
Poor poor them...

Really they have no "Justice" (for that they have any millionnaire/billionnaire in prison)...

I will be a pirate till the day i die. When has music become more about the money then the message. These musicians already make more then they deserve, its music, and everyone has it in them to create, no need to play them millions of dollars. Most of the music we listen to now and days is shoved down our throats through mtv and radio. They play what they want you to hear. www.thepiratebay.org bitches

yup, there is not a man under the stars who would think of such a thing as say... morality...

My favorite artists, after fighting with these blood sucking leeches for years, opted to just release music for free on the net and rely on touring to make the real cash.

nin.com
http://remix.nin.com/
http://www.bigheadtodd.com/

Why am i going to pay for a single hit song that i heard on the radio for free when i could download it from some p2p and use it in my mp3 player, flash drive to connect to my car deck and share it with my friends? Those cluckers have got to be kidding.

I love how the statistic does nothing but benefit them and comes FROM them. I'd love to see just how they could actually track something of such a magnitude as downloading music with any sort of accuracy. I am sure the margin of error is like + or - 75% which is just laughable. If only they would redirect all their energy of prosecuting and lynching to a much better avenue.

not surprised. downloads are no different to cassette tape recording/dubbing in the old days though downloading is easier and is vast.

bullshit statistic, how do they know its 95%? they just made that up. In order to know that you have to know how much music has been downloaded in the world - which means, you have to know, all the torrent trackers and peers, all the gnutella network (limewire and such), direct connect hubs, websites, ftps etc.. how the fuk does anyone get that information?

I call B.S on 95%

music online should be free, if you want a CD to put on your shelf, go buy one, i'll download thanks

Uhh $0.60 of my $0.99 cents per shitty DRM song on iTunes goes to the record label. Those greedy pricks can go die in a fire. I'm not signing to a label for my first album because I'm not interested in feeding corporate greed; I want to reach out to people with music, not into their wallets to buy an executive his new Bentley.

The statistic is pointless, since there is no indication of how much revenue is actually being lost, and it's also no indication of how the artist is supposedly suffering. Funny how the poor, humbled industry is still making millions and the artists pushed through the mass-marketing pipeline seem to be doing fine rolling in their millions. I don't see the @#$^ing Jonas Brothers on the streets for all the illegal music downloading that probably goes on from preteens that don't have the means or care to buy an album.

Any estimation is stupid; you'd have to be estimating the sum total of all data transfer involving copyrighted material from person to person or god knows what else based on arbitrary criteria. I downloaded some System of a Down for free, then ended up buying at least three copies of each album (don't ask why, that's not important), so I'd say the execs more than got their share, and I gave Serj Tankian and Daron Malakian enough for a latte each. Oh and the world didn't implode because I got a song for free.

As someone who is interested in the industry and plans on doing this for a living, I think these people should be ashamed of themselves. Of course I want to make a living, and I want to be paid for my work, but I'm not going to be a naive numberwhore because the industry wants to pile up outrage when pushy execs trying to get artists to sell their souls just aren't enough anymore.

... 95 Percent Music Downloads Still Illegal, and the producers and managers are angry that they don't get tha fast money from no talented 'one-day' or 'one-song' bands and singers... on the other side, there are artists, who made huge amounts of money by working, touring... and wee get quality concerts and shows... the live experience can not be pirated!!!

I definitely wouldn't trust an association that claims to represent the music production WORLDWIDE, for any data it shares with the public. Plus that's cr*p - If pirated music didn't exist people in countries like Bulgaria where I'm from would listen only to the mainstream cr*p they play on repeat on the radios and sell in the music stores. And I fully agree with DjEaZy - I end up buying the albums after I pirate them if they are worthy.

Well every cloud has a silver lining, it would appear from what I've read most record labels are in trouble and the whole idea a band or artist needs a nig name record label behind them to be successful is going to be a thing of the past in the next 10 years thanks to internet downloads.

I laugh at all the people here who justify their actions (see: piracy). I also laugh at people who get angry at those who have amassed wealth due to a working business model (see: "poor billionaires").

Your justifications do not change the morality of stealing something (see: definition of theft; taking something that isn't yours without permission).

The business model may not be perfect; but if you have beef, simply boycott and do not buy the product. Your lack of agreement does NOT make piracy any more or less moral - stealing is stealing, period.

Nobody said capitalism was perfect, but the artists would be giving away their music for free if they wanted you to have it for free. Newsflash: the artists you worship just might want you to purchase the CD/MP3 because, even though they don't make the majority of the profit, they make SOME of the profit... and that is called their INCOME. Period.

