Piracy thread

[bright lights, big city]

Look at the movie, Hobo with a Shotgun.  You can't tell me that piracy didn't make that movie blow up.  They sell it in fucking best buy.

Exactly, I know about a dozen people that've now seen that. Every single one saw a pirated version. Then I went and fukcing bought it at best buy because I pirated it and thought it was absolutely amazing.

[skinnypuppy]

If piracy is such a good way to make money then why is every band broke and every label dead or dying?

We found good music with or without piracy back in the day. Good music finds a way. I'm not selling out, I'm actually keeping the BAND in mind here. I know what goes on behind the doors, and I know bands make money off record labels. Bands don't just give records to labels for free, you know. They DO make money off albums sold. They make/lose just as much money off touring and merch at this point too.

The idea that supporting a band through tickets or merch is a 'better' option is silly. Everyone takes a slice of the pie with touring and merch, and when the day is over it's almost the same profit gross as an album sale. Not exactly the same, but almost. Bands who sell 500 concert tickets are NOT making as much money as you think. Plus, most of your favorite bands can't even bring in more than a few hundred people to those venues, so the revenue is even less. Then gas. Then car repairs... It's never ending. The added revenue of ALBUM SALES can truly make a band continue on.

the argument that 'free' gets new fans is mute to me at this point because those new fans arent bringing in any type of revenue to keep the artist afloat.

I think this depends on the type of music we're talking. I know that i'm absolutely dependent on free downloads if i am to quench my thirst for new music. I wouldn't have known half the artists i do if it wasn't for "piracy". And i also think it's necesary for smaller, less known acts who don't get airtime on the radio or anything of the sort, to be able to have their shit heard. People aren't just going to go spend money on music they've never heard. Of course i'm like most music lovers, if i find something i really like, i'm gonna buy it the next time i see it in a store.

Those less-well-known-acts don't have a shot without having a roster of people helping them or a near-cult like following that helps boost them to the top. It's not as simple as posting a song on Youtube or Facebook and BAM you're a success, it takes a team of dedicated people who all believe in your music and support it financially to get it moving in the right direction.

skinnypuppy, you've sold out to the man.  Bands don't make much off of album sales.  They make their money on the road.  Which brings me to:

the argument that 'free' gets new fans is mute to me at this point because those new fans arent bringing in any type of revenue to keep the artist afloat.

Firstly, it's moot, not mute.  Secondly, the claim that fans bring no revenue is false.  If they enjoy the band, they go see them live.  Thirdly, majority of the time, it's labels trying to sue users that download.

Look at the movie, Hobo with a Shotgun.  You can't tell me that piracy didn't make that movie blow up.  They sell it in fucking best buy.

"Delivering his keynote address at this week's annual CA Expo in Sydney, former Google CIO Douglas C Merrill added to the growing belief that punishing and demonizing file-sharers is a bad idea. Merrill, who after his Google stint joined EMI records, revealed that his profiling research at the label found that LimeWire pirates were iTunes' biggest customers."

But, either way, piracy is here to stay.  Just recently, courts have settled on napster lawsuits.  Pirates will evolve. 

"You can't stop the internet, baby"
-Joe Rogan

Labels have never sued anyone. If you're going to make an argument, at least know your facts. the RIAA is not labels.

Of course piracy is here to stay, but right now these conversations are 'gimme gimme gimme im not doing anything wrong i want free albums shut up and gimme' - and that just isn't fair, and is hurting music and the business of music.

Look at the movie, Hobo with a Shotgun.  You can't tell me that piracy didn't make that movie blow up.  They sell it in fucking best buy.

Exactly, I know about a dozen people that've now seen that. Every single one saw a pirated version. Then I went and fukcing bought it at best buy because I pirated it and thought it was absolutely amazing.

Just because it worked for that movie doesn't outweigh the damage that has been caused for other movies. Same with albums.

[skinnypuppy]

Like I explained in my other post earlier in this thread, I _WAS_ YOU (you being in general). I was deep in the warez scene, I was a hacker, I was a full time pirate obsessed with mp3s and file sharing. Then I dove into the music industry and witnessed first hand the result of people downloading albums, not caring about it, and not properly supporting the bands through other means.

FFS even Deftones need to keep their career afloat at all times or else they wont be able to afford touring, merch, mortgages, etc. it's not like theyre 'living rich' - they're able to get by and keep the deftones business going, which is HEAVILY influenced by the amount of money they get from warner for each album.

Also the ticket marketing is falling every year too, so fans are NOT picking up the slack by buying more tickets. Deftones have been playing to the same sized crowds for nearly a decade in LA but do their album sales increase? no, they decrease. that means its not leveling out because the demand for their tours is the same with an album that sells 60k units as a record that sells 200k units.

