Record industry faces liability over `infringement' | Hacker News Reader

Record industry faces liability over `infringement'

thestar.com

102 pointsfogus16 comments

From the article:

It is difficult to understand why the industry has been so reluctant to pay its bills.

I don't find that difficult at all. (Neither does Geist, of course. I find myself enjoying quite a few of his posts; he's kind of a Canadian Lessig.)

If ever there were an industry that deserved sweeping into the dustbin of history, I vote for this one. Their moral argument against file sharing boils down to: "It's wrong for you to steal from artists. We're the ones who get to steal from artists!" When I think of all the stories I've read over the years of great musicians being swindled out of their life's work...

> "It's wrong for you to steal from artists. We're the ones who get to steal from artists!"

Got it in one!

The music distribution industry's relationship with fans and artists just keeps getting more and more perverse. How were they able to operate with such hostile policies in both directions (to both musicians and customers) for so long? It's a serious question; does anyone around here have any answers?

From what I have seen they were able to keep treating everyone badly simply because there wasn't (and really isn't still) a viable alternative available to bands that want large-scale distribution.

Sure, a band can distribute their work via the internet, but unless they are already well known they are always going to have trouble finding an audience.

I hope that the situation is slowly improving now that there are more ways to distribute your work, but it's still a sad state of affairs given that 'MySpace Music' is still the best known alternative distribution model...

It's not just about distribution. Production is extremely costly. Renting professional equipment costs a fortune every hour. You have to pay producers, sound engineers, technicians, etc. Music videos aren't exactly cheap to produce either. The costs of the production of an album can quickly reach five zeros. Record labels invest a lot in artists (on not very friendly terms for the artist, but that's a separate issue). Additionally, they provide them with connections. They help them getting performances in TV shows, getting their music played on the radio, etc.

These days a many bands chose the alternative route of becoming independent. It's not impossible to succeed this way but if you go down that part you as an artist have to invest a lot more time in marketing yourself than you would had to if you signed up with a commercial label.

Vertical integration and horizontal collusion. The labels have been found guilty of such, several times, in the US.

Do you have any sources for that information?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payola

In an information-scarce world, they controlled the gateway between musicians and fans. The net is putting a stop to that.

Has there ever been an industry whose downfall is more deserved?

Of all the industries being ravished by web technologies, I would argue that the recording companies certainly brought this downfall upon themselves more than any other. There are problems with this new landscape though. To quote from my executive summary:

"Advancements in technology have drastically changed the music industry by providing musicians direct access to resources previously controlled by record labels. While the Internet has increased musicians’ artistic freedom, it has also given them unwanted responsibility over their day-to-day operations. Musicians have to book and promote their own shows while also coordinating distribution channels for selling goods. This do- it-yourself environment has forced independent artists to divert their attention away from making music."

If there is such a thing as Karma, then this is a prime example of it balancing things out...

Sounds to me more like garden variety hypocrisy. :)

I particularly like how their own practice of overcharging thousands of dollars for each infringed song has come full circle to bite them.

This is the best news I've heard in a long time. I want to do something to help their case if I can. To any lawyers on HN: are there any aspects of this case that are likely to be amenable to crowd-sourcing/coding/anything I could do?

As someone working in the recording industry, let me add my thoughts. First, I'm not surprised at all to read this. This sort of stuff is pretty common. Not because of greed or malevolence (at least not primarily) but because of the utter incompetence and chaos in the music industry. The big four companies (Warner, Sony BMG, EMI and Universal) are enormous chaotic abominations where one department has no idea what the other department does (not unlike Microsoft or IBM in the software/tech industry). Corporate politics and ego plays a great part. Despite them constantly whining about the hardships caused by music piracy they grew way too comfortable as nothing really threatens their business model.

Don't get me wrong; we need record labels and publishers. Someone has to invest in discovering, coaching and marketing artists. This is not an anti-recording industry rant but as someone who really loves music I'm infuriated to see every day how incompetent the recording industry is.

Really I can imagine only two solutions: either a number of lawsuits like this delivers the shock to shake up the industry or emerging new competitors with better talent and more up-to-date views on the future of this business replace the old ones. Perhaps the second path would be better but to be successful in this industry, having money and being smart is not enough; you have to have lots of connections. Lots and lots of them.

$60 Billion!?

That's a preposterous amount of money! No way a court will ever grant that sort of thing.

/oh, wait.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com