Note: this blog item has nothing to do with (RED)
Paul McGuinness is going on the record to say that illegal downloaders should have their ISPs banned if they’re found guilty of stealing music, mentioning that the songwriters and musicians are the victims due to the lack of royalties from music no longer being paid for. He is encouraging people like Steve Jobs to work on solving the conundrum of keeping people from illegally sharing music/movies, etc. Of course McGuinness would be concerned about the royalties. U2 receive the highest percentage of royalties out of anyone in the music industry (give or take) at about 28% - so it hits the wallet super hard.
Over the years, it’s been very much a “us vs. them” mentality when it comes to this issue. If only the people would not steal the music, so that the artists get paid their royalty, this wouldn’t be a problem. But the problem isn’t *just* the person downloading without paying that’s causing this downward spiral. Let me explain:
First, let’s focus on what has happened in the recording industry - the business model of developing artists went out the window over a decade ago. So, a lot of the music is nothing more than mere pablum where “artists” are nothing more than one-hit wonders that sell a song then fade into oblivion. This does not encourage people to go out and buy the music - you know that the other 9 songs on the CD (give or take) are crap if the radio station is *only* playing that one song from an artist. Also, due to the consolidation of the major labels, less choice is available for the average listener - and indie labels are running low-budget as it is as they face more challenges to get the music heard.
Second, iTunes allows you to purchase just the song in most cases so that you don’t have to buy the whole album. Sure, when all was available was the 7″ single from a record store (remember them?), you’d get a B-side to enjoy for the same 99-cents (or $1.99 depending on if the single was currently on the top 40 list). If you liked what you heard, you’d go back and buy the next single - or the whole album. I’d be interested in finding out how many people return to iTunes to purchase additional songs (or the whole album) after buying the 1 song they want. For me, what iTunes has turned into is a place where I just get that one song that I really really like and that’s it. Prior to iTunes, if I really liked that song and the single was not available, I would have shelled out the big bucks to buy the entire CD. My CD library is chock-full of artists where I liked just one song, but I was forced to buy the entire CD. iTunes is really a double-edged sword in this regard.
Third, remember when you bought blank cassette tapes and recorded the radio to get a song you liked? Or, shared a “mix tape” or “mix CD” with friends or family members? Do you recall the music industry being so Orwellian Big Brother-like about this - going after people and suing them for thousands of dollars (or more), or threatening personal financial ruin in the way they are going after people now? Exactly - me neither. It’s gotten to the point where bullying the consumer is backfiring - enforcement of the law is important, but at least in the US, you’re innocent until you’re proven guilty and you have the right to defend yourself. I recall when I was working at MIT, there were quite a few students who were accused of illegal downloading - and these students really were not able to launch a defense. They were told to either pay the fine of thousands of dollars or be forced to pay a fine of tens of thousands of dollars. There was no defense for them - it was along the lines of “your IP address had x number of songs” - they personally may not have downloaded them…could have been someone else, but the owner of the IP address was held responsible. In some cases, people did not have firewalls or other safeguards on their computer and someone elsewhere in the world was able to gain access to their computer. In short, this bullying practice by the music industry doesn’t do much to win friends and influence people.
Fourth, the music industry should be more fair to the artists they have under contract. Sure - U2 has a sweet royalty deal where they own all their songs…but other artists should be offered better deals than what they’re given. Does McGuinness seriously think that artists are losing money solely because people are illegally downloading? More artists need wiley managers like McGuinness to advocate for them. And…if the music industry provided better support for the artists, they’d find that there would be more gems to mine that need a bit of time to fully shine. It takes a lot of pressure (and time) to turn coal into a diamond. So, instead of investing in a here-today, gone in a minute artists, make an investment in someone who can provide you with longevity and who has the talent to write their own material. Quality always wins out.
It’s easy to point a finger at the consumer and blame them for not playing by the rules - but as the industry as evolved, it’s been harder for the consumer. You buy the song, and you should be able to listen to it on any computer you own or on any mp3 player you own - but that’s not how it’s set up in some cases where it’s authorized for that one player. That’s not how CDs or cassettes work. So, there’s been a revolution among the consumer to try to use what they paid for - and in some cases, this code or technology led to people abusing it. I believe it’s this group of abusers McGuinness is talking about. Ultimately, there should be a better solution that allows for cooperation among the consumer and the industry instead of such heavy-handed tactics.
I’m not saying the artist should suffer - the music industry should stop being behind the 8-ball. The music industry (and not the artist’s manager) should be advocating for Steve Jobs instead of sending their industy legal hounds after college students who are already in debt for more money than they’ll be able to repay in the next decade.