[poofing acid]

The United States isn't bombing Libya, NATO is...

I never said, gimmie gimmie gimmie, Henry Rollins did.  I still buy albums. 

But how is it hurting music?  Are people not writing songs because they fear someone will pirate it?

And hobo with a shotgun is the perfect example.  Maybe if the labels stop putting shit music out, more people will buy albums.

[Deftones-argentina]

I think in past decades, fewer bands existed and had the chance to do professional recordings. So the average music fan listened to ummm, lets say 15 bands max. And he spent on many of 'em (but the others were pirated in cassete format)

nowadays, with the advent of tecnology and other stuff, recording your stuff and having a good sound out of it is really possible, and for whatever is the reason, a lot more bands exist. A LOT. & the internet helped people get into more bands which they wouldn't have known.
now the average music fan listens to 100 bands? 200 bands?
they might spend on 30 of them, 40 of them?

so maybe people are spending more on music (wether be cd's or whatever), there are just a lot (A LOT) more bands to cut the cake, resulting in thinner slices.

i'm not saying this is the absolut truth, just my take on the cause, I hope to open a debate rather than closing it. this comes from a musician (in 3 fucking bands) who is the writer, producer & recorder (I studied as an audio engineer a few years ago).

If it's for any additional interest, I paid 3 times the value of the normal cd price for most of the Thursday records(hoping to buy No devolucion the next week). I feel sorry, but I can't really do it for everyband I like/love.

[bIondie]

Also the ticket marketing is falling every year too, so fans are NOT picking up the slack by buying more tickets. Deftones have been playing to the same sized crowds for nearly a decade in LA but do their album sales increase? no, they decrease. that means its not leveling out because the demand for their tours is the same with an album that sells 60k units as a record that sells 200k units.

really? not a condescending question at all; i'm totally unaware of deftones' current state 'cause i have been giving less of a fuck every year since SNW and chi's accident, but the last time i tried to buy a deftones ticket (this year), they were sold out and the ticket cost like 3 times what it cost back in 2006 and they're playing big butt-fucking gay venues built for shitbags like aerosmith.

maybe you or someone can fill me in on when they decided 50+ dollars was a normal charge to see them live.

[bIondie]

don't jump on the generalization bandwaggon.

p.s. this statement fails coming from someone who thinks they're well involved in the music industry and trying to oppose piracy.

just sayin'.

[skinnypuppy]

I think in past decades, fewer bands existed and had the chance to do professional recordings. So the average music fan listened to ummm, lets say 15 bands max. And he spent on many of 'em (but the others were pirated in cassete format)

nowadays, with the advent of tecnology and other stuff, recording your stuff and having a good sound out of it is really possible, and for whatever is the reason, a lot more bands exist. A LOT. & the internet helped people get into more bands which they wouldn't have known.
now the average music fan listens to 100 bands? 200 bands?
they might spend on 30 of them, 40 of them?

so maybe people are spending more on music (wether be cd's or whatever), there are just a lot (A LOT) more bands to cut the cake, resulting in thinner slices.

i'm not saying this is the absolut truth, just my take on the cause, I hope to open a debate rather than closing it. this comes from a musician (in 3 fucking bands) who is the writer, producer & recorder (I studied as an audio engineer a few years ago).

If it's for any additional interest, I paid 3 times the value of the normal cd price for most of the Thursday records(hoping to buy No devolucion the next week). I feel sorry, but I can't really do it for everyband I like/love.

sadly, no, music sales as a whole, whether you include the influx of new bands, does not equal out. it thins out. album sales have been decreasing as a whole because the industry is indeed catalogued. there is a reason record stores dont exist anymore...its because no one is buying the albums.  i actually do think just as many bands existed in the mid to late 90s as they do today, they just didnt have myspace pages.

Also the ticket marketing is falling every year too, so fans are NOT picking up the slack by buying more tickets. Deftones have been playing to the same sized crowds for nearly a decade in LA but do their album sales increase? no, they decrease. that means its not leveling out because the demand for their tours is the same with an album that sells 60k units as a record that sells 200k units.

really? not a condescending question at all; i'm totally unaware of deftones' current state 'cause i have been giving less of a fuck every year since SNW and chi's accident, but the last time i tried to buy a deftones ticket (this year), they were sold out and the ticket cost like 3 times what it cost back in 2006 and they're playing big butt-fucking gay venues built for shitbags like aerosmith.

maybe you or someone can fill me in on when they decided 50+ dollars was a normal charge to see them live.

