Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Recording Industry Extinction Predicted RSN

michael posted more than 11 years ago | from the imminent-death-predictions-getting-boring dept.

Music 493

nautical9 writes "There's an interesting commentary from Wired's Charles Mann, speaking of the imminent death of the recording industry as we know it. Nothing really ground-breaking here, but it is a good summary and somewhat fair treatment of the RIAA's current state-of-affairs, and offers a little insight into what the world of music may be like without them (hint: perhaps better off)."

cancel ×

493 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I FAIL IT (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5143838)

??? yea, I do FAIL IT

Umm.. (5, Funny)

Gentoo Fan (643403) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143847)

"from the imminent-death-predictions-getting-boring dept"

Then why post it?

Re:Umm.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5143907)

From the It's-been-almost-a-half-an-hour-since-michael-said -something-snide-pointless-and-stupid department.

Re:Umm.. (1)

Gortbusters.org (637314) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143916)

We love watching things squirm and die like that.

Ironically, it will be interesting to see how the method for music revenue changes.

Remember, the music industry is loosely associated with the war industry [gortbusters.org] .

Re:Umm.. (2, Funny)

rot26 (240034) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143993)

Remember, the music industry is loosely associated with the war industry.

So noted.

Now tell me what the significance of that is? Should I worry about them dropping unsold CD's on my house?

Re:Umm.. (5, Funny)

slothdog (3329) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144069)

Then why post it?

So they'll have stories to choose from for tomorrow's news, silly.

ah, fuck it (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5143852)

first post

shizzle my nizzle

second post! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5143854)

sorry i couldn't resist ;)

It's a Wired article (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5143859)

Guaranteed, it'll never happen.

IN SOVIET RUSSIA... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5143860)

The Recording Industry Predicts Your Extinction!

Bush, the dictator (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5143866)

Capitol Hill Blue has learned the Joint Chiefs of Staff are split over plans to invade Iraq in the coming weeks. They have asked Secretary of State [sic] Donald Rumseld to urge Bush to back down from his hard line stance until United Nations weapons inspectors can finish their jobs and the U.S. can build a stronger coalition in the Middle East.

"This is not Desert Storm," one of the Joint Chiefs is reported to have told Rumseld. "We don't have the backing of other Middle Eastern nations. We don't have the backing of any of our allies except Britain and we're advocating a policy that says we will invade another nation that is not currently attacking us or invading any of our allies."

Intelligenced sources say some Arab nations have told US diplomats they may side with Iraq if the U.S. attacks without the backing of the United Nations. Secretary of State Colin Powell agrees with his former colleagues at the Pentagon and has told the President he may be pursuing a "dangerous course."

An angry Rumsfeld, who backs Bush without question, is said to have told the Joint Chiefs to get in line or find other jobs. Bush is also said to be "extremely angry" at what he perceives as growing Pentagon opposition to his role as Commander in Chief.

"The President considers this nation to be at war," a White House source says," and, as such, considers any opposition to his policies to be no less than an act of treason."

But conversations with sources within the Bush administration, the Pentagon, the FBI and the intelligence community indicate a deepening rift between the professionals who wage war for a living and the administration civilians to want to send them into battle.

Sources say the White House has ordered the FBI and CIA to "find and document" links between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, the mastermind of the 9-11 terrorist attacks.

"The implication is clear," grumbles one longtime FBI agent. "Find a link, any link, no matter how vague or unproven, and then use that link to justify action against Iraq."

Hilary Rosen is obviously psychic... (5, Funny)

3waygeek (58990) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143868)

That's why she chose now to resign [slashdot.org] her position as head of the RIAA. She doesn't want to preside over a sinking ship.

Re:Hilary Rosen is obviously psychic... (1, Offtopic)

joelwest (38708) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143952)

Even rats abandon a sinking ship..not that I'm name calling. Well okay. I am .

Re:Hilary Rosen is obviously psychic... (5, Insightful)

Kierthos (225954) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144007)

According to the article, it's already sinking. And the mega-companies that own the Big 5 aren't helping any either.

It's eerie how spot on that article is. I mean, when I was growing up, I would buy a copy of every single album I could find of certain artists, like ZZ Top or Queen. But nowadays, there just aren't any artists who can seem to pull that kind of longevity off, because the labels don't seem to be inclined to let them.

We've got boy-bands that almost certainly won't be around in 3 years, much less 5. We've got "teen stars" who will almost certainly lose any fan base they have in a few years as well... I mean, it just seems outright unlikely that any artists that start today (or for that matter, started in the last couple of years), will have anything near the amazing amounts of success of the bands of 'yesteryear'.

Sure, there are some bands who seem to buck those trends, but when you're looking at the real longevity of bands like Aerosmith, versus the possible (and tenuous) longevity of artists like Britney Spears... well, you know what? I think in ten or fifteen years, there will still be people listen to old Aerosmith tunes, but Britney Spears will be all but forgotten.