I gave up buying music when the RIAA forced me to rent it (DRM on anything means you can only use it while the seller wants you to). No, I do not pirate it either.

Its a known fact that the RIAA have had threats from artists over lack of payment before and the fact that the RIAA represented companies have a long track record of screwing over both sides of the equation just to get more money for themselves (remember, the RIAA keep about 60% of the overall costs of a music track and the artist usually gets less than 1% which seems very unfair). Its about time they got a dose of reality and actually had a business model that did not involve extortion.

I also agree that 95% of the current artist line-up just produce garbage and I suppose a lot of the sales of good music goes to prop the crap ones up.

And finally, don't forget that purchasing music is actually paying for the drug trade.... (how many artists have been linked to drugs before, alot more than pirates linked to it).

everyone knows this and sense the advent of napster illegal music downloading is still in full force and that it affects everything. new bands these days just have one good album "there first one" because the first album is always the best because they are innovative and at there best but with there next album there so scared because of the state the music industry is in so they will tone it down or go completely different and fall into the vortex thats called mainstream music

So basically the music industry could drop their prices from 1$ per track to .25$ per track and if they went from 5% download share to 20% they'd break even.

Does anyone think that would happen? Obviously they don't.

I do.

The RIAA is too greedy and stupid. it will never happen.

CAN ANYBODY HELP ON THIS ! I'M LOOKING FOR A SERVICE TO SELL RINGTONES TO LATIN AND SOUTH AMERICA ETC. BUT HOW CAN I HOOK THE PEOPLE UP FROM NOT CALLING INTERNATIONAL, SHOULD I LOOK FOR SITES IN THEIR COUNTRIES OR DOES THE USA CELL PHONE PROVIDERS AUTOMATICALLY CONVERT INTO DIFF. LANGUAGES. NEED HELP

Good thing that it's legal in my country (as it should be in all countries).

Sorry to be so outwardly irritated with your stupidity, but you fail. Piracy in the music industry is entirely misunderstood, and it has nothing to do with the justification of my part in it. I don't pirate music anymore. In fact, I've bought over 10,000 songs on iTunes. In this industry, the actual effect of things very much does matter. If you ignore all positive and negative effects and exactly who is impacted and how, you ignore the facts and the truth in favor of your simplistic morals that don't take everything into account.

So, because I hate the record labels, I should stop listening to music? Way to make a sound argument. I'll tell you what: when I do release my debut album, it's not going to be on a record label. And I'm going to convince other artists to do the same. You simply don't seem to get it: I am becoming part of the industry, and I am one of those who would be stolen from in this case. Read: I don't care. Don't act all high and mighty, because you're certainly not standing up for anybody.

Not only is capitalism not perfect, it's as much of a failure as communism was. In today's society, we are no longer citizens in a country, we are consumers in a corporation, one giant market that is the land of instant gratification and zero-accountability. I don't want to hear your justification for how it's alright to let the vampiric labels drain the musicians of their livelihood simply because it's legal. Two hundred years ago, black people were property, kind of like an iPod or your couch. And they had no more rights than a couch or an iPod. And people thought that was okay. the law did. And so it was the right way to think. Your thinking is just as sound.

Most of the artist's income comes from touring. But you're not very educated on the subject, or you would know that. Some are even going so far as to say "steal my music, I don't fucking care anymore". Read: NIN. And when he released his Ghosts album, DRM-free and in high quality and easy to steal, 800,000 people bought it in the first week. And almost all of that went to him and the people he worked with.

Your staunch support of a broken system in which we've all sold our souls out doesn't make you morally sound. It makes you a pompous dickhead. Get your shit straight.

Ummmmmmmmmmm no. Mainstream low-risk music has nothing to do with the musician. The independent artist doesn't have profiteering labels to pander to, so he will take the risks. It's the labels that are looking at turning a large profit and search for low-risk acquisitions. Read: pop stars. What the hell do you think American Idol is? But go ahead, use your false logic. It's not as if it matters what the truth is anymore, you can buy it for $0.99 on eBay and sell half of it back for a million dollars.

This article is pure B.S, they have no way to measure all of the downloads at once, let alone figure out they are music at all except under specific cases. Even then -you can't tell what song is being downloaded so, and even if you could, it would have to be matches up against a database of all music and that would take too long just for one song so how can you tell if it's legal or not. You can't.

Not shocked at all, why is it even a shocker?