Deftones, much like most smart bands, only play venues they know they can sell out, and if there is demand, they will add another gig to the tour in the same area. so, for example, during the white pony era, deftones played the palladium. for the next decade, they would only play gigs at the avalon, or house of blues, etc. maybe two or three shows at the avalon (totalling about 3k tickets) or two shows at the henry fonda (also 3k tickets) or one night at the wiltern (about 2k tickets) - they did this over and over and over, it was their normal touring pattern. plus, every single one of those shows sells out. as of RIGHT NOW, they can fill the palladium again which is awesome (5k venue) but when you think about it, its not that much different than three nights at the avalon. so its all push and pull with them...

theyve always gotten good festival spots, nothing really changed there, either. same type shit.  but the difference between the white pony era and the era today is gas is more expensive, food is more expensive, everything is more expensive. so ticket prices go up a little more but not THAT much. a deftones ticket during white pony era was prolly 25 or 35 and now its normally 35 or 40ish. but the capacity of the venues is the same, and they have more road crew now.

[theory]

I still buy CDs, but I think piracy may not necessarily be a band thing either...Personally I like having a 'hard copy' of a musician's work (mp3 files seem to take a sort of soul out of music for me).  But hey, nothing is going to stop people from downloading mp3s 'illegally' (wasn't everything fine until Metallica freaked out?).

Bands make WAY more money doing footwork ie. touring.  This means bands have to work...and rather than making everything sound perfect in a studio, they may have to sound good live!...haha I'm just being facetious here...but seriously, artists (who don't already) can really become innovative live! Every show a fan goes to can be different, allowing fans to hit up their favorite artist at various venues and receive a different experience (ie. different set lists, improvisation reminiscent of the jam bands in the days of woodstock, more meeting and greeting of fans).  I think it all comes down to people, too. If artists make themselves so inaccessible to their fans, people may not want to support them entirely. I'd like to really see the hard facts of 'record sales' vs. 'mp3 sales' and compare for the last ten or twenty years...

Bands also have merch, let's face it, you can't pirate a tshirt (and if you can, it probably looks like shit).  The record labels want to make money...that's the bottom line, so print more tshirts and record LIVE SHOWS...sell those...

Laws telling people not to do something aren't going to change anything. Think of the prohibition era. With good intentions Prohibition only allowed for crime to escalate and get out of control...this is what's happening with piracy.  We know from history telling people not to do something isn't going to stop them, especially when it's become a modern everyday part of peoples' lives.  It's time to move on, and switch the focus in my opinion.

[skinnypuppy]

laws at the very least can shut down the sites that release albums without consent 4 months in advance, dontchathink?

Also... the reality to touring is bands cant afford to tour unless the label helps, most of the time. labels wont help if they have no income due to album sales. see the problem? same goes for shirts.

in case yall havent seen this before... (however please be aware that these numbers are AFTER the label has already paid a large sum of money to the artist to release an album. the label splits seem 'greedy' from afar but are not as sinister as you think. labels pay between 500-500,000 dollars for an album and then have to recoup that money before they start shelling it back out to the artist. If a label spends 3M on an artist, that artist needs to profit 3M to the label before they can start receiving money again)

[theory]

Nah, they don't always need labels to help them out. My bro's old band got a government grant fairly easy and spent the money renting a van and on venues...with places like youtube,myspace, last.fm, facebook etc. independent artists have a better chance of becoming recognized and connecting with fans!

[skinnypuppy]

in canada, that doesnt happen in the US. its not fair to make an absolute statement when the vast majority do not get those opportunities.

[theory]

Fair enough. (and yes he lives in Canada) so the moral is: move to Canada...lol. It's hard, you know, cracking down on the 'crime' of piracy takes money, also...and what pays for crime crackdowns? Our taxes...I will definitely say most tax payers would rather see their money go into eliminating violent crime.  And, as far as the internet goes, people want to see predators brought down, not 14 year olds downloading albums. 

[skinnypuppy]

I'd rather my tax money go to salvaging the music industry than anti-gay movements or teaching creationism in public schools

[theory]

haha, me too...absolutely

[skinnypuppy]

A+
off topic, are those your pedals?

[theory]

A+
off topic, are those your pedals?

Haha, no..but thanks. That's Stephen Carpenter's pedal board., I know I wish those were mine..it's a pretty kick a$$ set up.

