TL;DR » Piracy kills no music
Distributing my work for free on the internet, I've been asked to clarify my stance on music piracy on numerous occasions. Disregarding my fear of reiterating what so many people have said before, I decided to write down my feelings on the matter. I'll start it off with a simple question: What's the single most important contribution piracy has given society? It should come as no surprise that 'distribution' is the correct answer. Not free content, but distribution.
As an artist, your ultimate goal is more frequently than not reaching people with your work. Traditionally speaking, there's a limited number of major channels for artists to market themselves through, and these channels are controlled by hard currency. If you don't have the budget, you don't get to play. This is nothing new and, some might argue, a form of quality control. If these channels were open to everyone we'd have three hour long free form jazz adventures playing on POP FM, accompanied by sounds reminiscent of animals slowly dying. Which is true, because we get weirder stuff on the internet already.
But let's discuss this notion of quality. I for one can't help but notice that pop music the past few decades has suffered in the hands of people only thinking profit. Compare an array of 70's hit music to the 90's equivalent and you'll catch on fairly quick. Yes, it reeks of popollution. Now don't get me wrong, a business should make money, that much is given. But when the pursuit of higher (and higher) profit margins have resulted in these soulless, bland and branded acts spewing their sixth-grade level lyrics through every major media outlet, warning bells should toll. Sex and violence will always have mass appeal, but I'm of the opinion that music should have more substance than a chorus repeating "I wanna fuck you." So clearly the argument that big business' hold on mass media by that merit benefits us, the consumers, is bunk.
So how's the internet different? Surely it's being controlled in a similar manner? Yes (in some aspects), but more importantly, no. As it has proven again and again, the real power of the internet lies within its inhabitants and not the providers. This shift of power is apparent to anyone who's been online the past decade. People will have their say, and through the power of anonymity, they will voice their opinion on pretty much any subject. If something new is deemed fresh and tasty by enough people, it will spread like an STD in a house full of nymphomaniacs. I myself can't even count the number of great records in my collection I owe to social networking. Records I never would have heard of if it hadn't been for modems, let alone been able to get a hold of.
On to the workhorse of anti-piracy patrons: Piracy is killing music because the artists are not getting paid. Indeed, because the current system is fantastic in that regard (note the seething sarcasm). I'm not going to debate how the old way of doing things is flawed, because there are so many people out there doing a far better job at that than I ever could. But if you honestly believe that online piracy is hurting artists who make a living off their music you should probably read up on the topic. In the interest of getting a point across, I'll sum it up for you: It's not hurting the artists, it's hurting the industry behind the artists. And that is, in my opinion, the beauty of it; Contrary to what they want you to believe, piracy is (if anything) saving music, because it's bringing a corrupt and exploitative machine down to its knees.
The bottom line is this: We need a new system, a transparent one. And straight off the bat there should be a paradigm shift in attitude towards piracy. Fighting this war on piracy is as pointless as a war on terrorism, because (as someone much smarter than me once said) you're fighting the symptoms and not the disease. I firmly believe that if the record industry spent their anti-piracy budget on reducing the price on albums, people would buy more records. And instead of holding anti-piracy campaigns, tell people exactly how much of each record sold benefits the original artist (but they'd better make it a reasonable amount first). You'd be surprised by how willing people are to support the things they love, as long as they don't perceive it as unfair or unwarranted.
I've never charged a dime for any of my music, but thanks to the internet I'm making a fair amount of money through donations and ad revenue. Money I never would have seen if it wasn't for so-called pirates downloading and uploading my music. And most important of all, this is money I can spend with a clear conscience, knowing I never sacrificed my artistic integrity to fit some sort of corporate formula. Now I'm not making a living with my music, and with the status quo I don't think I ever will. But that's not because of pirates, and it never will be. In fact, I salute them;
As an artist, your ultimate goal is more frequently than not reaching people with your work. Traditionally speaking, there's a limited number of major channels for artists to market themselves through, and these channels are controlled by hard currency. If you don't have the budget, you don't get to play. This is nothing new and, some might argue, a form of quality control. If these channels were open to everyone we'd have three hour long free form jazz adventures playing on POP FM, accompanied by sounds reminiscent of animals slowly dying. Which is true, because we get weirder stuff on the internet already.
But let's discuss this notion of quality. I for one can't help but notice that pop music the past few decades has suffered in the hands of people only thinking profit. Compare an array of 70's hit music to the 90's equivalent and you'll catch on fairly quick. Yes, it reeks of popollution. Now don't get me wrong, a business should make money, that much is given. But when the pursuit of higher (and higher) profit margins have resulted in these soulless, bland and branded acts spewing their sixth-grade level lyrics through every major media outlet, warning bells should toll. Sex and violence will always have mass appeal, but I'm of the opinion that music should have more substance than a chorus repeating "I wanna fuck you." So clearly the argument that big business' hold on mass media by that merit benefits us, the consumers, is bunk.
So how's the internet different? Surely it's being controlled in a similar manner? Yes (in some aspects), but more importantly, no. As it has proven again and again, the real power of the internet lies within its inhabitants and not the providers. This shift of power is apparent to anyone who's been online the past decade. People will have their say, and through the power of anonymity, they will voice their opinion on pretty much any subject. If something new is deemed fresh and tasty by enough people, it will spread like an STD in a house full of nymphomaniacs. I myself can't even count the number of great records in my collection I owe to social networking. Records I never would have heard of if it hadn't been for modems, let alone been able to get a hold of.
On to the workhorse of anti-piracy patrons: Piracy is killing music because the artists are not getting paid. Indeed, because the current system is fantastic in that regard (note the seething sarcasm). I'm not going to debate how the old way of doing things is flawed, because there are so many people out there doing a far better job at that than I ever could. But if you honestly believe that online piracy is hurting artists who make a living off their music you should probably read up on the topic. In the interest of getting a point across, I'll sum it up for you: It's not hurting the artists, it's hurting the industry behind the artists. And that is, in my opinion, the beauty of it; Contrary to what they want you to believe, piracy is (if anything) saving music, because it's bringing a corrupt and exploitative machine down to its knees.
The bottom line is this: We need a new system, a transparent one. And straight off the bat there should be a paradigm shift in attitude towards piracy. Fighting this war on piracy is as pointless as a war on terrorism, because (as someone much smarter than me once said) you're fighting the symptoms and not the disease. I firmly believe that if the record industry spent their anti-piracy budget on reducing the price on albums, people would buy more records. And instead of holding anti-piracy campaigns, tell people exactly how much of each record sold benefits the original artist (but they'd better make it a reasonable amount first). You'd be surprised by how willing people are to support the things they love, as long as they don't perceive it as unfair or unwarranted.
I've never charged a dime for any of my music, but thanks to the internet I'm making a fair amount of money through donations and ad revenue. Money I never would have seen if it wasn't for so-called pirates downloading and uploading my music. And most important of all, this is money I can spend with a clear conscience, knowing I never sacrificed my artistic integrity to fit some sort of corporate formula. Now I'm not making a living with my music, and with the status quo I don't think I ever will. But that's not because of pirates, and it never will be. In fact, I salute them;
Thank you for spreading my music.
"I like the people at our record company, but the time is at hand when you have to ask why anyone needs one. And, yes, it probably would give us some perverse pleasure to say 'Fuck you' to this decaying business model."
- Thom Yorke
- Thom Yorke
11 months later…
about 1 month later…
2 months later…
3 months later…
1 to 10 of 10
