According to Judland's article artists do get their money. Artists only get a small portion of the income, most of the money goes to the recorders.dann wrote:When it comes down to it, I don't mind paying a fair price for a song. I think $.99 is very reasonable. But only paying a few cents sounds like someone is getting ripped off big time.
linux friendly music download site or cracking drm
Moderators: snarkout, Patrick, dann
-
CptnObvious999
- Posts: 798
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 7:54 pm
- Location: Maryland
- Contact:
Here's my question: What has the potential of making more money?dann wrote:When it comes down to it, I don't mind paying a fair price for a song. I think $.99 is very reasonable. But only paying a few cents sounds like someone is getting ripped off big time.
1 - Charge $1.00 a song that some people would buy.
2 - Charge $.10 a song that many people would buy.
With the exchange rate and all, option 1 really doesn't provide much of a cost savings for me. In fact, with a regular CD at least I'd get the cover art and inserts.
However, as I said earlier, option 2 is such a benefit that it actually makes sense to buy. More people would be doing it.
I would say that if the record labels did the same as AllofMP3 here, income from music sales would be the highest in history.
Well, at least that what I came away with from all of the information I've read so far about it.CptnObvious999 wrote: According to Judland's article artists do get their money. Artists only get a small portion of the income, most of the money goes to the recorders.
Being on the "gray shade" of legal is something I'm used to anyway. Because I like to listen to my CD music on my MP3 player, the record companies already think that I'm a criminal... at least, that's how I feel I'm being treated by them.
I do not have all the facts on hand, but $.99 a song seems to be what the industry has settled upon based on what consumers are willing to pay and the cost it takes to produce the song in question. Now I realize these points can be argued right and left, but I'll take the $.99 at face value right now.Judland wrote:Here's my question: What has the potential of making more money?dann wrote:When it comes down to it, I don't mind paying a fair price for a song. I think $.99 is very reasonable. But only paying a few cents sounds like someone is getting ripped off big time.
1 - Charge $1.00 a song that some people would buy.
2 - Charge $.10 a song that many people would buy.
However, as I said earlier, option 2 is such a benefit that it actually makes sense to buy. More people would be doing it.
My point about being ripped off is that is $.02 - $.03 a fair price for the song (I quoted $.10 before, but according to the ALLOFMP3.com faq this is very inflated)? Sure, to a Russian this may be equivalent to $.99; but for a person in the US it's a steal.
Perhaps $.99 is a bit steep, especially if there are more than 12 songs on the cd. At $12.00 you are right, Judland, I am almost to buy the CD and getting a hardcopy, artwork, and liner-notes.
I sit here wondering if the money the industry looses because of Russian broadcast and distribution systems is made up in inflating costs in the US. Of course, this pondering ignores the fact that the cost is already inflated.
For me it ultimately comes down to an ethical quandry with regards to purchasing music electonrically. I can go the "legitimate" routes but I am forced into a paradigm that limits me so much that I cannot do it legally with the technology I have on hand (ignoring that I can use iTunes but I have to convert, burn and then rip).
I can go the illegal route and "steal" the files. Or, I can take the murky road and use a service like ALLOFMP3.com.
No matter what road I take, someone gets screwed. There should be a solution we can all benefit from.
-
CptnObvious999
- Posts: 798
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 7:54 pm
- Location: Maryland
- Contact:
Yup, its reasons like this why Linux isn't the most popular os. Hopefully somewhere on the interweb someone is working one a open source music store program if not someone should really start one updann wrote:No matter what road I take, someone gets screwed. There should be a solution we can all benefit from.
I hear ya, Dann. Those are all good points.
I can tell you this, though. In the last four years I've bought a grand total of two CDs.
In the same time span I've purchased a few months of membership in Emusic, a few CDs from MP3.com when they were still in the independent music artist business and now tracks from AllofMP3.
The only reason the recording industry is losing money (if that's even the true situation) is because they refuse to provide the products and services their customers demand. It's their own fault.
Services, like AllofMP3 was not in business till recently, and CD prices have not come down in over a decade. That's just not right. If anyone needs a lesson in morals, it's them, as far as I'm concerned.
I can tell you this, though. In the last four years I've bought a grand total of two CDs.
In the same time span I've purchased a few months of membership in Emusic, a few CDs from MP3.com when they were still in the independent music artist business and now tracks from AllofMP3.
The only reason the recording industry is losing money (if that's even the true situation) is because they refuse to provide the products and services their customers demand. It's their own fault.
Services, like AllofMP3 was not in business till recently, and CD prices have not come down in over a decade. That's just not right. If anyone needs a lesson in morals, it's them, as far as I'm concerned.
You guys have to also realize that the RIAA is cashing in on this piracy thing. Okay, they aren't making as much money as they would be if everyone that was on p2p bought every song they download, this I concede. However, not many of these people will buy the song with DRM if that is their only option.
Therefore, by suing the pants off every server, and eventually every downloader (the sky is the limit here), the RIAA can turn a decent profit. Why would they want to make it easy to download mp3s when they can just keep suing people? The infrastructure is already in place (the US judicial system), and their lawyers are doing most of the work.
Therefore, by suing the pants off every server, and eventually every downloader (the sky is the limit here), the RIAA can turn a decent profit. Why would they want to make it easy to download mp3s when they can just keep suing people? The infrastructure is already in place (the US judicial system), and their lawyers are doing most of the work.
good points
"Here's my question: What has the potential of making more money?
1 - Charge $1.00 a song that some people would buy.
2 - Charge $.10 a song that many people would buy.