Kierthos

Re:Hilary Rosen is obviously psychic... (5, Informative)

rot26 (240034) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144066)

It's eerie how spot on that article is. I mean, when I was growing up, I would buy a copy of every single album I could find of certain artists, like ZZ Top or Queen. But nowadays, there just aren't any artists who can seem to pull that kind of longevity off, because the labels don't seem to be inclined to let them.

First-record deals are notoriously BAD for the artist. If the first turns out to be successful, they then try to renegotiate the contract for more money. The record companies are neatly sidestepping this process by simply abandoning the band after one (or maybe two) successes and finding a soundalike clone and publishing THEIR music under another bad-first-record deal.

Re:Hilary Rosen is obviously psychic... (2, Insightful)

rot26 (240034) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144025)

Whoever modded this as a troll is retarded.

I suspect more than likely she's been asked to resign by other rats who wants will pin some blame on her later, but that's still pretty much the same idea.

Re:Hilary Rosen is obviously psychic... (1)

Cheap Imitation (575717) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144035)

And that's how you can tell it's a sinking ship... the rats are leaving!

Re:Hilary Rosen is obviously psychic... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5144037)

Hilary most likely resign because of Wired's article:

Hating Hilary [Coming Jan. 23] Napster slayer. Corporate thug. Industry shill. Hilary Rosen has heard it all as the reviled frontwoman for the music biz. Sure, she knows file-sharing is the future. She's just fighting to give the dinosaurs one last gasp.
By Matt Bai

The article will be online soon at: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.02/ [wired.com]

Cheers, AC

Paying customers? (5, Interesting)

Alcohol Fueled (603402) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143869)

"The industry rightly believes that if it can make file-swapping more difficult, and legitimate online services easier and less expensive, it can turn the kids on Kazaa into paying customers."

Umm.. They just mention Kazaa. I imagine that if Kazaa became pay only, people would just get their music elsewhere.

Re:Paying customers? (2, Insightful)

guido1 (108876) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143953)

"The industry rightly believes that if it can make file-swapping more difficult, and legitimate online services easier and less expensive, it can turn the kids on Kazaa into paying customers."

Umm.. They just mention Kazaa. I imagine that if Kazaa became pay only, people would just get their music elsewhere.


Read less literally. The writer isn't saying that everyone will have to pay to use Kazaa, he's saying that if the music industry can get its act together and figure out its own legitimate distribution system, without DRM blocks, that users will move to that.

He's saying that all of the "elsewhere" will become "legitimate online services."

Re:Paying customers? (1)

Alcohol Fueled (603402) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144030)

He's saying that all of the "elsewhere" will become "legitimate online services."

Eh, you're probably right about that. Even if the company doesn't want to be part of the RIAA's legitimate service or whatever, the RIAA would probably give them the choice of becoming part of our legitimate service, or being sued into the ground.

Re:Paying customers? (5, Insightful)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143959)

They don't want to make Kazaa pay only, they want to make Kazaa disappear, and all services like it, so they can replace it with their own 'music download' service.

Except their idea of an 'online service' is really just an online version of a retail store, without the added cost of producing the CDs and liner notes.

And they want to make sure that it's illegal for anyone else to license the songs and offer a competing service, much like they dont want stores selling used CDs, which offer a competing service to the handful of 'retail outlets' they have in their pockets.

The recording industry wont die, but it will evolve into something different. The "we must control everything from the artist's mouth to the consumer's walkman" business model simply cannot work in todays world.

Re:Paying customers? (2, Interesting)

valisk (622262) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144001)

I suspect that if Kazaa charged $5 per month per user, with unlimited downloads and people knew they couldn't be prosecuted for downloading and burning .mp3s then people would stay in droves.

The recordcos could even sell higher quality versions of the files for the true audiophiles out there.

Re:Paying customers? (1)

Alcohol Fueled (603402) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144068)

I suspect that if Kazaa charged $5 per month per user, with unlimited downloads and people knew they couldn't be prosecuted for downloading and burning .mp3s then people would stay in droves.

Very valid point. I know I'd stay for only $5 a month. But I bet the RIAA would say that even then they'd be losing money. RIAA seems like a bunch of bullying crybabies. "Our record sales are down, lets sue people who download music! Wahhhh!"

Re:Paying customers? (0)

azadism (578262) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144091)

The music industry should take a page from the pr0n industry [wired.com] , if you can't beat them, join them.

Re:Paying customers? (1)

Alcohol Fueled (603402) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144120)

Maybe the music industry should get their music into pornos. Wait, no... *imagines watching porno, then hearing Avril* ahhhhhh!

Why is this news (3, Interesting)

Achmed Swaribabu (642441) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143874)

It's my understanding that in Americia you run with a free market which means that the public at large decides who will success and who will fail. If an orgainzation is bad or not efficient then they should fail by using your system.

