I Wonder How The RIAA Will Respond

[Paul Tao]

A Canadian Record Industry Association study says that downloading doesn't hurt business (http://www.cbc.ca/consumers/market/murmurs/archives/2006/20060320_downloading.html).

[TBSowns524]

I doubt this will change anything the RIAA does.

[crit]

The RIAA will release a three letter statement in response to this: WTF?

[van_morrison]

at least the Canadians are honest, as opposed to those cunts at the RIAA

[JOJOFACE]

The RIAA is a joke. We should petition to have that crazy psycho lady leader of theirs voted off the island.

[bigXnasty]

A Canadian Record Industry Association study says that downloading doesn't hurt business (http://www.cbc.ca/consumers/market/murmurs/archives/2006/20060320_downloading.html).

amen

[Pass The Flask]

i love my country.

[GAD_guy]

DUH is all i can say. i have been making these arguments for years. too bad the greedy RIAA will ignore this in favor of its own biased surveys.

[justlive]

i think everyone already knew this.
the riaa wins in the stupid department.

[still]

I Wonder How SLADE775 Will Respond*

typo.

[gobblox is...]

no shit, it's only responsible for the mainstream of prolly 95% of the rock bands out there today....

[mikeyystyles]

Although the Canadians have about the population of NYC living in their country. And about 10 of those canucks own a computer. Therefore I could see how it wouldnt hurt downloading.

[GAD_guy]

Although the Canadians have about the population of NYC living in their country. And about 10 of those canucks own a computer. Therefore I could see how it wouldnt hurt downloading.

how absolutely wrong you are......

[Jason Tate]

Downloading may not hurt the big business of record labels, but it most certainly hurts bands in the genre covered on this website. The kids downloading and making music disposable are going after the new Saves The Day and Taking Back Sunday albums ... no one is eagerly anticipating (or knows how to get) the leak of the new Jessica Simpson album.

[GAD_guy]

Downloading may not hurt big business, but it most certainly hurts bands in the genre covered on this website.

remember when you used to be all about those "fuck the RIAA" shirts? what happened man?

[unholy_amanda]

Woo yay Canada. 64 days till I go to Vancouver. :D

[Jason Tate]

remember when you used to be all about those "fuck the RIAA" shirts? what happened man?
I still hate the RIAA, and think they are idiots going about things 100% the wrong way. That doesn't mean I have to support how the downloading craze has hurt bands I love and makes the music I spend my life devoted to completly disposible. Kids wait for a leak, download it, and don't even have time to experience or get into the music before something else they "can't wait to have" leaks and they forget about the first CD (and certainly don't want it a month [light years to teenagers]) later when it finally hits stores.

[Adeniz19]

Downloading may not hurt the big business of record labels, but it most certainly hurts bands in the genre covered on this website. The kids downloading and making music disposable are going after the new Saves The Day and Taking Back Sunday albums ... no one is eagerly anticipating (or knows how to get) the leak of the new Jessica Simpson album.i think it hurts the bands that are borderline about to make it huge and their CD leaks like a month before the release, but i also think it extremely helps the smaller bands trying to make a name for themselves.

[Jason Tate]

i think it hurts the bands that are borderline about to make it huge and their CD leaks like a month before the release, but i also think it extremely helps the smaller bands trying to make a name for themselves.
And what was the last "smaller band" CD that leaked and was spread? I mean come on, things like Cartel and Hit the Lights are not "small" bands that need the help of a leaked CD. It's not like joe-blow garage band is leaking and getting downloaded by 4,000 kids.

[Save my day]

I think in the right context downloading is helping get bands out there.

[Dave Ambrose]

paul tao, get online!

[GAD_guy]

I still hate the RIAA, and think they are idiots going about things 100% the wrong way. That doesn't mean I have to support how the downloading craze has hurt bands I love and makes the music I spend my life devoted to completly disposible. Kids wait for a leak, download it, and don't even have time to experience or get into the music before something else they "can't wait to have" leaks and they forget about the first CD (and certainly don't want it a month [light years to teenagers]) later when it finally hits stores.

i definitely agree that this scenario happens quite often. in fact, i have often been guilty of it myself. however, i buy much more music now than ever before. when an album is actually worth buying, i buy it even if i already downloaded it. the only albums i download but don't buy are the ones i never would have bought in the first place. how is that really hurting anything?

