The Role Of 'Perceived Value' In Music Is Small And Fading Fast

from the music-aint-gucci dept

Fri, Jun 15th 2012 1:01am — Leigh Beadon

anothercultland points us to a post over at Digital Music News (obnoxiously entitled "Want More People to Care About Your Music? Then Charge for It…") which, though massively overstated and oversimplified, actually gets at a point I've been thinking about for a while now. The basic premise is that the power of "perceived value" can make charging for music a better proposition than giving it away for free, based largely on a comment from an indie artist:

The music industry isn't the best at studying pricing (that's for sure), but there's evidence that price tags actually increase overall interest and demand for your music - whether that results in a paid transaction or not. Here's a comment from a seriously DIY artist in the trenches, Steady Fingers, who experienced something unexpected.
"But it's funny that even when I used to give away [my music] for free, there wasn't much traffic nor many downloads, almost nothing. Then we decided that we should put it up for sale so that we might be able to recoup some of the money spent on making the music videos (when it's your brother making the videos, I still consider it DIY.) Anyway, as soon as people saw that the music was up for sale, the website and other related social media gizmos received much more attention. Also, people began looking for ways to download it for free, which isn't always a bad sign."
Welcome to the strange world of 'perceived value,' a murky science that enables all sorts of obscene markups - whether at Starbucks, Gucci, or the Apple Store. But the basic idea is this: the simple presence of an elevated price tag - or a price tag at all - is often enough to convince someone that this product has worth.

There is actually some truth to this idea, but only under specific circumstances and with a whole lot of caveats. Perceived value is a real thing, and it can be pretty powerful—but there are significant limitations on how it can be applied to an infinite good like digital content. A good (non-musical) example is self-published Kindle novels: for an author just starting out, it's actually probably a good idea to charge $0.99 instead of making it free, because of the way Amazon separates the lists of free and paid books. Of course, as authors like Joe Konrath have discovered, books at $0.99 make a lot more money than books at $2.99—so the limitations of perceived value come into force quite quickly. In app stores, paid apps may once have held some clout over free ones—but now many of the top grossing apps are free and ad-supported, and the perceived value of a price tag to download has all but disappeared.

And it's disappearing everywhere, as the lines between professional and amateur get weaker all across the media spectrum. I buy a lot of $5 and $10 albums on Bandcamp, and I also download a lot more free ones—and I can't really remember which is which. For indie music, price is a poor indicator of quality. Besides, pretty much all music can be streamed first in a "try before you buy" fashion now, so any perceived value is quickly supplanted by an actual evaluation of the product. Just as with books in the Kindle store, there may be certain venues in which adding a price tag offers some advantage, but that can only go so far and it could always disappear in an instant.

Beyond that, and perhaps most importantly, there is nothing that says you can't charge for your music and also give it away for free. Or, at the very least, charge for it but accept (or better yet embrace) piracy. When payment becomes optional for fans and prospective fans, then they see it as an affirmative choice to support the artist, and many will make that choice. Dan Bull sold enough copies of his Sharing is Caring single to hit the pop charts, and a lot of the attention came not from the fact that he was charging money, but from the fact that he was also giving it away for free (as he does with all of his music). By offering an option to buy and an option to download for free, you get the best of both worlds: the power of perceived value in those few cases where it counts, and the attention of the growing number of people who don't view content that way anymore.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: free, kindle, perceived value, price

106 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Josef Anvil (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 2:01am

???
I'm not sure if there is a resounding opinion that music should be free. The problem is that most people like far more artists than they could possibly support.

That means that music needs to be priced reasonably. Music labels just have to accept that the old way is dead and gone and NOT coming back.

The labels need to experiment with elasticity and find the price-point that results in the largest profit. Currently they just think that the highest price the market will bear is the best. Music is not the same as a physical good.

One thing the labels have correct, music does have a HIGH value, it just also happens to have a LOW price. In an intelligent society that is a GOOD thing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ch'kody (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 3:17am

Depends also...
Any perception I hear from folks who indulge in free are saying is if they know the artist is starting to get popular, then they must be getting rich. "Bono doesn't need more money!" or "Gotye isn't going to miss it." And therefore, to them, it's ok to take.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 3:17am

Re: ???
Except the labels want to make the same money they have always made, even if its cut has to come out of the artists side.

The internet has created a platform that any artist can use, they no longer need the labels to make it big. You don't need a giant PR machine getting your name on every outlet, you just need to make what you love, get the attention of the fans, and make the money.

Labels will never innovate until we have artists who look at these silly new contract terms and realize they are their own brand and don't need the label to make money. Then you will see labels falling over themselves to craft some crappy system together that would have been cutting edge in the 1990s... and then hopefully dying off.

I downloaded what Dan Bull put on TPB, but I also bought each and every track on Amazon. I wanted to support Dan with a little cash, more downloads to break into the charts, and I enjoyed what he offered and how he offered it.

