The Music Piracy Controversy: A Hindrance or an Aid to the Music Industry?
Music piracy is a controversial issue in today’s society. There have been many disputes and cases filed over whether or not an individual has the right to use an electronic medium to take from or share a piece of music with another person based on the United States copyright laws surrounding it. And with the rise of technology and global communication over the last decade, there has also been a rise in music piracy. However, while some companies – like the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) – still think that electronically downloading, burning, and file-sharing music illegally is harmful, many recording artists who are the “victims” of piracy are now in favor of it, and are actually embracing it and using it to their advantage.
Many organizations today are trying to tell society that not only is music piracy illegal, but that it’s also morally wrong. MusicUnited, an organization that is trying to publicize how and why piracy is wrong and the negative effects that it can have has said, “Most of us would never even consider stealing something – say, a picture or a piece of clothing – from a friend’s house. Our sense of right and wrong keeps most of us from doing something so selfish and anti-social. Yet when it comes to stealing digital recordings of copyrighted music, people somehow seem to think the same rules don’t apply – even though criminal penalties can be as high as 5 years in prison or $250,000 in fines,” (MusicUnited). Basically, what they’re saying is, stealing is stealing. Taking a book from a store without paying for it is stealing, and stealing is illegal. Most people know this, and would have the common sense not to do something like this. The same idea holds true for a song, however; if one downloads a song from the internet without paying for it and without the artist or record company’s consent, then one is stealing the song, which is an illegal action. It’s as simple as that.
However, some people still have trouble comprehending that, because MusicUnited, the RIAA, and other organizations are continually trying to get out the word about the negative effects that music piracy has on bands and record companies, and that the action itself is illegal. According to statistics found on the RIAA’s official website, global piracy causes, “$12.5 billion of economic losses every year.” (RIAA). Also, there are, “71,060 U.S. jobs lost, a loss of $2.7 million dollars in workers’ earning, and a loss of $422 million in tax revenues, $291 million in personal income tax and $131 million lost in corporate income and production taxes,” (RIAA) every year due to music piracy. Those are some very startling figures. Basically, what all those numbers mean is that the recording industry is losing very large sums of money every year due to music piracy, and therefore, they cannot afford to pay employees that work for them, resulting in many job losses. These statistics are what have led the RIAA to believe that music piracy is harmful, and needs to be stopped.
There are also laws surrounding music piracy that are further backing up the RIAA’s case. According to federal copyright law, there are, “severe civil and criminal penalties for the unauthorized reproduction, distribution, rental or digital transmission of copyrighted sound recordings. (Title 17, United States Code, Sections 501 and 506). The FBI investigates allegations of criminal copyright infringement and violators will be prosecuted,” (RIAA). If a song or an album is copyrighted, and one uploads the album onto the internet or downloads it from a website without paying for it or without the consent of the record company and/or band, then one is, in effect, breaking copyright law and stealing the album, which could result in one being arrested and/or fined.
But, again, it is not simply legal issues that give anti-piracy supporters a reason to prosecute those that choose to download music. As mentioned previously, morals play a large role on their decisions and actions, and so do the livelihoods of all the musicians who make the music. Many people fighting in the battle against piracy feel that by downloading music illegally, one is disrespecting the band whose music one is downloading, and that one is preventing said band from earning money for the work that they are doing. MusicUnited has stated that stealing music, “…stifles the careers of new artists and up-and-coming bands.” (MusicUnited). They believe that by downloading an album, one is preventing a sale to the band. This means that, while one may have a copy of the album, that one is not actually giving anything back to the band for having it. By stealing the music, one would be stealing money from the band, which can damage the band’s career, especially if they are not very well-established.
Not only that, but the site also goes on to say , “The cost of recording and promoting a major album can easily top $1 million, and only one out of every ten ever turns a profit.” (MusicUnited). Albums are extremely expensive to create and market and produce, and by downloading an album without paying for it, one would be making it harder for a band to make a profit from their CD. Based on all of these facts, one can see that there are many moral and legal issues surrounding the controversy over music piracy, and why it has the potential to be harmful to those involved in the music industry.