This show to me that the music industry makes big money up to this point so most people are buying from them and it's only a small percentage of people who read slashdot who have problem.

Slashdot community little fish in big pond.

Re:Why is this news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5143938)

It's the Jack Wagner troll! First of all, if you really wanted to Indianize the last name, you would call it "Swamibabu". WTF is "swaribabu"? A pathetic attempt at sounding middle eastern/Indian.

And how does the music industry make big money up to this point? The article stated that relatively speaking, the music companies' revenues are dwarfed by other businesses in their family (like Sony). The industry is not making big enough money.

And an inefficient organization won't necessarily fail in capitalism. Take the computer companies as an example. Compaq and others were not necessarily inefficient. But Dell was/is more efficient than its counterparts, and so Dell succeeds, for now. That is, until someone finds another way to make the business more efficient. So it goes with the record companies.

Re:Why is this news (1)

valisk (622262) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144050)

Little fish? Maybe
But little like Pihrana, we can strip a argument to the bone in less than 30 secs :)

Re:Why is this news (1)

LMCBoy (185365) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144075)

the music industry makes big money up to this point so most people are buying from them

Your information's a little outdated. The music industry's sales figures fell by 3% in 2001, and an additional 11% in the first half of 2002 (according to the fine article). So it seems the market is deciding that the record companies are failing. That was sort of the whole point of the article.

3... 2... 1... (0, Funny)

Rayonic (462789) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143876)

Counting down until someone posts a modified "RIAA is dying" text, which will immediately get modded up to +5 Funny. (:

RIAA is dying (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5143905)

Netcraft confirms that the RIAA is dying!

It ain't gonna happen (1, Funny)

cscx (541332) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143879)

Recording industry -> Music -> Girls -> Clubs -> Hot, horny girls -> Sex

Nope, not gonna happen.

Re:It ain't gonna happen (1)

Gortbusters.org (637314) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143941)

Don't forget..

Recording Industry -> Music -> Girls -> Girls on MTV -> Horny guys who don't goto clubs

Re:It ain't gonna happen (2, Funny)

Guppy06 (410832) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144017)

You're confusing music with beer again.

RIAA is dying! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5143881)

You know the rest...

You know.... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5143882)

theres good things over at
Keithbowmanauto.com
Check it out, get happy

shit! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5143890)

man I just got down here to the lab, I almost had the first post, but the MFer who was here before me forgot to close all of his pr0n popups.

i hate you, i hate that, and without proper registration are posted as Anonymous Coward, is me.

Cmdr Taco Sucks, KPANSKY RULES

I think we've known this for a while.. (2, Insightful)

Gortbusters.org (637314) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143895)

even since the dawn of mp3s, I think we've all had that little feeling in our stomachs that the days of CD sales are limited. It wouldn't ruin the industry.. there'd still be concerts, music videos, and merchandising.

But what would be the main delivery of the art [music] to the public?

It is certainly difficult to say.. 20 dollars for a CD with 12 songs, of which 2-3 are usually "good". (poor generalization) Is it web radio or some other streaming service? Possibly.

Maybe 'albums' need to get bigger, like DVDs that include music videos. Traditional CDs are sold more like singles - very cheaply.

Re:I think we've known this for a while.. (1)

alen (225700) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143921)

If you're paying $20 for the regular run of the mill CD's then you're getting ripped off. Big time.

Re:I think we've known this for a while.. (1)

Gortbusters.org (637314) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143963)

You caught me, I haven't bought a CD since 1996, but last I heard they were around 16+ dollars, so I rounded.

Re:I think we've known this for a while.. (4, Informative)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144003)

Interesting idea. How about a DVD and a (Red Book) CD sold together? The DVD has all the audio tracks, plus the bouncing titties videos, plus the "making of" the bouncing titties videos. The CD just has the music so that you can play it in your car, or if (gasp) you haven't got a DVD player (yet).

Seems to me that you've got a good point there. Much of the cost of selling an audio CD is in making the singles videos to promote it. It's strange that the music business hasn't thought about trying to sell them as content.

Re:I think we've known this for a while.. (2, Interesting)

ender81b (520454) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144023)

Totally agree. I mean look at DVD sales. People can grab movies off the internet just as easily as they can music (granted it does take longer) but look at the huge amount of people buying DVD's and DVD players. or look at the success TV shows have had selling Season DVD's, nothing is cooler than watching your favorite show at 720p resoultion.

Why can't artists do the same? Of course you could point out that producing something like a 'music-dvd' would cost alot more than a pure vanilla music cd but the potentional for profit has to be higher.

Why can't the music industry sell us cool packaged deals like dvd's with all sorts of little 'extras'? I might actually pay for my music then... as it is now I see no point in buying a 20$ CD - not to mention I own most of the CD's I would ever want to own, I find very little new music now adays that I would consider spending money for.