[Adeniz19]

And what was the last "smaller band" CD that leaked and was spread? I mean come on, things like Cartel and Hit the Lights are not "small" bands that need the help of a leaked CD. It's not like joe-blow garage band is leaking and getting downloaded by 4,000 kids.oh i wasn't talking about leaked cd's about the smaller bands just downloading in general. i don't think leaks help at all. I'm all for record companies doing all of these watermark CD's and all that to try to prevent leaks.

[bste_lax]

RIAA's repsonse:

F'ing Canucks.

[Jason Tate]

i definitely agree that this scenario happens quite often. in fact, i have often been guilty of it myself. however, i buy much more music now than ever before. when an album is actually worth buying, i buy it even if i already downloaded it. the only albums i download but don't buy are the ones i never would have bought in the first place. how is that really hurting anything?
In that regard, I think that the downloader should delete the music he isn't buying. I understand wanting a CD early (and testing the waters, making sure they like it), and all that - but if you're not going to ever buy it, keeping it on your computer (or as so many kids do: burning copies for your friends of said CD), ends up hurting someone in the end. It's not a faceless crime, people just like to pretend it is - in my opinion. The problem is I am willing to bet a far greater % of kids download say, "I'm going to buy this the moment it comes out" and then forget becaue something else has leaked by the time the album actually hits stores. If there was a way for someone to download a leak and immediately purchase the CD if they liked it - I think more people would. Especially if say a shitty leak comes out (Brandtson, Saves the Day), and the kids had a chance to buy a CD quality one that day - I think more would then will a month from now.

[wesgemm08]

Last year the Mars Volta Cd leaked monthes before its release and it sold like 125,000(source:http://www.eonline.com/News/Items/0,1,16086,00.html) first week... I highly doubt the fact that it leaked monthes before affected the sales of the cd that much... I could find more examples but I guarantee tons of people downloaded the leak and still bought it, and even spread the word about how good it was

[Adeniz19]

In that regard, I think that the downloader should delete the music he isn't buying. I understand wanting a CD early (and testing the waters, making sure they like it), and all that - but if you're not going to ever buy it, keeping it on your computer (or as so many kids do: burning copies for your friends of said CD), ends up hurting someone in the end. It's not a faceless crime, people just like to pretend it is - in my opinion. The problem is I am willing to bet a far greater % of kids download say, "I'm going to buy this the moment it comes out" and then forget becaue something else has leaked by the time the album actually hits stores. If there was a way for someone to download a leak and immediately purchase the CD if they liked it - I think more people would. Especially if say a shitty leak comes out (Brandtson, Saves the Day), and the kids had a chance to buy a CD quality one that day - I think more would then will a month from now.well in my case i DL alot but i also buy alot. There are alot of CDs I like that I havent bought yet either because it's really rare and i don't like buying too much stuff online, or I just don't have the funds at the moment to buy it. But usually if the band comes and tours near me and i don't have their cd, i usually buy it there

[Jason Tate]

Last year the Mars Volta Cd leaked monthes before its release and it sold like 125,000(source:http://www.eonline.com/News/Items/0,1,16086,00.html) first week... I highly doubt the fact that it leaked monthes before affected the sales of the cd that much... I could find more examples but I guarantee tons of people downloaded the leak and still bought it, and even spread the word about how good it was
And for every band you say sold 125,000 copies of a CD, I'll show you one not selling nearly as much as they should.

Furthermore, Mars Volta was all over the press - mainstream like, on TV, etc., so they're going to seel stuff to people who don't download anyways. So I don't find that a good example.

Then we have bands where I've seen stats of 40k+ downloads on IRC bots yet their album sales are stuck at 15-20K. My opinion is: Big bands aren't hurt, small bands aren't hurt, it's the medium size band that are hurt the most.

[Jason Tate]

well in my case i DL alot but i also buy alot. There are alot of CDs I like that I havent bought yet either because it's really rare and i don't like buying too much stuff online, or I just don't have the funds at the moment to buy it. But usually if the band comes and tours near me and i don't have their cd, i usually buy it there
I'm not really refering to you in my sweeping generalizations, just FYI, I know there are kids that are great about this thing. Hell, I know I sent someone a stream of a few Morrissey songs and they ordered the album the next hour ... but there are kids (lots of them) that feel as if they are entitled to music for free, and don't think they're hurting anyone - (for example (http://www.absolutepunk.net/member.php?username=stoppayin4music )).

[wesgemm08]

And for every band you say sold 125,000 copies of a CD, I'll show you one not selling nearly as much as they should.