It is not only organizations who are sharing their views on the music piracy issue, however. Many bands and artists are now coming forward and sharing their personal views on illegally downloading music. And, surprisingly enough, not all of them see it as harmful. Obviously, there are many who agree with the RIAA’s stance on music piracy and believe that it is wrong and hurting their careers. Multi-Platinum Award-Winning artist Eve has been quoted as saying, “We work really hard. We love our fans and we appreciate the love, but don’t steal from us, support us. Go in the stores and buy the records.” (MusicUnited). Musician Mark Knopfler of Dire Straits has said, “You might as well walk into a record store, put the CD's in your pocket and walk out without paying for them,” (MusicUnited). These artists, obviously, are just as opposed to illegally downloading music as the RIAA seems to be. They feel that, with all of the hard work they do, they should be able to profit from their work. And those that illegally download are stealing their music and are preventing them from receiving the money that they claim to rightfully deserve. The Barenaked Ladies, a famous Canadian band, says, “When the Gap went online, T-shirts didn't become free,” (MusicUnited). They are stating that, just because one can find music online, doesn’t mean that one is allowed to download it at no cost. These artists – and many others, including music-icon Madonna, Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Inductee Elton John, three-time Grammy winner Diddy, rap-icon Eminem, and Italian tenor Luciano Pavarotti, to name a few – believe that uploading, downloading, and file-sharing music is, first and foremost, against the law, and second, damaging each of them as a band or musician. And they would all prefer to see music piracy put to a stop.
Yet, not all bands agree. In fact, many popular artists are in favor of downloading music for free, and are using it as a way to boost their sales as opposed to lowering them. Not only that, but there are many musicians who feel that some of the facts that the RIAA is coming up with are not true, and are not a very good representative of the general population of music lovers.
One of the most outspoken people about music piracy and views on it in the musical world is singer/songwriter Janis Ian. Since 1957, Ian has been producing music professionally, and has been nominated for and won many awards for her music, in addition to being known world-wide for it (Ian, Wikipedia). Ian differs from many artists in the fact that she feels that music piracy can actually be good for an artist’s career. She has written two major articles on music piracy on her official site stating her beliefs, and the overall theme of both is that the RIAA has mixed up and misinterpreted a lot of their facts, and that music piracy can actually do more good than harm. (Ian, Debacle and Fallout).
Ian has asked, “Who gets hurt by free downloads? Save a handful of super-successes like Celine Dion, none of us. We only get helped,” (Ian, Debacle). She claims that, apart from really well-known, well-paid musicians, not many artists today are really suffering due to piracy; if anything, they are only being helped by it. In fact, she has stated that, since she began placing free downloads of some of her songs on her site, her merchandise sales have increased by 300%. (Ian, Fallout). That is a significant percentage for sales to go up, and she believes that it is directly related to the fact that she is now letting fans download her music for free.
Ian isn’t the only one who believes in piracy, however. Many other bands and artists are pro-piracy as well. Radiohead, an Electronic Alt-Rock band from England, released their album In Rainbows last year as a free digital download. Fans did not have to go out and pay money to buy the album when it came out; instead, they could download it all directly off the band’s site for free (Radiohead). Trent Reznor, the popular industrial musician behind Nine Inch Nails, is a believer in illegally file-sharing songs, even boasting about having an account on the now late torrent-based file-sharing site OiNK (Buskirk).
Reznor, who recently split from his label, also decided to release his newest album in much the same way as Radiohead by offering the first nine tracks for free download off of his website. If the more diehard fans wanted more, they could get a, “$5 download of all 36 tracks, a $10 two CD set, a $75 deluxe edition package and a $300 ultra-deluxe limited edition package which featured a Reznor autograph, along with a variety of other merchandise,” (Strobel). He charged money to those fans who really wanted to pay for the album out of their love and respect for him, but allowed others to download a part of the album for free if they wanted to. Because of the respect that many fans have for Reznor, “the limited edition [$300] package…sold out all 2,500 copies,” (Strobel). Reznor proved here that a band does not need to professionally market their CDs and have a price put on them for people to buy; allowing the fans the option of downloading an album could potentially boost record sales.
