by Mike Masnick

What The RIAA Is Really Afraid Of: Its Own Demise

from the marketshare... dept

It's no secret that the RIAA has been known to fudge the numbers to prove their point that file sharing hurts sales. What was never entirely clear, however, was why they simply refused to believe any study that suggested file sharing could help sales. If anyone were interested in such studies, it should be the RIAA -- because they would show them a great way to increase sales (which should be their goal). However, Mark Cuban makes an excellent point about why the RIAA is acting the way they are, despite these studies. Even if sales are up, it's not the sales of RIAA members. Cuban suggests that sales are probably up, but it's the independent musicians who are making up the difference, while RIAA member sales are holding steady, or slightly decreasing. Remember, the RIAA represents the big music labels -- not the tiny ones. Almost everyone agrees that the real impact of file sharing is that it spreads the success outward. Rather than just a few mega-rockstars, you get many more successful musicians. The big record labels have built their business models on the idea of just a few mega-rockstars dominating the market. What this means, then, is that the RIAA members are losing marketshare. It's not overall sales that are down, it's just that the competition from smaller players is taking away sales from the big labels -- which is why that coalition of independent artists is supporting the Grokster side of the case. If this theory is true (and a lot of the evidence does seem to support it), then what the RIAA is really fighting about is not saving the recording industry. It's about saving the RIAA.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  • identicon
    Chomper, 30 Mar 2005 @ 9:37am

    No Subject Given

    Honestly, is this really that much of a revelation?

    Everyone knows the RIAA is trying to protect a monopoly. That is what the RIAA is for.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 31 Mar 2005 @ 3:01am

    No Subject Given

    we are a small label with 4 small unknown, outside scotland, bands, we sell about 10 albums a year (online). But there must be millions of labels and bands around the world doing the same thing which means 10s of millions of albums being sold that weren't sold before the internet.
    Also, we offer most of our tracks as free mp3s as well and get about 500 downloads a month - before the internet nobody would have heard us.
    We have tried not offering as many free mp3s for 2 6 months periods in the last 6 years, during both of those periods we stopped selling at all.
    i long for our tracks to appear on p2p.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Lindsay, 31 Mar 2005 @ 5:49am


    if the RIAA can hire a herd of lawyers to sue P2P users wholesale then they cant be hurting too much as far as income is concerned, like the previous poster said the RIAA is just wanting to protect their monopoly stranglehold on music distribution...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Show Now: Takedown
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.