More Musicians Realizing File Sharing Isn't Evil; Shakira, Norah Jones, Nelly Furtado Say It's Ok

from the figuring-it-out dept

A few different people have sent in the news that some more well known singers are saying that the industry is overreacting to the issue of file sharing. Sky News talked to three top female singers, Shakira, Norah Jones and Nelly Furtado, and found they all recognized that it was pretty much the natural state of the market, and it helped gain more exposure:
"I like what's going on because I feel closer to the fans and the people who appreciate the music. It's the democratisation of music in a way, and music is a gift. That's what it should be, a gift." -- Shakira

"If people hear it I'm happy. I'm not going to say go and steal my album, but you know I think its great that young people who don't have a lot of money can listen to music and be exposed to new things." -- Norah Jones

"If you love music you're going to make it anyway. You'll find an audience, and you may not make like millions of dollars but you'll make enough to have a house and a family and a car." -- Nelly Furtado
Looks like more and more musicians are realizing that fighting file sharing doesn't make sense, but learning to embrace it has tremendous benefits. Maybe, one of these days, the record labels will figure this out as well.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. icon
    The Infamous Joe (profile), 22 Oct 2009 @ 10:18am


    I have your counter-argument right here, pal:

    But wait, I thought artists could make MORE money by NOT selling copies? Why is this musician implying the opposite?

    Reading isn't your strong point, is it? If you take some time and really sound out the words, you'll understand that "could" doesn't mean "absolutely, 100% will". I know, I know, you think the masses should just hand over money for any old crap that's tossed at them, but that's not how the real world, or the free market, works.

    Furthermore, I *do* think that if file-sharing were accepted, there would be less Mega-super-ultra stars, but also way less still-needs-to-work-two-jobs musicians. More on that after I quote your next retarded comment.

    This is what copyright helps to enable and what freemunists seek to destroy.

    Strict Copyright doesn't help an artist-- *any* artist-- gain millions of fans. Talent does that. So why do we have Brittany Spears? Because the Labels have set up such an environment where you *needed* a label to reach that number of people. In fact, they used this environment to strong-arm artists into blatantly unfair contracts to rob them of their rights to *their own work*. THAT sounds like piracy to me. Back on topic, because of this environment, you were only exposed to the artists that the label wanted you exposed to-- the ones that were lowest risk, that sounded much like everyone else. In essence, a cookie-cutter cutout of the artists before. That is not art.

    Now that there is an easy, cheap, and quick way to spread your music/book/movie to literally the entire planet at once, these bloated incumbent middlemen are no longer required, so they villanize the method to make them obsolete, using the money from the unfair contracts they've forced artists into for decades. Now we can be exposed to a nearly unlimited number of new artists and judge for ourselves if they deserve to be compensated for their art, or if they are just a screaming monkey with a microphone playing power chords mindlessly.

    It doesn't matter if an artists has already made it big, or is just starting out-- the only people who are afraid of file-sharing are those without talent.

    Finally, a teacher does not reap any rewards if one of his students goes on to invent something innovative. A doctor does not reap rewards from everything accomplished by someone whose life she saves. A police officer that foils a burglary does not get a cut if the homeowner uses that not-stolen money in the stock market to make millions of dollars. Why, then, does a director deserve to keep getting paid for every viewing of his movie? Why does a pop singer deserve to get paid every time someone stumbles upon their music on Pandora? Why does an author keep getting paid every time Amazon Ctrl-V's an ebook and sends it to someone? IP Maximalists are not living in the real world if they honestly believe they are entitled to more money for doing absolutely, 100% no extra work. They had a good run, but it's a new age.

    Technology giveth and Technology taketh away.

    Do you copy?

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
Special Affiliate Offer

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.