If Dan Bull came to my corner of the world on tour, I would definitely try to get tickets and encourage more of my friends to come. I'm even willing to bet as I walked out the door they would be offering copies of the show for sale.

Music is still music - but it should no longer be done in the cookie cutter flow chart system of yesteryear.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 3:27am

Re: Depends also...
Bono is attached to the idea of his fans are assholes unless they pay and pay and pay. He and his manager have made some truly epic statements.

Not sure about Gotye, but I am guessing many people are sorta burned out on the one song and want to hear more.

Part of the problem is the illusion created by the labels by giving the artists tons of upfront cash to present a certain image, while getting what they fronted and a nice return on that "loan" over their entire career.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
fogbugzd (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 3:36am

I would like to know some additional information about the Sticky Fingers situation. If his experience came from listing his music on iTunes, Google Music, or the paid part of Amazon MP3, then his increase in fans may have come from putting his information in front of a different audience. In that case it would really be just another illustration that obscurity is a bigger problem for most artists than piracy.

Personally I find a lot of my new music through iTunes and Google Music. They are a lot easier and safer than using torrents. I am not really paying because I perceive the song I have to pay for as having a higher value. What I am really doing is using a service that is convenient and that I trust with my credit card information.

I do visit artist sites, but it is usually after I have found the artist on a paid platform. If I want to support the artist financially I can still do that through Google Music or iTunes.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
drew (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 3:51am

price != value
This appears to be a major stumbling block in a lot of pro-copyright arguments.
When I was a kid I bought cheap blank tapes and recorded stuff off the radio. The content was, to all extents and purposes, free.
But did I value that content? Of course I did! Those tapes got played hundreds of times. Gradually they've been replaced by CDs, records or MP3s. The stuff that I didn't value never got replaced.
Price had no impact on this process.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 4:12am

Re:
o_O
Not typing your cc info into a torrent tracker is a good idea.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The eejit (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 4:21am

Re: Re:
0/10 reading comp: fog was arguing that there may be a different causation than just putting it out there for sale: for example, iTunes can have direct links to the artists' site. The same applies for Google Music and Amazon. Which may be producing an increase in sales.

And fog doesn't pay for a torrent site: he pays Google and Apple and Amazon.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rekrul, 15 Jun 2012 @ 5:00am

I recall reading a story, not sure where, about someone who was trying to get rid of some large, working item (again, I forget the details). They put it on the curb with a sign that said "Free, works perfectly". It sat there for a couple days. They then changed the sign to "For sale, inquire within." Supposedly it was gone within a couple hours.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 5:05am

"If I Could Save Time in a Bottle"
To steal a title from Jim Croce, but to alter it a little (in an old fashioned way), "If I Could Save Music on Vinyl", I (or someone else) could sell it over and over and over again. Historically, the preparation of that vinyl (well now plastic disc) also took a lot of "work" to get out to customers. Now that "saved" entertainment is available digitally, the "cost" involved in getting it out there to the people has dropped drastically. In the "old days", the troubadoor would travel from town to town to provide entertainment. Since the invention of "recording", that was out of vogue for a long time. Now, to connect with fans, the entertainers are starting to travel again, and they are making more money from the performances than from the recordings (and many get to keep more of it than the gatekeepers). Isn't that curious?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sneeje (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 5:21am

Re: price != value
I think a lot of it has to do with what information you have available from your social network. If you are going to a new area and don't know anybody (or have access to the net), you might use price to decide the quality of the food in your area.

Same goes for music, if you have no other proxy for value, price will fill the gap. In the case of the apps example Leigh used, the market has stabilized enough that there is a lot of social feedback on the best apps and price is no longer a useful metric.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward of Esteemed Trolling (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 5:23am

Re: ???
Music is thriving.
( the people profiting is changing )

I say music has more value to some people now.

VIDEO: of some people who travel thousands of miles from all over the world to Belgian.
AKA...people who value music and are most likely avid downloaders

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPAAfupdpjg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZ8GXgfQjK U

And let's not forget the masses of people who flock to Ibiza every summer and all the music festivals throughout the world.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Cowherd, 15 Jun 2012 @ 5:24am

Re:
That's because transporting large objects costs money, time and effort. You don't do that unless you know the thing actually works. It's all too likely the sign-writer just wants someone to dispose of his junk for free.

This is not a good analogy for digital downloads.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hephaestus (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 5:28am

Re: Re: ???
"Except the labels want to make the same money they have always made, even if its cut has to come out of the artists side."

Agreed. The issue the labels face is ever increasing competition from several million bands out there all screaming for attention. The labels are pulling back on new artists and albums, digital download are reducing CD's sales, they have no future resales of the same music, the labels are also gouging to failure any start-up that wants their music, all of this combined points to a complete failure of the record labels in short order. In the end the artists using social media and spreading the word about themselves are the ones that will thrive.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 6:15am

I think someone might be confusing 'perceived values' with 'expected price'.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
bigpicture, 15 Jun 2012 @ 6:25am

A simple Analogy
Air is free, people breathe it all the time. There is fresh clean mountain air, and there is dirty rotten city air.