[tarkil]

Interesting figures :

Like most indie and d.i.y. artists, Uniform Motion relies primarily on digital sales and streaming to earn income from their recorded music.  Without the benefit of profits from brick and mortar retail, as Uniform Motion released a new recording, they decided to research and share with their fans what each source of income was going to pay them. While its an unofficial snapshot of what one EU based band is earning, it provides a valuable primer for any artist or label:

(1 EUR = 1.36 USD)


SPOTIFY:

    With Spotify, we'll get 0.003 EUR/play.
    If you listen to the album all the way through, we'll get 0.029 EUR.
    If you listen to the album 10 times on Spotify, we'll get 0.29 EUR
    If you listen to it a hundred times, we'll get 2.94 EUR
    If you listen to the album 1,000 times (once a day for 3 years!) we'll get 29.47 EUR!
    If you use the free version of Spotify, it won't cost you anything. Spotify will make money from ads. If you use any of the paid versions, we have no idea how they carve up the money. They only disclose this information to the Major record labels...

DEEZER: (A Spotify like service in UK and France)

    Deezer seems to pay a little more.
    We've been getting 0.006 EUR/play from them. That's 0.052 EUR/album play. If you listen to the album 10 times on Deezer, we'll get 0.52 EUR. If you listen to it a hundred times, we'll get 5.2 EUR. If you listen to the album 1,000 times (once a day for 3 years!) we'll get a whopping 52 EUR!
    If you use the free version of Deezer, it won't cost you anything and Deezer will make money from the ads. If you use any of the paid versions, we have no idea how they carve up the money either.

eMUSIC:

    eMusic is a subscription service. The cost of the album will depend on the plan you have. We get roughly $0.29/song or $2.60/album (9 songs).

AMAZON MP3:

    You'll pay 7.11 EUR to download the MP3's. We will get 4.97 EUR of that. That's a 70-30 split.

iTUNES:

    The album will cost you 8.91 EUR to buy from Apple.
    There's a 70-30% split there too, so we will keep 6.28 EUR/album.
    That being said, it costs us 35 EUR/year to keep an album on iTunes, Spotify, and Amazon (105 EUR per year for all 3 of our albums!) so we don't make any money until 24 people have bought a digital copy of the album on iTunes, or 150 single songs, or if we get tens of thousands of listens on Spotify! In most cases, it's actually more economically viable not to sell the music at all.

But what about if you buy the Digital version directly from us?

DIGITAL:

    We allow people to pay what they want for the digital version. If you choose to pay 5 EUR, Paypal takes 0.37 EUR, Bandcamp takes 0.75 EUR. Uniform Motion keeps 3.88 EUR. it doesn't cost us anything to have a page on bandcamp.
    If you decide to pay nothing, well, we get nothing, but at least you didn't give money indirectly to major record labels, which seems to be the case with Spotify!!

CD:

    If you buy a CD, directly from us for 10 EUR, Paypal takes 0.515 EUR, Bandcamp takes 1.5 EUR. So there's slightly less than 8 EUR left for us. But hold on a second, it costs a fair bit to make the CD.
    The CD itself costs 1.2 EUR, the booklet costs about 50 cents, the CD packaging is 1.8 EUR and the sticker on the front costs 35 cents.
    That's a total of 3.65 EUR
    So in reality, there's 4.34 EUR left for us.

VINYL:

    If you buy a 12" Vinyl from us at 15 EUR, Bandcamp takes 2.25 EUR, Paypal takes 0.646 EUR so there's 12.10 left. The cost of the Vinyl itself is 3.06 EUR
    The labels cost 1.3 EUR. For a total of 4.36 EUR
    So there's 7.75 EUR left for us.
    However, we had to press 250 of these (because that's the minimum order), so it's very unlikely we'll make any money on them.
    We need to sell 72 copies before we break even on the vinyl edition. We've sold about 30 so far.
    If we break even, we'll lower the price a little bit.

[theory]

Hmm, interesting figures, and quite revealing...thanks!

[skinnypuppy]

All those figures are factual, FYI though slight variations depending on how who and how you manufacture physical products (cds, vinyl, shirts, etc) though even if you print 10,000 shirts, you're only saving a small amount per unit compared to a short run of shirts, CDs, etc.

Also very interesting;

http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/101111spotify

http://www.musicthinktank.com/blog/spotiwhy-are-subscription-music-services-a-sustainable-busin.html



LOVE this comment from a user;
Comment By: MDTI
Wednesday, October 12, 2011

by empirical study of the "markets", i found that independant artists make more money by playing in the street/metro/subway in half a day than having tracks on those streamers for monthes and years.... The only difference is that the guy putting his track on streamers doesn('t want to beg in the metro (this is probably a bad business plan if an economic desicion has to be based on revenues only ;-)

Some of those subway player are actually real bands and they sell CD on their venues too....

Sustainable economic model: begging !!!!! it is proven to be an even older trade than the oldest trade of the world...

Streamers are an evolution from the dinosaurs :-)

What will happen when the public will only have access to the top 10 of what remainj of the "major" "companies"...