Piracy, RIAA, Lawsuits

[Muck]

I still buy cds... can't duplicate the quality.

Sure you can. Just look for lossless (FLAC etc) rips.

Or you could move up to higher resolution SACD & DVD-A recordings.

 

[sparcboxbuck]

sparco - It doesn't take money out of the hands of your friends who are musicians. It takes money out of the hands out of the middlemen (record labels) who fuck over musicians by not properly reimbursing them for their work.
.

To an extent I agree with you. The largest slice of the pie goes to the middle men while the artists are hosed over and over. That's the system, eh?

The entire music industry is, and has been, hosed for a long time. Those who make the money do so on the backs of those who make the art. With the advent of digital music and what is a much lower cost distribution system (the internet), artists should be figuring out a way to take the fat out of the system and take more for themselves. But there's obviously something that is getting in the way of that happening.

The system is fucked... there's no two ways about that. Perhaps my reply was 75% based on the pain that I hear in my friends voices when they talk about hanging it up or at least slowing down production because it isn't financially viable.

I wish that I had the time and energy to do something to take the entire music industry down and turn it on it's ear... damn desk job gets in the way.

Thanks for adding to the debate. It's an interesting one... even if we don't necessarily agree on every point, I'm sure that we all agree on the fact that artists are getting hosed. Without the artists... we've got nothing. That's what I'm afraid of... being stuck with the artists that the music industry decides what I want to hear.

 

[WolverineMike]

if it makes anyone feel better, I got the CD I was looking for off Amazon for 4 bucks. I hope the band can eat now......

 

[LoKyBuckeye]

If it's free it's for me. True musicians are in it for the art... not the money. If they want to wine about money being taken out of their pocket then get out of the business.

 

[Brewtus]

If it's free it's for me. True musicians are in it for the art... not the money. If they want to wine about money being taken out of their pocket then get out of the business.

Jeff Bebe: Some people have a hard time explaining rock 'n' roll. I don't think anyone can really explain rock 'n' roll. Maybe Pete Townshend, but that's okay. Rock 'n' roll is a lifestyle and a way of thinking... and it's not about money and popularity. Although, some money would be nice. But it's a voice that says, "Here I am... and fuck you if you can't understand me." And one of these people is gonna save the world. And that means that rock 'n' roll can save the world... all of us together. And the chicks are great. But what it all comes down to is that thing. The indefinable thing when people catch something in your music.

 

[Muck]

The system is fucked... there's no two ways about that. Perhaps my reply was 75% based on the pain that I hear in my friends voices when they talk about hanging it up or at least slowing down production because it isn't financially viable.

Sure and I completely understand that. I just hope you realize that all the guys in bands I ran around with in the 90's went through the same thing.

Most bands don't make squat and never have...unfortunately it just seems to be part of the deal. As has already been mentioned most musicians aren't really in it for the money...which also means that they tend not to be great at marketing their product (which is why the 'middle man' came to power in the first place).

The next time you talk with your buds maybe you could discuss some of the ways that bands do make money off their product. Take a few pages out of Gene Simmons' book and merchandise, merchandise, merchandise....then merchandise some more. We're in an age where they have more means (the 'net) to get in direct contact with current & potential fans that previous generation of musicians could only dream of. Take advantage of it!

 

[WolverineMike]

i always thought bands made their money off of tours and stuff, not record sales.

 

[jwinslow]

i always thought bands made their money off of tours and stuff, not record sales.

They do. The 'stealing from musicians' strawman by the RIAA is blatant deception. The breakdown of record sale revenue leaves them with very little after studio, label, agent, marketing, production take their cut.

That's why many artists would prefer cheaper digital releases. They want to get you hooked on their music and buy their gear, tickets and develop a loyal following.

The RIAA is protecting the businessmen with their lawsuits, not the artists.

 

[Saw31]

They do. The 'stealing from musicians' strawman by the RIAA is blatant deception. The breakdown of record sale revenue leaves them with very little after studio, label, agent, marketing, production take their cut.

That's why many artists would prefer cheaper digital releases. They want to get you hooked on their music and buy their gear, tickets and develop a loyal following.

The RIAA is protecting the businessmen with their lawsuits, not the artists.

Not how it works. And, frankly, you're not even close.

Bands are "loaned" money to do their initial recordings, videos, marketing, etc. Once they have earned enough through record sales to pay that back, they generally make 50% or so off their record sales depending on the publishing and distribution deals they've signed. For every successful band that actually pays back the initial INVESTMENT, there's probably 100 that do not and are a loss to the labels. So, the fact of the matter is that you are stealing from the bands, as well as whoever is getting the other 50% or so of the money coming in (label, managers, distributors etc.) It's a business. If you are in possession of product that you didn't pay for, you stole it. Period. Not difficult to understand...