Re:I think we've known this for a while.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5144052)

> 20 dollars for a CD with 12 songs, of which 2-3 are usually "good". (poor generalization)

if the poor generalization refers to the 2-3 part, you're right, it is a poor generalization......

Quote... (5, Insightful)

dietlein (191439) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143898)

And the electronics industry's attitude toward the labels is summed up by an Apple slogan: Rip. Mix. Burn. Which, a music executive once told me, translates into "Fuck you, record labels."

Funny, I don't agree that the "electronic industry's" attitude can be summed up by Apple's slogan. Apple is one of the few that dares to encourage people to Rip/Mix/Burn.

(Thinking Sony, etc.)

Re:Quote... (1)

May Kasahara (606310) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143997)

Apple's a company with a huge customer following among creative types; I would think that their encouragement to "Rip/Mix/Burn" is intended more to enhance people's creativity... which happens to include the art form of the homemade mix album ;)

Speaking of Sony, the Wired article on Sony Electronics vs. Sony Music (which is being posted tomorrow [wired.com] ) is an interesting read as well.

Re:Quote... (4, Insightful)

Dr Caleb (121505) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144040)

I don't see what's wrong with Rip/Mix/Burn. The record companies have weasled the gubmint into levies on CDR/DVD-R media, MP3 Players etc.; so I pay for the right to R/M/B even if I don't often excersize that right.

I say to the Record Gorillas: If you want to collect the levies on media, shut the hell up if I decide that I'm going to use what I've already paid for.

Re:Quote... (1)

gorilla (36491) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144062)

Sony have the MEX-HD1, a device which you can put in a CD, and it burns the cd to the internal HD. Sony also have portables such as the MZN-505, which convert mp3's into the minidisc format, or the memorystick walkman, which does the same into the memorystick format. This to me says that Sony electronics has the same basic attitude as Apple - electronic music files sells hardware.

Re:Quote... (2, Insightful)

hackstraw (262471) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144079)

How is "Rip/Mix/Burn" saying fuck you to the record labels? Rip implies that you already have the cd.

Again, for the umteenth time, why doesn't the record labels give the customers what they want? Why is it that dvd's and cd's are close to the same price, but dvd's have much much more content on them. Why can't they include an iso9660 disk with the mp3's already on it along with the music cd?

Re:Quote... (2, Insightful)

snitty (308387) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144082)

Funny, I don't agree that the "electronic industry's" attitude can be summed up by Apple's slogan. Apple is one of the few that dares to encourage people to Rip/Mix/Burn.


The differance is Rip/Mix/Burn is legal, while Download/Mix/Burn isn't.

Apple even put's "Don't Steal Music" on their iPods.

The point of Apple's ad campaign was to allow people to make mixes of their own music and listen to them on CD's that they burned on their iMacs. Now that they have the iPod that slogan dosen't exist. The point is moot.

Re: Quote... (2, Insightful)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144089)


> Funny, I don't agree that the "electronic industry's" attitude can be summed up by Apple's slogan. Apple is one of the few that dares to encourage people to Rip/Mix/Burn.

Last time I looked at hard drives in a retail shop, the box made no bones about storing music as one of the "needs" for a high-capacity drive.

And of course, even those parts of the industry that aren't saying it may still hold that attitude. Surely you don't think all those CD recorders are being bought by people who want to back up their data?

The electronics industry, like the music industry, wants to make a buck. They don't have much reason to give a fig about the music industry's wishes. You could think of them as competing industries on this topic, in the sense that what's good for one is bad for the other.

Re:Quote... (1)

oliverthered (187439) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144093)

This is a weird stance from a company that kills anyone who Rips/mixes and burns anything Apple.

Though there quite happy to do it to BSD.

Not flaimbate, it's a fact as more-or-less anyone will tell you.

Re:Quote... (2, Insightful)

keyne9 (567528) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144121)

Even if it was summed up by Apple's slogan, I would think that the recording industry would not interpret it in such a way. After all, if you can RIP the music, you obviously bought the CD to begin with.

I would think "Download/Mix/Burn" would be more like "Fuck you, Recording industry."

I doubt it (5, Insightful)

Kickstart70 (531316) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143904)

Unless we advance some form of public ownership, and tear down the structure of corporate business, we will always have corporations. As long as we have corporate record companies, they will seek an organization where they can band together for self-protection.

While it may not always be CALLED the RIAA, it will always BE the RIAA.

Kickstart

Re:I doubt it (1)

Gortbusters.org (637314) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143985)

On the topic of corporate structure, would you believe that business wise the music industry tied to the war industry? [gortbusters.org]

Re:I doubt it (5, Insightful)

Rary (566291) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143990)

...we will always have corporations. As long as we have corporate record companies...

Your logic doesn't quite flow. Just because we will always have corporations, does not necessarily mean we will always have corporate record companies. The need for record companies is rapidly disappearing. When the service provided by a service company becomes obsolete, that company becomes obsolete. It doesn't remain just because corporations still remain and it's a corporation.