Furthermore, Mars Volta was all over the press - mainstream like, on TV, etc., so they're going to seel stuff to people who don't download anyways. So I don't find that a good example.

Then we have bands where I've seen stats of 40k+ downloads on IRC bots yet their album sales are stuck at 15-20K. My opinion is: Big bands aren't hurt, small bands aren't hurt, it's the medium size band that are hurt the most.
And how many bands owe their exposure to the nationwide scene entirely to the internet.. come'on now, without the internet at least 50% of these bands in the "pop punk scene" wouldnt even be selling 20K.. and even if there is 40k downloads online, without downloading to a certain extent, these bands wouldnt be reaching as big an audience, they wouldnt be able to get as many people to shows, which would hurt their chances of getting "big" just as much as downloading would

[Adeniz19]

I'm not really refering to you in my sweeping generalizations, just FYI, I know there are kids that are great about this thing. Hell, I know I sent someone a stream of a few Morrissey songs and they ordered the album the next hour ... but there are kids (lots of them) that feel as if they are entitled to music for free, and don't think they're hurting anyone - (for example (http://www.absolutepunk.net/member.php?username=stoppayin4music )).oh for sure. i knew you werent referring to me but i'm just saying that DLing does have some advantages.

[wesgemm08]

And what if i own something on vinyl, should I have to pay for the vinyl and cd just because the cd transfers more clearly to my computer.. or do I gain the right to download then?

[Jason Tate]

And how many bands owe their exposure to the nationwide scene entirely to the internet.. come'on now, without the internet at least 50% of these bands in the "pop punk scene" wouldnt even be selling 20K

Lots of them do, but that doesn't give people the right to steal or take an album for free just because, "without the internet they wouldnt sell 5k" - I mean, if it continues as you describe it then it will make the internet completely useless as a promotional tool. If a band can get "big" via the internet yet not sell the albums, there's no way a label will sign them. The internet may push an album to 20k, but if it never hits at LEAST 50k the band's probably not going to be able to make a living off of being in a band.

I also have a hard time accepting your argument for the pure sake that it's a hypothetical (and to say "just as much" implys research and data neither you or I have). You don't know the truth about how many they would sell without the internet or if their album didn't leak. I make my assumptions because I can compare what happened with P!atD and Cartel/Acceptance. If you'd go to a show, you'd think they had the same fan base; yet the album sales are disgustingly different. That's (IMO) because of who is buying the CDs, and when the albums were available for download. It's a shame when to sell albums a band HAS to go mainstream and market to 12 year old girls because those are the ones who for SURE will buy a CD (because they don't know how to download it).

[Teoa_Fes]

Although the Canadians have about the population of NYC living in their country. And about 10 of those canucks own a computer. Therefore I could see how it wouldnt hurt downloading.


Why are some americans so ignorant?

[Jason Tate]

And what if i own something on vinyl, should I have to pay for the vinyl and cd just because the cd transfers more clearly to my computer.. or do I gain the right to download then?
Look up the law, I don't know what it says about that. I frame my vinyls and buy the CDs, I don't know why you would have just the vinyl and not the CD to being with .. if you're going that analog, you having a digital computer and mp3s to being with seems stupid.

[wesgemm08]

I also have a hard time accepting your argument for the pure sake that it's a hypothetical, and you don't know the truth about how many they would sell without the internet or if their album didn't leak, I can just assume because I can compare what happened with P!atD and Cartel/Acceptance.

Isnt at this point in time the argument that the internet ruins bands cd sales also hypothetical too

Green Day for example:

As of June 2005, nimrod. has sold 1.9 million units in the US
...despite the fact that Good Riddance was easily one of the biggest songs of that year(1997)


and what has american idiot sold to date.. like 7 million

[wesgemm08]

Look up the law, I don't know what it says about that. I frame my vinyls and buy the CDs, I don't know why you would have just the vinyl and not the CD to being with .. if you're going that analog, you having a digital computer and mp3s to being with seems stupid.
I buy stuff like pelican, sigur ros, explosions in the sky, red sparrows, some screamo/grind stuff on vinyl, not all of my music


...it was more of a hypothetical question

[never look back]

well the reason why i have just the vinly and not cd is b/c i like the sound of the vinly better than the cd and it doesnt really make sense to re buy everything i have. i would just have copies of everything which sucks.

