Music piracy has been an alarming topic of discussion within the music industry in the last decade. With the Internet being more readily available all over the world, the majority of the music distribution online has been conducted illegally. In the US alone, $12.5 billion is lost annually to music piracy as reported by the RIAA. Today, mega star recording artistes and giant labels oppose music piracy because of the losses they stand to bear. Prior to the existence of the popular mp3 music format, these record labels and artistes enjoyed longevity and outstanding record sales at the cost of the consumer. I remember Eminem, as early as 2001, selling as much as 9 million records for his album “The Marshall Mathers LP”. Back then, digital music had not gained popularity so I was obliged like everyone else to go purchase the entire album even though I only liked about a handful of tracks from it. Fast forward today, consumers have reacted differently to the way music is commercialized. The same Eminem, over the course of the years of the notoriety of the mp3 format and its distribution over the internet, has struggled with mediocre sales with “Recovery” being his most successful album since 2002’s “The Eminem Show”. In my own honest opinion, if I am not able to listen to the entire track of the album, I am not buying it. In today’s world, people who purchase music are the same people who were able to download it for free. Before the release of an anticipated album, what do most people do? They google the title to see if there are any leaked tracks floating the Internet. Once they find the entire album, they listen and rate. If they are hardcore loyal fans, on the release day, they go out and purchase the album. If the album was worth the download, the same individuals, through appreciation for the contents of the album will purchase a legal version once it has been officially released. On the other hand, recording music artistes like Sean Kingston and DubFX have used the Internet and its distribution channels as a means to gain popularity and attain record deals.
I am not condoning illegal distribution of music, but it is what the highly lucrative music industry decades ago did not anticipate. Now, there are means initiated by agencies protecting music and business partners to control the online distribution of music content as mentioned here. Effective models have been categorized under download/subscription and streaming. Examples of the download/subscription services are Nokia's Come With Music, Google's Music Link Service, an TDC's PLAY service. Streaming services such as Myspace Music, Spotify, Lala have helped in promoting artistes and identifying music tastes and generating additional revenue like concert ticket sales.
Even with legislation and policies set in place, I still believe that consumers and even emerging artistes will rely on the internet as sources of retrieving and distributing music; legally or illegally.
I totally agree with your title saying the Internet is both a curse and a gift to Music piracy. The Internet could be a curse to the Music Industry by limiting artists record sales when people illegally download the music from sites such as Limewire. But this is seen to be only true for established artists whose records are already widely known. On the other side, Internet Music Piracy could actually be a gift to younger recording artists whose works are not very familiar. These artists take advantage of online piracy by releasing mixtapes for consumers to download for free to increase their popularity. This then leads to mixed feeling on what is right and wrong on the topic of Music Piracy. Today, downloading any form of music off the internet is deemed as wrong, but in the "old days" music was distributed by making copies over the radio in form of cassette tapes or from one CD to another. This was not seen as illegal so where can the line be drawn with the Internet and its role in Music Piracy?.
ReplyDeleteI completely understand the gripes and complaints of the music industry about piracy, lost profits, and a general lack of control over the property that they own, however, there is one aspect that still puzzles me – Mixtapes in piracy. You talked about the RIAA in your post and I can agree that their services are needed in some capacity to try to combat piracy, but I recently watched a documentary that included a portion about a record store owner that sold mixtapes and was shut down mainly lead by the efforts of the RIAA. Mixtapes have been a huge promotional tool for the record industry ever since DJs began playing them at night clubs years ago. The industry has now taken a harsh stance against this without considering the benefits of artist exposure and possible increased sales due to artist release anticipation. In any instance the digital age has produced a litany of problems for all parties involved. Only time will tell where this problem will end up.
ReplyDeleteInteresting post. Also, I'm curious what you think, as an international student, do you think that copyright infringement is an American or a ‘first world’ problem? The concept of intellectual property holds very little value in many places. The US holds a majority of the rights to the world’s intellectual property. Furthermore, do you think that entertainment is too expensive? The price of a movie ticket is more than twice the minimum hourly wage rate in the United States. Prices are comparable worldwide, with a movie ticket costly more than the average money salary in some countries. Shouldn’t entertainment be accessible for all? Would lowering the price reduce piracy? Or should those who are willing and able to pay continue to subsidize the industries for those who are illegally accessing entertainment? Lastly, are piracy and profitability mutually exclusive? The New York Times recently reported that James Cameron’s Avatar was not only a leading film in the box office but also the most pirated movie worldwide!
ReplyDelete