[sarcasm]
Let’s see how many comments this controversial post generates. So exciting. 
[/sarcasm]
After burning out on he-said-she-said politics last year, I started blogging about digital technology, digital music technology, to be exact. I’m not a music or tech blogger, but it was an oddly satisfying distraction. A reporter quoted from one of my tech posts, and I picked up a few readers genuinely interested in the new stuff.
But I returned to political blogging because…hmmm.
Anyway, I blogged about the Recording Industry Association of America’s (RIAA) case against a man who illegally shared music files, Atlantic Recording Corporation v. Pamela and Jeffrey Howell. The RIAA is a trade organization that represents major record labels. For those who care about the outcome of the case, here’s an update:
[click to continue…]
Update: A few months ago, I mentioned a song called “Beautiful Life” by Annie Barker. It’s beautiful. I bought it on iTunes even before it finished playing on a music podcast I listen to. Want to hear it? Listen to the full track on my MySpace page music player. I asked her to add it to her music player so I could upload it to mine and share it with you. I hope other artists listen and respond to their fans! 
————————————————————————————————————–
In an ideal world, bands could focus solely on the craft of creating, composing, and recording music while earning a decent living, almost passively, through the sale of that recorded music. Making a lot of money performing that same music would be—pardon the tired cliché—icing on the cake.
But unless you’re signed to a label with star-making machinery churning in the background for you, that ideal world is just that. Today, artists have to do a lot more than sell recorded music to support themselves.
By now we know all about the ground-shifting little MP3 file. Digital downloading, legal or otherwise, has cut deeply into the sale of physical media like CDs. Even if users choose to pay for digital music, they have the option of buying only one or two songs from an album. An entire album: $12. Two songs: $2. Somebody’s earning less money, wouldn’t you say?
[click to continue…]
Back on the east coast. It’s raining. 
Looking for more evidence of digital music downloading’s impact on CD sales? Remember 12-CDs-for-a-penny music clubs? At least one is closing down. BMG Music Service announced that it would close shop by 2010. CDs sales are down, and DVDs aren’t selling well, either. From the article:
One of the problems music continuity clubs face is the growing popularity of MP3 players, which give consumers access to music whenever they want it.
“Consumers want control of the process instead of the other way around, like it used to be,” Benjamin says. As a result, “continuity is in the process of reinvention” as clubs try to figure out how to give members more control. She points to HCI’s Silkies hosiery club, which now allows members to decide how often they want shipments as an example.
The growth of digital music is behind Bertelsmann’s decision to shut down the BMG Music Service club, company representatives said during its annual analyst meeting in March. The company’s US CD business fell in line with market declines in physical music sales, which dropped off by more than 20% in 2007, according to Bertelsmann. The US DVD club also didn’t perform well, and Bertelsmann is considering shutting it down, too. Book clubs, however, are relatively stable.
[click to continue…]
3:19 p.m. PT: Whenever I feel like blogging (like today), I have a ton of other stuff to do (like today). When I have free time to blog, I don’t feel like blogging. For instance, I feel like blogging some more, but I have to finish a book review (due tomorrow), do some heavy lifting on my book proposal, and I just finished a telephone interview with Essence magazine. I don’t think I can mention what the story’s about yet, and I’m not certain my quotes will make the cut. I’ll let you know!
Anyway, let’s talk about bands and fans.
[click to continue…]
Tuesday, May 6 @ 6:42 a.m. PT: Thanks for the birthday wishes, everyone! 
I met country singer Rissi Palmer last Friday at the Stagecoach Festival. The photo of us isn’t the best quality, but there it is. As people I meet often tell me about my photos, Rissi’s photos don’t do her justice. She’s downright radiant. I reviewed the show for Blog Critics. I’ll link when it’s up.
Later…Check out the review.
[click to continue…]
9:15 a.m. PT: I’ve blogged about a case called Atlantic Recording Corporation v. Pamela and Jeffrey Howell a few times, and I wanted to give you an update.
You may recall that the Recording Industry Association of America’s (RIAA) sued a couple for transferring copyrighted digital music files to a peer-to-peer network (P2P) called Kazaa.