If songs were $0.05 people wouldn't mind paying and the music industry would make more money than it does now. It will happen soon unless they find a way to bust everyone that ever downloaded music illegaly...Which is more likely?..Until either of these things happens pirating will chip away at the industry until it falls apart. With more poor countries getting access to the internet and computers. Pirating will only get worse. I doubt the RIAA will travel to Africa to sue some kid for downloading a few tunes.

novadays music is CRAP !!! music is all about money. what are those rap and hip-hop songs ? is that music ? all is made on computer. to pay for that ? you got to be kidding. anyone who isn't deaf and has a sound card with a mouse can "create" music.

what about king crimson and pink floyd and shadows.. those are who made something. kraftwerk , bee gees, mike oldfield, and so on.

That's a miserable generalization. The mainstream music garbage has been around for many decades. Unless you're telling me there were not a thousand Pink Floyd clones a number of years ago that released an album and then suddenly died off.

How it's made is entirely irrelevant. I do music production on my computer, and my setup has cost me tens of thousands of dollars. It's every bit as professional as one of those deluxe-sized studios with the miles of patch cord and mixer bays.

In spite of the garbage cluttering the music industry, there is actually quite a bit of incredible music that has come out recently, including a couple of albums that came out within the past year that I think can easily rival anything even Pink Floyd put out. Sorry, only the jaded fools who have lost all passion for anything will come to the conclusion that music is dead. It most certainly is not. In certain small quarters, it is thriving. That's the way it's always going to be.

[Quote]Sorry to be so outwardly irritated with your stupidity, but you fail. Piracy in the music industry is entirely misunderstood, and it has nothing to do with the justification of my part in it. I don't pirate music anymore. In fact, I've bought over 10,000 songs on iTunes. In this industry, the actual effect of things very much does matter. If you ignore all positive and negative effects and exactly who is impacted and how, you ignore the facts and the truth in favor of your simplistic morals that don't take everything into account.

So, because I hate the record labels, I should stop listening to music? Way to make a sound argument. I'll tell you what: when I do release my debut album, it's not going to be on a record label. And I'm going to convince other artists to do the same. You simply don't seem to get it: I am becoming part of the industry, and I am one of those who would be stolen from in this case. Read: I don't care. Don't act all high and mighty, because you're certainly not standing up for anybody.

Not only is capitalism not perfect, it's as much of a failure as communism was. In today's society, we are no longer citizens in a country, we are consumers in a corporation, one giant market that is the land of instant gratification and zero-accountability. I don't want to hear your justification for how it's alright to let the vampiric labels drain the musicians of their livelihood simply because it's legal. Two hundred years ago, black people were property, kind of like an iPod or your couch. And they had no more rights than a couch or an iPod. And people thought that was okay. the law did. And so it was the right way to think. Your thinking is just as sound.

Most of the artist's income comes from touring. But you're not very educated on the subject, or you would know that. Some are even going so far as to say "steal my music, I don't fucking care anymore". Read: NIN. And when he released his Ghosts album, DRM-free and in high quality and easy to steal, 800,000 people bought it in the first week. And almost all of that went to him and the people he worked with.

Your staunch support of a broken system in which we've all sold our souls out doesn't make you morally sound. It makes you a pompous dickhead. Get your shit straight.[/Quote]

Go ahead an be irritated; it simply shows your lack of maturity when you approach something you wish to debate.

Piracy might be misunderstood in the music industry; rather than being concerned over immoral acts of theft, executives are simply angry about figures. I'm sure many couldn't care less about the artists' cash flow, and I'm sure some do. I'm very glad that you've decided to legally build a large digital music collection; we need more people like you. Strangely though, I don't remember saying that "the actual effect of things doesn't matter".

I find it interesting, however, that you think morals have levels of complexity. Honestly, I find morals to be relatively easy - arriving at the moral conclusion, or accepting said conclusion, can be difficult. However, if you bothered to read several of the previous posts above my original comment, you'll notice a slew of idiots who have no moral qualms about stealing due to their ridiculous justifications.

Lets see - how many people basically said that "Music today is crap; therefore its moral for me to steal something because I don't think highly of it"? Not only is that completely contradictory and hypocritical, but its plainly ignorant.

For you to think capitalism is as much of a fail as communism was shows you ignorance to this world. My family comes from an island named "Cuba", and let me tell you my friend - you are sorely mistaken when you infer that capitalism has failed along with communism. You cannot possibly comprehend the stark contrasts between socialistic economic policies and capitalistic policies. If you truly need me to elaborate on this point, its not worth my time because you're obviously not thinking straight.

