Music Exec: ISPs Must Pay Up for Music-Swapping

Reuters ^ | January 18, 2003 | Bernhard Warner

[tdadams]

people aren't buying CDs for the simple reason that the major labels are churning out crap that nobody wants to listen to.

I hear people say that all the time, but it's demonstrably false. The record companies are putting out what people are buying. It's just a sad commentary that the majority of the music buying public's taste runs toward pre-fab pap.

[garbanzo]

These guys simply refuse to get it: people aren't buying CDs for the simple reason that the major labels are churning out crap that nobody wants to listen to.

I'm still waiting on the RIAA to explain why the viewership for the music industry awards shows is falling through the floor despite the addition of every "popular" music act to the program.

[Wyatt's Torch]

Did you happen to see the halftime show of the NFC CHampionship game yesterday? Some joker named "JaRule" was doing his hip-hop thing and was booed unmercifully by the Veteran's Stadium crowed. One of the funniest things I've ever seen.

[zarf]

A flat fee, regarless of all he mumbo jumbo, will be charged. Then you can download anything you want.

I don't understand how intellectual property, songs and songwriters, books and authors, programmers and software are supposed to survive if they don't receive royalties. The vast majority barely receive anything as it is.

I don't understand the attititude that music or software and the like should be free. A flat ISP charge would solve the problem and make the leeches who want free "stuff" pay.

[zarf]

What non-music files? Like the bootlegged version of Microsoft Office you got off Lime Wire? Give me a break!!

[zarf]

It wouldn't matter what you or the others wanted to download if you simply pay a flat monthly or annual royalty fee that would be distrubuted to the industry.

You want a free version of Microsoft Office 2002 or Dragonball Z. or the latest tune fron Coldplay!?

Pay for it!!!!

What a concept!

[kms61]

And what if I don't want to download anything? I shouldn't be forced to pay. This is just another form of taxation.

The companies that make up RIAA have been bypassed by technology, just like the buggy whip makers of another era. They should just shut up and die quietly.

[Charlotte Corday]

If I had a way, after downloading an album by one of my favorite non-top 40 artists, to send him or her $5 directly, I'd do that in a heartbeat.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

"We will hold ISPs more accountable," said Hillary Rosen, chairman and CEO the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA),

What an ego! What makes her think she or the RIAA has the power to make the ISPs do anything at all? Sue 'em! That's her answer for every woe the RIAA has. Just sue everybody...customers included.

[alrea]

until big time record executive weasels once again start signing and promoting artists based on their musical talent rather than their looks, fashion sense, attitude and age, they will continue to see their sales fall until they go bankrupt and have to stand around begging for cocaine on street corners

the label formula is broken. the more big hat soap opera stars and fat boy hip hopera rap they throw out there the worse it gets. a couple of young independent bands might eventually sweep the net and put more of these music mafia out of business eventually.

[xrp]

Get off the accusational tone in your posts. I don't download music files (MP3s). I don't even like music, I listen to talk radio all day.

In that light, why should I have to pay an additional fee to my Internet Service Provider?

I also don't use MS Office applications save what I have on my work laptop (fully licensed). For anything at home, I use OpenOffice, freeware for the Linux platform.

Blow on that duck call, boy.

[Orbiting_Rosie's_Head]

I'm going to have the last laugh when all the freeloaders put the record companies out of business and then wonder why the only music they can find is crap like your kooky uncle recorded in his garage

A lot of old "garage" music is actually better than the crap churned out by the RIAA.

[wolfman]

Money shouldn't be the motivation for making music anyway.

[alrea]

I'm going to have the last laugh when all the freeloaders put the record companies out of business and then wonder why the only music they can find is crap like your kooky uncle recorded in his garage.

garage technology is improving so much that the uncle has the technology to compete with the biggest studios with the best cocaine. great songwriters don't need anything more than the uncle to get cd's out there that sound better than anything elton john or garth brooks ever did.

[zarf]

How does one glean a tone from a clearly rhetorical quetion?

Lighten up big guy....

[Future Snake Eater]

Yeah, I saw it, too! I thought it was great! And on the AFC Championship halftime show,LL Cool J was up there attempting to rap his way into the crowd's hearts and failing miserably. They didn't boo him (not that I could tell), but they sure made it evident that his act was unwelcome.

[alrea]

wouldn't matter what you or the others wanted to download if you simply pay a flat monthly or annual royalty fee that would be distrubuted to the industry

more farts in the wind; the economics of the net are that label bureaucracy is no longer in "demand." the economics and technology of recording is that the studios are not needed to support the better artists. the economics of entertainment is shifting away from central control. it was fun while it lasted, but it ain't about executive dining anymore. freedom is again crushing bureaucracy.

[zarf]

Nonsense. Tell that to Mozart or Bach. To say that art is should be made for art sake the biggest load of crap I've ever heard.

Many of the great masterworks were commissioned, not created by some mysterious need for self expression.

[zarf]

Nonsense. So you think music, software and other intellectual property should be free?

Once one person purchases a single copy (whether it's through Sony Music or from the creators own home web site) of the item they should be able to distribute it world wide without compensation to the creator?

You have no problem with this?

[sleeper-has-awakened]

Before I was able to download music I only bought about 2-3 CD's a year. With the peer to peer site I go to there are chat rooms generally set up by people interested in the same style of music. I had know idea that my favorite type of music was still alive and well. Progressive rock is not played anywhere on radio these days, but thanks to p2p sharing I was able to discover great music. I now buy about 50 CD's a year, thanks to the ability to check out new artists on mp3.

Of course, most of the CD's I buy now are from small independent labels, it would be interesting to see how the sales of small independent labels has been doing since file swapping started.
I think the major labels have missed the boat and are stuck in their old ways. The solution to their problem is quite simple, put out a better variety of music artists, reduce the cost of CD's to something reasonable like the costs old LP's and tapes from days gone by, and embrace the p2p technology to promote your artists, set up your own network and charge a monthly fee.