Other artists, too, including Andy Hull of Manchester Orchestra and the members of the band Staple, allow fans to download, upload, and share their music for free. And they all claim their record sales haven’t been hurt because of it. Some bands have also embraced file-sharing because they feel that they are spreading the word about their band more effectively by allowing people to keep passing on their music to others free of charge. In an interview with ThEbAkEr, a female musician who is part of the underground experimental black metal band DarkGrandpa, she stated that she and her band allow their fans to download a good portion of their music, because, “It’s nice to be able to show the old fans our new stuff and introduce new fans to what we have to offer,” (ThEbAkEr). Others feel the same way, stating that it’s easier for people to hear about and listen to them if their fans are able to freely spread their music around without having to purchase a new copy of the CD each time. Ian has claimed that artists do not become successful strictly through CD sales, but through “exposure,” (Ian, Debacle). She says that people aren’t going to buy a band’s CDs if they don’t know who the band is; they need exposure in order for people to hear about them and buy their CDs in the first place. And she believes that downloading albums on the internet for free is a great way for a band to gain this necessary exposure (Ian, Debacle). By downloading or sharing copies of music by an artist, individuals are getting to hear what said artist sounds like without having to pay full price for their CD. Before going out and spending money on a CD that one has the chance of not even enjoying, one could download or get a burned copy of the album to “preview” the tracks first. And if one likes the CD enough, one can then go out and purchase a copy of it.
Many bands are also beginning to see more eye-to-eye with those who are pro-piracy because they feel as though what the RIAA is saying is a misinterpretation of the facts. They say that, while the record companies and music industry in general may be losing some money from illegal downloads, that they themselves are not experiencing much – if any – negative effects from it. Popular mainstream rapper 50 Cent has been quoted as saying, “What is important for the music industry to understand is that this [music piracy] really doesn't hurt the artists.” (50 Cent). Janis Ian also believes that RIAA and the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences (NARAS) are being ridiculous in saying that downloading is costing her money and hurting her record sales. She says, “The premise of all this ballyhoo is that the industry (and its artists) are being harmed by free downloading. Nonsense,” (Ian, Debacle). She believes that the case that the RIAA is trying to make about piracy hurting a band’s record sales is false. In fact, she goes on to say that, “…after 37 years as a recording artist, [and] creating 25 albums for major labels,” she’s, “never once received a royalty check that didn’t show that I [she] owed them money,” (Ian, Debacle). She claims that she has made most of her money from touring and shows, merchandise, updating her own site, writing articles, etc. This gets her money and exposure, which results in a larger profit for her. The idea, then, that piracy has been hurting her income is preposterous. One must ask the question, then, as to whether the organizations who are against piracy are more worried about the impact it’s having on the artist’s finances or their own.
Courtney Love, widow of grunge legend Kurt Cobain and singer and frontwoman of the band Hole, doesn’t necessarily agree with music piracy, but does agree with the thought that the bands are the ones losing the most profit from sales due to piracy is ridiculous. Much like Ian, Love claims that the labels these days are making the most money. According to her, many musicians have even had to file bankruptcy to make any money or get out of terrible contracts with their labels, because, despite the fact that their albums are selling millions of copies and earning them millions of dollars, they’re not seeing any of that money; their labels are getting it all. (Love). She has cited different artists and groups that this has happened to over the years, including TLC and Toni Braxton (Love).