If it was a preference most people would breathe the clean mountain air. So there is a novelty industry that puts clean mountain air in cans and sells it, and also air from places like LA. Does that make the canned air more valuable or just a novelty? If you put a price tag on dog S**t does that make it more valuable? Some people call themselves musicians, and think they can put a price tag on NOISE and that makes it more valuable? Give your head a shake, because there is something loose in there.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
shawnhcorey (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 6:41am

Selling music isn't about music; it's about selling a piece of glory. Until you figure that out, your sales are going to be dismal.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 7:03am

Re: Re: price != value
The only issue I have with your example is that you always have someone to ask and word of mouth is the absolutely most powerful form of advertisement. If you see a restaurant and are interested in it there is usually someone around that you can question other than one of the people that work at the restaurant (and sometimes even the restaurant workers will give you their real feelings). You don't need the net for everything and we've become way to dependent on it for everything. Plus sometimes it's nice to talk to a new person.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sneeje (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 7:12am

Re: Re: Re: price != value
You're right of course, I'm just saying that in the absence of other input (or with limited input), we fall back to price as a proxy for value. Even if you have someone to ask, there's nothing that guarantees you'll value that input.

I value my friend's opinions on music b/c I know they will have my best interests at heart, but others may have different motives, like trying to sell or market specific goods.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jupiterkansas (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 7:39am

Re: Re:
And I can see the exact opposite happening. Put a for sale sign on it - never sell it. Write "free" and it's gone. Doesn't prove anything.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 8:04am

Perceive This!
What about a price difference in digital and physical copies? Is a digital copy "perceived" as less valuable than a physical one? Even if it comes with the exact same content?

Oh, and shameless plug:
thegentlemenbastards.bandcamp.com
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 8:27am

Re: Depends also...
From my own experience, I have downloaded music I was unsure of, then returned to buy the entire album if I enjoyed it.

I did the same recently with the new Keane album (however instead of downloading, I turned to spotify), and frankly I had reason to be hesitant since the album before Night Train was terribad.

I think that is one of the bigger issues. The RIAA doesn't exactly instill trust with their consumers when they release a consistent stream of garbage music.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 8:49am

Re: Depends also...
it used to be that a handful of superstars made the bulk of the money for the music industry. Now that's spread out to tens of thousands able to make some money at it. It used to be that most people owned 10-100 cd's and now they can fit the equivilant of thousands into their shirt pocket. Is that a bad thing? No. But price does pay a factor when it would take $10k to fill up your ipod with music that you weren't sure was a "keeper".

The demand has risen. People enjoy music and with the tools today, the costs have dropped for making music and making it accessable. If Hollywood does not want to cooperate with consumers, they will go elsewhere and many already have. There is a huge disconnect between what people want to listen to and the garbage Hollywood is putting out. Hollywood's response is to make what people want, less available and less known. That's "capitalism"?

I hear much more about efforts to keep independents out of mainstream music than anything else. I guess ICANN has approved the .music TlD which the RIAA will probably use to push "certified" music - whatever the heck that is.

"indie" is not a genre.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 8:56am

Re: ???
people have been saying the same nonsense about graphic artists, book, software, everything... this week that changed when Oatmeal pushed back on the bullying from FunnyJunk...

read and learn about ARTISTS RIGHTS

http://theoatmeal.com/blog/funnyjunk_letter

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/06/ lawyer-demands-20000-so-webcomic-raises-100000-from-the-internet/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 8:59am

Re: Re: Depends also...
I love the paradox of pirate logic:

1) Rich Rockstars don't need my Money.

2) Labels Don't Pay Musicians.

Which lie is it? If labels aren't paying artists, how do we have so many musicstars?

http://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/06/05/artists-know-thy-enemy/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 9:01am

Re: Re: Depends also...
It's not about the RIAA, it's about artists getting ripped off, the RIAA has just about nothing to do with the conversation. and, when you steal from artists, or enable the theft of the artists work, YOU are WORSE than the RIAA you despise and loath.

https://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/06/07/artist-exploitation-calculator-internet-edition/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 9:02am

Re: Re:
"o_O
Not typing your cc info into a torrent tracker is a good idea."

are you suggesting that torrent trackers are not legitimate businesses?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 9:04am

Re:
great observation
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Robert (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 9:14am

Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
Love that promotion of TPB's $14 million "estimated" -- important is the "estimated" word.

In fact, as proven by the indictment against TPB, in a court of law, you know, fact-based arguments, TPB does NOT make anywhere near the estimates and barely brings in enough revenue to keep the system going. The THREE people running it and their ONE investor are NOT in it for the money, or they would have closed shop a LONG time ago!

