More Artists Steer Clear Of iTunes and New Music…
Posted August 28, 2008 — in Music News
Man Arrested For Leaking Guns N’ Roses Tracks: A Los Angeles man who posted nine pirated tracks from “Chinese Democracy,” from Guns N’ Roses, was arrested by FBI agents and charged with violating federal copyright laws. He uploaded the songs from a computer at the online ad sales company where he works and if convicted of the felony count, he faces up to five years in prison. It’s about time the government is enforcing copyright laws. Here is the affidavit.
New Music: Listen to Walking Alone and Finding Your Way by
Daniel Ghattas. Ghattas hails from Montreal and draws influences from Bryan Adams, Daniel Powter, and Jack’s Mannequin. When I started writing and recording songs I vowed that I would make sure every track on my album was not just good but great. “No filler tracks” was my motto says Ghattas.
Music Biz Questions iTunes After Kid Rock’s Platinum Record:
The Wall Street Journal published an article titled “More Artists Steer Clear of iTunes“. Although iTunes have sold 5 billion downloads a growing number of record companies are trying to steer clear of Apple’s iTunes because they think that in some cases it’s crimping overall music sales.
Atlantic Records recently pulled the album by R&B singer Estelle from the iTunes Store, the same week that one of its songs entered the top-10-selling tracks on iTunes.
Many artists do not want their work dismantled and to be sold in individual tracks, instead iTunes requires that songs be made available separately. Artists, managers, and labels believe they can make more by selling complete albums for $10 to $15 than by selling individual songs. “In so many ways it’s turned our business back into a singles business,” says Ken Levitan, Kid Rock’s manager.
We think this solution is easy. iTunes requires that songs be made available separately because consumers prefer that, but, do artists prefer this? If artists want to sell their album as a complete package then iTunes should have this option. I can’t completely agree with Kid Rock’s manager that iTunes turned the music business into a singles business, because the music biz has always been a singles business since the 1970’s. Although it’s not far fetched and unreasonable to believe that iTunes can cripple album sales in some cases.
Re: Guns ‘N Roses tracks
Yes, I agree to have that guy do some time for letting Chinese Democracy out into the public. I mean, have you heard those tracks!?!??!
Comment by Scott — August 28, 2008 @ 10:16 am
It’s a rare occasion anymore, but I agree with you on this, Dean. iTunes should allow artists to sell *only* their entire album if they choose to. I doubt the artists will see the results they’re expecting, but they should still have that choice.
To be honest, I wasn’t aware that iTunes didn’t offer that as an option. Believe it or not, I still buy CDs (and rip them to mp3s).
Comment by Jalan — August 28, 2008 @ 10:32 am
Bullshit, Dean.
When the industry became an album business, it was treated as an album business. In the 90’s the industry had become dependent on the album business model but they treated everything as if it was a singles business. THIS ISN’T FAIR TO CONSUMERS. They stopped selling physical singles while upping the price of albums while signing artists who only have one decent song. Talk about a giant middle finger to the consumer! If you want to sell 10 songs, you better make damn sure that they’re 10 great songs that people want, otherwise you’re selling a $15 single. And you can only cheat consumers for so long.
If you’re making REAL albums, I have no problem with a move to take singles sales off of iTunes, but if you’re trying to sell me a bloated single, I’m just going to download the track illegally. And most other folks will, too.
The bottom line is that Rock & Roll Jesus will be lucky to sell more than a quarter of what Devil Without a Cause sold, even with a hit single & no competition on the radio. The other 75% are just downloading it illegally. And with each coming generation that number is going to grow. Yanking your catalog off of iTunes, reverting to a dependence on physical sales spells certain & absolute doom for the industry.
I can’t think of the first thing that the music industry has done PROACTIVELY to catch up with current consumer behavior trends. What a gigantic clusterfuck. How did these people get hired?
This entire charade is called “painting yourself into a corner.”