Love has mentioned on her internet blog that the RIAA is upset about piracy because it is coming out of their pockets, not the artists. In fact, because of the way that some companies are interpreting copyright laws, many are claiming that they own the rights to a musician’s song as opposed to the musician’s themselves owning it. Many artists are opposed to this, and Love is one of them. She explains her reasoning like this: “When you look at a legal line on a CD, it says copyright 1976 Atlantic Records or copyright 1996 RCA Records. When you look at a book, though, it’ll say something like copyright 1991 Susan Faludi, or David Foster Wallace. Authors own their books and license them to publishers. When the contract runs out, writers get their books back. But record companies on our copyrights forever,” (Love). What Love is saying here is that, unlike author’s who own the rights to their books, most musicians don’t own the rights to their own music; their labels are the ones that own it and are allowed to make all decisions concerning it.
In the interview with ThEbAkEr, this musician thought the RIAA owning the rights to a band’s music was, “stupid,” (ThEbAkEr). While not signed to a label, she still believes that labels have too much control over their bands music, and that they have more rights than they should. She believes that most decisions concerning piracy should be left up to the band or musician, not their label (ThEbAkEr). And, because artists want the freedom to make their own decisions and own their own music, many are leaving their labels. According to Love, many bands are choosing to leave their labels once their contract expires so that they can manage themselves. This allows them to have more money and take all their profits for themselves, without having to pay their record companies, and allows them to make more of their own decision (Love). Reznor, mentioned earlier as splitting from his label and producing and marketing his own music, has already done this, and many bands are sure to follow him.
What does this all mean for the RIAA, then, and how does it relate to piracy? Simple: if bands start disagreeing with and leaving their labels, said labels aren’t going to be getting any money. And therefore, neither is the RIAA. According to Orson Scott Card, author of more than thirty novels and a regular contributor to the online political newspaper, Ornery American, record companies are realizing that, “musicians don’t need them [the record companies] anymore,” (Card). And if a musician doesn’t need a label anymore, that means less and less money for the label. Which is why some argue that so many companies and organizations are so dead-set against piracy: they don’t want to lose a profit. After hearing this and examining how the RIAA has misinterpreted and not been completely honest about some of their facts and statistics, one must wonder if they are not just pushing the issue because they are most worried about losing money for themselves. Of course there are some who must have the artist’s best interests at heart, and indeed, there are many artists who against illegally downloading music. However, one must also note that it is interesting that most of the hype and controversy surrounding music piracy comes from those who are being most greatly effected by it, and yet, are not making the music in the first place.
So, this all leaves one with a few final thoughts: What does one do about the issue of music piracy? Is there a way to resolve it? Do companies like the RIAA just continue to slowly track down and sue each music pirate one by one? Or, can artists and their labels learn to adapt to piracy?
According to a 1996 article by James Boyle in the New York Times, “If classroom copying is sharply curtailed, if we give someone a software patent over basic functions, at some point public domain will be so diminished that future creators will be prevented from creating because they won’t be able to afford the materials they need. An intellectual property system has to insure that the fertile public domain is not converted into a fellow landscape of walled private plots,” (Boyle). What he is saying is that, if we keep putting into effect new kinds of copyright laws, and we keep preventing people from using material that has already been used, that, eventually, no one is going to be able to create anything new anymore. In effect, creating more, tougher laws isn’t necessarily going to make things better; if anything, in the long run, it could actually makes things worse.
Instead, labels, companies, and musicians need to try a number of other ways to go about relating to the piracy issue. Card has offered some suggestions on how to lower file-sharing, beginning with just telling people to cut back. He has said that these people in charge should not outright tell those that are downloading to stop or arrest them for it as the RIAA has been doing, but “scorn” them for it. He also suggests that the record companies should get rid of the, “piracy hurts sales crap,” and should, “drop CD prices to a reasonable level,” (Card). And, most importantly, “start treating the artists better,” and, “stop threatening…[people] with ludicrous prosecution,” (Card). He is saying that, while labels still have a right to profit from music sales and therefore be angry because they are down, that the ways in which they are going about to prevent this are only making matters worse. Instead of suing everyone and telling them to quit right this second, they should just tell music pirates to cut back on the amount they download and support the artists they love by occasionally buying a new CD. And if labels lower CD prices to a more reasonable level, this should encourage people to buy more CDs. By learning to adapt to the issue instead of opposing it, the RIAA will not only be saving a lot of time and money, but, if done properly, could be making more money in the long run.
