Interesting reading but that is from a US perspective so does not explain why CD's cost more in the UK than the US, I was putting forward a reasoning behind this.

And as the article states, record companies are a business and as such there to make money, put it this way if 100,000 people buy a CD then the artist will get something from it, if 100,000 pirate it they will get nothing - irrespective of what the record companies are making you are robbing the very people you claim to support.

"Have a stare at this"..... from that very page.....

By Eric Leach and Bill Henslee

Eric Leach is an intellectual property and business law attorney at the firm of Goodman and Leach. He can be contacted at eleach@goodmanleach.com.

Bill Henslee is a professor at Pepperdine University School of Law, where he teaches copyright and entertainment law. Contact him at william.henslee@pepperdine.edu.

Come on guys... you might as well be reading an article on international politics by George W Bush..... how naive can you be?

Is the theme of this thread really nothing more than 'I don't wnat to pay for CDs because corporate America creams off all the profits'?

Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't, I have no problem with others getting rich by providing us with a music industry. The alternative would be to only have access to music via live performance or sheet music. Neither are as practical or convenient as CD, MD, DAB FM etc. Enjoy it - lose the bitterness and don't steal from the musicians

Peace man peace....

I buy my albums from MusicZone where you can get albums at £6.99, £9.99, and £10.99 even the latest albums, I find that cheap compared to going to Virgin or HMV who just charge way over the odds.

I got Silver Side Up and The State via the net for £20. Was a little dissapointed that both cds are about 40mins long. I just burnt both to one 80min CDR. £10 for one 80min disc would be much better value.

You really are not making any sense at all.... like I said before... if people want recorded music (which they do), and it costs money to produce/dsitribute whatever then the simple economics of the situation dictate that somehow they are going to have to pay for it.

Market forces (as much championed by multi-nationals when it suits them) will ensure, in a supply-vs-demand kind of way, that recorded music will always be available in ways that people want it (assuming they do want it) and are therefore prepared to pay for it.

What isn't guarunteed is:
a) The continued existence of every music industry player that exists today. Boo hoo, thats capitalism, get used to it. Companies go bust all the time, small and large.
b) The continued use of marketing spend as a substitute for product quality.
c) The continued "globalisation" of music, whereby people in Russia and Taiwan are saturation marketed the same tosh that's served up in America or Britain, as if the entire world is expected to have the same music tastes.
d) The eternal acceptance of an economic model based on CDs, records, Cassettes, Minidiscs, MP3s (etc)... ultimately if you are running a business which relies on technology and new technology means that people are buying less of your product then you have to change your product. Its called competition, and is another of those things much championed by multi-nationals when it suits them.

Whinging about people downloading music or copying CDs is tiresome - they've just been sold internet connections and CD recorders what do you really expect them to do?.

When I was younger and poorer I copied cassettes, and they used to moan about that. I'm sure I could find a parent who remembers the music industry moaning about the inception of reel-to-reel tape in the sixties. Before that the music industry moaned about radio.

Moaning and whinging about being robbed of revenue in one way or another is what the music industry has done for most of the last century. They behave like a spoilt child who's not been given his sweets. Thats the way they are. Its boring.

Now, my original issue with whoever it was that said it, was the statement that went something like:

which, lets face it, is completely nonsensical. If there is a demand for new music, and it costs money to produce it, then somewhere along the line it is going to have to be paid for. This is the most simple basic fact of economics; supply and demand.

All it takes is some clever businessman to figure out some new way of making money when people are copying and distributing music without always directly paying for it. Someone will do it. If the traditional music industry can't get its arse in gear then something will come along and fill the void.

..and going back to the old:

... I say.. what about the internet?

Think about it:-
*Good quality recordings can be made at home at a tiny cost relative to the big studios.
*Musicians can duplicate and distribute their product at very low cost on the internet.
*Marketing on the internet is only really needed to sell junk; friendsreunited had no marketing - if something on the internet is good enough, it won't need marketing, it will market itself.... and..... in any case marketing on the internet can also be very cost effective.

So if you are a talented musician with a home studio and an internet connection..... you can record, duplicate and distribute your product without needing a record company. If you're good enough you could charge people for access and make good money. Maybe people will copy stuff themselves but some people would have to pay - and if people like your material then they'll be happy to.

Importantly, you'll be able to take a much higher proportion of the cash people are paying because you have no big officies, no executives, no marketeers, no pressing plants, no shipping costs and no bloody lawyers. You end up with a far more efficient micro-business and all those unncessary, untalented people are out of a job. Boo hoo.

OK, maybe thats a little bit fanciful... BUT... I think the point is clear..... maybe the music industry is really afraid of becoming completely superfluous....


... and if you've just skimmed all that then go back and read it properly... it may be long but it's good stuff

I have absolutely no sympathy for record companies.

Take the Napster scenario for example. Music was being illegally dowloaded left right and centre. However, cd profits were on the up and staying up.

Record companies along with artists such as Metallica and Dr Dre decided to sue Napster.

Napster agrees to start charging members for its service and then paying billions a year to such artists and companies but they still refuse.

Napster is shut down - hundreds of other similar services pop up and piracy continues.....for free.

If the record companies go down the pan - they will be the authors of there own misfortune im afraid.

Couple of things...

People have been making home copies of music since the blank tape was invented - people sharing music over the internet is exactly the same principle.

These figures you see of xx million downloads being made usually equate to about 3 songs per user by the time you divide the number of downloads by the number of users.

Besides, if someone does download 20 albums in a week, chances are there is no way on earth they would have gone out and bought those albums had they not been able to download them. Unless they had far too much money. Therefore, you can't easily equate the number of downloads directly to losses on the part of the record companies.

Despite regional economic differences, yes of course cds are priced too high in the UK.

If record companies go bust this will hardly kill of music - most artists write and record music for the love of doing it, not to make record companies money. I'm not saying they should be deprived of a living, just that there will always be music.

Last, but not least, profits from cd sales in the UK rose by 5% in the last year anyway.

Hooray!!

Iain

thats what i was going to say you could say that it is only people sharing what they have bought, isn't that a good thing? that people share?

Just a thought.

I agree. It's a good promotional tool, if only the music industry knew how to make the most of it.

The men in suits seem to think that everyone should exist in isolation, buy what they're told to by the media and not share it, only speaking to each other about it in terms of "oh you must go and buy this".