It's obvious the agenda you're promoting.

What is it with you Lowery, you didn't get anything beyond your Cobol experience so now you're pissed at the tech companies? Come on man.

Do you know how many tech companies have tried to come up with good ideas and work with labels only to be sued out of existence or burdened with exorbitant license fees they went bankrupt?

Yeah, blame the techies for that. Whatever dude.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 9:22am

Re:
value *
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 9:26am

perception is a funny thing, I used to think in the 80's that all freeware and shareware was full of malware and could only be found in shady places than open source happened, today I view commercial software as a place of malware and shady practices and look for open source licenses as a pointer to determine the intent of the producer of something.

I still ain't buying music though, not from anybody who believes in monopolies and government enforcement of such monopolies, that means I look at the licenses that they are released under.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 9:30am

Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
People sharing something are not stealing they are promoting the artist at the very least and that can even be proven through math.

http://phys.org/news/2012-06-mathematical-success-movies-office.html

Can you come up with empirical data that sharing anything hurts the market?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Leigh Beadon (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 9:31am

Re:
I think someone might be confusing 'perceived values' with 'expected price'.

...howso?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 9:41am

Re: Re: ???
What rights?

The right to censor others?
No thank you, no artist should have that power.

The right to criminalize any culture sharing?
No thank you, nobody should have that right.

The right to extract rent from something they did decades ago for the entirety of their miserable lifes plus 95 years?
No thank you, that is not a right that is a social parasitic belief.

The right to sue mothers, old people and go about threatening just about everybody?
No thank you, that is not a right anybody should have either.

Why do you keep ignoring all the immoral and illegal stuff that artists do?

The only criminals that have rights are artists? is that it?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 9:45am

Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
I don't think you understand how trust between a company and it's consumers works.

There's been plenty of studies here suggesting that if you maintain a positive rapport with your consumers, they will buy your product.

That is something the RIAA can resolve.

Piracy is not, or are you not aware of the all the money and effort they've spent to stop praiting that has resulted...in well, more pirating.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 9:49am

Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
Yeah...labels pay musicians, then turn around and try to screw them out of royalties just to balance their annual income

http://gizmodo.com/352762/riaa-wants-to-cut-artist-royalties-to-9-apple-wants-them-at-4-artists- just-want-to-eat
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 9:56am

Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
Here ya go Lowery - http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/apr07/articles/contracts.htm
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 10:09am

Re: Re: ???
read and learn about ARTISTS RIGHTS

Do I need an industry card or endorsement to get ARTISTS RIGHTS? How are these different from the rights I already have? Can I carry these RIGHTS with me to a new job? What are the monthly fees?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward of Esteemed Trolling (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 10:22am

The right to con people
Theoatmeal drama... lol... A MAN-MADE ripple in a sea of filesharing.

Nothing changed, even tho it was a successful play, on people.

Unknowing people will realise the truth in the end.
http://badwebcomics.wikidot.com/the-oatmeal
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward of Esteemed Trolling (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 10:25am

lol wot
Not typing your cc info online is a good idea.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TtfnJohn (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 11:27am

Re: A simple Analogy
"Clean" mountain air can be as smelly as what's at is foot a and and often is. If there's a pulp mill down there you'll smell it at 10,000 ft just like you will at 600ft. Maybe not as strong a stench but a stench.

If there's a forest fire you'll still be choking on the smoke all the way up.

Of course, there is an elevation where the stenches dissipate if no other reason that the air thinning.

And as for that pristine mountain stream water your favourite brewski is made of, if you believe the ads it's still sterilized before the beer is made just like the ugly water flowing through downtown streams.

And that bottled water you're drinking? A few days ago it came out of the bottling plant's tap.

Yet people pay for air fresheners with the scent of clean mountain air, pay obscene prices for the bottled water they can get from their tap and dryer sheets with no end of outside scents.

The value these people ascribe to these things isn't always about the price, though high prices are expected for bottled water. In the end what I'm saying is that price and value are two different things.

I may pay more for U2 record than I would for Metric one but I'll value the Metric record more than U2 because I like them better.

Incidentally value != valuable. Value is an emotional response not a rational one. I may, and do, value a couple of my old, dog eared, beat up books more than I do gold but that doesn't change the fact that gold is more valuable due to its scarcity. A small charge for a song/video doesn't make it more valuable though it will imply more value than a freebie to a new fan or someone just discovering an act. We're conditioned to consider free music as bad music due to the fact that for decades the first discounted LP or CD were the truly awful recordings. That that doesn't necessarily apply in the Internet age doesn't change years of conditioning. For some of us the small charge implies a value, rightly or wrongly. Keeping in mind that value and valuable are NOT the same thing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 11:48am

Re: Re: Re: ???
you are CONFUSED...