I don't know if record companies, and subsequently the RIAA, will cease to exist. I do know that if they don't start to actually adapt to the changes that have occurred in the market right before their bewildered -- and apparently non-functional -- eyes, it's highly unlikely they will remain profitable.

McDonald's (2, Interesting)

GQuon (643387) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143913)

From the article:
labels' new legitimate online music services attracted fewer paying customers than the McDonald's in Times Square.

We can be sure to see the visits to that burger joint to drop as well. I mean, when this [slashdot.org] becomes commonplace.

Re:McDonald's (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5144095)

I can see it now:
McDonald's projects Q1 loss; blames sales drop on piracy. Burgersharing networks might be partly responsible for a 10% drop in revenue world wide. McDonald's respond by declaring anyone downloading and sharing their meals as "Hamburglars"(TM). New measures planned include requiring signing an EULA when collecting take-away, and doubling prices.

And in Other RIAA News (2, Informative)

abcxyz (142455) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143915)

Hillary Rosen announced her resignation from the group today to spend more time with her family.

Washington Post Story [washingtonpost.com]

Re:And in Other RIAA News (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5144033)

at least that's what the riaa want you to believe!

Maybe I'm dense... (1, Funny)

SoCalChris (573049) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143919)

But what does RSN mean when they say their death is predicted RSN?

Does it mean Really SooN?

Re:Maybe I'm dense... (1)

grub (11606) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143961)


Real Soon Now.

Don't mod this post up, it's obvious. Do however feel free to mod the parent down. ;))

Re:Maybe I'm dense... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5143973)

Real Soon Now

Re:Maybe I'm dense... (1)

certron (57841) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144084)

"But what does RSN mean when they say their death is predicted RSN?"

RSN is generally translated as Real Soon Now. It is used occasionally when the event is in the future, but at an undefined time in the future. Asking when a software project was going to be completed, it could be answered with "Real Soon Now". This doesn't mean that the release date is definite, or that the release itself is definite either. Perhaps a good example for the term is AMD's Hammer processors, which were originally supposed to be released late 2001, then middle 2002, then end of 2002, and now, hopefully, we have them in mass production and distribution after April/March of 2003.

http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/Real- So on-Now.html

Re:Maybe I'm dense... (1)

Morel (67425) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144101)

Real Soon Now

Re:Maybe I'm dense... (0)

Incorrigible (570746) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144119)

I was confused by that, also.

According to acronymfinder [acronymfinder.com] , it means

Real Soon Now

I could be wrong, though -- it could have meant "Republic of Singapore Navy."

Litmus test (2, Interesting)

Em Emalb (452530) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143927)

for companies.

Make a boatload of money doing one thing and doing it well. (In this case, it's screwing everyone related to the music--buyers, musicians, etc)

Now, the test comes in when something causes a decrease in sales, or your business model becomes obsoleted by new technology.

Why is it so hard for companies to adapt? They are obviously in it for the money, why not change your business model to accomodate new things?

If the RIAA was a small company, nothing like this would occur, since they'd either adapt or die--in a hurry.

It's just taken a really long time for RIAA to realize they need to change, and if they don't, well, I look forward to cheaper cds.

Woohoo! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5143935)

RIAA is dying!

Thanks to wonderful innovations like the mp3/ogg codecs and a working p2p environment...

If only DeCSS could now bring down the lawyers of the MPAA...

So, they will die (3, Interesting)

inerte (452992) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143937)

But what really worries me is the possibility that the companies that build what we love, eletronic devices and gadgets, take RIAA's place.

RIAA is trying to protect its business model, where they control everything on the mainstream music chain. Technology can break a link of this chain, the distribution of an artist material.

But! The laws and the mentallity that RIAA is leaving is the most dangerous thing. Tech industries may (or will?) have control on distribution.

RIAA is showing them that this IS possible, and that consumers aren't doing much besides complain. No changes on the institutional power and the supplu of money is coming steady.

The recent agreement between the tech industry and the RIAA shows exactly this. Most of the RIAA associates are, in one way or another, connected to the tech industry. It was a PR move to soften its images with the public.

What I really think is that we are becoming less political involved with a lot of issues, but that's a subject for another post!

Re:So, they will die (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5144094)

Actually, I think that the hardware companies and definitely the ISP's (eg, AOL-TW) will use content to lure buyers to their products. If AOL were to fund some kick-ass artist and sign a contract with them, and offer their music as a stream through AOL cable, people would get the service to hear the music. It'd be like if SGI put Linux in servers that is sells while contributing to Linux and providing optimizations for their hardware.

What do they do? (3, Interesting)

LoudMusic (199347) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143940)

What do the recording agencies do? Record, remaster, produce, manufacture and market musicians.