However, as I said earlier, option 2 is such a benefit that it actually makes sense to buy. More people would be doing it."
good points judland
another question I have and something that I hear Itunes does is that you can only copy a song so many times and then you have to buy it again.
To me 99 cents a song seems steep if you are going to do that. if songs were maybe 40 cents and an album was 5.00 dollars I would pay all the time as long as I could put a copy on my computers, mp3 player, and cd's etc.
I think the RIAA could put a site like this up and charge 40 cents a song with no restrictions and they would just be good old plain mp3 format and they would have themselves a little gold mine. I would pay to get all my old albums if they had them and then some. But they just want to control their stuff with DRM and charge double the price per song and then have it blow up if you copy too many times. that is just BS. to me they have no ethics.
1 - Charge $1.00 a song that some people would buy.
2 - Charge $.10 a song that many people would buy.
However, as I said earlier, option 2 is such a benefit that it actually makes sense to buy. More people would be doing it."
good points judland
another question I have and something that I hear Itunes does is that you can only copy a song so many times and then you have to buy it again.
To me 99 cents a song seems steep if you are going to do that. if songs were maybe 40 cents and an album was 5.00 dollars I would pay all the time as long as I could put a copy on my computers, mp3 player, and cd's etc.
I think the RIAA could put a site like this up and charge 40 cents a song with no restrictions and they would just be good old plain mp3 format and they would have themselves a little gold mine. I would pay to get all my old albums if they had them and then some. But they just want to control their stuff with DRM and charge double the price per song and then have it blow up if you copy too many times. that is just BS. to me they have no ethics.
Ah - so this is where all the action is. I posted about allofmp3.com in your blog. FWIW, cracking DRM is also illegal, possibly more-so. Circumventing security, and breaking "encryption" are definite no-no's.
Guess I should have checked out the forums sooner.
Guess I should have checked out the forums sooner.
Shared pain is lessened, shared joy is increased; thus do we refute entropy.
--Spider Robinson
--Spider Robinson
-
CptnObvious999
- Posts: 798
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 7:54 pm
- Location: Maryland
- Contact:
Believe it or not the RIAA *WON'T* put up a site that sells music online and definately not one with out DRM. The RIAA thinks the internet is too unsecure and that if they loose any control they will loose lots of money. The RIAA can also make just as much money sueing people ridiculous amounts of money for piracy.
I took a few minutes and read the discussion about "War Driving" here and thought again about this whole music thing.
After reading my own comment about not taking advantage of someone without their consent just because you can, I've decided that AllofMP3 may not be the answer for me.
Even though buying music from them may not be breaking current laws that are in place, using a loophole for my benefit (at the songwriter's expense) is still ethically wrong.
The recording industry is corrupt, and apart from the bankruptcy of Microsoft, there's nothing more I'd like than to see them collapse under their own weight. However, stooping to their level may not be the best course of action.
Thanks, Pat, for the reminder.
After reading my own comment about not taking advantage of someone without their consent just because you can, I've decided that AllofMP3 may not be the answer for me.
Even though buying music from them may not be breaking current laws that are in place, using a loophole for my benefit (at the songwriter's expense) is still ethically wrong.
The recording industry is corrupt, and apart from the bankruptcy of Microsoft, there's nothing more I'd like than to see them collapse under their own weight. However, stooping to their level may not be the best course of action.
Thanks, Pat, for the reminder.
-
Ridigid
http://www.hymn-project.org/
"The purpose of the Hymn Project is to allow you to exercise your fair-use rights under copyright law. The various software provided on this web site allows you to free your iTunes Music Store purchases (protected AAC / .m4p) from their DRM restrictions with no loss of sound quality. These songs can then be played outside of the iTunes environment, even on operating systems not supported by iTunes and on hardware not supported by Apple."
"The purpose of the Hymn Project is to allow you to exercise your fair-use rights under copyright law. The various software provided on this web site allows you to free your iTunes Music Store purchases (protected AAC / .m4p) from their DRM restrictions with no loss of sound quality. These songs can then be played outside of the iTunes environment, even on operating systems not supported by iTunes and on hardware not supported by Apple."
I just purchased some music from http://www.mp3tunes.com/ via L-Songs. I bought a best of big band (swing) album for $8.88 containing over 30 songs:
http://www.mp3tunes.com/album_details.php?album_id=1459
You have a music locker that your music sits in and you can download them as much as you like. They're high quality mp3's. I'd prefer ogg but they sound pretty good. The store is compatible with all platforms/browsers.
http://www.mp3tunes.com/album_details.php?album_id=1459
You have a music locker that your music sits in and you can download them as much as you like. They're high quality mp3's. I'd prefer ogg but they sound pretty good. The store is compatible with all platforms/browsers.
I also purchased this album:
http://www.mp3tunes.com/artist_details. ... st_id=7094
Celldweller - sounds somewhat like Nine Inch Nails, modern & heavy
http://www.mp3tunes.com/artist_details. ... st_id=7094
Celldweller - sounds somewhat like Nine Inch Nails, modern & heavy
Magnatune let's you decide how much you want to pay for a full album:
http://magnatune.com/
They even let you listen to the whole album before hand. The artists get 50% of the sales. Very cool compared to the a-holes at the major labels. They even offer free downloads for Creative Commons projects. Check them out and support them. Their motto is "We're not evil!"
http://magnatune.com/
They even let you listen to the whole album before hand. The artists get 50% of the sales. Very cool compared to the a-holes at the major labels. They even offer free downloads for Creative Commons projects. Check them out and support them. Their motto is "We're not evil!"