According to an earlier RIAA motion for summary judgment, Jeffrey Howell admitted to loading Kazaa file-sharing software onto his computer and placing the files at issue into the folder. The court granted the motion for summary judgment. (A summary judgment means that a court makes a judgment in a case without a full trial.)
Howell later said he admitted no such thing. In his motion to reconsider, he admitted creating a Kazaa account, installing Kazaa software, and authorizing “certain types of files to be shared through KaZaA.” But he denied placing copyrighted files into the shared folder or authorizing sharing those files. He claims that his computer placed the files into the Kazaa folder.
It wasn’t me. It was my computer! Sounds strange (as a defense), but it makes a difference legally.
The RIAA filed another motion for summary judgment. On Monday, a federal court denied it on two grounds. Download the 17-page order in PDF.
As I mentioned before, the RIAA wants to nab people on a “make available” claim. If a user has placed copyrighted files in a P2P folder, the files have been made available for distribution. Regardless of whether the user intends to distribute the files or actually distributes the files, he has infringed copyright and should be held liable.
[click to continue…]
***Scroll down for updates***
Since I started blogging about digital music late last year, I’ve heard from readers who say they don’t listen to popular music but find the whole illegal downloading and file sharing debate interesting.
Others have suggested artists and bands I might like, and some said they’ve become fans of artists I blogged about. Some of you have turned me on to new artists and new sounds. I may buy a track or two or three. I rarely buy albums. Rarer still will I buy a physical CD. In fact, I may never buy another CD, unless a favorite band decides to release a new album on CD only.
The point is that in a small way, readers and I have been engaged in “digital discovery.”
Musically
In the digital age, it’s both easy and difficult to find new bands and artists. Let’s take file sharing web sites out of the equation for a moment. If someone suggests an artist or band, and you want to hear the music, all you’d need to do (most of the time) is surf to the artist’s or band’s site and listen to a song. Hopefully, they’ll have at least two songs available for full streaming. If not, the artist or band probably has a MySpace page, where you can listen to full versions of a few songs. In this way, the Internet has made music discovery easy.
Back in the day, people bought music based on what they heard on the radio. If bands (esp. independent) can’t get radio airplay, how do they get their music out there for discovery? They need to promote like crazy, online and offline, and allow users to listen to full versions of their songs.
On the other hand, there are “tens of millions” of music tracks out there. People who create and promote this music are competing with each other for our attention, which is already stretched to capacity. With scarce attention and a seemingly limitless supply of stuff out there (again, thanks to the Internet), finding new artists that we might like is difficult.
[click to continue…]
I’m geeking out over this news.
Have you heard? Flickr users with Pro accounts ($25 a year) can now upload videos along with photos (90-second limit). I’ve got at least 50 short clips from family gatherings and other events going back to 2005. They were on two hard drives, waiting patiently for me to convert them to an acceptable format and upload them to YouTube. Sometimes, procrastination is worth the effort.
With Flickr, you don’t have to convert the videos. Just upload from a digital camera as is. Solid.
My brother snapped that photo of me last month as I prepared to do a cheerleader jump. (I was a cheerleader eons ago in 8th and 9th grades.) He was laughing at me, naturally. We were on a soccer field, there was a nice breeze blowing, and I was feeling kind of, well, youthful. I did a cartwheel, too. It wasn’t half bad for an almost 41-year-old who hasn’t done a cartwheel since…man, where has the time gone?
Head over to Flickr and start uploading!
So I’m reading a post about another Radiohead-related “innovative” move, a social networking space called Waste Central.
I don’t know if Radiohead’s officially endorsed the site, but fans are creating profiles and blogs, uploading photos, music, and videos, signing up for special e-mail addresses, inviting friends, and communicating with other members on W.A.S.T.E. (which, by the way, is U.G.L.Y.).
So I follow a link to Ning, the platform on which W.A.S.T.E. was created, and I think, “Good grief! As if Facebook and MySpace didn’t take up enough time and energy, here’s yet another site that walls up users inside closed networks. Ning gives users the tools to create their own social networks. Walled gardens beget walled gardens.”