I can't argue that America has turn into a consumer society; this is true, but not quite directly relevant to our discussion. I already mentioned that the business model isn't perfect; but I have a surprise for you: nothing has changed even in 100 years. Everybody acts like the RIAA and their greed are a recent phenomenon. Try finding a vinyl record produced in 1900 - the label will clearly tell you, verbatim: "this record cannot be sold for less than $1".

It's true that the executives drain money greedily from funds that could be going directly to the artist; then again, if you'll check some of the previous posts, people mention how "artists have enough money, they don't deserve those millions because I said so, therefore STEALING is okay!". I stand by my point when I say "If you don't like the fact that the product costs that much money, simply don't buy it". I never said stop listening to music - I simply said avoid the issue altogether, as opposed to STEALING. If society decided to react solely on impulses, we'd be in a pretty big mess. Imagine America completely disregarding red lights, stop signs; there is such a thing as common sense, with common decency, and common OBVIOUS morals.

Since stealing isn't an alternative, apart from not purchasing a particular product (that's what music has been for over 100 years at this point, since the first phonograph: a product) there's nothing more you can do. Nobody is forcing you to purchase that product, and despite label/artists contracts, I highly doubt that musicians want you to steal their music, as opposed to pay for it. Regardless of where they make a majority of their money is irrelevant; I know that artists make a lot of money off of tours. Does that change the relevance or morality of "Stealing music is wrong"? Besides, I know that not every single artist agrees with his record label (read: Artist Formerly Known As Prince), but lately these musicians that have been jumping on the digital distribution bandwagon are more concerned about raking in a bigger profit from albums than what the RIAA does about piracy.

I don't "staunchly support a broken system". I simply support the undeniable moral that stealing is wrong, and sometimes it really saddens me to see people as ignorant as many of the previous posters. Stealing is wrong; but completely denying that fact shows that people are voluntarily ignoring their conscience, and possibly nullifying any sort of ethics they originally had with this mind state.

Being an up and coming musician - things like this should be your concern. There are several generations of kids who think that they have justifications for stealing music, and even if they had none they would still do it.

My post was about the immorality of stealing something, and the idiotic justifications people place behind them. It wasn't a debate on all these topics such as communism, the ethics of the music industry, or how musicians make their money. Now that I've answered your statements, perhaps you more clearly derive the purpose behind my original post.

Stealing, regardless of one's reasons, is wrong: undeniably so. People need to face this fact.

I am a bit surprised that the number is still 95%, that seems a bit too high to be really believable (probably we'll need some independent 3rd part to do some investigation to get the real number). I cold believe 95% at universities. I could even believe it's gone up a bit with recent hard times. I think people should still pay for the music, even though I do agree the current system has some reprehensible aspects (CDs cost the manufacturer something like 50 cents to make, but we end up paying 30 times that with the distribution chain, marketing overhead, the very low percentage that gets actual to the artists, etc.). So I am at 100% legal, it's a moral thing. Over the last few years, I've converted a fair amount of my purchases to iTunes and other digital formats, and I still buy CDs from Amazon or whomever, but I still pay for what I listen.

But clearly, the business model is broken, and the music industry is dieing, and to the extent that is blocking new artists (and my ability to find/buy ones that I like), we as a consumers and the industry must arrive at some reasonable middle ground. So I would suggest something along these lines:

1. Reduce the prices of CDs - if something is reasonably priced,
people won't rip it off, pretty simple really.

2. Make digital downloads/sharing easier (and better quality) -
iTunes and Amazon are pretty good, but DRM can be a pain, and
it would be nice to just buy a digital license, and have whatever
format available for download/update on some number of devices
(PCs, iPODs, MP3 players, Hi-Fis, etc.). I see the format wars
of MP3 vs AAC vs WAV vs etc. as just the same sort of thing as
VHS vs BETA, HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray, just getting in the way.

I think too, that there's a potential here, if the Music industry doesn't act quickly, for the Artists to just go direct with web companies that would essentially host their Artist Logo'd/TM'd web site, with a click-to-buy type capability, eliminating the middle-men. Kind of surprised that Go'Daddy or someone similar doesn't already offer a music commerce site, plug'n'play as it were. Kind of surprised the artists put up with what they do now, and don't sue the monopolistic practices (locked up venues, paty to play, contracts with such low return to the artist, etc., etc.) of the music industry, since it's apparently not even protecting their interests because of all the pirating going on.