As for digital distribution: That's fine. It is considerably cheaper. Doesn't change the fact that not paying for the downloads is still stealing money from the bands. There are a thousand things that need to happen for a band to hit the "big time". 999 of those things, your average band has no way of doing for itself. Not impossible, but I have yet to see any band do it on there own. They need the help 99.9% of the time from the evil businessmen. You can sit here and pretend that the people who do the logistics of the music industry are evil and whatever, but the fact is that most of them have come through the business the same way as the bands have. They are selling music because they didn't want to sell widgets. They love the music and know way more about what it takes to make good music than anyone here, and almost always more than the bands themselves know. You most likely wouldn't recognize your favorite song if you heard the way the band originally wrote it. They are also the ones taking all the risk. They are fronting the money to get these bands out there. And yes, it's not cheap. A typical album with a top notch producer may run ya $300k. To get one of the few truly elite producers will push it closer to a mil. And now you have to distribute it and market it. Don't make the assumption that these bands know how to write and, just as importantly, produce a song. Very few have both skill sets, very few. The top producers are every bit as talented as any of these bands and usually have more talent in their little finger than these bands when they are still just starting out...

It is true that there is a band or two making a killing from touring and merchandising, but very few bands are capable of that today (I've been told, by someone who would know, how much one particular top band is making per show just from merchandising and you would probably shit your pants. Private info and I'm not sharing it.) Very few bands can do this however. Typically you need 3 or 4 national acts to even book medium size venues (3500 seat arenas). Very few bands are getting rich from merchandising.

I have been in and around the business for years. I know how it works. I know the people who find the bands you hear on the radio. I know what they do. I have worked with them and traveled with them all across the country. They are not evil.

 

[jimotis4heisman]

Not how it works. And, frankly, you're not even close.

Bands are "loaned" money to do their initial recordings, videos, marketing, etc. Once they have earned enough through record sales to pay that back, they generally make 50% or so off their record sales depending on the publishing and distribution deals they've signed. For every successful band that actually pays back the initial INVESTMENT, there's probably 100 that do not and are a loss to the labels. So, the fact of the matter is that you are stealing from the bands, as well as whoever is getting the other 50% or so of the money coming in (label, managers, distributors etc.) It's a business. If you are in possession of product that you didn't pay for, you stole it. Period. Not difficult to understand...

As for digital distribution: That's fine. It is considerably cheaper. Doesn't change the fact that not paying for the downloads is still stealing money from the bands. There are a thousand things that need to happen for a band to hit the "big time". 999 of those things, your average band has no way of doing for itself. Not impossible, but I have yet to see any band do it on there own. They need the help 99.9% of the time from the evil businessmen. You can sit here and pretend that the people who do the logistics of the music industry are evil and whatever, but the fact is that most of them have come through the business the same way as the bands have. They are selling music because they didn't want to sell widgets. They love the music and know way more about what it takes to make good music than anyone here, and almost always more than the bands themselves know. You most likely wouldn't recognize your favorite song if you heard the way the band originally wrote it. They are also the ones taking all the risk. They are fronting the money to get these bands out there. And yes, it's not cheap. A typical album with a top notch producer may run ya $300k. To get one of the few truly elite producers will push it closer to a mil. And now you have to distribute it and market it. Don't make the assumption that these bands know how to write and, just as importantly, produce a song. Very few have both skill sets, very few. The top producers are every bit as talented as any of these bands and usually have more talent in their little finger than these bands when they are still just starting out...

It is true that there is a band or two making a killing from touring and merchandising, but very few bands are capable of that today (I've been told, by someone who would know, how much one particular top band is making per show just from merchandising and you would probably shit your pants. Private info and I'm not sharing it.) Very few bands can do this however. Typically you need 3 or 4 national acts to even book medium size venues (3500 seat arenas). Very few bands are getting rich from merchandising.

I have been in and around the business for years. I know how it works. I know the people who find the bands you hear on the radio. I know what they do. I have worked with them and traveled with them all across the country. They are not evil.

yea but they cant hold their damn liquor! they got all boozed up and post incoherent ramblings on the interwebs!!!11!11eleventy!!1!

 

[jwinslow]

If you are in possession of product that you didn't pay for, you stole it. Period. Not difficult to understand...

I'm not justifying that.

Once they have earned enough through record sales to pay that back, they generally make 50% or so off their record sales depending on the publishing and distribution deals they've signed.

What percentage of my 15 dollars does the band see from a CD sale?

edit: this is what I was referring to:

$1,000,000 in album revenue

$630,000 to the label

$23,000 to a musician

 

[jimotis4heisman]

I'm not justifying that.
What percentage of my 15 dollars does the band see from a CD sale?

edit: this is what I was referring to:

$1,000,000 in album revenue

$630,000 to the label

$23,000 to a musician

im no expert, but it appears from his post that would coordinate with how many cds are sold.

 

[jlb1705]

Not how it works. And, frankly, you're not even close.