[Jason Tate]

Isnt at this point in time the argument that the internet ruins bands cd sales also hypothetical too

Green Day for example:

As of June 2005, nimrod. has sold 1.9 million units in the US
...despite the fact that Good Riddance was easily one of the biggest songs of that year(1997)


and what has american idiot sold to date.. like 7 million

Completely hypothetical, but I can make a solid argument based on the bands I work with on a daily basis. No one does the research for the medium bands (Cartel, Acceptance, Hit the Lights, etc.), so we'll never know the actual numbers on this sort of thing -- but what I do know are these facts: more people have downloaded Cartel's CD on one IRC chatroom, then have bought it. That doesn't even take into account all of the people they shared it with after that .. or other means of distribution. That's a fact, and those numbers don't lie. That's really where I'm coming from on this particular thing ... my journal has other issues I have with downloading, but as of right now I'm only talking about exact CD replicas.

[maledixtion]

Downloading may not hurt the big business of record labels, but it most certainly hurts bands in the genre covered on this website. The kids downloading and making music disposable are going after the new Saves The Day and Taking Back Sunday albums ... no one is eagerly anticipating (or knows how to get) the leak of the new Jessica Simpson album.
OMFG... She has a new one coming out? I NEED IT! Can anyone send this? I'll ysi it up and spread the wealth.

[SwedishHeat]

Downloading may not hurt the big business of record labels, but it most certainly hurts bands in the genre covered on this website. The kids downloading and making music disposable are going after the new Saves The Day and Taking Back Sunday albums ... no one is eagerly anticipating (or knows how to get) the leak of the new Jessica Simpson album.

You get to listen to the Saves The Day and Taking Back Sunday albums early, how come I don't??

I know the answer, but the point is, people wouldn't be half as excited to get the leaks if this website didn't hype the shit out of every new thing that's coming out.

/slight exaggeration

[Jason Tate]

You get to listen to the Saves The Day and Taking Back Sunday albums early, how come I don't??

I know the answer, but the point is, people wouldn't be half as excited to get the leaks if this website didn't hype the shit out of every new thing that's coming out.

/slight exaggeration
I'm not so sure that's true, or fair to us. If Rolling Stone hypes the shit out of the new Justin Timberlake album, that doesn't mean all their readers go and download the CD though.

[kg00d]

For one I love Canada and secondly I am one who downloads stuff early if I have access to it. Last year I got MCS, Cartel, Houston Calls, AFS, BNO and plenty more all early. It gave me an opportunity to get into the record and I bought all of these records plus plenty more. Ya not every CD i download I buy. Im the one actually hurting the big name bands. Some CDs last year I downloaded such as coldplay, audioslave to name a few i didn't bother buying because they are huge. I target bands as tate referred to as medium sized. I have the new Hit The Lights record and i will be at my local store that day picking that up plus the new Moneen. I can keep going but the general idea here has been explained. Downloading helps me get into so many bands and then I buy the record if its good.

[The Coalition]

I couldn't agree more with Jason Tate about any one thing ever.

Music is a luxury, not a right.

File Sharing on a non-mass scale helps bands grow. Sending it to your buddy, or burning them a copy can open their eyes. Then you can give them shit personally about buying it. File sharing on p2p networks, where you get the whole album from some nameless person is hurting album sales.

[The Coalition]

For one I love Canada and secondly I am one who downloads stuff early if I have access to it. Last year I got MCS, Cartel, Houston Calls, AFS, BNO and plenty more all early. It gave me an opportunity to get into the record and I bought all of these records plus plenty more. Ya not every CD i download I buy. Im the one actually hurting the big name bands. Some CDs last year I downloaded such as coldplay, audioslave to name a few i didn't bother buying because they are huge. I target bands as tate referred to as medium sized. I have the new Hit The Lights record and i will be at my local store that day picking that up plus the new Moneen. I can keep going but the general idea here has been explained. Downloading helps me get into so many bands and then I buy the record if its good.

Are purevolume, myspace, ap.net, countless other music zine sites, mtv.com, live shows, e-cards, samplers not enough ways for you to "get into good bands" without breaking the law?

[kg00d]

Are purevolume, myspace, ap.net, countless other music zine sites, mtv.com, live shows, e-cards, samplers not enough ways for you to "get into good bands" without breaking the law?

I use those sources as well, however when I hear something good I like to hear something with good quality. Hearing crap quality doesn't always do it for me.