Nearly as I can tell computers and the Internet have pretty much taken over those roles. As far as getting paid for their hard work, I guess musicians are left to concert money and merchandise. Most listeners aren't going to be paying for an album that they can download for free, either legally or illegally.

Maybe the recording studios will be replaced by concert halls. Maybe the future is a movie theator with a band stage. Hey that'd be cool.

Re:What do they do? (1)

night_flyer (453866) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144002)

Most listeners aren't going to be paying for an album that they can download for free, either legally or illegally.

that is flat out not true, most customers LIKE having a physical medium, even though more mp3 players are becoming available, people still like to have the liner note, they like something tangeble.

"It's the end of the world as we know it.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5143943)

...and I feel fine!!!" - REM

What do I have to pay the RIAA for this?

what they need... (1)

utexaspunk (527541) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143948)

the record industry sucks, and I'm all for seeing their demise, but I want to still have people who make a living as musicians, and while they can make a decent living by performing, they really need the profits from selling their music.

I'd recommend that they make the CD itself (and not just the music on it) an object worth having. Unique and artful packaging, tickets to concerts inside, or whatever. It's not rocket science. People don't buy the CD's cause the CD isn't worth having.

Songs vs. Albums (2, Insightful)

laetus (45131) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143967)

Customers don't "listen" to an album. They listen to songs; individual tracks. And until the music industry understands that, they'll continue sinking.

This excludes of course, classic albums like Rumours, Dark Side of the Moon, etc. But those are few and far between.

We need to tax everyone who uses the internet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5143969)

We need to tax everyone who uses the internet, that will save the poor record companies. I find it funny that this article predicing the fall of the record companies comes on the heels of the record compaines trying to tax everyone who uses the internet whther they download copyrighted music or not. I woner if this story will be cited by the record companies as they try to put an unfair tax on everyone who uses the net.

Fuck the record companies, the poor babies only sold 20 billion dollars worth of music last year. Boo fucking hoo.

Conglomerates suck out the life (5, Insightful)

gosand (234100) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143978)

In the past two decades, every big label has been swept up into one of five major groups: Universal, Warner, Sony, BMG, and EMI, which together control about 75 percent of global recorded-music sales.

I more or less knew about this, but it was nice to see it put so well. Of course, they are blaming everything under the sun except themselves. I can't think of one conglomerate that didn't just suck the life out of everything it touched. The music industry is supposed to be about the art of music, but it has just turned into another lifeless business.

if you treat customers like criminals (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5143986)

If you threaten jailtime to your customers then your customers will go away.

A very expensive lesson for them to learn

Re:if you treat customers like criminals (1)

Badgerman (19207) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144047)

If you threaten jailtime to your customers then your customers will go away.

It's doubtlessly not the only reason, but that's nicely put. The labels have managed to make enemies of their customers - and show no signs of stopping.

Sure, just like AM radio died... (5, Insightful)

dpbsmith (263124) | more than 11 years ago | (#5143994)

... killed off by FM. And then all radio died, killed off by television. And then both the movies and television were killed off by people home-taping movies on their VCR's. And then books died, killed off by eBooks and photocopiers.

Oh, wait, none of that happened, did it?

The existing recording industry power structure may be in for a rough time, and the Deccas and Polygrams and Capitols may join the likes of Studebaker and Eastern Airlines and Crossley, but people will be recording CD's and selling them to other people for quite some time.

Re:Sure, just like AM radio died... (1)

dknight (202308) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144100)

You listen to AM radio much?

Personally, I've never once in my entire life tuned into an AM station. Heck, I only listen to ONE FM station.

Yea, ok, so they did not die as an immediate result of the "next big thing" but a slow death is still a death.

The age of independent records. (3, Insightful)

blake213 (575924) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144011)

I believe we will soon be entering the age of independent records. I've been preparing to record my solo debut record independently, and I will be distributing/promoting it myself. If in fact the record industry does collapse soon, I believe many artists are going to have to turn to independent labels and/or producing records themselves. Of course, with this route, one gets much less exposure than if a big league label was to be in charge. But I think that there can be ways around this.
If a new artist makes a CD, and begins promoting it, and selling online, eventually the word will get out. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but it's rather difficult to find and download independent music off of major file-sharing apps like Kazaa and Gnutella. So, in turn, this is a measure of the artists popularity. So if an independent artist can become popular enough for people to start downloading his music online, then this creates the potential to tour and perform live. And perhaps that's the ticket -- live performances could possibly make up for money lost on file sharing. As popularity grows, more money can be made off of live shows, and thus more albums can be produced, etc.
I'm sure I am leaving a lot of out of this theory, but it seems that there still may be some hope for the music business, in the form of independent labels and records.

Re:The age of independent records. (1)

Junks Jerzey (54586) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144072)

If a new artist makes a CD, and begins promoting it, and selling online, eventually the word will get out.

