Archive for May 5th, 2004
Musicians Discuss Views on File Sharing
The Pew Internet & American Life Project presented at a conference some early findings of an online survey it did of more than 2,700 musicians to gather their views on copyright and file-sharing issues.
Among other things, these musicians are very divided about the problems and marketing potential of online file-sharing systems and they are not sure the recording industry campaign against illegal downloading will help them. Many of these artists themselves share some of their songs for free online and find that it helps them sell more CDs, draw bigger concert audiences, and get more playing time on commercial radio.
The survey of musicians and songwriters was conducted online between March 15 and April 15. While the sample for this survey is not representative or projectable to the entire population of musicians and songwriters, it brings many more voices into the debates about copyright laws, the impact of online music swapping, and the long-term prospects for the music industry.
Pew Internet & American Life Project. Pew Ineternet Project Data Memo: Preliminary Findings from a Web Survey of Musicians and Songwriters. (.pdf) May 2004.
Does Privacy = Anti-Technology?
Declan McCullagh, Washington, DC correspondent for News.com, wrote another typically incisive column last week, analyzing the nature of privacy advocacy, particularly as it has been illustrated during the recent objections to Google’s Gmail.
"The objections lodged against Gmail are telling, because they illuminate two different views about how to respond to new technologies. The protechnology view says customers of a company should be allowed to make up their own mind and that government regulation should be a last resort. Privacy fundamentalists, on the other hand, insist that new services they believe to be harmful should be banned, even if consumers are clamoring for them."
Declan McCullagh. Gmail and Its Discontents. News.com. April 26, 2004.
File Sharing: The Sequel
Granted, the iTunes and iPod music distribution model is pretty decent for both consumers and artists. Let us forget, for a moment, that the downloading model turns what historically has been a music sale (which is covered by copyright law’s first sale doctrine) into a music lease (which is not covered by federal copyright law, and instead is handled as a contract between buyer and seller, often with no negotiation and take-it-or-leave-it terms.)
The current downloading model reintroduces the single to American music buyers, and, at least in the case of iTunes, gives buyers relatively free reign to transfer their leased songs across different players (i.e. from computer to car to home stereo).
What the iTunes model doesn’t really allow for right now, though, is capturing live performances. And many of the best artists — Clapton, Prince, Dave Matthews Band, Parliament — often give their best performances live. eMusicLive gives buyers the opportunity to capture these performances in an authorized fashion.
It will be interesting to see how much money the musicians make from this venture, particularly since it seems that live performances will again be the way that musicians make their money. Let’s face it: radio is so tightly programmed that it is virtually impossible for new songs to get play on the airwaves, although satellite radio ventures like XM Radio and Sirius may provide some opportunities. Further, most of the music is laden with samples of pre-existing work, making it harder for many songwriters to make a living by peddling tunes.
And theft, whether it be on the Web or on the street, always hampers revenue flow.
As a result, the live performance has become even more important as a way for musicians to earn money.
Associated Press. ‘Dude! This Thing Is Awesome!’. Wired News. April 29, 2004.
COPYCENSE 