Let�s be clear, there is a difference between protecting the right to the freedom of expression, and profiting from the illegal exploitation of that expression itself.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
FarePlay, 15 Jun 2012 @ 12:35pm

Perceived Value
The real discussion needs to be about illegal file sharing, both as a decimator of revenue and the message it conveys. Talk about becoming unimportant, illegal downloading makes your work valueless.

In this country, the primary response has come from the industry, the RIAA and MPAA, who have both spent hundreds of millions of dollars on legislation and enforcement, which has worked to the advantage of illegal file sharers. Particularly after the RIAA made a serious miscalculation early on in going after individuals, not service providers.

There has not been a concerted effort to sway "popular" opinion by focussing on the real issues that people can relate to; tens of thousands of working class people can't earn a living, because millions of people who illegally download have no idea about the impact of their actions.

People who choose to not support artists and download music and film illegally really only have one valid reason; because they can.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 12:58pm

Re: The right to con people
*** Unknowing people will realise the truth in the end.
http://badwebcomics.wikidot.com/the-oatmeal ***

so you don't like being beat at your own game... how ironic.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:03pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
" Can you come up with empirical data that sharing anything hurts the market? "

yup

http://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/05/22/why-arent-more-musicians-working-professio nally/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:05pm

Re: Re: Re: ???
*** Do I need an industry card or endorsement to get ARTISTS RIGHTS? How are these different from the rights I already have? Can I carry these RIGHTS with me to a new job? What are the monthly fees? ***

these rights are free, granted to you in the constitution of the USA, should you be a citizen. Larry Lessig learned this the hard way...

http://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/05/08/larry-lessig-is-wrong/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:08pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
thanks lowestofthekeys, can you point me to the article that details the contractual terms and payment the pirate bay is offering artists?

it's ok, I'll wait. it hollywood worked like the internet, musicians would not get paid for anything ever.

http://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/06/04/how-copyright-encourages-creativity-in-hollywood/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:09pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
Sorry, I do not see anything linking this to sharing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:10pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
why do you think it's only about music? your arguments quickly fall apart when applying the same (faulty) logic to users of music software...

http://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/05/12/the-paradox-of-pirate-logic-music-versus-music-so ftware-full-post/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:10pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
you'd actually have to read the article at the link...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:14pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
Sorry Lowery can you point me to where I declared that the Pirate Bay was a legitimate label?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:15pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
"It's obvious the agenda you're promoting."

it is obvious, isn't it? very simple, artists rights against illegal exploitation by for profit companites.

http://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/06/05/artists-know-thy-enemy/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:16pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
"why do you think it's only about music?"

Um, err...I know this is embarrassing for you, but my point this entire time has focused on music, not music software.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:18pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
"Sorry Lowery can you point me to where I declared that the Pirate Bay was a legitimate label?"

so than you agree The Pirate Bay is an illegally operating business ripping off artists and paying them nothing, fantastic. Thank You. That wasn't so hard was it?

I mean, there is this - Convicted and Upheld... uh oh...
http://phys.org/news/2010-11-convictions-upheld-pirate-bay-file-sharing.html
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:18pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
Oh you mean the part in one of the articles he quotes where it says:

" You�ve got to continually engage with your fans, encourage and incentivize them to �spread the word�. BLOG, TWITTER, POST, make at least some of your music available for free to your public, let them know how good you really are! At every gig, grow your mailing list and your army, make some noise, it will pay off."

So, Lowery has an article linked from his website that actually supports Techdirts method of dealing with fans...amazing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:19pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
Yes, it is, however you support an equally illegal system that rips off artists as well.

However, you have never admitted to it, which is kind of sad.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:20pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
"Um, err...I know this is embarrassing for you, but my point this entire time has focused on music, not music software."

and um, err... that is why you fail...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:23pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
And just for repetitions sake

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/01/exploit-now-pay-later-music-labels-finally-pay-ar tists/

So yeah, you can either go either way on the model, however only one model allows you to keep your copyright.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:24pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
any wrong doing is unacceptable, and artists have legal recourse with labels that they don't have with the pirate bay.

so I'll agree that they are equal when the pirate bay issues contracts and payments to artists, and also respects their rights to free agency to have their work removed.

until then, it's funny that your solution to one injustice (record labels) is an even greater injustice in piracy which pays nothing, zero, zilch, nadda... and yet retains 100% of the money.

this in fact makes you WORSE than the RIAA you loath so much.

if the future is in fact in free, monetized by advertising revenues, shouldn't the artists be compensated in that value chain?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:24pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
I know, because I was bring up music software in my posts, right?

Old man Lowery, you dun it again!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:26pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
copyright is worthless if you can't get paid? and that's the point. should hollywood producers of film and tv be allowed to exploit artists the same way illegally operating businesses on the internet do?

http://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/06/04/how-copyright-encourages-creativity-in-hollywood/

http://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/06/09/copylike-org-evil-corporations-we-dont-like-them/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:28pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
Legal recourse? If they're signed into a contract, they have a slim chance of winning or risk being put into a long, expensive legal battle, and their content still gets put on TPB.

