Having been one of the first people to jump into this debate, I'll try
to keep this to the point...
In my opinion some of the pro-Napster arguments recently posted here are
so full of holes it's unbelievable. Some of the points made essentially
seem to boil down to "it's OK to steal from somebody who's a bit rich,
because they won't miss it as much".
I do agree that Napster can often be a useful (but uncontrolled)
promotional tool for some tracks/artists that people wouldn't otherwise
have heard, so the fact that the mixed version of "We Come One", as
played on British radio, probably isn't too bad because it encourages
people to go out and get the whole, unmixed proper track. Putting up all
the unmixed tracks from the new single, however, simply _is_ going to
reduce sales of the CD. The number of people who would buy it, but don't
bother because they can get the MP3 instead, is going to outweigh the
number of people who go and buy the proper CD _because_ they've heard
the MP3. That's because people are lazy.
As for "bands should make their money from concerts"- bands don't make
all that much money from concerts (usually)- there are a _lot_ of costs
involved, particularly in a tour, and a lot of artists who tour are
doing so in order to try to get people to buy their CDs, which is where
their revenue actually comes from. And of course, bands can't be
everywhere at once, so concerts can only play to select thousands of
people, whereas CDs are available worldwide. If bands needed to make all
their money from concerts, ticket prices would jump up- and less people
would turn up.
And as for the classic can't-afford-CDs-they're-too-expensive-so-let's-
just-get-the-music-illegally-and-that's-OK comments... it's a laughable
logic. If we were talking about starving people stealing food, then
there's a possible debate here. But what we're talking about here is
music- a leisure, luxury item. You don't _need_ it. If you can't afford
it or you don't want to pay the asking price for it, then- NEWSFLASH-
you don't buy it, and you don't own it. Tempting though it might be, you
don't want into a Rolls Royce (posh car) showroom and drive off with the
most expensive car for nothing, simply because you can't afford it
therefore they should give it to you for free.
To say that CDs are so expensive that only Bill Gates can afford them,
or will be soon... if that becomes the case, then that's precisely
_because_ CD sales have dropped because of Napster, and bands need to
get their money somehow, so have to charge more because they're selling
less. Napster is pushing _up_ the cost of CDs, and then using the fact
that CDs cost a lot as a defence. Pile of crap.
Apart from that, CDs are priced related to what people will pay- if
people can't or won't pay certain CD prices, the CD won't sell.
The people who use Napster to download tracks that are easily found in
shops, instead of buying them, are thieves. There are far worse crimes
to commit, and nobody is dying or starving as a result, but musicians
are getting less money because people are indirectly stealing from them.
This is the state of play that I don't have major objections to- but
when people write long arguments about _why_ stealing things is
absolutely fine and is good for everybody, I have to laugh. Then
despair.
Stuart.
--
Stuart Bruce - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.atomiser.demon.co.uk
http://www.stuartbruce.co.uk
--
This message was sent through the Faithless Mailing-list.
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
UNSUBSCRIBE FAITHLESS in the body of the message.