Just for fun, I performed a few faith-related searches on Ning and found social networking sites like Christians of America, Christian Music, and Christian Fiction. Revealing…
(Side note: Ning has been around since 2004, and people have been writing and talking about it just as long. I’m late as usual, but Radiohead’s newly announced W.A.S.T.E. space is the news peg I need to blog about it. You’ll rarely read “breaking news” here at LBC, as I’m sure you already know. I offer long-winded opinion and “analysis” on what’s been reported elsewhere.)
Here’s my spin. I like putting all my proverbial eggs in one basket. This blog is Centralized Me. I use Facebook and MySpace to promote my blogging and writing. MySpace is where I reach out to bands (and they reach out to me), drop hints for backstage passes, and cross-post music-related blog entries. Not to denigrate bloggers who’re really into social networking sites, but I’d rather devote time and energy to LBC – my blog and my brand.
I understand the appeal of certain social networking sites. They’re private (except to advertisers?). Google doesn’t index pages on these sites. For now. These walled digital gardens serve as sanctuaries, places to “socialize” with like-minded people, share updates on what they’re doing at any given moment (eating, reading, about to take a nap – it’s wild), and upload photos that won’t end up in Google search results.
There’s something that bugs me about social networks I can’t quite put my finger on. “Closed networks” comes close, but it’s more than that. I’ll think about it and get back to you.
I don’t listen to rap. I don’t know anything about rapper/producer Jay-Z’s music. Even if my life depended on it, I couldn’t tell you a thing other than “rapper.” But his deal, announced yesterday, is noteworthy.
Many Millions
Jay-Z dumped his record label, Def Jam, and cast his lot with Live Nation, a concert promotion company that also handles recording, publishing, touring, merchandising, and web sites for artists. Over 10 years, he’ll rake in $150 million. (Source)
Jay-Z will get $25 million in advance, $5 million a year in “seed money” for his label, $10 million for every album over the next 10 years, and “significantly more funds available for future acquisitions and expansion.” An obscene amount of money in any case, but if people are paying to see and hear him…
Last year, Madonna left Warner Music and signed a 10-year, $120 million deal with Live Nation. U2 cut a 12-year deal for touring, promotion, and web site only. The band is still signed with Universal Music.
Also see Live Nation rocks the music industry.
[click to continue…]
Do a Google search on any band or individual artist. Go ahead. I’ll wait.
The top three search results turned out to be an official web site, a Wikipedia page, and a MySpace page, right?
If you want to know more about a band or individual artist — where they’re from, how long they’ve been together, discographies, biographies of each member, etc. — Wikipedia usually is the better choice. Unlike MySpace pages, Wikipedia is mostly text. It’s easier on the eyes than crowded, bulky MySpace pages. The downside/upside of Wikipedia is that anyone – fan or foe, amateur or pro – can edit it.
According to a new study, people searching for information on artists choose to view Wikipedia pages over MySpace pages two to one. An excerpt of the story:
“The interest that people had to go to MySpace to find out more about their favorite band is waning in favor of going to Wikipedia,” Yahoo head of programming and label relations John Lenac says. “In the last six months, it’s surpassed it.”
Yet when compared with the number of artist profiles on MySpace, Wikipedia entries are noticeably fewer. MySpace claims 3 million artist profiles. Wikipedia does not have an exact count of artist entries, but estimates that it’s in the “tens of thousands,” according to Wikipedia Foundation head of communications Jay Walsh.
…
What’s more, because of Wikipedia’s low profile relative to the MySpace hype machine, many artists and their managers remain ignorant of the resources available to them.
“There’s been many people I’ve talked to that didn’t even know they could upload a Wikipedia page,” Lenac says. “There’s been some managers that didn’t even know what it was.”
Having a page on MySpace is still important for musicians, but love it or hate it, you can’t ignore Wikipedia. It’s here to stay. It comes up high in search engine results, so anyone who’s got an entry listed should pay attention to the page’s content. Because Wikipedia can be edited by anyone (though editors supposedly keep a close watch), even someone who has no idea what he’s talking about, it’s important to check pages now and then for accuracy, signs of bias, etc.