I could care less what the Pirate Bay does, both systems do not work, but instead of debating that you stigmatize yourself by arguing from one side of the shit pile.

It's even funnier that you argue for musicians to get screwed by labels instead of embracing DIY and retaining the rights to their creations. Obviously money is your only concern which makes you as bad as the labels.

Your pre-conceived notion that I do not wish for artists to be paid is kind of short-sighted, don't ya think?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:31pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
And Hollywood is a guarantee cash cow? You just linked an article talking about how little musicians are getting paid.

Plus you have -

http://torrentfreak.com/how-the-riaa-screws-artists-with-creative-accounting-110708/

Oh and once more for clarity

http://gizmodo.com/352762/riaa-wants-to-cut-artist-royalties-to-9-apple-wants-them-at-4-a rtists-just-want-to-eat
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:33pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
Oh hey, and look at what the RIAA does to defend your creative rights:

http://consumerist.com/2008/03/riaa-pockets-filesharing-settlement-money-doesnt-pay-artis ts-whose-copyrights-were-infringed.html
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Leigh Beadon (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:34pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: ???
granted to you in the constitution of the USA

Can you please quote the relevant part of the constitution?

Not the part that grants congress the ability to create IP law - the part you are claiming exists, the one that actually explicitly grants copyright in the constitution.

I would very much like to read that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 1:51pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
Also, just an fyi...the dubious statistics for Tunecore have been outlined here - http://davidtouve.com/2011/11/24/making-heads-and-tails-of-tunecore-artist-sales/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 2:03pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
LOTK:
Legal recourse? If they're signed into a contract, they have a slim chance of winning or risk being put into a long, expensive legal battle, and their content still gets put on TPB.

AC:
No, they singed a contract so that they DO have rights and recourse. Many artists can and do successfully "win" against labels, and many times without costly legal battles BECAUSE they actually to have contracts. Would you buy a car or a house without a contract? Probably not.

LOTK:
I could care less what the Pirate Bay does, both systems do not work, but instead of debating that you stigmatize yourself by arguing from one side of the shit pile.

AC:
Of course you could care less, that's specifically the problem. I'm not defending any wrong doing. You are making an assumption that all record deals are bad, when in fact this is not true. You don't hear about the good deals and happy artists because it doesn't make headlines. Also, and again... 1) Record Labels are Ripping Off Artists and 2) Millionaire Music Stars Don't Need My Money is something of a Paradox of Pirate Logic.

LOTK:
It's even funnier that you argue for musicians to get screwed by labels instead of embracing DIY and retaining the rights to their creations. Obviously money is your only concern which makes you as bad as the labels.

AC:
I embrace artists getting paid, it's pretty simple. I'm pro-choice. I support the artists right to make whatever decisions they feel is best for them, including what to give away, where, when and how much. If someone is profiting from the exploitation of the artists work, the artists should be a part of that value chain. The Pirate Bay and most other pirate sites, profiting from the illegally exploitation of the artists work do not include the artist in that value chain and do not allow them the CHOICE to opt in or out. You can't have liberty without consent.

LOTK:
Your pre-conceived notion that I do not wish for artists to be paid is kind of short-sighted, don't ya think?

AC:
Not really, you haven't given any indication to the contrary.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anunoomus Kowhard, 15 Jun 2012 @ 2:17pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ???
"I would very much like to read that."

Me too. In fact I'm sure a lot of folks here would like to read that. Unfortunately this particular Anonymous Coward won't reply, thus living up to the cowardly half of their namesake yet again. If by some miracle they do reply, it won't be to answer the question, but to ramble about something idiotically nonsensical for the millionth time.

Regarding the story, there has always been a common misperception that money = good. The reasoning tends to be that the more something costs, the better it must be. If someone is giving something away for free, it must surely be worthless junk. Those who have lived long enough know this is far from being the truth. Getting younger folks to understand this though is pretty much impossible and the winners always end up being the folks overcharging for their wares (like the businesses mentioned in this article). As the apt saying goes, "There's a sucker born every minute."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 2:20pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
Well, we have something in common. We both don't like the RIAA. I'm not sure how that excuses an even WORSE system where companies and businesses make 100% of the money and pay artists nothing...

