4 ms·

I know the Internet has seriously damaged the music label's revenue stream but why hasn't it done even more damage? It is 2011,the labels should not still have

I know the Internet has seriously damaged the music label's revenue stream but why hasn't it done even more damage? It is 2011,the labels should not still have this much power, should they?

Swizec 15y ago
Simple, the law says so. It's difficult to change in a decade what the law has been saying since 1662 (that's when copyright law came into the existence, around the time printing was invented). What we've seen since then is simply a natural result of the slippery slope that resulted as a pretty good idea. It will take a long time to go back up such a slippery slope again.
- calcnerd256 15y ago
  No, the law says that once they're in that position, that position has the power. The question was why we keep putting them in that position.
zmanji 15y ago
If labels have copyright over the song they have a legal monopoly over reproduction of the song (minus fair use). The Internet alone cannot destroy this type of monopoly for legal services.
daleharvey 15y ago
I fully agree, everyone talks about how disgusted they are by record labels, myself included, but we have been in this game a while now, artists have had the ability to sell directly the consumers, media services have been in the position to promote independent artists. I remember some Steve Jobs quite about the scary truth about news organisations producing washed down trite because that is what people are asking for, is the same true of the music industry?
- potatolicious 15y ago
  Record companies are still relevant because they provide what is probably the most important element of a band/musician's success: marketing. This is not something music fans are likely to admit, but their tastes are determined more by shrewd marketing than by some "objective" measure of talent or quality. It reminds me of an article I read recently - a world-renowned violinist played in the DC Metro for a day. Not a single person recognized him, and very few people recognized the quality of his performances. Most just passed him by and some dropped quarters as if he's just a run of the mill subway performer. IMO, people do not have the discerning taste they seem to attribute to themselves. This goes for movie buffs, music fans, video game connoisseurs. Everyone. So, in an environment where people's perceptions of art and media is more determined by preconceptions and biases than any pseudo-objective measure of quality, the difference between winners and losers is who can shape their image the best. This takes a shitload of money, spent in a shrewd way - record labels are still very, very good at this.
  - tdeitch 15y ago
    The violinist you're thinking of is probably Joshua Bell. There was an article about his subway performance in the Washington Post several years ago: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/04/AR2007040401721.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04...
    - tptacek 15y ago
      You would be very well served by tracking down every other long-form Weingarten piece you can find as well. Amazing writer.
  - jinushaun 15y ago
    Logically, in order for Spotify to survive, it must develop a platform for artists to market themselves therefore bypassing the labels. During the height of MySpace there were countless stories of new artists being discovered on there. The iTunes music store also has that potential, but Apple doesn't seem interested in going down that road. Spotify has a long way to go before that happens though. Its music discovery features are almost worthless. The What's New section lists nothing I care to listen to. It would also be nice to see tour dates and real social features.
hyperbovine 15y ago
They own rights to pretty much all music that was recorded in the 20th century. It would be difficult to overstate thr amount of money/power that affords them.
rmc 15y ago
the Internet has seriously damaged the music label's revenue stream Has it? It's 10 years since Napster lost the court case and the music industry is still awash with money. Have the record labels lost much revenue in the last 10 years? I don't believe that "piracy is killing the record labels", because if it was, they would have been killed by now.

I know the Internet has seriously damaged the music label's revenue stream but why hasn't it done even more damage? It is 2011,the labels should not still have this much power, should they?

Swizec 15y ago

Simple, the law says so. It's difficult to change in a decade what the law has been saying since 1662 (that's when copyright law came into the existence, around the time printing was invented). What we've seen since then is simply a natural result of the slippery slope that resulted as a pretty good idea. It will take a long time to go back up such a slippery slope again.

calcnerd256 15y ago
No, the law says that once they're in that position, that position has the power. The question was why we keep putting them in that position.

zmanji 15y ago

If labels have copyright over the song they have a legal monopoly over reproduction of the song (minus fair use). The Internet alone cannot destroy this type of monopoly for legal services.

daleharvey 15y ago

I fully agree, everyone talks about how disgusted they are by record labels, myself included, but we have been in this game a while now, artists have had the ability to sell directly the consumers, media services have been in the position to promote independent artists. I remember some Steve Jobs quite about the scary truth about news organisations producing washed down trite because that is what people are asking for, is the same true of the music industry?

potatolicious 15y ago
Record companies are still relevant because they provide what is probably the most important element of a band/musician's success: marketing. This is not something music fans are likely to admit, but their tastes are determined more by shrewd marketing than by some "objective" measure of talent or quality. It reminds me of an article I read recently - a world-renowned violinist played in the DC Metro for a day. Not a single person recognized him, and very few people recognized the quality of his performances. Most just passed him by and some dropped quarters as if he's just a run of the mill subway performer. IMO, people do not have the discerning taste they seem to attribute to themselves. This goes for movie buffs, music fans, video game connoisseurs. Everyone. So, in an environment where people's perceptions of art and media is more determined by preconceptions and biases than any pseudo-objective measure of quality, the difference between winners and losers is who can shape their image the best. This takes a shitload of money, spent in a shrewd way - record labels are still very, very good at this.
- tdeitch 15y ago
  The violinist you're thinking of is probably Joshua Bell. There was an article about his subway performance in the Washington Post several years ago: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/04/AR2007040401721.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04...
  - tptacek 15y ago
    You would be very well served by tracking down every other long-form Weingarten piece you can find as well. Amazing writer.
- jinushaun 15y ago
  Logically, in order for Spotify to survive, it must develop a platform for artists to market themselves therefore bypassing the labels. During the height of MySpace there were countless stories of new artists being discovered on there. The iTunes music store also has that potential, but Apple doesn't seem interested in going down that road. Spotify has a long way to go before that happens though. Its music discovery features are almost worthless. The What's New section lists nothing I care to listen to. It would also be nice to see tour dates and real social features.

hyperbovine 15y ago

They own rights to pretty much all music that was recorded in the 20th century. It would be difficult to overstate thr amount of money/power that affords them.

rmc 15y ago

the Internet has seriously damaged the music label's revenue stream Has it? It's 10 years since Napster lost the court case and the music industry is still awash with money. Have the record labels lost much revenue in the last 10 years? I don't believe that "piracy is killing the record labels", because if it was, they would have been killed by now.