According to the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), 30 billion songs were illegally downloaded between 2004 and 2009. Even with sites like iTunes and Rhapsody offering legal downloads, peer-to-peer file sharing still exists. Illegally downloading music has had a significant impact on the music industry resulting in a loss of profits and jobs, and changing how music is delivered to the masses. (Adkins, n.d.) Showing that even having the ethically correct option P2P sharing of illegal media is still thriving. The RIAA reports that music sales in the United States have dropped
When I was in middle school, the biggest way to get music for free was a website named Limewire. Nothing was more exciting than to be able to hear a song on the radio then go home and download it to our desktops. Also cool, was the fact that if one of us didn’t have a song, our friend could simply “burn” it onto a c.d. for us. That was the only way we knew how to get music, aside from going out and buying the whole album. Apple’s iTunes was just starting out and iPods were just being created. Limewire was the way to go. Little did we know that Limewire was illegal and costing singers, songwriters, labels, and everyone associated with just one song, huge amounts of money.
When thinking about music downloading and streaming we must not only consider legal mediums (which only exist because the practice was illegal after Napster’s failure) such as iTunes and Spotify, we must consider the overwhelming presence of illegitimate or illegal streams and downloading mediums such as FrostWire or YouTube2MP3. The music industry revenue streams have been changed, molded, and affected by the music downloading and streaming world in many ways. The music industry makes money through three ways: album/single sales, royalties, and concert revenues. All three of those streams have been effected in various ways some negative and some positive. Musician, and record label founder, Isaac Hanson said it perfectly; “I think downloading is both saving and killing the music industry at the same time”. His quote is confirmed by the data as well as my This partially confirms my theory that the music downloading has completely destroyed the music
I also believe that if you are a true fan of a certain music artist, then you should want to pay the money for their music and help support them in their music career. Downloading songs for free is disrespectful to music artists and takes away the meaning of hard work they put into all of their musical work. I would tell any friend of mine who supported illegal downloading that it’s illegal and if they really wanted to support that music artist, then they would buy the music and prove their support and passion for music by paying for it.
In “The Music Industry Has Been Revolutionized,” Greg Kot explains musicians in the music industry are experiencing unwanted change around the world from technology since the popularity of file-sharing websites available online. Consumers of music don’t want to pay for music because of the increased availability, although not doing so prevents revenue for musicians. Explained in Kot’s article, increased popularity of file-sharing has made access to music so convenient to the point where the music industry is confused about how to respond to the lack of revenue while still keeping music readily available for consumer use. New technology has allowed the music industry more opportunities in being efficient with producing music. Furthermore, it
The ongoing file sharing of music on the Internet has caused the loss of millions of dollars for the music industries. Instead of people going to the store and purchasing CD’s from their favorite music artists, they are going on the Internet and downloading their songs for free. Downloading one song can take as fast as thirty seconds, which means that a person can download an entire album in less then 10 minutes. After downloading these songs in MP3 format, a person can easily burn the songs onto a music CD using a CD writer. This is how easy it is for a person to make their own CD and spend much less money doing so. A CD normally ranges from ten to twenty dollars in price. But if you were to make your own CD it can cost anywhere from fifty cents to three dollars. This depends on what quality CD’s you use or how cheap you buy them for. Downloading your own music and making your own CD’s cuts down the price around 90 percent. This means that as more and more people purchase CD writers, the music industry will be losing more and more money.
The world has gone from radios and CDs to downloading and streaming music. It is so simple now for someone to hear a song they like, look it up and install it, weather it's on an app such as Spotify, YouTube or the App Store. Although it is a luxury for the costumers we must also consider what it is doing to the artist career. The issue for the artist is the payments-per-stream of a song are much lower than what an artist would receive from a download. That's not fair for the hard working artist not to get his/hers full payment for their hard work and dedication.People get tired of hearing the same old songs on the radio, they can be considered "overplayed." So yes I can see why people would want to download songs instead of buying a CD,but "according to data journalist David McCandless, a signed solo artist would need about 5,478iTunes downloads of a song per month versus 4,200,000 YouTube streams per month just to make the U.S. minimum wage."
3-4). While these statistics provide a look into the numerical growth of the streaming industry, it is also important to discuss the power that these streaming services have generated—over both the music industry and over established/aspiring artists. Subscriptions are on the rise, having increased significantly over the past ten years, but as is the amount of users streaming music on a free-trial or ad-supported basis—ultimately undercutting the music industry and artists alike. Blewett and Gollogly (2017) elaborate on this point, stating that, by the end of 2016, paid music streaming subscriptions drove a revenue growth of 60.4%—this growth more than offsetting a “20.5% decline in downloads” and a “7.6% decline in physical revenue” (Blewett & Gollogly, 2017, para. 4). Moreover, Borja and Dieringer (2016) explore the concept of streaming even further in their academic article, positing that the decline in paid digital downloads may be a direct result of streaming—as, music streaming can be perceived as a “complement” for music piracy, in which listeners can freely sample music to pirate later on (Borja & Dieringer, 2016, p. 1). The authors also suggest that streaming can provide a “venue for discovering and listening to new releases”; and after completing their 1052 surveys, conclude that streaming increased the likelihood of piracy by
The question then became “Just because we can get the music we want without paying for it, should we?” (Tyson, 2000, p.1). This issue of illegal downloads, which is also referred to as piracy, has been a hot topic ever since the introduction of Napster. According to Recording Industry Association of America “In the decade since peer-to-peer (p2p) file-sharing site Napster emerged in 1999, music sales in the U.S. have dropped 47 percent, from $14.6 billion to $7.7 billion” (RIAA, 2014).
The internet is the one media that brings up the most controversy in bands spreading their music. Whether they promote it or not their music is downloaded for free on the internet. Most bands do not like that their music is downloaded for free, but they can’t do much to stop it. In a way downloading music for free could bring the musicians even more money. If a person likes one of the songs they downloaded off of the internet they may be inclined to buy the entire album or at least the single. After the person buys the latest album they may even buy earlier albums from the same artist if they like the music enough. The internet has
The music industry much like every other industry has found ways to connect their product to the people through technology. Now music is readily available to the public through many avenues ITunes, YouTube, and so much more. As music has become more available to the public the industry now faces the threat of illegal downloading and sharing of music files. Many people will purchase an album through a download site and then either post it for free download to others or distribute it to their friends; while those who do this don’t usually face consequence does that make it right?
Copyright infringement is the unauthorized use of copyrighted material in a manner that violates one of the copyright owner's exclusive rights, such as the right to reproduce or perform the copyrighted work, or to make derivative works that build upon it.
Though Jenny, a thirteen-year-old from Kent, thinks a little different when she responded, "I used to download music all the time, but now people are getting sued in America and I'm not brave enough to do it any more"(CBBC). So the action taken by the RIAA has changed some people's views about the downloading of songs, but there sure hasn't stopped the majority. A lot of the people do not even think of sharing music as stealing, when technically they are getting the music for free.
I believe that at the heart of this controversy is a drive to bring music production into the twenty-first century. Making CD's more accessible, economical and usable benefits all everyone except maybe the CD producers, in the end. Listeners can access music when, where and how they want to for less money, as the have grown accustomed to doing. Musicians cut out the middleman, allowing them to keep more of the profit. This is undoubtedly the future of the industry. While companies are searching for ways to hold on to 90 percent of the profit and to continue to combat illegal downloading, others are negotiating new terrain