You keep arguing the solution to one injustice (record labels) is an even greater injustice in piracy. I'm not sure how you think not getting paid is better than actually getting paid. More artists made more money from labels than they will ever make from piracy. In all sincerity, can you honestly say you don't understand that?

http://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/05/22/why-arent-more-musicians-working-professionally/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 2:21pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
it actually helps if people understand how the reporting systems work...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 2:24pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
the truth is, music software has a value to consumers, as they are actually using it, yet they still steal it. so the consumer relationship/value argument holds no weight in the conversation about piracy, and that is why you fail.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Robert (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 2:30pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
It has exploited consumers and was punished for price fixing, finally, in 2003, too bad those charged should have been brought forth in the '80's.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 2:34pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ???
"�the Supreme Court shut the door, finally and firmly, on any opportunity to meaningfully challenge a copyright statute constitutionally. " - Larry Lessig

http://www.thenation.com/article/165901/after-battle-against-sopa-whats-next
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 2:37pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
"So, Lowery has an article linked from his website that actually supports Techdirts method of dealing with fans...amazing."

and you should read the whole thing...

http://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/04/15/meet-the-new-boss-worse-than-the-old-boss-full-po st/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Robert (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 2:38pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ???
Are you sure you couldn't find a link to your own site for this reply? Come on Mr Lowery, you MUST have something on your site you love to promote here like it was 100% accurate (while others use numerous sites to counter), especially your "lesig gets it wrong" article?

You're missing a chance to direct traffic to your site, what's going on? Are you slipping or something?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 2:39pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
"And Hollywood is a guarantee cash cow? You just linked an article talking about how little musicians are getting paid. "

I think you need to re-read that.... but in any case, getting PAID a little is a lot better than getting paid NOTHING as is the case with the Pirate Bay and other for profit commercial businesses ripping off artists and paying them nothing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward of Esteemed Trolling (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 2:42pm

That makes no sense.

Irony is a word, with a definition.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 2:49pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: ???
There is a invented distinction made by some to further self interests that are not of interest for society at all.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 2:53pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
Where is the math dude?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 2:54pm

Here's The Ultimate Circuit Breaker
All the artists who agree that free sharing is the way forward, just go ahead and do it. All the artists that don't will either continue to be popular with the public, or will fade away to oblivion as people refuse to buy their music.
There is NO conflict between amateur and pro in music. I buy my music from Beatport and there is NO distinction. You buy a track because you like it, not because one is pro and not amateur. I'm happy to financially support both.
The only conflict comes when choice is taken away, and artists have their work forcibly taken from them.
This debate has raged on for ten years, and I've yet to see the majority of musicians embrace free sharing, but I see lots of consumers freely sharing artists work whether they like it or not.
So concentrate your consumption on the artists that agree with you about free music, and don't consume the music of the artists who want to be paid. Easy, debate over, end of conflict!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 2:55pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
I don't see it, I don't pay for it and I even don't listen to it anymore, that is why you are not going to get paid by me ever again.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 3:00pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
"I'm not sure how that excuses an even WORSE system where companies and businesses make 100% of the money and pay artists nothing... "

TPB isn't a comparable system to the TPB, you are comparing apples and oranges, especially since TPB is only offering marketing to the bands.

"You keep arguing the solution to one injustice (record labels) is an even greater injustice in piracy. I'm not sure how you think not getting paid is better than actually getting paid. More artists made more money from labels than they will ever make from piracy. In all sincerity, can you honestly say you don't understand that? "

Where did I argue that? Oh wait, you never use citations...

Actually, as Techdirt has demonstrated multiple times, you can get paid without going through a label.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 3:04pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
Oh? elaborate please?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 3:10pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
But I never brought up music software...and yes the consumer/company argument does hold water.

A common complaint from consumers is DRM, which is intrusive and makes it difficult to use the media they buy.

Why deal with that when you can pirate DRM-free content?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 3:13pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
He did, you just missed the part where Ted Cohen says digital distribution can be successful, and DIY can work.

You just ignore the parts that don't suite your agenda.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 4:31pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
That's because the lessons from music software debunk your theory.
The music software companies are run by young, innovative, tech savvy individuals, not corporate dinosaurs.
They've done everything the filesharing lobby ask the music industry to do.
they given you free and instant demos, even free software, cheap products, downloadable 24/7/365, but all the most popular music software products are on illegal filesharing sites and are enthusiastically pirated. Why? because people would rather pay nothing than pay $50 or $250. It's sooo common sense in the ten years you've failed to explain how you effectively sell an identical product when there is a free one flooding the market.
The nesy excuse we hear is "sell something else". But music software can't go on tour, and music software doesn't drive the consumer to buy Ableton t-shirts, or have Ableton coded in their own home as a private performance.
The experience of music software demonstrates how you can't compete with (illegally) free.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 4:48pm

Re: Re:
n/m.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Leigh Beadon (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 7:46pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ???
Umm... what?

The (arguable) fact that the Supreme Court has ruled out any further constitutional challenges to copyright is not in ANY WAY the same thing as saying "copyright is granted by the constitution"

Indeed, the very fact that there was ever any room for constitutional challenges is due to the fact that copyright is not, itself, in the constitution.

Thanks, though - for me, it's definitely an entertaining conversation when I ask someone to cite the U.S. Constitution and they reply by quoting Larry Lessig...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 9:54pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
AC1:
TPB isn't a comparable system to the TPB, you are comparing apples and oranges, especially since TPB is only offering marketing to the bands.