Labels also need to realize that society and technology today is different than it was five, ten, or even twenty years ago. Anthony G. Gorry, a professor of management and computer science at Rice University, has said that music companies really need to learn to adapt to the increasing amount of technological advances. By simply calling Person-To-Person (P2P) sharing, “theft,” they are overlooking the technology that has allowed that to be so. He claims that today’s kids are raised in a different society, and have different beliefs relating to technology and illegally downloading music, which music companies fail to recognize (Gorry). He believes that as technology advances and changes, that more and more people are seeing it as a better way to get what they want without any negative effects, and that many believe that piracy isn’t wrong. Because of this, companies need to learn to adapt and somehow embrace this, because, as time goes on, it’s only going to increase. And being so thoroughly opposed to it is going to get them nowhere. Companies are already starting to this a little bit. When posed with the question as to whether CD burners should be outlawed, since many people are using them to burn illegal copies of CDs, the RIAA has stated they do not believe that is a good way to go about things. They believe that, while burners are obviously being used to make illegal copies of CDs, that CD burners and other “burning” or “copying” devices should not be outlawed. They have claimed that, “Devices and technology are not the problem. It’s when people use technology to break the law that we take issue,” (RIAA). In other words, they want people to use CD burners and other technological devices, but in a responsible, legal way. This still isn’t adapting quite as much as they could – or should – be adapting, but it is a start and is showing that they are finally beginning to acknowledge that some things in technology are almost encouraging people to pirate music, and that it would be virtually impossible to completely get rid of it based on that.
Finally, it has been stated by many that one of the best ways to go about eliminating piracy is to make products that consumers will enjoy for a reasonable price. Ian has stated in one of her articles on piracy that, “It’s difficult to convince an educated audience that artists and record labels are about to go down the drain because they, the consumer, are downloading music. Particularly when they’re paying $50-$125 a piece for concert tickets, and $15.99 for a new CD they know costs less than a couple of dollars to manufacture and distribute,” (Ian, Debacle.) She believes that part of the reason that people pirate music so much is not just because it’s free and easy and technology allows them to do so, but because the cost of CDs, concert tickets, and other merchandise is just too expensive. She asks later in her article Fallout, “Do I think consumers, one the industry starts making product they want to buy, will still buy, even though they can download? Yes. Water is free, but a lot of us drink bottled water because it tastes better. You can get coffee at the office, but you’re likely to go to Starbucks…and bring it back to the office with you, because that coffee tastes better. When record companies start making CDs that offer consumers a reason to buy them, consumers will buy them. The songs may be free online, but the CDs will taste better,” (Ian, Fallout.) What Ian is saying here is that, regardless of whether the albums are available to download for free online or not, that if companies start producing good quality, affordable material that their consumers will want to buy, that the issue of piracy will not be as big of a deal. Reznor has already proven this in marketing his last album. Again, part of the album was put up for free download online, but fans could also choose to pay money for it as well. And because it contained a lot of material that they wanted and liked, his fans ended up buying all 2,500 copies of the $300 set. (Strobel). This shows that, given a quality product that is marketed right and comes with items that they want to have, that fans will always buy music, regardless of whether or not the album is already online. Companies need to adapt to this and start marketing their products in a better, more affordable way, and start giving their audiences exactly what it is that they want to have. In doing so, they can stop worrying about piracy being such a huge issue, because more will be willing to buy than download.
