CD lull due to economy and CD prices, not piracy

[UglyCasanova]

God i hate RIAA:|. They could learn from some other independent labels about how a real record company should be run. No, they won't make a billion dollars but it's better going bankrupt. Times are changing, and I think people are finally beginning to get tired of the manufactured sh!t that is being force fed into pop culture.

 

[mpitts]

Originally posted by: diskop
There has been Video game piracy for much longer than music piracy, but video game sales are up 20%. Stop whining you pathetic cry babies.

I would disagree with your statement that video game piracy predated music piracy. People have been copying tapes for over 20 years now.

I don't know of anyone who was bootlegging Q*Bert and Donkey Kong.

I do agree with the point you are making. The RIAA wants to blame piracy for the reason their revenues have dropped. The reality is that most people who steal music were not inclined to purchase the albums in the first place. It is hard to chalk that up as lost revenues, but the RIAA will use whatever they can to fuel their arguement.

The reason that the video game industry continues to thrive, depsite rampant piracy, is due to the fact that they put out good products. They are consistent in pricing, and you can also rent a game prior to buying it to determine whether you will like it or not.

Until now, you couldn't really do this with a record. It is a matter of sucking it up, plunking down $14-$17 for an album, and hoping that you will get something that you like. I think that a large part of the decline in people music purchases are due to the fact that they are tired of getting burned and winding up with a record that has two songs they like and 10+ that they don't.

It seems to me that the RIAA (and labels in general) seem to think that every person that is a potential customer also has the tools and know-how to "steal" a record. That is just not the case, but they would lead you to believe otherwise if only to help their case.

 

[SinnerWolf]

the RIAA is simply greedy, like most companies...only difference is that they don't actually produce anything or even offer any services, merely dictate. Most organizations adapt whenever such a change occurs within their market. However, they refuse to accept any other business model then the one they've been spoonfeeding themselves from since the days of elvis. And it's coming down to legal intervention, forced adaption, or slow and deliberate death. I personally blame the artists for not taking more of a stand on the issue, since they are really the only ones who have the power to begin a change. But even if they do, it's unlikely they'd get much media attention if any, since sony, aol/warner, and the like all have their grubby hands in tv, newspapers/magazines, etc... The bright side about our legal system is that even if they do reach a decision, it will take years to reach and even longer to establish as a rule. In the mean time, the technology fueling the feud and piracy thrives on doing the very thing the RIAA is incapable of doing...adapting.

 

[diskop]

Originally posted by: mpitts

Originally posted by: diskop
There has been Video game piracy for much longer than music piracy, but video game sales are up 20%. Stop whining you pathetic cry babies.

I would disagree with your statement that video game piracy predated music piracy. People have been copying tapes for over 20 years now.

I don't know of anyone who was bootlegging Q*Bert and Donkey Kong.

I do agree with the point you are making. The RIAA wants to blame piracy for the reason their revenues have dropped. The reality is that most people who steal music were not inclined to purchase the albums in the first place. It is hard to chalk that up as lost revenues, but the RIAA will use whatever they can to fuel their arguement.

The reason that the video game industry continues to thrive, depsite rampant piracy, is due to the fact that they put out good products. They are consistent in pricing, and you can also rent a game prior to buying it to determine whether you will like it or not.

Until now, you couldn't really do this with a record. It is a matter of sucking it up, plunking down $14-$17 for an album, and hoping that you will get something that you like. I think that a large part of the decline in people music purchases are due to the fact that they are tired of getting burned and winding up with a record that has two songs they like and 10+ that they don't.

It seems to me that the RIAA (and labels in general) seem to think that every person that is a potential customer also has the tools and know-how to "steal" a record. That is just not the case, but they would lead you to believe otherwise if only to help their case.

*scratches head* Good point, you got me on that one

What I meant was duplication nowadays with compression and all is just about as good as the original. Before, copying tapes degraded and a copy of a copy wasn't very great. And at most you could only copy from your friends or friends of friends.

Now that the RIAA is actually seriously thinking about going after the average P2P user, I'm not sure what will happen in the near future.

 

[Pooteh]

Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1

Originally posted by: UCDznutz
you know, i just got back from Best Buy, and they have alot of the new cd releases on sale for about 6.99 to 11.99. That's pretty damn affordable. You've just gotta want the cd right when it comes out, not a few months later when its up to 16 bucks.

The new dvd's there too were about under $14.99. These dvd's and cd's aren't really as expensive as everyone says they are.

Here new CDs cost $22 (22 Euros) or more. New DVDs too in that region, you just have to hope they buy a lot of them and can't sell all, then they sell them for 9.99 afterwards. (The DVDs, the CDs may drop as far as $18 unless they notice after a year that really no one wants it)

wow, poor you, especially after taxes. here in california you can get cds on sale for just what he said. 6.99-12 bux is what i pay for a new release. Thats not much to complain about right? sure if your a twit you can go to barnes and noble or other overpriced stores that charge you 17-22 for a cd, but thats a choice.


kind of inconsistent to rant about the RIAA being unethical while you go around downloading music yourself me thinks. you won't lower prices? i'll steal from you!!

i think the just method of protest would be to abstain from all use of said cr@p right?

i'm not saying their tactics have been a tad pathetic, but the tactics of the file sharers isn't much better

 

[gopunk]

Originally posted by: Pooteh

Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1

Originally posted by: UCDznutz
you know, i just got back from Best Buy, and they have alot of the new cd releases on sale for about 6.99 to 11.99. That's pretty damn affordable. You've just gotta want the cd right when it comes out, not a few months later when its up to 16 bucks.

The new dvd's there too were about under $14.99. These dvd's and cd's aren't really as expensive as everyone says they are.

Here new CDs cost $22 (22 Euros) or more. New DVDs too in that region, you just have to hope they buy a lot of them and can't sell all, then they sell them for 9.99 afterwards. (The DVDs, the CDs may drop as far as $18 unless they notice after a year that really no one wants it)

wow, poor you, especially after taxes. here in california you can get cds on sale for just what he said. 6.99-12 bux is what i pay for a new release. Thats not much to complain about right? sure if your a twit you can go to barnes and noble or other overpriced stores that charge you 17-22 for a cd, but thats a choice.


kind of inconsistent to rant about the RIAA being unethical while you go around downloading music yourself me thinks. you won't lower prices? i'll steal from you!!

i think the just method of protest would be to abstain from all use of said cr@p right?

i'm not saying their tactics have been a tad pathetic, but the tactics of the file sharers isn't much better

when did file sharing enter that conversation?