Takeaway for bands and individual artists: If you have a Wikipedia page, don’t ignore it. Check it periodically. If you don’t have one, don’t create one yourself. Eventually, a fan will do it for you.
The last time I blogged about the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), I called out Washington Post reporter Marc Fisher for neglecting to read a legal brief that was the subject of one of his stories. (See Washington Post Gets It Wrong)
According to Fisher, the RIAA contended in a brief filed in Atlantic Recording Corporation v. Pamela and Jeffrey Howell that copying your own CD to your computer hard drive was illegal. There is some debate whether the RIAA holds this view, but it did not make this assertion in the brief. While it may seem like a minor point, people reading Fisher’s story — and relying on his reporting — were bound to get the wrong impression about the issue before the court.
The point wasn’t so much that Fisher didn’t read the brief before writing the story. It’s that he attributed statements to the document that weren’t in the document. The Post eventually issued a correction. Too bad fun things like that don’t happen every day.
RIAA Update
The RIAA, around since 1952, is fond of filing lawsuits against regular old private citizens for what it considers illegal downloading.
[click to continue…]
I found a link to an old story in the New York Times magazine called “Sex, Drugs and Updating Your Blog.” It was published last year, but in web time, that’s old.
The gist of the well-written and appealing story is this: new and/or struggling musicians can make a decent living without record labels and big marketing machines if they harness the power of the web by starting blogs, running discussion boards, and interacting with fans, who want to feel connected.
Musicmakers and Blogupdaters
Heavily featured in the piece is a musician named Jonathan Coulton, who quit the 9 to 5 to write and perform music. He posts a new tune on his blog every week. Coulton’s earning a decent income selling his music online, and he’s managed to build quite a fan community.
One fan creates illustrations (for free) for each of his songs. Other fans make videos for his songs and post them on YouTube, which promotes his music and creates even more fans. Yet another fan built a web site to archive fan-made videos.
Coulton makes (and saves) money when traveling by doing what I call “target touring.” He polls readers to find where they live and schedules a concert if there are more than 100 fans in a given area. That way, he knows a show will sell well, and he endears himself to fans even more by hitting smaller towns where other acts rarely tread.
[click to continue…]
For 17 years, Jeff Price owned an independent label called spinART Records. He managed to do great things, but that was before the so-called digital revolution. In 2004, Price realized the label was no longer sustainable.
“The advent and general adoption of the Internet, digital media and hardware took control of the global music industry away from the record labels and media outlets and handed it to the masses,” he writes. (Source)
Rather than cursing the masses and resisting changes brought on by the Internet, Price decided to adapt. He wanted to stay in the music business but needed to make money. “[W]hat could I do to remain in the music industry under a model that would not rely on selling music (the exploitation model),” he asked himself. “And thus the idea for a new model was born, turn distribution into a service for a simple up front, one time flat fee.”
Digital Label
Price created a service called TuneCore, which allows artists to upload songs and create albums. TuneCore places these albums in online music stores, and artists keep all the profits and all their rights. And they can cancel their accounts at any time. The catch? Well, if you want to call it that, TuneCore charges 99 cents a track, 99 cents a store per track, and $19.98 a year per album for storage and maintenance. Not a bad deal.
[click to continue…]
I dig these “music industry in flux” articles.
Change can make one feel unsteady, but we all need to be shaken up from time to time. The old ways of doing things pass away, opening up new and sometimes fresh ways of buying, selling, living…
The article begins with a reference to Amy Winehouse and rehab and ends with this advice to an industry staring at the digital revolution like a deer in headlights: “[T]o shake off its blues, the record business must itself continue to break old habits. Saying yes to rehab is a start, but returning to health is going to take a sustained dose of discipline and imagination.”
In between are issues familiar to regular LBC readers and others following music/digital tech news: CDs sales are down, illegal downloading is up, record labels are trying to lay claim to artists’ concert ticket and merchandise sales (known as 360 deals) because CDs sales are drying up, etc. If you have the time (and inclination), read the entire article. It’s a concise, information-packed overview of the state of the music industry today.
[click to continue…]