There is indeed much controversy when it comes to the issue of music piracy. Many companies, including the RIAA, believe that by downloading a song, one is stealing it based on copyright law and is therefore committing an illegal act, and there are a number of artists who feel the same way. Record companies feel as though they are being robbed of their income because they are not making enough profit off of CD sales anymore. Yet, more and more bands are beginning to embrace the concept of music piracy, and are starting to see it as a way to get them new exposure and new fans. And because some don’t agree with the ways in which their labels are claiming rights to music that they didn’t even create, bands are beginning to leave their labels in favor of producing music on their own; some, such as Radiohead, Trent Reznor, and even Janis Ian, even going as far as to put tracks up for free download on their websites. Artists are beginning to use the concept of piracy to their advantage and learning to adapt to it. And if record companies would be willing to do the same, in addition to working on a better way to market CDs and merchandise and sell them at a more reasonable price, they too would find that, while the songs may still be available for free download online, that more consumers will start buying CDs again. By learning to adapt to advances in technology and the changing thoughts of consumers that make up the largest part of the music industry’s sales, music piracy will no longer be an issue. If anything, in the long run, it will end up helping artists to make more sales than hinder them. As Janis Ian has stated at the end of her Fallout article, “America has always exported its culture; that is our number one route into the hearts of the rest of the world. Instead of shutting that down, let’s run with the new model, and be the first and best at it. It’s a brave new world out there, and somebody’s got to grab it,” (Ian, Fallout).
Works Cited
Buskirk, Eliot Van. “Reznor vs. Radiohead: Innovation Smackdown.” Wired. 09 Apr 2008.
<http://www.wired.com/enter
Card, Orson Scott. "The Harms of Online Music Sharing Are Exaggerated." At Issue: Internet
Piracy. Ed. James D. Torr. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2005. Opposing Viewpoints
Resource Center. Gale. Normandale Community College. 02 Apr. 2008
<http://find.galegroup.com/
=T010&prodId=OVRC&docId=EJ
upName=mnanorman&version=1
50 Cent, "http://recproaudio.blogspo
artists.html." Recproaudio: Miscellanious Music. 09 Dec 2007. 10 Apr 2008
<http://recproaudio.blogspo
Gorry, Anthony G. "Many People Do Not View Online Music Sharing as Wrong." At Issue:
Internet Piracy. Ed. James D. Torr. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2005. Opposing
Viewpoints Resource Center. Gale. Normandale Community College. 09 Apr. 2008
<http://find.galegroup.com/
=T010&prodId=OVRC&docId=EJ
upName=mnanorman&version=1
Ian, Janis. "FALLOUT - A Follow Up to The Internet Debacle." JanisIan.com. 01 Aug 2002. 10
Apr 2008 <http://www.janisian.com/ar
Ian, Janis. "THE INTERNET DEBACLE - AN ALTERNATIVE VIEW." JanisIan.com. May
2002. 10 Apr 2008 <http://www.janisian.com/ar
"Ian, Janis." Wikipedia. 3 Apr 2008 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wi
Love, Courtney. "Courtney Love does the math: The controversial singer takes on record label
profits, Napster and "sucka VCs."." Salon.com. 14 June 2000. 13 Apr 2008
<http://archive.salon.com/t
MusicUnited, MusicUnited.org. 02 Apr 2008 <http://musicunited.org/>.
Radiohead. 09 Apr 2008. <http://www.radiohead.com/d
RIAA, "Facts and Figures." 02 Apr 2008 <http://riaa.org/keystatist
Strobel, Dan. "Trent Reznor: Singlehandedly Fixing the Music Industry?." The Campus Word.
23 Mar 2008. 14 Apr 2008 <http://www.thecampusword.c
ThEbAkEr. Personal interview. 14 Apr 2008.
~o~*~o~
"I don't need air
I don't need to breathe
And I don't need rest
I don't have time to sleep
'Cause I've got you... and you've got me
And that's all we need"
-When I Get Up, Tegan and Sara
"I don't need air
I don't need to breathe
And I don't need rest
I don't have time to sleep
'Cause I've got you... and you've got me
And that's all we need"
-When I Get Up, Tegan and Sara
No comments:
Post a Comment