I, too, used to work at a college-town record store in the '90s, and I occasionally chat with the owner. When I talked to him around 2003, he said they were now just breaking even or losing money in the store, and that the college kids were all showrooming, just browsing and using the listening stations, and then going back to their dorms and downloading and/or burning CD-Rs; at least, this is what they told him. They still came in to buy the more obscure stuff, but the store was increasingly relying on eBay sales. This meant that most of the "good stuff" wasn't on the sales floor anymore, it was being sold online and shipped overseas for gobs more than anyone local would pay. This led to a downward spiral: people quickly learned there was a good chance they wouldn't find much worth buying in the shop, so they came in less often. And the owner was no dummy, he knew there was other stuff going on; new CDs were still too expensive, kids didn't even own CD players anymore (just computers and iPods), record companies were offering less interesting music, distributors were cutting back on returns, kids were spending more on videos and games...so he didn't blame the decline in business strictly on piracy. But every college kid knew how to get free music via the Internet; it's ridiculous to say it had no effect whatsoever on sales. Of course it did. It just wasn't the only thing.
The store is still limping along in 2012, sticking to its tradition of low prices to keep people coming back, but the volume just isn't there like it used to be; they're still only profitable because of eBay.
Are the bass line parts of a composition actually covered by copyright?
I once read an interview with someone... George Clinton or Bootsy... saying you generally "can't copyright a bass line" or rhythm/drum part, as it's usually not the "melodic" element of the song.
Challenge to music industry: tell us how you figure your piracy losses
No one knows how the RIAA, MPAA, etc. come up with their "loss" figures. Why don't they tell us? What do they have to hide?
Reid chose the $150,000 per-willfully-infringed-work cap on statutory damages as the basis for his "$8 billion iPod" punchline. The RIAA is currently aggressively litigating two file-sharing cases with that $150,000/work damage cap, so it is effectively what the industry says music is worth, although everyone acknowledges that it bears little relation to actual damages. It's just the upper end of a range the law allows, possibly in part for its deterrent effect, as an option when actual damages are difficult to determine or are just too low to be worthwhile.
I would've liked if he went on to point out what was raised in the Sony BMG v. Tenenbaum appeal: with damage figures like that, the "value" of even a small fraction of the number of files being shared not only makes lawsuits against file-sharers extremely profitable, but it quickly exceeds the global GDP: all the money in the entire world couldn't pay for a few hundred iPods full of music.
On the post: Why Do The Labels Continue To Insist That 'Your Money Is No Good Here?'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The store is still limping along in 2012, sticking to its tradition of low prices to keep people coming back, but the volume just isn't there like it used to be; they're still only profitable because of eBay.
On the post: Bruce Springsteen, Another Pirate Remixer!
Are the bass line parts of a composition actually covered by copyright?
On the post: When Entertainment Industry Numbers Are More Suited To Comedy Than Analysis
Challenge to music industry: tell us how you figure your piracy losses
Reid chose the $150,000 per-willfully-infringed-work cap on statutory damages as the basis for his "$8 billion iPod" punchline. The RIAA is currently aggressively litigating two file-sharing cases with that $150,000/work damage cap, so it is effectively what the industry says music is worth, although everyone acknowledges that it bears little relation to actual damages. It's just the upper end of a range the law allows, possibly in part for its deterrent effect, as an option when actual damages are difficult to determine or are just too low to be worthwhile.
I would've liked if he went on to point out what was raised in the Sony BMG v. Tenenbaum appeal: with damage figures like that, the "value" of even a small fraction of the number of files being shared not only makes lawsuits against file-sharers extremely profitable, but it quickly exceeds the global GDP: all the money in the entire world couldn't pay for a few hundred iPods full of music.
Next >>