AC2:
Huh? TPB is not TPB? Which is the apple and which is the orange?

AC1:
"You keep arguing the solution to one injustice (record labels) is an even greater injustice in piracy. I'm not sure how you think not getting paid is better than actually getting paid. More artists made more money from labels than they will ever make from piracy. In all sincerity, can you honestly say you don't understand that? "

Where did I argue that? Oh wait, you never use citations...

AC2:
Actually, it was LOTK who was making that argument. Do you really disagree that Pirates sites that pay artists NOTHING, are somehow paying more than labels who actually write checks? Talk about not understanding the difference between Apples and Airplanes...

AC1:
Actually, as Techdirt has demonstrated multiple times, you can get paid without going through a label.

AC2:
So has a NYC subway brusker.... what's your point?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 9:55pm

Re:
yes, you should look it up.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 9:57pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ???
So you can see than that Lessig is wrong, according to the Supreme Court. Good luck fighting the constitutionality of copyright. Mission Accomplished, Thanks for playing...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Jun 2012 @ 10:00pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ???
"There is a invented distinction made by some to further self interests that are not of interest for society at all."

ha... Lessig tried that argument and LOST.

http://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/05/08/larry-lessig-is-wrong/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Leigh Beadon (profile), 15 Jun 2012 @ 11:44pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ???
Er... what? I have no idea what you're on about. I was asking you a very simple question. So let's back up, and maybe you can try to answer it.

You said this, in reference to copyright:

"these rights are free, granted to you in the constitution of the USA"

And I ask you again - what part of the constitution are you referring to? I'm just looking for the citation. Where does the constitution grant copyright to artists?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JMT (profile), 16 Jun 2012 @ 12:11am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
"the truth is, music software has a value to consumers, as they are actually using it, yet they still steal it."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PaulT (profile), 16 Jun 2012 @ 12:12am

Re: Depends also...
"Any perception I hear from folks who indulge in free are saying is if they know the artist is starting to get popular, then they must be getting rich."

You need to widen your social circle. Perhaps also take into account business models where "free" doesn't mean copyright infringement.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JMT (profile), 16 Jun 2012 @ 12:13am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
Crap, that didn't work...

"the truth is, music software has a value to consumers, as they are actually using it, yet they still steal it."

Wait, musicians are dirty, thieving pirates too?!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PaulT (profile), 16 Jun 2012 @ 12:14am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
"Sorry Lowery can you point me to where I declared that the Pirate Bay was a legitimate label?"

You didn't. This asshole jumps to the conclusion that anyone who doesn't lie prostrate at the feet of the traditional recording industry must be a pirate and thus only supports The Pirate Bay at the expense of all "other" labels.

He's an idiot.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PaulT (profile), 16 Jun 2012 @ 12:16am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
" getting PAID a little is a lot better than getting paid NOTHING as is the case with the Pirate Bay"

Yet, you repeatedly attack business models discussed here that allow just that without the need for signing your rights away to a label who refuses to join the 21st century.

Also, there's still the small fact that nobody has lauded TPB as such an alternative business model here except the voices in your head.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Jun 2012 @ 8:23am

"Without music, life would be mistake" - Friedrich Nietzsche
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Jun 2012 @ 8:44am

Re:
"Without music, life would be a mistake"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Jun 2012 @ 6:06am

Re: Re: Re: Re: ???
http://gnu.org/philosophy/misinterpreting-copyright.html
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2012 @ 12:47pm

Re:
Hey, you know what they say. Opinions are like assholes. Everyone's got one, and they all stink.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2012 @ 12:53pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
You're the one making the accusation. They doesn't have to disprove what you say, you have to prove what you say. So where is your proof that Lowestofthekeys doesn't wants artists to be paid? Is it your assumption that they are a pirate? No proof offered, just assertions. The fact that they don't care for major labels? Again, just an assertion, not really proof. Come on, you can do better than this, can't you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2012 @ 12:55pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
People compete for those busker licenses, so don't discount those out of hand so blithely.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2012 @ 12:59pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Depends also...
it is obvious, isn't it? very simple, artists rights against illegal exploitation by for profit companites.

Let me fix that for you: Artist's rights against illegal exploitation by for-profit companies, as long as those companies aren't major labels, because the major labels are my GOD, and I'll keep sucking at the teat of the labels.

Keep collecting that paycheck, buddy. We still aren't buying into it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Claire Ryan (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 3:44pm

Just want to say
In case no one's pointed it out yet, J.A. Konrath DIDN'T find that he made more money at 99c. He's still debating on what's the best price, as far as I know.

http://jakonrath.blogspot.ca/2010/09/ebook-pricing.html
http://jakonrath.blogspot.ca/2011/ 03/another-update-on-list-experiment.html
[ link to this | view in thread ]