Siri Amrit Kaur wrote:
>>On Saturday 04 December 2004 09:02 pm, Jared Anderson wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I believe those with good products, ideas, or inventions will be rewarded
>>>regardless of copyright laws (or Kazaa) if what they offer is truly
>>>unique and superior.
>>>
>>>
>>I agree to some extent. The market likes good stuff and votes with
>>dollars.
>>
>>
>>
>>>I think society evolves how it wishes, and
>>>regardless of what the RIAA wants, they will have to evolve too if they
>>>wish to survive.
>>>
>>>
>I'm finding this discussion fascinating and elucidating. It's making me think
>of how the Dave Matthews Band has set up its' business model from its'
>inception. This is a little OT, but demonstrates what you're talking about.
>
>DMB does things very differently from most bands, and are consequently far
>more successful than most bands. They've always allowed fans in the audience
>to tape their live performances and distribute those recordings free of
>charge. They used to let tapers to plug into their soundboard, but stopped
>that when people started selling those recordings. The band asks that people
>not sell their live shows, but always give them away. They don't like
>filesharing, but prefer people actually mail the disks to each other to keep
>it personal. They ask that people BUY their studio-recordings, and not make
>copies of those to give away.
>
>The fans spread the free music around and it increases their fan base. Because
>people like what they hear, they're more likely to buy tickets to shows and
>buy their albums when they get released.
>
>When they were negotiating their first recording contract with RCA, RCA wanted
>to put a stop to the live taping. The band refused and RCA gave in. They've
>continued to allow taping and are consistently one of the top three grossing
>bands in the world (with U2 and the Stones.)
>
>This year, they started making some of their best shows available for download
>for a price. These are soundboard recordings which are better quality than
>most tapers can pull. They're marketing these shows directly, bypassing the
>recording company.
>
>Basically, fans respond to the band's talent and generosity by generously
>giving money back to the band. Some people cheat and sell the live shows over
>Ebay, or distribute them as MP3s over the net, but overall it's a hugely
>successful business model. If a lot of artists adopt this model, it will
>force a change in the recording industry.
>
>Sorry if I've bored anyone with this.
>
>Siri Amrit
>
>PS. If anybody wants some DMB shows, contact me off-list and we can set up a
>B&P (burn & postage).
>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------
>PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
>http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>
>
This IS an interesting discussion. As far as the market liking good
stuff, though, it's not as simple as that. The market gravitates towards
monopoly, as economic power centralizes and consolidates. Thus, while we
have a proliferation of labels in the average food store, you would
likely be astonished if you followed those labels up the food chain in
any given category , to find out that they are all owned by the same
few mega-corporations such as Beatrice Foods and Nestle. The situation
is the same with the recording industries and the media- we are actually
only dealing with a small number of mega-corporations controlling the
entire market.
When this happens, there is no real or meaningful competition- Adam
Smith's invisible hand gleefully flips us the bird, and the quality of
goods trends toward decline with no corresponding decrease in price.
This is the situation which we see now with the recording industry.
There is no significant competition, so there is no pressure on the
music industry to find the next Dylan or Hendrix. They control the
airwaves, and they produce the music. We will buy it because it is what
they sell, and because there is no commercially available alternative.
Any significant competition which does crop up must inevitably start
small, and will, barring the miraculous, be pounded into oblivion by the
superior economic might of the monopolies.
[note: I realize that a monopoly in the strict sense is one business
dominating the market. What we are actually dealing with is what
economists refer to as "shared monopolies." When four or fewer companies
dominate 50% or more of a given market, the result is a shared monopoly
in which the behavior more closely resembles a monopoly or cartel than a
competitive free market.]
--
Lee Einer
Dos Manos Jewelry
http://www.dosmanosjewelry.com
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)