>"we want to see a new method come in that doesn't allow a bunch of legal-minded people with no appreciation for music and music distribution to cheat bands out of money, to deny a lot of musicians the right to profit, and to pursue draconic punishments for the people who speak out against them."
The RIAA is shady and music labels give bands a hard deal, no doubt about that. But what makes you think that bands will be able to turn a profit when everything is free? Where there is no scarcity, there is no price.
Music is broken.
Maybe it is a positive social good that the RIAA blokes have to go find new jobs, but the bands get screwed either way.
The RIAA is shady and music labels give bands a hard deal, no doubt about that. But what makes you think that bands will be able to turn a profit when everything is free? Where there is no scarcity, there is no price.
There you go again. (I'm very sorry that you're getting picked on in this thread, but you're throwing up a straw man that's very conveniently simple to argue against.) Your assumption is that the current model of music - the broken one - is the only possible model of music. It's not. There are certainly solutions to be had. The problem is that the RIAA is not taking said solutions.
The company to root for is the company that figures out a model that works for bands despite pirating and an oversaturated market. Thinking there's no hope won't help anything.
The Pirate Bay isn't a model. It's a vast swath of illegal activity. But that's not going away, and frankly I think that the model in which most music is torrented is better for everybody. I never buy an album that I don't like anymore.
The solution is to figure out how to many money despite the unending piracy. The RIAA thinks the solution is to sue the pirates, which is stupid, because the pirates are only doing what feels natural. Models exist that can work alongside piracy. Take, for instance, the pay-what-you-want, model, the pay-to-ensure-release model, and the 70%-free model. Three systems that all have been earning bands money.
I think the demand for services like iTunes is driven partially by the perceived legal risk involved in using free alternatives. Suing the pirates might actually be a profitable idea for the RIAA.
iTunes is not popular because of fear. It's popular because it's easy. I buy albums on iTunes when I want to get music quickly. The ease of access is worth the price.
iTunes is not the ultimate solution; it may be the ultimate sales interface. There are still better methods of distribution.
The RIAA is shady and music labels give bands a hard deal, no doubt about that. But what makes you think that bands will be able to turn a profit when everything is free? Where there is no scarcity, there is no price.
Music is broken.
Maybe it is a positive social good that the RIAA blokes have to go find new jobs, but the bands get screwed either way.