Slashdot Log In
Would a Boycott of the MPAA/RIAA Help Matters?
Posted by
Cliff
on Tue Dec 17, 2002 04:55 PM
from the captive-audiences dept.
from the captive-audiences dept.
ChrisGoodwin asks: "Why do geeks support MPAA and RIAA? Here on Slashdot, the talk is all about how evil the film and record companies are. But when the next Star Wars or Matrix or Lord of the Rings comes out, it's all about camping out to get tickets. According to RIAA's web site, member companies distribute 90% of the legitimate sound recordings in the United States; chances are, if you've ever bought music, you've given them money. (Take a look at their list of members.) Heck, most of the film companies own, are owned by, or share a corporate parent with a record company, and many of us get our internet access from part of the MPAA/RIAA conglomerate. So why is it? Why do we continue to buy their product? Why are we giving them money so that they can harass us? Why hasn't there been a call for a boycott of the record and film industries?" This is in the FAQ, but this is certainly a discussion worth having. With the pervasiveness of media in our society, for some it is not as easy as "boycott" or "no boycott", and it may be unfair to the artists we like for us to do so, and as Big Media diversifies, a boycott on movies and music may still not be enough. So do you feel a boycott of mass media will help matters, or would such be counter-productive in some way?
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Would a Boycott of the MPAA/RIAA Help Matters?
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 702 comments
(Spill at 50!) | Index Only
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Yep (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yep (Score:5, Informative)
Movies: Only attend matinees, if you MUST see it in a theatre.
DVD's: Only buy used. Period. It's not that difficult to find a pawn shop, or ebay, or whatever.
Music: Only buy used. Again, it's not that hard to find your favorite artists. Wanna support the artist? Go see their show, buy their ts-shirt or cd AT THE SHOW.
I utterly REFUSE to give those fsckers another dime that I don't absolutely have to.
Re:Yep (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe an additional way to help support your favorite artists is to steal their music, then donate to them anonymously...
Re:Yep (Score:5, Interesting)
Movies: Only attend matinees, if you MUST see it in a theatre.
DVD's: Only buy used. Period. It's not that difficult to find a pawn shop, or ebay, or whatever.
Music: Only buy used. Again, it's not that hard to find your favorite artists. Wanna support the artist? Go see their show, buy their ts-shirt or cd AT THE SHOW.
I utterly REFUSE to give those fsckers another dime that I don't absolutely have to."
This would not work. Period. All they'll see is that there's a decline in sales. Where do you think they'll place the blame? Hint: Their first assumption won't be that they're being boycotted.
At best, it'd backfire. Ironically, it'd probably be useful to give them more money. As silly as it sounds, the RIAA sounded incredibly idiotic when they claimed that Napster cut into their sales while they were at the peak of their sales.
I bet you a contributing factor to the dismissal of the SSSCA was that the MPAA couldn't make legitimate claims of losses. If people really did shift over to P2P like the *AA fears, then a different story might have emerged from that whole ordeal.
Re:Yep (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yep (Score:5, Informative)
check them out:
matador [matadorrecords.com]
dischord [dischord.com]
touch and go [southern.com]
mint [mintrecs.com]
southern [southernrecords.com]
merge [mergerecords.com]
alternative tentacles [alternativetentacles.com]
or, for the fast route, hit the google listing of record labels:
http://directory.google.com/Top/Arts/Music/Record_ Labels/
[google.com]
Re:Yep (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know. I think movies are the only thing you should really see. Movies which run at 7-10 bucks are all in all a good value for the money. I don't feel ripped off if I go see a good movie at that price. Anyway, keep in mind that these movies cost often over 1.00E+8 dollars to make. It's reasonable for MPAA members to expect a healty 5 or 10 percent profit on they're effort.
It's buying the DVD, the tee-shirt, the action figures, the pop-corn, the lingere (hehe.... ok maybe goign a bit too far) thats where the rip off is, as the cost to product such spinoffs is almost noexistant, and profit can go up into rediculous amonts 30,40,50%... the sky's the limit really.
YOu want a boycott? Sure, but hit the where they're ripping you off, stop buying LOTR collectors edition DVDs and star wars for 30-40 bucks a pop.
Sorry (Score:4, Informative)
Movies: Only attend matinees, if you MUST see it in a theatre.
MPAA still gets a cut; even if not directly, the cost is offset in the feature price.
DVD's: Only buy used. Period. It's not that difficult to find a pawn shop, or ebay, or whatever.
Music: Only buy used. Again, it's not that hard to find your favorite artists.
Sorry, somebody originally had to buy it in the first place, which means that MPAA or RIAA still got its share. Creating a demand in the secondary market is only going to stimulate a surge in supply in the primary market.
Wanna support the artist? Go see their show, buy their ts-shirt or cd AT THE SHOW.
Sorry, the RIAA gets its cut here as well, at least from the CD sales (the T-shirt sales and concert tickets will vary depending on the artist's contract).
You are missing out on another thing: even if somehow the distribution channel is completely bypassed, that means that the artist didn't get paid either.
The problem with both RIAA and MPAA is that neither one consists of a single corporation, but that they are "trusts" which have succeeded in sustaining oligopoly power.
A boycott truly means: never watching movies outside of independent films, and never listening to music outside of independent music. Most of us (myself included here) are all consumerist victims to the mass market.
Sorry, we can't beat them using these tactics.
Re:Yep (Score:5, Insightful)
I haven't bought a CD, DVD, etc. from any artist that is owned by the RIAA or MPAA in a year. I have told all my friends and family that I will not give them as gifts and that I prefer not to receive them as gifts either. And, I have explained to all those friends and family why.
I rent no movies.
I download no copyrighted tracks.
How do I survive without media?
I buy music from local bands that press their own CDs. I borrow movies from the public library. I use over-the-air broadcast TV only -- no cable or satellite. (My one vice is going to first-run movies at the theatre.)
Do you know what I found out? I don't need those people as much as I thought I did. Sure, sure, my little boycott won't put those guys out of business. I know that. But now I have my money instead of them. As for you, you must decide for yourself.
We are so few (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:We are so few (Score:4, Funny)
Not Retaliation.... Competition (Score:5, Insightful)
Boycott! (Score:5, Funny)
Not Feasible (Score:5, Insightful)
No one wants to stop buying from their favorite artist, who is most likely distributed through the RIAA. And no one wants to miss a much-anticipated movie, even though the MPAA is involved. I don't want to say we have no willpower or convictions, but there are just things people will always want to see and hear, and these things are provided by an evil company. Asking someone to give up these things is maybe asking a bit too much. Sure there are those of us who don't want to see LOTR, but there's a good chunk who would stop at nothing to see it, despite its "evil" ties.
There have to be alternatives to a boycott. Because if you're basing your entire revolution on something of that magnitude, you're going to be sorely disappointed. The masses need their entertainment, and will get it from the easiest source.
Re:Not Feasible (Score:5, Insightful)
The message of a boycott is to say "Even though I like the product, even though I'm your target market, I hate what you're doing so much, I'll suffer to cause you pain".
Without that message, what are you saying? That you don't like them? That you don't respect them? They don't care if you like them! Unless you're willing to make it an ultimatum - change or else - they'll just tweak the product, the marketing, or the pricing until you give in.
Also, its a fallacy that huge numbers have to be involved. Remember, profits = revenue - expenses. The expenses are roughly the same for movies and music, regardless of numbers. So every dollar lost to revenue tends to directly effect profits. Turn off %10, even %5 and believe me they will feel it. Give that money to a non-offending vendor like Emusic (the one I use) and they'll feel it twice.
Re: (Score:5, Insightful)
However, I do boycott the RIAA.
Perhaps. (Score:5, Insightful)
Heck No. (Score:5, Insightful)
A better idea would be for us to find RIAA/MPAA a business model adapted to the digial age--one that's more effective than the "Street Performer's Protocol" and more flexible than the current "pay per copy."
(Of course I have an idea. I'll write a journal about it, and y'all can see it there!)
boycott is not the answer (Score:4, Insightful)
Why Boycott all of RIAA? (Score:5, Insightful)
We'd be much better off boycotting the Big 5 of the music industry - Sony, Warner, EMI, BMG, Universal, and leaving indie labels and musicians that need every last bit of support alone.
The hard part... (Score:5, Insightful)
I personally no longer purchase new CD's unless I'm buying them directly from an unsigned artist. I go to the used record store if I want something published by a label. It might take a little while for something specific to show up but I always have a list of 20-30 CD's that I want to buy at a given time anyhow. I would certainly participate in an official boycott and do my best to explain the position to non-geeks. However, my gut instinct is that the only way you can get a boycott against the record companies to work is to say they're drowning bags of kittens to make CD's or something.
Don't expect any support from the media either...
brainwashed (Score:5, Informative)
Boycott? (Score:3, Interesting)
don't want her to go the movies because of your beliefs.
I doubt she will care.
[sarcasm]I'm sure the looks you'll get when you explain to her why the **AA's are bad will justify it.[/sarcasm]
Those without children:is it ok to support a large corporation that's greedy? Well, apparently so, since the majority of
Because... (Score:5, Funny)
I must watch it...
I must own it...
My own...
My preciousssssss
If you want something done. . . (Score:5, Insightful)
otherwise, cut out your eyes and ears. 'cause, really, there's no way of stopping yourself from putting money into their hands. When you listen to the radio, you are supporting the RIAA via advertisers. Same with network television. a media boycott is just not feasible in a media saturated country (it's one of the US' largest exports)
No, it wouldn't unless.. (Score:5, Insightful)
A bunch of people suddenly stopping use of a product(s) does not send a company a message. It must involve some sort of media frenzy so that the message is clear. If we just stop buying/supporting RIAA/MPAA without letting them know that there is a boycott, then they'll just see that as further justification that pirates are cutting into their profits.
Donate to the library! (Score:5, Interesting)
There is a simple way you can take action against the MPAA and RIAA. Donate your old music CDs and movie videos to your public library.
If you later decide that you want to hear or watch something you donated, just get it out of the library.
Re:Donate to the library! (Score:5, Interesting)
Then you'd have to go buy more copies of the stuff you donated.
Cheers
-b
Boycott = less sales = "mp3s are killing us!!!" (Score:5, Insightful)
At least, that what's the RIAA is going to say.
It could hurt us too (Score:5, Interesting)
For this reason and because we geeks make up a small portion of all who give money to them, it's probably best for us to increase awareness of all the bad that the MPAA/RIAA are doing and support groups like the EFF.
Why boycotts are a risky business (Score:5, Informative)
I was just pondering the practicalities of a RIAA boycot this morning (okay, who installed the trojan on my PC???
Unfortunately, such boycotts can backfire very, very badly.
Imagine if the
If CD sales remained unaffected then the RIAA could simply turn around and say that this proves most people are happy with their pricing, their product and their attitudes to the marketplace.
Or, even worse, if such a boycott did affect sales in a negative way, they'd simply say that this was due to piracy and that it endorses their stand on copy-protection, the DMCA, etc.
In effect, we'd be hoist by our own petard.
Anyone contemplating a boycott ought to be very sure they've got the numbers (and I'm talking *big* numbers) before they embark on such an action.
A better way might be to incite people to get active in starting a petition protesting the loss of fair use due to recent and proposed moves by the RIAA/MPAA.
This would have to be a petition where signatures are collected in ink, on sheets of paper. Cyber petitions are too easily discredited.
I'm sure, given the seven degrees of separation principle, that if everyone here solicited everyone they knew to sign such a petition, and got them to do likewise, it wouldn't be too hard to dump a very large truckload of dead-tree pulp and ink on the doorstep of Congress.
That's the way democracy works isn't it?
Well .... (Score:5, Insightful)
As far as I can tell (and this applies to me personally) the biggest gripe that people have about MPAA/RIAA is that they want to squelch a persons right to fair use. I don't think anyone begrudges their attempts to keep actually pirating at bay, it's only when these attempts prevent the legitimate owners from doing things that the copyright laws appear to allow is when hackles get raised. Please feel free to add anything else (like artists rights, but I don't really have an opinion on this personally as it is more contract law imho).
OK, so we want to make sure our fair use rights are kept intact. How is the best way to go about doing this? I see two possible approaches. One approach that falls into the category of "why can't we all just get along", is this.
The second approach (and probably more realistic) is to say, "hey, no matter what technology we throw at it, people will copy it". Fine, this is a valid point. But lets be realists here and accept that the MP/RIAA will not take this for an answer. So again, I think having us as a community help them come up with a solution to their needs that is mutually beneficial. Suggest alternatives, create/push these alternatives. Put youself into their shoes, say "I need to protect my IP from those who would illegally gain/attain it" and say, how would I solve this issue?
I guess both my suggestions fall into the category of, lets solve the problems instead of fighting wars. Not that I have anything against fighting wars, it's just that, like in "War Games", there can't be a winner. Sure we could "boycott", but would that REALLY do any good? We're just to small a segment to make any real impact with our wallets, but we could potentially make more impact with our heads.
What took you so long? (Score:3, Informative)
already do (Score:3, Insightful)
waste of time (Score:5, Insightful)
Boycotting is a complete waste of time in this case. We are not talking about boycotting fur which has a negative stigma attached to it, nor are we walking about sticking it to some small company that doesn't want to play by the rules. Media is just too pervasive in society and the next round of teenyboppers can keep the big media companies afloat with their rampant desire for the next N'Sync and Power Rangers.
Beyond that, while there are many Slashdotters who have no problem skipping Star Wars or LOTR until it comes out on video, ask them to not purchase the next Resident Evil when it comes out. Video games (something geeks love) and the movies are hopelessly intertwined. When you support the video game or the console (hello!?! PS2 is made by SONY!) you support the DRM bills we all hate.
If the geeks on Slashdot want to make a difference, they should
There are a lot of smart people reading Slashdot. I read a number of posts on any given topic that the author should just cut and paste into a letter, throw it in an envelope and send it to his or her legislator.
That is how you make a difference... not by boycotting.
-ABoycott Church, too? (Score:4, Interesting)
Why cant you... (Score:3, Informative)
See a movie, make a donation.
Then at least you're not contributing to the net evil.
Ok, show of hands here.... (Score:4, Insightful)
News flash -- this means that RIAA doesn't care about you. By definition, you are not their customer. Hell, you're not even close to their target demographic. Why would they care if you love/hate/support/boycott/praise/condemn them?
You, personally, have absolutely zero impact on their bottom line.
Zip
Nada
--
A *successful* boycott would help a lot (Score:3, Insightful)
An unsucessful boycott would simply demonstrate the impotence of the high-tech community with respect to any kind of political action, particularly since success in terms of affecting sales would require selling this outside the community, and would be worse than useless.
However, there will be a consumer boycott, and it will be effective. The next generation of DRM disabled audio gear with no analog or digital outputs, i.e. encrypted from source to speakers or CRT is on its way and was discussed yesterday here.
The public will scream its heads off when they find out what's in it, "You mean my VCR won't work, either?" and when they're told "DRM TV or NO TV", will be calling their Congresscritters telling them to tell the FCC to put off digital-only TV.
Hollywood won't lose any money over this, but the high-tech manufacturers who bought into Hollywood bullshit will lose billions, and a lot of jobs are going to get lost. Hopefully, including those of the CEOs who were stupid enough to roll over and play dead for their new masters.
Because I want to support the good stuff (Score:4, Insightful)
So what's the *practical* answer? What can drive the message home to the entertainment industry without making it cease to exist? From the point of view of the MPAA members, reduced movie attendance because of a grievance over their legal policies looks indistinguishable from reduced movie attendance because people don't like their movies. It just looks like there is less of an audience.
This is especially a problem with the kinds of movies geeks like to see. If the industry sees that geek-friendly movies are not doing well, their reaction is NOT going to be to change their legal policies to appeal to the geeks. Their reaction is going to be, "Oh, I guess we should stop making movies like this - they don't seem to do very well for some reason." And then no more movies we like get made.
So, yes, I *am* going to be giving my money to see The Two Towers - multiple times. But I will be sure to balance that out with donations to the EFF.
# geeks/ #ppl < .1% (Score:3, Insightful)
Most of the time people on
-shane
Boycotting the MPAA and RIAA will have no effect. (Score:4, Interesting)
Boycotting the MPAA and RIAA won't do any good, for one major reason: the number of people who actually care about this issue is so small compared to the population at large that the RIAA and MPAA is unlikely to even notice that a boycott is occurring.
What WILL happen is that the people involved in the boycott will punish themselves, suffering weeks without internet access, movies, music, and so on, all just to find out that their suffering has all been in vain.
Then, there are the logistical problems. How, for instance, will boycotters coordinate their activities if they cannot read Slashdot because their ISP is their cable company? And, if they cannot coordinate their efforts, isn't it possible that at least some of them will never realize the boycott is over, ending up forty years from now like latter-day Rip Van Winkles, trying to plug decades-old Linux boxen into some hyper-modern network? Hair down to their ankles, teeth rotten away, eyes frozen into a thousand-yard stare?
Let alone the withdrawl symptoms they'll experience when they give up their favorite games. Public-service wards will fill with people whose thumbs continually twitch, twitch, twitch in a memorized UT sequence... Periodically they'll yell "BUY A BIGGER GUN!" The orderlies will be nervous wrecks. Electroshock will certainly follow.
No, friends, I think I'll pass. I think it will be a lot more fun if one of us creates a half-life mod oriented around the MPAA and/or RIAA headquarters and posts it to a friendly mirror. Surely at least ONE employee of one of these agencies reads slashdot? And, surely SOMEONE out there likes doing game mods, and has a few hours to spare?
I'd just like to see the boss battle against Valenti. THAT would be SOMETHING. Do a sort of "ROBOVALENTI" theme, maybe. Use really bad, color mug shots from the media. Animate it like on SouthPark. Maybe do something like the "bedroom" scene between Saddam and the devil? Um... Or not.
Boycott == piracy (Score:5, Insightful)
(irony intended)
Sound absurd? Not really. All of the television and much of the print news has some affiliation with the RIAA/MPAA. On the news, slumping music sales are attributed to piracy by kids. If THAT is true, then declining automobile sales must be caused by little green men from mars, because the media is pretty much ignoring the economy right now.
News outlets like CNN run -- unedited -- the RIAA's claim of 400 burners siezed in that NY piracy raid. Never mind that it is NOT TRUE, the news doesn't care about accuracy and even if they are aware of an error, they have a vested interest in the RIAA/MPAA.
Anyways, they'll just spin it so the boycott gets no mention, and dropping sales is because of filesharing on that evil Gnutella network, and obviously the RIAA needs a license to hack your system looking for loot... blah blah
-S
"They're grups! bonk, bonk, on the head."
Missing the point (Score:3, Insightful)
The reason the ??AA don't get my money is that my standards for what is 'good' are higher than 99% of the crap they generate. I'm just not interested. If they can find a way to make me interested, they'll get my money. This is the way most people think. The problem everyone seems to be having is that most people settle for what the ??AA is putting out, and it's not good enough for this crowd's tastes.
So what's your problem? Don't go to the movies. You won't be missed, and you won't miss it. Just don't whine about a useless and impractical boycott for ideology's sake. Heaven forbid, you might actually try doing something about it, like starting your own production house. But OMG, that'd require, like, getting off your ass and going outside. And being slightly intelligent and business-savvy. And dealing with liars, cheats, VCs, and all sorts of other unmentionables. Naw, much easier for you to sit down, bitch about how much life sucks on /., and munch Cheetos.
The Problems with a Boycott (Score:3, Insightful)
There is a difference here, of sorts, in that the MPAA actually has reasons to deserve the boycott and bad press. They're about as close to evil as a company can get. But it would still do no good.
We're not talking about something easy to get around. I cannot blame a company's product for actions on the company. I don't care how bad the RIAA is, I will still support the artists I love and get their CDs. Used isn't an option on New CDs, and that is the surefire way to guarantee that the artist will not get any money from your purchase. At least they get something from a retail sale.
As a proud member of the masses, I enjoy purchasing things like CDs, DVDs, and Video Games. There are incentives to buying a DVD these days. All those bonus features, deleted scenes, etc. There is no other medium that moves around the RIAA/MPAA that offers these things. This problem is not new, and will not go away, it just simply is part of capitalism.
There is no true alternative for a lot of entertainment venues out there. Movies are movies, and even if you download them, you trade quality and extras for that "freedom". And there is a rule... if enough people do it, and they actually lose money, then things will vanish. How many bands out there have been affected by poor album sales, and then been dropped by a label. There is no way that I can tell if they were killed off by KaZaA or the other Napster clones, but I'm sure at some point it helped. The same could some day be true with movies.
The problem is in what the RIAA does now, and how much of a drain they are. Boycotting perfectly good movies and artists will not make the RIAA/MPAA go away. It will strangle out the good artists, and we will be covered with every clone and "corporate success" artist out there. Even if the artists are only getting $1 a CD, they are still getting that dollar, and boycotting them affects that too.
What I would look at doing is trying, like some others, to bring the truth about the RIAA/MPAA to light for all to see. Passing around those articles, writing letters to congressmen, or making those visible posts. The
boycott-riaa (Score:4, Interesting)
We still get a large number of visitors who drop by the site on a daily basis, to check to see what the news is. Some of the most recent articles include: "RIAA's Statistics Don't Add Up to Piracy" (article) [boycott-riaa.com] and The RIAA's response to "How many CD Burners were there actually in the Queens Bust?"(article) [boycott-riaa.com] seems there were a heck of a lot less than the equivalent the stated. Straight from the horse's mouth
My personal boycotting lead me to start buying independent music and I've actually been buying more music than I ever did from RIAA artists and labels. Partially because its often cheaper, around $8.00 -$10.00, and partially because the music is often much better, than what the majors are putting out.
In 2001 RIAA sales were down 5% and they RIAA laid off 16 people in Jan 2002. This year the sales are down 7% to 9% (depending on whose numbers you read) hopefully we can look forward to more layoffs. Less staff less impact. The RIAA membership dues are a portion of the labels sales, lower sales=smaller budget=less impact.
Those that say there is no affect on the RIAA and MPAA are misguided. In the past 2 1/2 years I've bought over 150 CDs from independent musicians, money that went to them, not to RIAA labels. But the largest affect that has taken place is that people are begining to discover independent music, are buying it, ignoring the majors offerings, and as a result the RIAA is becoming the Maginot Line [www.dlc.fi] of the music industry. We make them irrelvant by bypassing them. What else is happening is that artists are beginning to wake up speaking out as well, Joni Mitchell, Janis Ian, Elton John, The RAC headed by Don Henley, just to name a few. The RIAA's positions coupled with a loss of sales, has come to the attention of Congress, The DOJ to name but a few and many former backers in congress are finding that the RIAA isn't always right or even telling them the truth. Unethical business practices are coming to light that have been the industry standard for years, that are forcing changes in the way the industry works, in their actions toward artists and consumers.
This is not an if/then type of thing, there are a lot of varibles involved, that each action has an effect somewhere, maybe very subtle, but the overall result is that while the RIAA is winning the battles, they are losing the war. And their desperation is showing.
No..it won't help...because..... (Score:3, Interesting)
The solution is the other way around, "artists and producers" need to "ignore" the RIAA/MPAA and find alternative distribution models, alternative promotion models, and change the way they deal with customers....as of now....every customer who pays $14 to a retailer, and gets one CD, is paying the retailer around $2, and the rest goes to RIAA distributors, who keep another dollar and a half, and pass on the rest to the record company. So the record company gets around US$ 10.5 per CD sold at full price.
Out of that, depending on how good a deal the lawyers of the band managed to cut out, the artist gets somewhere between US$1 to US$3 per disc, plus the check they got for recording if they were lucky. Record studios keep the rest, and account for production/promotion costs.
Let's say "Public Enemy" did an album, got paid US$2 a disc ("good" payment), and a bill of US$ 0.5 million for recording it (highly unlikely), and they sold a million copies, then overall, RIAA managed to get US$ 8 per disc, let's deduct US$ 1 for production (too much, but then let's take the worst case), and put a hefty big promotion worth US$ 1 million for the overall project, then too, the record label made a total of US$ 6 million on this recording in just the base first week/month sales of the album. Whereas artists made US$ 2.5 million, but then that's the best case for the artist, and the worst for the company.
In real world, not only do the artists get paid far less, they also loose the rights to their own work, and that means being unable to "re-sell" their own old music to another company, when their contract with one company expires, or breaks out.
The artist got only US$ 2.5 (in an optimal case) for 1 million copies of his album, lost his music; fans got Costlier CDs, RIAA got rich.
Let's say the artists did everything all by themselves, produce, market, promote and then sell, one album for US$ 7 for a physical "CD", and an electronic download for US$ 5.5 for the entire album download, or US$1.5 for the "best singles".
It costs US$ 0.5 million to get two weeks for a final recording in a good sound studio. It costs US$1 to make a CD with jewel case and covers, a nice poster and a nice lyrics booklet. Let's say they spent US$.5 million in making and spreading a music video, US$0.5 million in promos and adverts, and outsourced distribution from one of the underground low-price distribution networks, pay them US$ 1 per CD sold, the total cost, other than the artistic talent, comes to around US$ 3 to produce an album.
Let's say they sold 1 million CDs, because other than their talent, the marketing was better because they spent more money, and went the right way, and then, the album is cheaper, and has more goodies. They still own their music, they earn from the online sales in "full", and that single the public really fancied will sell so much for US$1.5 that it would make them even more money to pump into promos. This lands the band on a cash pit of over US$ 5 million, while making it cheaper for customers to acquire their music.
Now, obviously, a new artist won't have so much money to pump into all this, so the established ones need to begin on this first, and the others will soon latch on. Obviously, there will be other music companies, those who will be the "breeding ground" for new upcoming artists, invest in their effort, and overall, make money, but then, the internet makes it so much easier to begin small, and then grow up big for any artist.
Now, the dynamics for the movie industry are a little different, and i'm not so familiar with those, but i guess similar things apply there too, specifically in the DVD sales area.
So guys, it's the artists who need to "ignore" the RIAA/MPAA alliance, and find alternative means to reach their audience. Not the other way around.
Re:Why don't we boycott them??? (Score:3, Funny)