[livelovecrydie]

i've read this entire thread and NO ONE has mentioned this....

has anyone else noticed that the rise of the internet (it seemed to really get going about 1996-ish) was nearly simultaneous with the rise of "our genre of bands" into the mainstream?

since a lot of other genres hit the mass media in pre-internet days, my question: why is it that it took "our genres" until the last couple of years to finally really hit the mass media? (examples include good charlotte, simple plan, fall out boy, hawthorne heights)

check out these events in chronological order (though i cant remember the exact dates, these are in order)

1) internet becomes mainstream [96ish]
2) blink's josie is a hit. doesnt spawn a punk-rock craze though... hm... [98ish]
3) napster gets popular, people can get music for free *gasp* [99ish] (and here comes the turning point for our bands now...)
4) sum41's "fat lip" is first ever "punk-rock" video to hit TRL [01ish]
5) good charlotte hits the radio in a big way [01-02ish] (and yes, before 'lifestyles of the rich and the famous' hit the radio, you wouldve considered good charlotte in "our genre". anyone who remembers that song 'little things' knows what im talking about)
6) blink gets really popular somewhere around this time period, cant remember what song finally did it
7) simple plan.
8) you guys know the rest... fall out boy, hawthorne heights, etc

all right, now my point. i am trying to say there is no coincidence between the rise of downloading and the rise of "our bands" into the mainstream. and i highly doubt it was just advertisements on the internet that helped these bands become popular. being able to download these bands' music sped up the process of getting punk/punk-rock/emo/pop-punk/etc bands into the mainstream.

i dont know if downloading is hurting the music industry these days, i havent seen any statistics or anything. but downloading got "our music" into the mainstream. plain and simple. and i, personally, find that to be a very good thing that most of the country is being exposed to this wonderful music.

lastly, think about this...

why didnt this whole craze for AP.net-related music begin when blink's dude ranch came out, close to a decade ago? it was on the radio. people were hearing it. but that style of music didnt take off like it has in the last couple years.

so why not? my answer... downloading wasnt popular back then. all people knew was blink. they couldnt further their interest in this new style of punk-rock by downloading "joe schmo's garage band" that resembled blink's new age punk rock. (i say new age punk rock because punk rock used to have a whole different meaning way back in the day)


(ps- you all know what i mean by "our bands" or "our genre", dont get technical about that)

[livelovecrydie]

I couldn't agree more with Jason Tate about any one thing ever.

Music is a luxury, not a right.

File Sharing on a non-mass scale helps bands grow. Sending it to your buddy, or burning them a copy can open their eyes. Then you can give them shit personally about buying it. File sharing on p2p networks, where you get the whole album from some nameless person is hurting album sales.


you're looking at that in black and white..... you gotta dig deeper...

the fact is... people talk about music. they talk to their friends, family, co-workers about music they've heard.

you say getting the album from a nameless person hurts album sales. so lets say you downloaded that album, didnt like it much, didnt buy it. that DID hurt album sales. but what if you briefly mention that band to 6 other people in your day-to-day conversations (good OR bad, those people heard the band's name). then 3 of those people, thanks to downloading, are able to easily check out the band that they heard about . 2 of those people like what they heard. 1 person REALLY liked what he/she heard. they go out and buy the album. YOU JUST GOT THAT BAND A SALE BY DOWNLOADING MUSIC.

this does happen in real life. a lot more than you might think.

[maledixtion]

Blink was popular prior to Sum 41 and Good Charlotte... unless "What's My Age Again?", "All the Small Things", "Adam's Song", "Rock Show", and an appearance in American Pie don't count.

[TommyGunn]

Canada is of no use to the world. They are to the world what North Dakota is to the United States...a wasteland that is nice to visit once in a while but god knows why you would ever want to live there.

Therefore, I will take this study with a grain of salt.

[GAD_guy]

Canada is of no use to the world. They are to the world what North Dakota is to the United States...a wasteland that is nice to visit once in a while but god knows why you would ever want to live there.

Therefore, I will take this study with a grain of salt.
'
40 million people live there. i wouldn't call it a wasteland, unless i was just ignorant.

[TommyGunn]

Chevy and Ford make plenty of money as companies, so I think it is OK to steal their cars. Just don't steal from the mid size companies like Kia and Saturn because they work really hard and need the money.

In fact Ford should be happy if I steal their cars, because if my friends see me driving around in the new Mustang, then lots of kids will want them and probably buy them. Plus if I like the car alot, eventually I will buy one for real.