Right, and then one person rips it, posts it, and it's all over. The reason you don't see much of this right now it because locally produced CDs sell a handful of copies.

what if..... (1, Funny)

A Vengrow (624934) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144019)

What if they had public exocutions of all the teenie bopper studio band sugar coated micky mouse club burnout brat packs and billed them out at halftime shows at football games? they could even make it entertaining too. Not just some cheesy lethal injections, Im thinking about fucking crucifixions, and beheadings. When was the last time you saw anybody stoned to death? I'd pay 20 bucks to see that! And certainly the commercial time spot sales would be able to keep the industry going for many years to come.

Two Quotes Stand Out: (4, Insightful)

Badgerman (19207) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144024)

Ultimately, Timothy suggested to me that night, the industry as we know it could vanish not so much because of technology but because few people over the age of 30 would care if it did.

This is very true. In some cases, I know people in their mid 20's who wouldn't care.

Being in my mid-30's, most of the industry does nothing for me, does not interest me, and when its not ignoring me, its insulting my intelligence or calling me a theif. Meanwhile it churns out lame, uninteresting, repetitive music. Good riddance I say.

All of these models would produce fewer global superstars and more locally successful musicians. We might not see another Michael Jackson circa 1982, but we also wouldn't see another Michael Jackson circa 2002. Not a bad tradeoff.

There's already a lot of good work going on on city, state, and geographic-area levels. Bands working on these levels seem to have a whole different mindset and be more in touch with their listeners.

And yeah, I'll give up any future Michael Jacksons to avoid . . . any future Michael Jacksons.

Good article

Re:Two Quotes Stand Out: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5144088)

I'm 24 and I don't give a flying fuck for the American music industry. With the exception of bands like Iced Earth, Savatage, Kamelot, Dream Theater, and Spock's Beard, American music is shit. I get most of my rock from Europe.

Death to Pop!! Long live Heavy Metal!!

RIAA is Dying (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5144026)

It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered RIAA Association community when IDC confirmed that RIAA market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all music. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that RIAA has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. RIAA is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last [samag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [amazingkreskin.com] [amazingkreskin.com] to predict RIAA's future. The hand writing is on the wall: RIAA faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for RIAA because RIAA is dying. Things are looking very bad for RIAA. As many of us are already aware, RIAA continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time RIAA chairman Hillary Rosen only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: RIAA is dying.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

EMI leader Theo states that there are 7000 customers of EMI. How many customers of BMG are there? Let's see. The number of EMI versus BMG posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 BMG users. Warner Music posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of BMG posts. Therefore there are about 700 customers of Warner Music. A recent article put SONY at about 80 percent of the music market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 SONY customers. This is consistent with the number of SONY Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of piracy, abysmal sales and so on, Napster went out of business and was taken over by BMG who sell another troubled online music service. Now KaZaA is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that RIAA has steadily declined in market share. RIAA is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If RIAA is to survive at all it will be among music dilettante dabblers. RIAA continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this late point in time. For all practical purposes, RIAA is dead.

Fact: RIAA is dying

Changing not disappearing (3, Insightful)

arudloff (564805) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144029)

The need for the label isn't disappearing, it's changing. We'll see the majors start contracting instead of expanding just like every other industry affected by technology. More outsourcing specific tasks (a&r for example). The label will take on a more management style role, and will become more of a "branding" issue. (Think punk scene: you know what a fat records band is going to sound like before you even press play). We'll also see labels start providing health insurance and accounting assistance to aid future MC Hammers. Ahhh, the possible return of the career artist

People love entertainment, people love music. It'll always be around, and there will always be money in it. It's just going to take some restructuring, even if it costs a whole lot of people their jobs.

Just a thought..

Only Extinction if they dont adapt (2, Insightful)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144045)

Sure their market will be reduced, and morph. But if they learn to adapt, they will survive.

Besides, the *industry* will do fine, its just the companies that have a stranglehold over it that are in trouble and must adapt, or die.

Paying too much in the wrong direction (5, Insightful)

Vinnster (572111) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144056)

Ask anyone where the money they pay for their CDs goes, and they'll tell you: 5% to the artists, 95% to the executives. No one feels like they are actually supporting the artists when they buy a CD! If we wanted to support the artists, we should buy Concert tickets! sell the CD for $5 (most of the CDs out there are only worth $5) and sell the concert tickets for $10 more! Much more of the profits from concert tickets goes into the pockets of the artists! The record labels are an obsolete marketing model. Radio play and file sharing works. The word spreads. When you hear something your friend burned onto his/her last CD, and you like it, you also want to know what it is! If something is of good quality, the people will buy it, period. Not everyone will pay for 100% of the music they burn, but they will pay for enough to keep the artists living the life, but only those who deserve it, and entertain us enough.

Oh, and by the way, Britney can whine all she wants, but for every $1 she's whining about, the execs are out 15! She's just the puppet in "her" anti-piracy campaign.