Comment by Jon Cole — August 28, 2008 @ 11:09 am
I know that iTunes allows you to have “album only” tracks, where you actually have to buy the whole album to get the track… but I agree, artists should be able to decide whether or not their songs go as a whole package or in singles. Some works of art are meant to be presented in an entire album form (i.e. the new Coldplay album).
Comment by Etty Metal — August 28, 2008 @ 4:32 pm
is this the future ? check this out KOAR
http://www.myspace.com/retardobot
Comment by larry anderson — August 28, 2008 @ 5:00 pm
@KOAR: That dude who leaked the GNR tracks did the band a huge favor. It got people talking about the band again months before the full album release.
@Larry Anderson: That’s not the future. That’s 1998.
Comment by SusanRockStar — August 28, 2008 @ 6:56 pm
Susan,you hit the nail on the head for Retardobot. I haven’t heard that sound since 1998… WHEN I HAD A DIAL UP MODEM!
Comment by david — August 29, 2008 @ 5:39 am
The question is.
Who gave those GN’R songs to that guy?
Comment by Dave — August 29, 2008 @ 9:19 am
Ah yes, it’s like that restaurant critic–the food was terrible and such small portions.
It’s near impossible to tell why a record does or doesn’t sell thanks to illegal downloaders like Jon and his complicit community.
The answer to “bloated singles” is don’t buy it not go steal it.
The only reason that “go steal it” is an answer is because the mob is so big that it’s unlikely that any single mobster is likely to get caught.
I’m sure that lots of people don’t like high priced gasoline, either, and they think that the oil companies are giving consumers the middle finger. But they don’t steal gasoline because they have a very good chance of getting arrested if they do.
This is called a “market” and markets work on rules, the most basic foundation of which is enforceable private property rights. If there are no private property rights, there can be no legal market, so there can be no “market failure” that we hear about so much from the profesoriate. What is usually characterized as a “market failure” is actually a successful and illicit black market. Not the same thing.
Artists should clearly have the right to distribute their work in whatever format they want, for sale, free, whatever. If they want to take the king’s shilling, become walking billboards for some product and be dependent on advertising and corporate largesse, then that’s their choice, too.
If the “consumer” that the hoards of self-appointed consumer protection folk are so concerned about doesn’t like the offering, they can decline to buy not decide to steal.
Next we’ll see Public Knowledge lobbying for laws that force artists to sell the way Public Knowledge thinks they should.
Comment by hewalkshetalkshecrawlsonhisbellylikeareptile — August 30, 2008 @ 7:13 am
The reason gasoline isn’t stolen is not fear, it’s scarcity. Well, perhaps it’s fear indirectly, but if people could, in their own bedroom, copy as much oil as they had room to store for practically $0, you bet your ass they would. People give as much a shit about Exxon as they do Universal, I’m sure. It’s two very different things, thieving & copying, with very different motivations that demand very different reactions.
The fact of the matter is that our country is not built on moral obligation, but on the words of lawmakers and judges. And we ALL know the labels have been living by the phrase “It’s only a foul if the ref sees it” for years & years & years. We didn’t need Elliot Spitzer to tell us. And where corporations have the power to lobby for rules to be written in their favor, consumers have the power to band together & violate the laws anonymously. It’s two sides of the same coin… everyone, essentially, wants to “get theirs.” Me & my complicit community are, in practical terms, the consumers’ response to the practices & the very existence of the RIAA. It’s the twenty first century equivalent of throwing crates of tea into the Boston Harbor, only far more passive.
If the labels want to survive this situation, they aren’t going to get ANYWHERE crying foul. We’re 8 years into this & it’s very clear. The self-righteous rhetoric only justifies the mentality of the mob (let he who is without sin cast the first stone, right?) & the media coverage only grows the mob. Each scare tactic makes everyone take the industry less seriously & each website that gets taken down is replaced by at least two bigger and better websites. Online stores closing & consumers losing access to all of the copy protected WMA files they bought at full CD price doesn’t help, either.
