Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Piffer OT - And Other Assorted Nuts -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cheeky Kid who wrote (53585)	9/23/2000 4:28:06 PM
From: The Phoenix	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 63513

Cheeky, I don't disagree with anything you said - not a thing. Prices for music ARE too high and artists should sell their music directly but the web that has been weaved will be difficult to unravel. Artist need to get airtime and so they sell their souls for the illusive record contract. The record companies in turn spend significant dollars to buy airtime and market the act and in many cases make investments in a band to get them visible. The question then becomes what is a fair ROI. You suggest cutting out the middle man altogether - maybe this is what happens over time. But I suspect that becoming a successful band for the foreseeable future will require investment from a record label. No band is going to make it big by selling their music on the web. More importantly this whole discussion drives to issue of capitalism - the very fabric of our society. If a record label decided to use the net as a marketing vehicle and is able to gain a marketing advantage for their signed talent - insuring better return for the artists as well as the label then other labels will follow suit or they will risk losing artists to the more innovative label. What I disagree with is using what I percieve to be an illegal means, to drive down prices and give away a product for which an artist has paid their own sweat and heart for. To give away a product that a company has invested time and money in. If a customer doesn't like the way the music is published then they shouldn't buy it... but to create/support an illegal means of distribution is simply not the right answer. Yes, this kind of thing has gone on for years. We all have cassette recorders in our homes... heck I have a CD recorder. The intended use of these items is supposed to be for personal use. Do people break laws? Yes! Do they get prosecuted if they do - if they get caught - yes they do. Is the US government after China for breaking copywrite laws - absolutely. Is Napster a target for supporting the illegal distribution of copywritten material - no doubt in my mind. But as Rich1 suggested I may not have a clue. It's funny. Everyone assumes that the illigal copying of music on the net isn't hurting the record labels or the artists and maybe it's not... or the impact is small. But if this kind of "stealing" continues then where will it stop. The net should be used for legal means of distribution and to allow heretics to survive on the net gives those businesses that use the net for reputable distribution of products a bad name and give the net a bad name. Bottom line - keep it clean. Phoenix