Plus, even if I do not buy the car I go to alot of car shows and buy seat covers and new rims for the car and that is how you really support a car company.

SO MANY IDIOTS ON THIS BOARD. Think about what you are saying...god dammit you are fucking stupid.

[wesgemm08]

Chevy and Ford make plenty of money as companies, so I think it is OK to steal their cars. Just don't steal from the mid size companies like Kia and Saturn because they work really hard and need the money.

In fact Ford should be happy if I steal their cars, because if my friends see me driving around in the new Mustang, then lots of kids will want them and probably buy them. Plus if I like the car alot, eventually I will buy one for real.

Plus, even if I do not buy the car I go to alot of car shows and buy seat covers and new rims for the car and that is how you really support a car company.

SO MANY IDIOTS ON THIS BOARD. Think about what you are saying...god dammit you are fucking stupid.
By far one of the worst comparisons I have ever seen... and you call other people idiots? Think about your logic there for a second, it makes no sense

[enj0i29]

Canada is of no use to the world. They are to the world what North Dakota is to the United States...a wasteland that is nice to visit once in a while but god knows why you would ever want to live there.

Therefore, I will take this study with a grain of salt.

Wow, so many people hate Canada, yet can't back it up with any facts to why it sucks. If you can't say anything of value to the forum, then shut the hell up.

[GAD_guy]

Chevy and Ford make plenty of money as companies, so I think it is OK to steal their cars. Just don't steal from the mid size companies like Kia and Saturn because they work really hard and need the money.

In fact Ford should be happy if I steal their cars, because if my friends see me driving around in the new Mustang, then lots of kids will want them and probably buy them. Plus if I like the car alot, eventually I will buy one for real.

Plus, even if I do not buy the car I go to alot of car shows and buy seat covers and new rims for the car and that is how you really support a car company.

SO MANY IDIOTS ON THIS BOARD. Think about what you are saying...god dammit you are fucking stupid.

the second absolutely retarded thing you have said in this thread. maybe you should just move along.

[Tristan Needler]

Chevy and Ford make plenty of money as companies, so I think it is OK to steal their cars. Just don't steal from the mid size companies like Kia and Saturn because they work really hard and need the money.

In fact Ford should be happy if I steal their cars, because if my friends see me driving around in the new Mustang, then lots of kids will want them and probably buy them. Plus if I like the car alot, eventually I will buy one for real.

Plus, even if I do not buy the car I go to alot of car shows and buy seat covers and new rims for the car and that is how you really support a car company.

SO MANY IDIOTS ON THIS BOARD. Think about what you are saying...god dammit you are fucking stupid.
sorry, but you cannot call another entire country of people useless and turn right around and call others idiots. you've basically just destroyed any credibility you had.

i may have considered your point had you not insulted me in the process.

[mr fun]

i've read this entire thread and NO ONE has mentioned this....

has anyone else noticed that the rise of the internet (it seemed to really get going about 1996-ish) was nearly simultaneous with the rise of "our genre of bands" into the mainstream?

since a lot of other genres hit the mass media in pre-internet days, my question: why is it that it took "our genres" until the last couple of years to finally really hit the mass media? (examples include good charlotte, simple plan, fall out boy, hawthorne heights)

check out these events in chronological order (though i cant remember the exact dates, these are in order)

1) internet becomes mainstream [96ish]
2) blink's josie is a hit. doesnt spawn a punk-rock craze though... hm... [98ish]
3) napster gets popular, people can get music for free *gasp* [99ish] (and here comes the turning point for our bands now...)
4) sum41's "fat lip" is first ever "punk-rock" video to hit TRL [01ish]
5) good charlotte hits the radio in a big way [01-02ish] (and yes, before 'lifestyles of the rich and the famous' hit the radio, you wouldve considered good charlotte in "our genre". anyone who remembers that song 'little things' knows what im talking about)
6) blink gets really popular somewhere around this time period, cant remember what song finally did it
7) simple plan.
8) you guys know the rest... fall out boy, hawthorne heights, etc

all right, now my point. i am trying to say there is no coincidence between the rise of downloading and the rise of "our bands" into the mainstream. and i highly doubt it was just advertisements on the internet that helped these bands become popular. being able to download these bands' music sped up the process of getting punk/punk-rock/emo/pop-punk/etc bands into the mainstream.

