Not cool! Totally lame!

Britain to crack down on piracy

I wonder if this would count as a breach of privacy.

That is gay.

You could have posted this in that topic we had going on this before. Eh?

This is fine andy, its news. Don't turn into a nazi.

I thought about that. But then I didn't.

Riiight. Does that mean you're now both ?

You did not just call me CREVU.

With my 300th post I curse you ANDY!!!!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/6music/news/20080818_eno_downloading.shtml

Kinda interesting (and short, okay?) article. Not even really an "article", more of a comment, or blurb, or... something.

Article wrote:Eno says that the download revolution has come at the right time because he felt the music industry had grown complacent: “The music industry really had a free ride. There was a huge appetite for buying music and they were selling it quite expensively actually, that fostered a generally quite lazy attitude within record companies.

“And then suddenly when challenged by the possibility of a different future, their only response was to try to resist it and to say that it isn’t going to happen and we’ll stop it from happening.”

So, how do people think that “download revolution” will change the way music, for example, is distributed? No change? Big change?

And how will it affect record labels? Is it the end for them? Or will they be successful in stymieing the new technological developments? Or neither?

Not the end, recording labels will still be a part of it, but i think that the new thing will be that the music will either be free or rediculously cheap over the net. They will then probably ask for a cut of the live acts and other things rather than the record sales.

Mm, interesting. Will the music be free (or cheap) because of people continuing to "illegally" download it, or because record labels (or whoever is concerned) will just have to accept the new trend and go along with it?

Also, what is it that the record labels actually do (I really have no idea)? Are they the ones providing all the recording equipment + space and producing the CDs? And if they are, what if artists, due to increasing availability of quality recording technology for the general public, produce and distribute their own stuff? Or will there always be things that are the exclusive domain of the record labels?

They're generally the ones paying for the recording. You can buy time in a recording studio without going through a record company - but it's expensive.

Ah. So, that would mean it could be the end for them...?

They are generally the ones promoting the artist, so advertising, making hte actual cd, photo shoots, putting them on opra that type of deal. The live acts etc are generally, as far as i understand it, the province of the artist's manager and the record company doesn't get much of that. That is where the artists make their money, from touring and merchandise.

I was fairly certain that the record labels are the ones who negotiate tours on behalf of the Artists, which is why many groups switch labels when they become aware of how ridiculously overpriced tickets are (Pearl Jam and Sound Garden are fine examples)?

but i've been wrong before!

you're probably right, however i do know that the artists get the money on tour and the records get the money from records, generally speaking

Glenjamin wrote:I was fairly certain that the record labels are the ones who negotiate tours on behalf of the Artists, which is why many groups switch labels when they become aware of how ridiculously overpriced tickets are (Pearl Jam and Sound Garden are fine examples)?

but i've been wrong before!

That's true for bigger acts; but often smaller acts will have a third party manager or will manage their own tours. Sometimes record labels will give out loans to fund overseas tours.

Hmm, the more you know!

'Nuva article. Kinda related.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/music-piracy-not-so-bad-sneaky-say/2009/02/25/1235237719911.html

So is that saying Artist's could care less about piracy- as it only hurts the labels?

2 minds about this- 1) i dun like getting gouged for $30 just because a cd is new; 2) Record labels probably employ hundreds of people who rely on the label doing well to , you know, eat.

Glenjamin wrote:So is that saying Artist's could care less about piracy- as it only hurts the labels?

A little. You could always read it....

Glenjamin wrote:2 minds about this- 1) i dun like getting gouged for $30 just because a cd is new; 2) Record labels probably employ hundreds of people who rely on the label doing well to , you know, eat.

Yeah, point 1) annoys me as well. I'm not sure how it's justified...

I don't like point 2. You can't justify an outdated, superfluous, unnecessary organisation just because people rely on them for an income. It's unfortunate, I know. I don't like it, but that's how it works. They can probably get new jobs... They'll have to.

Just tape it of the radio then.

Wha? Why? I can download it with better quality and put it straight on my mp3 player...

The penguin can't solve all your problems, Nick.

Now who's being naive Andy?