Bands are "loaned" money to do their initial recordings, videos, marketing, etc. Once they have earned enough through record sales to pay that back, they generally make 50% or so off their record sales depending on the publishing and distribution deals they've signed. For every successful band that actually pays back the initial INVESTMENT, there's probably 100 that do not and are a loss to the labels. So, the fact of the matter is that you are stealing from the bands, as well as whoever is getting the other 50% or so of the money coming in (label, managers, distributors etc.) It's a business. If you are in possession of product that you didn't pay for, you stole it. Period. Not difficult to understand...

As for digital distribution: That's fine. It is considerably cheaper. Doesn't change the fact that not paying for the downloads is still stealing money from the bands. There are a thousand things that need to happen for a band to hit the "big time". 999 of those things, your average band has no way of doing for itself. Not impossible, but I have yet to see any band do it on there own. They need the help 99.9% of the time from the evil businessmen. You can sit here and pretend that the people who do the logistics of the music industry are evil and whatever, but the fact is that most of them have come through the business the same way as the bands have. They are selling music because they didn't want to sell widgets. They love the music and know way more about what it takes to make good music than anyone here, and almost always more than the bands themselves know. You most likely wouldn't recognize your favorite song if you heard the way the band originally wrote it. They are also the ones taking all the risk. They are fronting the money to get these bands out there. And yes, it's not cheap. A typical album with a top notch producer may run ya $300k. To get one of the few truly elite producers will push it closer to a mil. And now you have to distribute it and market it. Don't make the assumption that these bands know how to write and, just as importantly, produce a song. Very few have both skill sets, very few. The top producers are every bit as talented as any of these bands and usually have more talent in their little finger than these bands when they are still just starting out...

It is true that there is a band or two making a killing from touring and merchandising, but very few bands are capable of that today (I've been told, by someone who would know, how much one particular top band is making per show just from merchandising and you would probably shit your pants. Private info and I'm not sharing it.) Very few bands can do this however. Typically you need 3 or 4 national acts to even book medium size venues (3500 seat arenas). Very few bands are getting rich from merchandising.

I have been in and around the business for years. I know how it works. I know the people who find the bands you hear on the radio. I know what they do. I have worked with them and traveled with them all across the country. They are not evil.

How many bands have failed to pay back a record label's initial investment because of piracy? Common sense tells be that bands that don't sell enough probably aren't being pirated all that much - or at least enough to make a difference anyway.

Secondly, why is the standard for a successful musician "making a killing" or getting rich? Why not just making a living? There are plenty of artists out there who are not rich but are successful - they're 10+ years and 5 or 6 albums into their careers. They may not often play venues larger than a theater as a headliner, but they do well enough to not need a day job and still pay the bills. If those people aren't making money off of touring, how are they doing it? I can't imagine that guys like Jeff Tweedy, Colin Meloy and Ryan Adams are living just off of royalties. Oh, and many of those artists give away some of their music and/or permit taping at their shows.

 

[Saw31]

I'm not justifying that.
What percentage of my 15 dollars does the band see from a CD sale?

edit: this is what I was referring to:

$1,000,000 in album revenue

$630,000 to the label

$23,000 to a musician

You can't take averages like this and spread it out across the industry. Established bands don't need the labels to front all the money. They accordingly will make a much higher percentage of each sale. But only a very few bands are in this position. If it was easy, we'd all be rock stars. The vast majority of bands/musicians are in the situation of having to pay back the original investments made by the labels. That skews these numbers to the point of them not being useful. I know a band that had to sell 100k copies before they broke even with the label. They didn't, but they wanted the top producer, the best booking agent etc, etc. The label took a loss. The labels finance their careers up to the point that they don't need to anymore. But then there are still costs involved with both the music production and the production of the discs and then distribution. All of that costs money, and it depends on who's paying that money up front. Only certain organizations have the infrastructure in place to do this stuff, so you have to use them. Most bands don't have the ability to do distribution specifically, even digitally, because they need to be out on the road doing what they do. Being a band. Is it wrong that Sony gets a cut for printing and distributing the discs and that Best Buy gets a cut for putting it on their shelves?

The percentage a band makes from a single sale could vary widely depending on the contracts they've signed. Ex: A top producer may want a percentage instead of a straight fee. A lot of these bands need session musicians (because they suck, happens all the time), and if they've hired somebody that wants a percentage, that affects it as well. There could be any number of people getting a piece of that sale, but the bands make most of these decisions, so generally it's a result of their own decisions. Some bands will sign contracts that say "once x amount of discs sold/money made, we pay you x percentage of each sale/dollar above that". Another example. A lot of bands have a friend/s that "believe" in them that finances them before they are signed and they have obligations to pay those people back. They may have even committed a percentage of lifetime earnings back to this person. Dumb decision, but has nothing to do with the labels. I've seen all kinds of different things that affect that percentage and besides the fixed costs of production, usually it's the bands own decisions that put them in the situation they are in.

 

[Tonyank]

Demoniod is a great site. be careful on Pirate Bay.