Showing posts with label music piracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label music piracy. Show all posts

Saturday, April 25, 2015

The Man Who Broke the Music Business: The dawn of online piracy; New Yorker, 4/27/15

Stephen Witt, New Yorker; The Man Who Broke the Music Business: The dawn of online piracy:
"Napster lasted barely two years, in its original incarnation, but at its peak the service claimed more than seventy million registered accounts, with users sharing more than two billion MP3 files a month. Music piracy became to the early two-thousands what drug experimentation had been to the late nineteen-sixties: a generation-wide flouting of both social norms and the existing body of law, with little thought for consequences. In late 1999, the Recording Industry Association of America, the music business’s trade and lobbying group, sued Napster, claiming that the company was facilitating copyright infringement on an unprecedented scale. Napster lost the lawsuit, appealed, and lost again. In July, 2001, facing a court order to stop enabling the trade of copyrighted files, Napster shut down its service.
That legal victory achieved little. Former users of Napster saw Internet file-sharing as an undeniable prerogative, and instead of returning to the record stores they embraced gray-market copycats of Napster, like Kazaa and Limewire. By 2003, global recording-industry revenues had fallen from their millennial peak by more than fifteen per cent. The losing streak continued for the next decade.
The R.I.A.A. tried to reassert the primacy of the industry’s copyrights. But civil suits against the peer-to-peer services took years to move through the appeals courts, and the R.I.A.A.’s policy of suing individual file-sharers was a public-relations disaster. To some at the music labels, Congress seemed disinclined to help. Harvey Geller, Universal’s chief litigator, spent years futilely petitioning legislators for better enforcement of copyright law. “Politicians pander to their constituents,” Geller said. “And there were more constituents stealing music than constituents selling it.”"

Thursday, January 31, 2013

As Music Streaming Grows, Royalties Slow to a Trickle; New York Times, 1/28/13

Ben Sisario, New York Times; As Music Streaming Grows, Royalties Slow to a Trickle: "A decade after Apple revolutionized the music world with its iTunes store, the music industry is undergoing another, even more radical, digital transformation as listeners begin to move from CDs and downloads to streaming services like Spotify, Pandora and YouTube. As purveyors of legally licensed music, they have been largely welcomed by an industry still buffeted by piracy. But as the companies behind these digital services swell into multibillion-dollar enterprises, the relative trickle of money that has made its way to artists is causing anxiety at every level of the business."

Monday, September 5, 2011

O.K., Downloaders, Let’s Try This Song Again; New York Times, 9/3/11

Janet Morrissey, New York Times; O.K., Downloaders, Let’s Try This Song Again:

"Still, Qtrax is relying primarily on the ads linked to the music player to finance licensing fees and to make the company profitable — a business model that many industry experts are skeptical can work. They point to previous hopefuls like Napster, which was sued by the record labels over copyright laws and is now a shadow of its former self (and now charges subscription fees for music) and to SpiralFrog and Ruckus, which had some backing from the major labels but collapsed after failing to raise enough cash to cover royalties to the record companies."

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Kindle e-book piracy accelerates; CNet.com, 2/18/11

David Carnoy, CNet.com; Kindle e-book piracy accelerates:

"You can argue whether it was Napster or the rise of the iPod--or most probably both--that led to the huge amount of music piracy, but the book business will also take its share of big losses as it moves further into the digital realm."

Friday, November 12, 2010

Joel Tenenbaum: a year on from being sued for $4.5m; (London) Guardian, 11/9/10

Joel Tenenbaum, (London) Guardian; Joel Tenenbaum: a year on from being sued for $4.5m: Last month, the RIAA shut down the peer-to-peer site Limewire. I was sued by the same organisation for sharing 30 songs online – 12 months on, my battle with them continues:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/musicblog/2010/nov/09/joel-tenenbaum-a-year-on

How to save the music industry; GQ.com, 8/13/10

Paul McGuinness, GQ.com; How to save the music industry:

"Bourget's action was a milestone in the history of copyright law. The legal wrangling that followed led to the establishment of the first revenue-collection system for composers and musicians."

http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/entertainment/articles/2010-08/13/gq-music-paul-mcguinness-on-music-piracy/file-sharing-on-spotify-and-piracy

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

France Mulls 'Three Strikes' Internet Piracy Bill; NPR, 9/15/09

NPR; France Mulls 'Three Strikes' Internet Piracy Bill:

"Trying to crack down on piracy, French lawmakers have spent the summer arguing over legislation dubbed "three strikes and you're out of Internet service." Under the bill, authorities will be able to cut off service to suspected Internet pirates — after two warnings. French President Nicolas Sarkozy and entertainers like it, but privacy advocates see is as a threat to civil liberties."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112839261

Saturday, September 5, 2009

Record Labels Say Student Is Still Encouraging Illegal Downloads; New York Times, 9/3/09

Dave Itzkoff via New York Times; Record Labels Say Student Is Still Encouraging Illegal Downloads:

"The cautionary tale of Joel Tenenbaum continues. Weeks after he was ordered to pay $675,000 to record labels for illegally downloading and sharing music, those labels are saying that Mr. Tenenbaum, 25, a graduate student at Boston University, is continuing to encourage music piracy by linking to a file-sharing service on a Web site created for his defense, The Boston Globe reported. A Twitter feed for joelfightsback.com, a Web site run by Mr. Tenenbaum’s legal team, posted a link to the Swedish file-sharing service The Pirate Bay. That site, whose founders were convicted in April by a Swedish court of aiding in copyright violations, posted a playlist called “The $675,000 Mixtape,” which linked to the songs that Mr. Tenenbaum admitted to downloading illegally, and featured a photograph of Mr. Tenenbaum with his arms crossed. The Recording Industry Association of America has filed for an injunction that would order Mr. Tenenbaum to destroy his illegal files and stop promoting piracy. Mr. Tenenbaum said he had nothing to do with the song list on The Pirate Bay, and plans to appeal his verdict and fine."

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/03/record-labels-say-student-is-still-encouraging-illegal-downloads/?scp=2&sq=tenenbaum&st=cse

Sunday, August 2, 2009

Op-Ed: New York Times: Swan Songs?, 7/31/09

Op-Ed: Charles M. Blow via New York Times; Swan Songs?:

"The problem is that if people can get the music they want for free, why would they ever buy it, or even steal it? They won’t. According to a March study by the NPD Group, a market research group for the entertainment industry, 13- to 17-year-olds “acquired 19 percent less music in 2008 than they did in 2007.” CD sales among these teenagers were down 26 percent and digital purchases were down 13 percent.

And a survey of British music fans, conducted by the Leading Question/Music Ally and released last month, found that the percentage of 14- to 18-year-olds who regularly share files dropped by nearly a third from December 2007 to January 2009. On the other hand, two-thirds of those teens now listen to streaming music “regularly” and nearly a third listen to it every day.

This is part of a much broader shift in media consumption by young people. They’re moving from an acquisition model to an access model.

Even if they choose to buy the music, the industry has handicapped its ability to capitalize on that purchase by allowing all songs to be bought individually, apart from their albums. This once seemed like a blessing. Now it looks more like a curse.

In previous forms, you had to take the bad with the good. You may have only wanted two or three songs, but you had to buy the whole 8-track, cassette or CD to get them. So in a sense, these bad songs help finance the good ones. The resulting revenue provided a cushion for the artists and record companies to take chances and make mistakes. Single song downloads helped to kill that.

A study last year conducted by members of PRS for Music, a nonprofit royalty collection agency, found that of the 13 million songs for sale online last year, 10 million never got a single buyer and 80 percent of all revenue came from about 52,000 songs. That’s less than one percent of the songs.

So it was no surprise that The Financial Times reported on Monday that Apple is working with the four largest labels to seduce people into buying more digital albums. It’s too little too late."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/01/opinion/01blow.html?_r=1&scp=3&sq=charles%20blow&st=cse

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

Music Labels Cut Friendlier Deals With Start-Ups; New York Times, 5/27/09

Brad Stone via New York Times; Music Labels Cut Friendlier Deals With Start-Ups:

"“Entrepreneurs are also realizing they need to spend as much energy on their business model as they do on technological innovation.”

The changes stem from an unavoidable and unpleasant reality facing the music business: the economics of offering music free on the Web do not work...

As a result, the online music landscape is littered with the wreckage of failed or troubled music start-ups...

“There was a generation of Web companies that signed up for deals that didn’t make sense, and unfortunately they set a precedent,” Mr. Westergren said. “Now that those deals turned out to be unsustainable, it made the labels realize that there was actually not hidden money they were missing out on. I think labels have a much better understanding of the economics of the business."...

Spotify plans to launch in the United States later this year, and its founder, Daniel Ek, claims that the music labels have given the start-up flexibility because they are attracted to a service that converts illegal downloaders into monetizable consumers of music. “This is what has been lacking for 10 years. The only way to beat piracy is by actually creating a legal service that is just as good,” Mr. Ek said."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/28/technology/start-ups/28music.html?_r=1&hpw

Friday, December 19, 2008

Music Industry to Abandon Mass Suits, Via Wall Street Journal, 12/19/08

Via Wall Street Journal: Music Industry to Abandon Mass Suits:

"After years of suing thousands of people for allegedly stealing music via the Internet, the recording industry is set to drop its legal assault as it searches for more effective ways to combat online music piracy.

The decision represents an abrupt shift of strategy for the industry, which has opened legal proceedings against about 35,000 people since 2003. Critics say the legal offensive ultimately did little to stem the tide of illegally downloaded music. And it created a public-relations disaster for the industry, whose lawsuits targeted, among others, several single mothers, a dead person and a 13-year-old girl.

Instead, the Recording Industry Association of America said it plans to try an approach that relies on the cooperation of Internet-service providers. The trade group said it has hashed out preliminary agreements with major ISPs under which it will send an email to the provider when it finds a provider's customers making music available online for others to take...

Meanwhile, music sales continue to fall. In 2003, the industry sold 656 million albums. In 2007, the number fell to 500 million CDs and digital albums, plus 844 million paid individual song downloads -- hardly enough to make up the decline in album sales."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122966038836021137.html