More Musicians Recognizing Copy Protection Is A Bad Thing
from the now-they-realize dept
It's not like it hasn't been said before, but it appears that more musicians are recognizing that copy protection hurts everyone -- and they're even going to the NY Times Op/Ed page to say so: "Conscientious fans, who buy music legally because it's the right thing to do, just get insulted. They've made the choice not to steal their music, and the labels thank them by giving them an inferior product hampered by software that's at best a nuisance, and at worst a security threat. As for musicians, we are left to wonder how many more people could be listening to our music if it weren't such a hassle, and how many more iPods might have our albums on them if our labels hadn't sabotaged our releases with cumbersome software."
Of course, the recording industry still refuses to admit that copy protection could be anything but wonderful.






Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
No copy protection until we're famous?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: No copy protection until we're famous?
http://www.indie-music.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=820
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: No copy protection until we're famous?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: No copy protection until we're famous?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: No copy protection until we're famous?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
change of heart
Since then I've realized that it isn't that simple. I agree that the RIAA is mainly concerned with preservation of its monopoly; any concern they have for musicians is strictly limited to what will support this agenda. They extract their pound of flesh, and in return for this, they provide little more than inflated CD prices. The prices continue to rise, and the musician's share is miniscule.
And business as conducted by the major labels would do the Mafia proud.
I also agree that, ironically, copying will often lead to regular CD purchases. It's also possible that reasonable CD prices may also encourage more CD purchases, but the RIAA will prevent that any way they can.
It seems that the only solution for a musician is to go off the grid, give shows, and sell your own home-brewed stuff. The Grateful Dead is a prominent example. They did quite well, and I never heard them whining about bootlegging or copying.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: change of heart
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: No copy protection until we're famous?
I find it a refreshing thought, that he's admitting that if he was rich and famous he might (but not definetly would) feel different...and now, he'll never know.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
No CDs this Christmas
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Grateful Dead
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: change of heart
Dave, prior to this Sony fiasco, I would have agreed with you. But, and speaking for myself alone here, they've killed my will to continue to try to be an upstanding citizen...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: No copy protection until we're famous?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Copy Protection
Let them copy protect all they want. It has yet to affect my life in any major way.... when it does.. i'll find a way around it.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Copy Protection
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Copy Protection
There's a company that keeps track of p2p networks for the recording industry. I think they're called 'overpeer' or something.
Anyhow, it turns out that the average time from a CD being released to it showing up on the p2p networks is about 6 minutes.
The average time if the song is only available copy-protected (iTunes-only release or copy protected disks) is still only 6 minutes.
Weeks? Ha!!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment