Ask a Music Producer/Publicist About Filesharing and the RIAA

Bill Evans is one of those people in the music business who doesn't get a lot of public exposure, but keeps the wheels cranking behind the scenes. He's not just a musician and techie, but a publicist whose clients include Numavox Records artists Kerry Livgren and Michael Gleason as well as progressive rocker Neal Morse; he's produced (among many others) songs for the Burning Annie soundtrack and the Kansas Tribute Project. Naturally, since he makes his living in the music business, Bill is not 100% in favor of unrestricted filesharing. But what might work? And what might not? Let's find out what this music biz insider thinks -- one question per post, of course. Answers to the "Top 10" questions will be published soon after he gets them back to us.

Re:Go Away

[CashCarSTAR]

I disagree. The producer is an integral part of the music process. A lot of the time the producer/mixer adds just as much to the sound as the artists themselves.

Where does the money go?

[stames]

I'm a big advocate of the prosperity of music artists, especially small-time ones. I go to a lot of concerts. I like to buy indie music direct from the band. I generally try to avoid buying music from big-name production houses because I'm sick of all the gratuitous and pervasive advertisements and endorsements that come along with it.

That being said, my question is (and I hope you can even answer this): when I lay down my $15 for a CD, where does that money go? How much goes directly to the artist? The producers? Publicists and people in your position? Record company CEOs? Charities? Etc etc.

Basically I'm concerned that if I fork over $15 because I really like the music, I think that a big portion of that should go directly to the artists themselves, but in reality $14.95 is ending up making CEOs wallets fatter.

--j

Do you consider this stealing?

[BrianUofR]

If I download an mp3 off a file-sharing network, that's stealing. Because I'm not going to buy the album now, and that's a tangible loss of revenue for the record label. Lost revenue = stealing.

But what if I had no intention of ever buying the album. In other words, the probablity of revenue from me from that album was exactly zero. Then I download the tracks off kazaa. How am I hurting the label? How am I stealing?

The labels imply that the Opportunity Cost of an "illegal" download is buying the album. What if it's not?

Re:Should we change copyright?

[BrynM]

Changing copyright is exactly what these large companies are trying to do through lobbying, petitioning and legal action. They just don't have any of the comsumer's interest in mind while they are doing it.

Would prices really drop if there was no pirating?

[hardaker]

One of the things that major media distribution companies (including music, video, games, etc) argue is that the only reason the prices are so high on media is that piracy of their product makes the prices go up. Many, however, are not convienced of this argument and think the prices would likely stay the same and the profits of the company would be the only thing affected (which is what I think annoys most of the users of the world: that the cost is so high when production costs are so low). Do you have a feel for whether on at least whether the music industry really would lower the prices on all its media if the piracy came to a sudden end, or do you think the prices would just stay the same?

Does the music industry believe in laissez-faire?

[sh4d0wb0x3r]

Do you believe that the recent lobbying efforts by the music industry are (1) an honest attempt to stop what they believe is only a criminal action or (2) an anti-capitalistic market intervention, designed to prevent competitors from entering into the online-music market before they exist? If (1), how do you believe the industry would respond to legislation which required (a) open content formats; and (b) guaranteed full-quality fair-use personal copies; if (2), how do you explain this dichotomy, and why should we as consumers tolerate it?

About getting signed

[pfankus]

I'm a music graduate student, and many of my collegues are aspiring musicians in both traditional (classical), jazz, and popular music. Many of them are torn between unrestricted filesharing and protecting their music and future incomes, on the verge of signing to a major label. How do you propose that musicians are mass-marketed (e.g. the only real reason any sane musician signs to a major) if the revenue stream of the labels is purportedly dwindling due to unrestricted filesharing?

The organized crime angle

[bennomatic]

It has been said [canpress.ca] that organized crime is responsible for the sale and distribution of billions of dollars worth of pirated (i.e. hard copy) music CDs worldwide. This begs two questions:

1- Why is the music industry focusing prosecution efforts on poor individual college students who are (a) difficult to track down and (b) not making any money on their endeavors when there are large organizations which are (a) centralized, so stopping them might do some good, and (b) profiting from their activities?

2- If free file swapping is so damaging to music CD sales, then why aren't mafia types trying to stop this phenomenon as well, given they have so much to lose?

Question:

[Spytap]

As technology progresses, means of distribution and advertising also progress. As radio becomes obsolete (as much due to it's own decisions as technological progression), many would argue that File Sharing is not only an easier method of advertising, but potentially a much broader method as well. Coming from a person with 1200 MP3s (of which all are legal and a good half are owned because I originally downloaded a song that I liked) I personally prefer an open plethora of files to a closed Clearchannel fest of the same 40 songs over and over again. What would you say has to change if P2P and file sharing are to become a possible market for advertising and marketing music?

cost v sell

[514x0r]

why is it that, though a CD costs far less to produce than a cassette tape as is evident by the cost of the blank media, CDs retail for far higher than cassette tapes?

same question for DVDs.

Re:Do you consider this stealing?

[Anonymous Coward]

You are still stealing. The price you pay for the music and media are meant to give you the right to listen to it (the music)at you convience. Since you have taken that right without compensating the author of the music you have stolen. Don't try to rationalize it. Downloading music without paying is stealing, pure and simple. So you're a thief. There are worse things that you could be. Accept yourself for the thieving soul you are. You will lead a happier life.

Post-RIAA world

[Phoenix666]

Seems to me that one way or another, the RIAA and content companies in their present form will die. Fans already know about P2P and file sharing, and that is not going to go away until the day they can implant restrictor chips in our heads, cripple every computer, and monitor every communication/sound wave on earth (READ: never).

But your skills such as yours are valuable, and I don't see the need for them going away. However, instead of working for a record company in the future, I wonder if you won't work for musicians themselves in much the same way that a band probably currently hires an accountant, lawyer, or agent.

Have you and your colleagues thought about this sort of scenario, and have any of you talked about forming an agency/consultancy in this way that would work for artists instead of the other way around?

It seems to me that you folk have a golden opportunity to help artists avoid the tyranny of the record labels and capture the money that currently goes to Mottola and Rosen. It would also do the world a great service by putting the final nail in the coffin of the content companies, but that's only if you care about the rest of us.

Re:Erroneous Assumption?

[Anonymous Coward]

I couldn't afford the price of a ticket, so I snuck in through the back. But I wouldn't have paid anyway, and no one was standing where I was standing, so it's not like I was stealing, 'cause I didn't take anything. Uh, Dude?

Re:marketing

[Chakde Phate!]

There's a crucial difference between music piracy and software piracy. Don't forget, for the vast majority of home computer users (the majority do not read Slashdot) Windows is the only option. Furthermore, sooner or later they will upgrade, if only to be able to run other software.

In other words, Microsoft gets no free publicity out of piracy, because it has pretty much saturated the market and very few people are now switching from other OSen to Microsoft, certainly not in the home user sector where the majority of piracy takes place

On the other hand, in the music industry there is a great deal more choice. People don't buy music out of necessity or because there is no other choice, but because they like it. In this situation there is a real benefit to giving away the product free. See the Baen Free Library [baen.com] for a more detailed rationale.

Justifying the price

[MrResistor]

One of the lessons that seems to be "learned" time and again by the content industry is that the best way to combat piracy is to lower the price. For example: when I was a kid movies on VHS were fairly expensive ($60-80 IIRC), and everyone had at least a shelf full of movies they'd rented and copied, or taped off TV. Now that prices are reasonable ($10-15) nobody bothers to go to that trouble, and yet everyone I know still has at least a shelf full of movies, but now they're "origionals".

So, how does the record industry justify the current price of CDs? Doesn't it seem obvious, given the lessons of history, that the inflated price is the root cause of piracy?

I should note, perhaps, that I neither pirate nor buy CDs at this point. Why should I buy a CD when I can get a DVD of a major film, with all kinds of extras, for the same price? It seems to me that this has far more to do with the decline of CD sales than online filesharing.

Finally, I understand that CD prices were supposed to have dropped as a result of the recent lawsuit, but I haven't seen a difference in either record stores or mail-order record clubs, such as Columbia House. In fact, the prices seem to have gone up slightly.

Re:Erroneous Assumption?

[Bohnanza]

Touring is a real pain in the ass and most artists hate it. If someone wants a home and a family, they shouldn't need to rule out a career as a musician.

Re:Erroneous Assumption?

[uunh haun]

Actually, if they are the sole breadwinner, then they probably should. And this is the case with or without file sharing

bootleggers on the street

[Isaac-Lew]

Why doesn't the RIAA go after the person selling $5 bootleg CDs on the street? In my opinion, prosecuting the real criminals would make more sense than chasing college students/homemakers/etc who aren't making a profit. Why does the RIAA alienate their target audience?

What's wrong with...

[Atario]

...concerts?

Weren't concerts (i.e., in-person performances by the artists, whether stadiums or drawing rooms) the primary moneymaker for musicians in the past? Why not consider recordings to be a form of advertising for the concerts? Won't more people be willing to pay more money to see a concert if they have found they like the music they've listened to from that artist? And if that advertising comes at no cost to the artist/record company/whoever, as it is with P2P, isn't that all the better?

(Leaving aside for the moment all the ancillary revenue from things like T-shirts and such.)

Re:marketing

[macdaddy357]

While Napster was online, CD sales were up. This is beyond dispute. People heard songs they liked, then went out and bought recordings, much like radio in its glory days. Best of all, Napster was a free promotion. No one had to cough up any payola [dontbuycds.org] to get songs listed there. Now, the recording industry has millions so angry that they don't buy CDs. [dontbuycds.org] So, why did your industry kill the goose that laid the golden eggs? Are you stupid?

Re:He shouldn't

[TabsAZ]

Saying that getting a good recorded sound requires hundreds of thousands of dollars in a huge studio and a team of engineers is completely false. I have heard full albums produced in a bedroom using Pro Tools on a normal PC or Mac that easily rival major studio quality. The way that home recording technology is progressing, the major studio is going to be made almost completely obsolete. Check out someone like BT (he makes a kind of progressive electronic style of music) - his albums are 100% recorded, engineered, mixed, and mastered at his home studio using Logic 6. Tell me his music doesn't sound professional. Another great example - A Perfect Circle - their guitarist Billy Howerdel is a Pro Tools master and recorded their first CD at their own studio and probably the upcoming second one as well. Sure, people from an older generation like The Rolling Stones or other bands like that aren't going to understand how to use Pro Tools and the like, but current up and coming artists who've grown up with computers their whole life sure as hell are going to be capable. Industry executives have very good reason to be concerned - the only barrier remaining to a band that wants to be completely self-sufficient with their music is distribution. As soon as a system arrives that allows artists to securely sell their own music online and make a profit, it's going to mean the death of the old-fashioned recording industry.

Copyright infringements or social philosophies?

[Wvyern]

How do you think any group will ever be able to enforce or completely limit filesharing anyway? The historical facts show that people will ALWAYS find a way to do what they want to do, regardless of what measures the PTB put in place to restrict or inhibit said actions. Remnember, many of the people who enjoy such forums as this are just sorts of people who will always take is as a personal challenge to discover a way around limitations, rules, laws, etc..., for no other reason that to prove it can be done. The more you fight it, the more creative they get, until eventually the original issue being debated is obscured by the battle that evolved between 2 groups with diametrically opposing viewpoints on life in general(think Democrats / Republicans not just fileswappers / RIAA)