Wednesday, December 10, 2008

Making Money on Piracy

http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/news/2008/03/music_levy

So how about it? Should we tack some more taxes on our already outrageous internet costs just for the 20% of America that can't keep their noses clean? Would it really save the industry, or even help it a little?
I'm not so sure. I think that file sharing has become such a significant piece of our society that it almost seems strange to think about dealing with the consequences for something that a lot of people don't even understand is wrong. And even the ones that do understand that it is wrong pump their fists and say "damn the man!" but turn around and want an industry job because it seems cool. Well the truth of the matter is people, musicians don't make money if the albums do not sell. Unless you're 50 cent and choose to slap your face on every endorsement that tickles your fancy, it is very tough to make a dollar from touring alone. Does anyone really fully comprehend the sheer expense that goes into touring? Everyone just seems take in the well lit stages, pyrotechnics, and band garb without considering how much is poured into that. And not only money but man hours. The extent of it all sometimes sets my head a spinning.
It is hard to put into perspective how simply burning a cd as opposed to "click to buy" has really hurt the industry, at least for myself it is. And I have an industry job, I have had to watch good friends lose their jobs and harmless holiday parties be canceled because no one wants to pay for a god damn CD. I'm guilty, my family is guilty, my friends are guilty and it's quite the internal battle of all hipocracies, to worry about the strength of my company but turn around and burn a CD. I will admit that I have never illegally downloaded a song in my life, I wouldn't even know where to find the torrents is someone asked me, but I have burned.
We have been saying for years now that someone somewhere has got to figure out a way to make money off the piracy or the industry will never survive. But is this really the right way to go about it? It's like in high school when no one could wear black just because some group of kids started a cult or hankerchiefs got banished because the elderly teachers thought it was all gang related. Whatever metaphor you want to use to help you understand, go for it, there is a million instances where this stuff happens. Other people paying for someone elses mistakes. That in itself is a piece of our culture.
An idea that had been discussed when I was in college was considering the labels working together with advertising companies that market to torrent sites. That to me, makes a bit more sense because at least you would be targeting your audience and you wouldn't be charging the public extra. Adveritising companies could chose to disclose their advertising opportunities on torrent sites and labels could choose to partner with them and take a small share if they felt it was a profitable opportunity. But the disclosure of torrents sites is another tricky venture. I think that labels have refused similar ideas because it would considered siding with the enemy. In order to keep afloat though, the idea could be revisted. Even still, it's a tough arguement because we know that those advertising companies do not only do advertising for torrent sites, so how do we disguish when a consumer is looking at the ad on Facebook or a torrent site? You can't make the people that use Facebook, but not torrents sites pay extra right?
The fact of the matter is that the people are going to pay, whether they're supposed to or not. That is, if this idea is put into action. Even if they are able to avoid charging every single cable viewer extra, they are still going to be higher costs somewhere. If labels want a piece of the advertising pie, then the ad costs will go up for the other companies purchasing ad space. If their costs go up, their product price goes up, and it'll all becomes a big trickle down affect. Or the ad costs could go up, and they could choose to just purchase less ads, thus leading to less exposure and less exposure would could potentially hurt their profits.
Which path to take. One has to be traveled, perhaps one that I haven't even seen or heard about yet. Perhaps one that has not been proposed yet. But the if the Music industry does not strive to push itself forward, then it will drown in this very spot it sits in, finger on the trigger and all the resources laying at it's feet.
Needless to say, this is the first someone good idea that's come about since CD sales really started falling in 2000. Let's hope that there is more brainstorming yet to come.

No comments: