Downloading

« Lucinda | Main | The Love of My Life »

Downloading

We've all done it. Because its so great. You hear a song or you hear of a song. You log onto a file sharing network and download the song. You listen to it on your computer, you burn it onto a CD, and you put it into your MP3 player. This is the best way to acquire and listen to music that has ever been invented.

I first did this in 1998. I've used Napster. I've used Morpheus, Kazaa, Limewire, and countless other file sharing networks. I had one of the first Rio players. I've played MP3s on PDAs and cell phones. And I love the iPod. If this sounds like a confession, it is.

Because stealing is wrong. And it has to stop. And I think it will.

I've had file sharing software on all the computers in my house for years. My kids used them. I used them. But the day that Apple came out with the iTunes music service, I removed all the software from all the computers in our house. I gave my kids a monthly allowance on the iTunes service and taught them how to use it (which took about a nanosecond because its so intuitive). We've been legal ever since.

I read earlier this week in Frank Barnako's Internet Daily that the use of file sharing networks is down 41% since the RIAA starting suing people several months ago. That's a good thing contrary to most people's opinion. Stealing is wrong and the music industry had to come up with a good PR initiative to make that point loud and clear. I think they've finally found that PR initiative in these lawsuits. They aren't looking to crush anyone. In fact, most of the initial lawsuits have already been settled.

But playing hardball isn't enough. Because most of us aren't stealing because we don't want to buy music legally. We are stealing because downloading is the best way to acquire and listen to music that has ever been invented.

So the music industry had better hurry up and get their entire library online. Do it now. Because they've got a window of opportunity to close the deal with consumers. But it won't last forever. And if they blow it now, then consumers will realize that they don't ever have any intention of giving us music the way we want it.

And then I will go back to Kazaa, Morpheus, Limewire, and the rest. And I won't come back next time.

Comments (13) | Posted October 3, 2003 in Venture Capital and Technology

Comments

A point well made.

I have to say that I started to use KaZaa as somewhere to digitise my music collection. The recors companies had not released the back catalogue for those artists that I had on Cassette onto CD and I was looking forthe bast way to store my record collection. Now I have most of the tracks from some 500 cassettes stored on my Iomege Peerless Drives.

At the same time I also took advantage of the fact that some albums available on Kazaa had not been released in Europe.

However I have stopped now, because the community has been poluted not just with bad data but also viruses. Will I go back?

No I don't think so, my firewall does not like p2p sites.

Posted by: Digital Evangelist | Oct 3, 2003 7:38:43 AM

Number of tracks on sale in the iTunes store: 200,000

Number of tracks referenced by Allmusic (which is good but not totally comprehensive): 4,954,384 + 841,954 performances of classical music.

In other words, the biggest online store officially blessed by the RIAA carries 3% of what's referenced by Allmusic. If you take into account all the records that didn't make it into this database (e.g. lots of non-American music, white label electronic music and so on) the real figure is probably 1% or less. Don't hold your breath about the current music cartel doing a decent job about putting its catalogue online, considering the number of vinyl records that never made it to CD.

Posted by: Olivier Travers | Oct 5, 2003 6:04:19 PM

There's a not-very-well articulated subtext by people who download . . . We know stealing is wrong.

. . . And yet we also know that the music industry and the RIAA haven't been straight with us. The savvier amongst us know about the findings of price fixing and other anti-competitive acts.

We're tired of buying crappy CDs for $18, and there's only one good song on it. We're amazed that the DVD of a movie which cost $90 million to make is actually sold for less than the CD of the soundtrack, which are all old songs.

Music over the radio is free . . . Music from MTV (remember when they had music?) is free. Is this much different? Is streamign something qualitatively different than radio?

Why isnt downloading music just another form of Try-before-you-buy shareware ? I know I'm not the only one who bought a lot more CDs of stuff I found on Napster. . .

Posted by: Barry Ritholtz | Oct 6, 2003 3:48:34 PM

what is the best way to downloading music?

Posted by: Sara | Nov 10, 2003 3:35:31 PM

I don't understand why the actual companies (kazaa, morpheus, etc.) aren't the ones being targeted. If a book store was giving away books to whoever wanted them, you yourself can't be entirely blamed for taking one. And why is it illegal? If I take a recording vehicle and record a song over the radio, am I stealing as well? Why were cd burners invented? Their sole purpose is to illegally copy other poeple's music. Why don't they shut down cd burner companies? I think it's because the industry would lose against the big companies. Look who they target, people who don't want to pay for music definitely don't have enough for a lawyer. The music industry is just getting greedier and wanting more money whatever way they can get it, even if it's sewing a 12 year old girl.

Posted by: fredrick | May 17, 2004 11:47:08 AM

fredrick:

Why were cd burners invented? Not one sole purpose, but a few. A way for consumers to back up very large amounts of data, in contrast to using floppy disks. Also, a way to copy music CDs (legal or not - depends on situation and understanding of fair use rights). Why don't they shut down cd burner companies? Good question.

Then again, there is a reason why most burner manufacturers have a disclaimer on the packaging (and whatever else they sell) that the burner should only be used for legal purposes, and that by using the device, user agrees not to hold company liable and bears all responsibility for use. But you know humans.

Posted by: Alan | Aug 27, 2004 8:11:38 PM

Well, Sara, it isn't actually the people taking the music that are being sued, it is those giving it away. So in your example, the people uploading the music are like the bookshop giving away the free books. But I have to agree the recording industry is going about this all the wrong way. Like Olivier, I have bought many CDs after first coming across tracks from them on peer to peer file sharing. Some of them are styles of music I would never have thought of trying if I had not had the opportunity to listen free first. And I think there are very many more like us. I think the result of all the lawsuits will be fewer CD sales, not more.

Posted by: Graham | Nov 11, 2004 12:27:52 PM

you are wrong. downloading slays.

Posted by: na | Nov 17, 2004 1:08:43 AM

First, downloading music isn't illegal in Europe(where i live) uploading is.
second , illegal music is not bound to all kinds of restrictions (DRM) so illegally downloaded content is actually a better product than the restricted en crippled legal versions.

Finally , downloading isn't stealing , if i take an album from the store without paying for it , the shop cannot sell it to someone else while the shop owner already paid for it (including the costs of pressing the cd and printing the cover,) so they lose income and their product is gone.

When i download it from Kazaa the product is still where is was before i downloaded it. how could that ever be theft.
It's like recording a song from the radio on tape

Record companies are trying to let the consumer believe downloading is theft, but in fact their obsolete business models are on the edge of extinction.(which is a good scenario)

Artists no longer need the greedy record companies who steal from them .
When this moneysucking leeches are out of the picture , music prices wil drop to reasonable levels and the artists will earn even more money.
when that time comes(maybe in 5 years) i will pay for music once again.
But until then i keep on downloading

Posted by: sol | Dec 27, 2004 6:06:18 AM

The aspect that none of you have actually considered in reference to the price of CDs is that it is not each individual CD that costs heaps. It is the initial recording.

In recording you have the cost of the studio hire, production, audio engineering, the record label's funds, the recouping of the advance the artist receives and then you have the stores mark up.

CDs are worth $20 and the artist receives very little, maybe only $1 per CD, that is nothing, with thousands of people downloading that adds up and the artist does lose out.

How would you like it if you had performed ssomething that was on sale and then you hear that people are stealing it. I knwo I wouldn't like it.

it is theft.

You hear music in stores yes, but the stores pay to play the music, the same applies to movies. It goes to the phonographic performances collection agency.

Music costs everywhere and as long as downloadin is happening hte price will NOT go down. It will only go up.

Posted by: Liz | Apr 7, 2005 11:41:53 PM

what about DVD's? they are legal to download just not upload, u may burn them to a disc, but not sell them.

Posted by: Pete | Jul 6, 2005 3:42:18 PM

I am very interested this theme, with attention I will read following informations.
Notebooki , Telewizory Lcd , dvd , kino domowe , Kamery Cyfrowe , kuchnie , ekspresy do kawy , lg , samsung , siemens , panasonic , toshiba , amica .