Last night in the pub..... (1)

oliverthered (187439) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144057)

We had a lock in last night, about six of us rainging from 60 years old to about 22(all left wing)

Anyhow, the 60 year old was saying how the record industry was dead, you can get anything over the internet, who needs CD's.
One of my friends, 26, Never buy's CD's any more, she only ever downloads music off of kazaa.

The Juke box in the pub kept skipping, they have about 400CD's in the juke box, and are replacing it with, music downloaded off of the internet and stored on a PC.

And I only ever get music from sites like besonic(I don't like stealing).

So, that's 4/6 indepentend people saying that the record industry and the Stars they create are dead, and will have to start playing pubs and bars again, like 'real' musicians.

The End.

The answer is simple (1)

daviskw (32827) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144070)

The tech companies should just buy the media companies outright and give everything away for free. Treat music the way we treat movies. A release from a major artist would be good for a month or two and as soon as his music became available online his profits would start to decline.

On the other hand, a full third of all CDs I currently own I bought because I downloaded a song from Napster or Kazaa that I liked.

The music industry is going to go broke because the big money is being spent on people who look good, not on people who sound good. It's as simple as that.

Webcasting Issue (2, Insightful)

Steve B (42864) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144071)

That sympathy is in short supply. Rightly or wrongly, record companies are detested by... webcasters (for demanding royalties).

The problem isn't the demand for royalties per se -- it's the demand for royalties over and above what over-the-air stations pay.

Just a thought . . . (2, Interesting)

Badgerman (19207) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144074)

Is Rosen's departure from the RIAA the first rat leaving a sinking ship?

Just something for us to consider. If the article is correct, then we should look for signs of the inevitable downturn.

probably better off ... (4, Interesting)

porky_pig_jr (129948) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144077)

I remember recent discussion regarding the role of producers and publisher and the article stating that the function of producers is 'filtering of all the crap they are getting and presenting the consumer with the best staff'. I wish it were true. In reality, producers invent the product they believe consumers would like, and since the product is rather vacuous, that is, has no contents, they put the excessive amount of efforts on packaging and advertising (junk food, anyone?) The sooner the present system goes the better. Doesn't look like anyone (except producers) will loose anything.

While I'd like to believe it ... (3, Interesting)

burgburgburg (574866) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144087)

and do eventually think there will be a major reorganization of the recording industry, I don't remotely believe that it is imminent.

More importantly, two of the foundation elements of this article are misleading and/or potentially wrong. First, the 11% decline of sales this year can be attributed to

a) the 25% decline in output by the labels
b) the economy
c) the generally boring content

My vote is on a and b. c never seems to have an effect.

Also, the usage of P2P services does not necessarily bode ill for the recording industry. As has been advanced here before, P2P services often drive sales (they have for me and quite a few others). Just because the Suits don't believe it doesn't mean it isn't true.

Not in my lifetime (2, Insightful)

SilentJ_PDX (559136) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144108)

Someone's saying the recording industry is going to die? We're talking about an industry powerful enough to have laws written for them (they may not get passed, but they do get written). The recording industry may change as a result of the recent troubles, but there's no way it's going away. Even if everyone in America decided to stop buying CDs tommorrow, I guarantee they'd find some way to keep themselves alive for a few years... whether it be by lawyers, legislation (HR-342: Save America's Recording Professionals Bill), or even (gasp) new products.

Dribble (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5144117)

RIAA dying - That would be like dogs and cats living together, MASS HYSTERIA!!

Another reason why RIAA doesn't deserve sympathy (4, Interesting)

tcc (140386) | more than 11 years ago | (#5144126)

MP3 was out, it still took long enough before it actually ended being the de-facto choice for encoding music to send off the net.

If the RIAA would have been smart, they would have a guy somewhere appointed to "new technologies" and he or his team would have seen it coming, they didn't. Mistake number 1.

Now even when they DID miss that coming, they (as opposed to most startups that would have died for such a blattant mistake) had the resources to still built either something BETTER or USE that technology to good ends, rethink a buisness model to adapt to this new technology, and heck, still make money in the process.

How? well, a lot of ideas have been given out here and throughout the last years, and it's not like they didn't have the ressources to hire somebody with a brain or a decent marketting agency to come out with something, instead, they've invested all of their ressources in Lawyers and fences and exploding bridges and disinformation. It's their choices, but usually this is the choice of dying .COMs, not healthy companies, so in that respect I probably am missing something but again, usually, common sense is not something so common with the 6 digits salary, and inexistant in the 7+ digits.

It's a shame, when you think about it, artists didn't win anything with all that money spent in their "crusade against MP3", RIAA didn't win anything either in that investment, technology didn't win either (imagine all that money being put to audio R&D, we probably would have had something a lot better than Ogg today).... only lawyers won something, why don't corporations get a clue? haven't they seen that NO ONE won with such a tactic up to now?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>