So sayeth The Guardian, in an editorial where writer Louis Pattison seems to be rather confused about the realities of how MP3 blogs actually work these days. But apparently, “there’s collateral damage” if you download free music, and “if you’re a fan of independent music, it could be everything you hold dear”!
Of course, the genie’s long-since fled his bottle when it comes to free music on the internet. But watching independent labels feel the squeeze, I’m coming to think that MP3 blogs are a more insidious - and ultimately, maybe more damaging - threat to smaller and medium sized labels than the likes of the copyright lawyer’s most trumpeted bad guy, bittorrents. With torrents, you have to hunt for your files, the download can be pretty time consuming, and ultimately, you’re under no illusions that what you’re doing is of questionable legality - hey, the largest bittorrent tracker in the world isn’t called The Pirate Bay for nothing. Blogs, by comparison, are quite a comfy affair: a bit of purple prose, a nice picture rustled up on Google Images - hey, you could probably read that ‘Please support the artists’ disclaimer at the side, pass the link onto a friend and fool yourself into thinking you’re spreading the good word. You’re not, of course. You’re just cementing the idea in your own mind that it’s acceptable to take music for nothing.
Sooooo…BitTorrent sites are no biggie because they involve a little more effort, which surely discouraged those 180,000 OiNK users? And it’s cool because those kids know that what they’re doing is a legal/ethical no-no? But some guy posting “‘Flick of the Wrist’ off Queen’s 1974 album Sheer Heart Attack” is eroding what’s left of “small and medium-sized independent labels”? Huh? To say nothing of the fact that most of the high-profile MP3 blogs are only too happy to be in bed with the biznow highly wary about posting anything that hasn’t been cleared with a publicist. Or that a quick trawl of the Hype Machine will show that most MP3 blog links go dead after a month, maybe two. See, and for years we thought the single-serve MP3 blog model was one of the better/more benign arguments in favor of the “try before you buy” philosophy constantly touted by digital partisans.
If You Love Music, Stop Taking It For Free [Guardian]
If the evidence we have is that the internet is killing Ozzy and middling indie bands, I would say we are coming out ahead.
the biggest threat to small and medium indie labels are small and medium indie labels themselves. at least major labels acknowledge they are selling COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS and do what must be done, no matter how unpopular, to try to make economically smart moves… meanwhile, thousands of indie labels proliferate, releasing dozens of thousands of shitty little releases from bands that the music buying public really is not interested in and yet the indie labels continue to persist in putting out the music because of their supposedly “INDEPENDENT” prerogative.
there needs to be a line drawn in the sand between music as a hobby and music as a career. And about 99% of folks thinking their making music their career need to wake up, smell the coffee and stick to the day job folks
i’m sure most everybody who has downloaded a song or album from an illegal source has anecdotal evidence that that at least one download resulted in a purchase. it’s the single least rational argument in the download era, but people feel justified in making it. (rule of thumb: using anecdotal evidence to prove a point usually doesn’t work because it ignores too much data. saying “i bought a concert ticket once because of a download” ignores all of the other outcomes from all the other downloads.) what about all the *other* downloads that *did not* result in a purchase? those matter as well because they may have (probably did, my guess) resulted in fewer purchases.
i know a lot of people who equate “try before you buy” with downloading songs and living with them for a while. they need to spend *a lot* of time with those songs. me? five seconds of a myspace stream counts as a trial. i know in a very short amount of time if i want to buy something.
labels try to offer the “try before you buy” by giving out a free song or two, streaming music at the label site and streaming music at the artist’s myspace page (if you can stand the d.r.m.). there are plenty of opportunities to sample music. the moral here, as i see it, is that “sample” means different things to different people. some need half a song once. some need an entire album for a few weeks. (and let’s be honest…some just want a lot of free music. period. they don’t buy much and they never get off the couch to attend concerts.)
with subscription services (rhapsody, zune, napster) or social sites (e.g. imeem, last.fm) labels and artists get paid while you sample. good for artists. music blogs have a lot of music not found on those services/sites, and the music is readily available and free. good for users.
something between the two would be great for those who love music blogs. if people really want to sample before they buy, the sampling should be monetized. i see no legal way to do this at the current time (an ISP tax is so, so unlikely) so those (few) consumers with a nagging conscious may want to voluntarily shift to other forms of discovery. that’s a tough switch to make. while imeem is pretty cool, it can’t replace a well-curated music blog.
there’s a risk, though, for labels. if sites/services that allow sampling become much better, far more easy to use, etc., sampling will simply replace purchasing (similar to how satellite radio acts as a substitute for cd purchases for many of its users).
damn you, whatz-new!
While I won’t go into all the reasons 12″ singles are irrelevant to me (Hell, why they’re probably irrelevant to anybody but DJs.) I will say that I stole “Sound of Silver” (to use an example pertinent to the article) from a megaupload thread and listened to it for a week before I bought the CD. I doubt I would have gotten into that record (which has emotionally moved me in ways I didn’t anticipate that what is, ostensibly, a dance record could) if I didn’t have the option of hearing it at my complete convenience before spending money on it.
I don’t think the ones that are giving out a song or two are hurting anything. If I ran a label that did lots of singles like DFA, then yeah…I think it’d definitely make a dent.
Question: does anyone know if DFA’s publicist(s) sends out mp3 links?
And: what’s worse to me is the ever-increasing prevalence of full album mp3 blogs. When does Rapidshare get sued?
Also: does anyone know DFA’s deal with EMI? Is it P&D? or just D?
Mmmm….letters.
I think it is ironic when labels like DFA, who would not be nearly as popular as they are now without all the attention blogs have given them over the years start complaining about mp3 blogs once they get more mainstream acceptance.
@Paperboy 2000: Probably when the cover (”self policing” by way of agreeing to a terms of use disclaimer) fails in court, which seems unlikeley (after all, any 16 year old who can add “2″ to the year they were born can still see porn). Full album blogs are tits though. Shareminer/ megaupload/google hack makes it even easier. Besides, much as I think we’re probably heading for an EP model, I like to judge albums as albums instead of as vehichles for singles/hype/show promotion (though they do those things too).
Popmatters examines the history of hip hop on television. The Idaho Statesman interviews Grace Potter. Your songwriting on this latest CD is story-driven. On the last track, “Big White Gate,” you talk about being a bad mom, having had three children with three different men. …