What it comes down to is that consumer behavior has changed, largely as an effect of the labels own choices to focus on singles, neglect or downright offend the consumer (rootkit debacle, Y! Music disaster, etc), shun technology, etc. If the labels want to survive, they’re going to have to DROP THE BULLSHIT SELF-RIGHTEOUS CRYBABY ACT and bend the the consumer. And that means slashing the price of music to the point that it reflects the amount of music and the manner by which people have become used to consuming music (the price of filling a 160 gig iPod @ $.99 is about $30k… think about what people listen to music on & then consider whether that is reasonable or not). This is in the sub $.25/song range, probably closer to half that. And it also means adapting to this new volume-dependent system by dropping the focus on Christina, Mariah, & Justin, & focusing on making more better music that doesn’t necessarily appeal to the lowest common denominator. It means more Jackson Brownes & less Timbalands. Supposing there are no Jackson Brownes out there, this means developing them. (oh fuck! did he say developing an artist??)
It’s a new world & what’s “fair” doesn’t really play into it because the money is in someone’s pocket & they’ve gotta want to give it to you. The money is still there, the interest is still there, but every passing second that the labels refuse PROACTIVITY & every new method they use to alienate consumers makes it more & more of an uphill battle.
And for the record, in addition to the music that I may or may not download, I spend hundreds of dollars per month on cds, dvds, & vinyl (both new & used). I also have had a Rhapsody subscription for years now. And I go to several shows weekly, whether it’s dropping $100+ to see Jackson Browne @ the Tabernacle or $10 to see Right Away, Great Captain. I even voluntarily pay to see my best friends’ shows (for example Right Away, Great Captain). So my comments aren’t coming out of selfish gain, but out of just having my goddamn eyes open for the last decade while others have seemingly sewn theirs shut.
Comment by Jon Cole — August 30, 2008 @ 2:33 pm
check this out KOAR this guy kinda sounds like the singer from the 70’s band Foreigner
http://www.youtube.com/AshesFromWithin
Comment by larry anderson — August 30, 2008 @ 2:48 pm
Foreigner had good songs. And unique hooks. And memorable parts. lol.
Comment by Jon Cole — August 30, 2008 @ 2:52 pm
Dude. In no way was that ANYTHING like Foreigner. What the hell was that?
If you’re going to plug your own band - at least be honest about who you sound like.
Also - that was horrible!
Comment by Mike — September 1, 2008 @ 1:14 pm
The truth is without this leak Guns And Roses would have had little attention like they are getting now, and if they are going to sit back and let this fan go to jail I will make sure i download my free copy from online and never give them a dime.
Also on the Itues Debate, The industry is trying to make you think that without Itunes things will be ok, the only reason they are on their last breath of air is because of Itunes, and consumers will buy albums if they are good, so advice to the industry learn how to put out good music again and just maybe people will buy, its a pretty simple thought process.
Comment by Digitalmind11 — September 2, 2008 @ 10:49 am
I’m not sure you can compare gas to music. Gas is a necessity, and though music may be, to a certain extent, I don’t think you can get fired for your iPod not working. However, you can lose your job for not showing up for work (no gas).
That being said, it seems to me that, if we are talking about record companies either making their music available via CD only, or only selling entire albums, I hope the lesson learned is not to gouge the public. One of the main reasons why iTunes is so successful is no only because of the singles, but because of the lower prices for entire albums.
I also agree with not having to buy an entire album for only a few good tracks.
Comment by Orlando Luckey — September 2, 2008 @ 12:54 pm
I think that if you are in the business of making music that people want to hear/buy, then you are obligated to at least somewhat cater to their wants. If you have an album with 3 great songs and 9 mediocre ones, I don’t see why a fan should be forced to buy the 9 to get the 3. If it’s eating into your business, then make 12 awesome songs.
Comment by Daniel Hollister — September 2, 2008 @ 1:40 pm
Whatever. You guys are changing the subject.
The point is…… that Ashes From Within suck!
Comment by Mike — September 4, 2008 @ 5:01 pm