i dont know if downloading is hurting the music industry these days, i havent seen any statistics or anything. but downloading got "our music" into the mainstream. plain and simple. and i, personally, find that to be a very good thing that most of the country is being exposed to this wonderful music.

lastly, think about this...

why didnt this whole craze for AP.net-related music begin when blink's dude ranch came out, close to a decade ago? it was on the radio. people were hearing it. but that style of music didnt take off like it has in the last couple years.

so why not? my answer... downloading wasnt popular back then. all people knew was blink. they couldnt further their interest in this new style of punk-rock by downloading "joe schmo's garage band" that resembled blink's new age punk rock. (i say new age punk rock because punk rock used to have a whole different meaning way back in the day)


(ps- you all know what i mean by "our bands" or "our genre", dont get technical about that)


Brilliant post. But the pop-culture acceptance of punk-ish music started in the early 90's with Jane's Addiction, aith No More, Nirvana, The Offspring, Green Day and Rancid. The internet just gave the marketplace a chance to reach critical mass like one big worldwide clubhouse. Also, don't forget the late 90's is when technology started reaching into alot more homes, so the barrier to entry to the music biz plummeted... with ProTools and Photoshop everyone is a record label. Everyone's a band worthy of distribution. The business part sucks because of oversupply, piracy, and greed of the majors.

[kidsrdumb]

unless the record sucks, then it probably hurts..

[The Coalition]

you're looking at that in black and white..... you gotta dig deeper...

the fact is... people talk about music. they talk to their friends, family, co-workers about music they've heard.

you say getting the album from a nameless person hurts album sales. so lets say you downloaded that album, didnt like it much, didnt buy it. that DID hurt album sales. but what if you briefly mention that band to 6 other people in your day-to-day conversations (good OR bad, those people heard the band's name). then 3 of those people, thanks to downloading, are able to easily check out the band that they heard about . 2 of those people like what they heard. 1 person REALLY liked what he/she heard. they go out and buy the album. YOU JUST GOT THAT BAND A SALE BY DOWNLOADING MUSIC.

this does happen in real life. a lot more than you might think.

and you are looking at it in a really skewed way.

that same person who dowloaded an album in reality, probably allowed it to be downloaded by 10 other people (which is a very low end estimate if we are talking mass p2p), so even if they get the band one sale from it, they are still down 9. I completely agree that the word of mouth of the internet has helped music. When it becomes mass, and infinite people can download it an hour, there is no way the word of mouth carry over from having those people just hear it can ever keep up.

you must have missed my other post of how to get into good music, because those ways have the same effect of the word of mouth sale that you proposed and they are not illegal.

sidenote: the car company thing is really not that far off, it's just too bad he ruined is with the canada post. I had a comparison similiar only using fashion as a replacement for music as the industry people steal from. Maybe I will search it down.

[TommyGunn]

sorry, but you cannot call another entire country of people useless and turn right around and call others idiots. you've basically just destroyed any credibility you had.

i may have considered your point had you not insulted me in the process.

dude. your screen name is ShitEater. I rest my case.

[Tristan Needler]

dude. your screen name is ShitEater. I rest my case.
and yours is so much better?

seriously, read that post and tell me you truly believe what you said about canada. if you take it back, maybe i can afford you some respect, but if you believe that honestly, seeing your points is not worth the time it takes to read them.

[Tristan Needler]

making fun of someone for the country they live in or are born in is no better than making fun of one for their race, sex, orientation, or anything else, and it hurts no less. so think before you speak please.

[Jason Tate]

you're looking at that in black and white..... you gotta dig deeper...

the fact is... people talk about music. they talk to their friends, family, co-workers about music they've heard.

you say getting the album from a nameless person hurts album sales. so lets say you downloaded that album, didnt like it much, didnt buy it. that DID hurt album sales. but what if you briefly mention that band to 6 other people in your day-to-day conversations (good OR bad, those people heard the band's name). then 3 of those people, thanks to downloading, are able to easily check out the band that they heard about . 2 of those people like what they heard. 1 person REALLY liked what he/she heard. they go out and buy the album. YOU JUST GOT THAT BAND A SALE BY DOWNLOADING MUSIC.

this does happen in real life. a lot more than you might think.
If what you're saying actually did happen on a large scale, we wouldn't be having this discussion. It's this mentality that leads to the problem because kids think, "well, I'm helping the band by spreading their music, someone's going to buy it" - which I think the numbers have proven to be completely false. Sure a % might, but if you share 4 songs with a friend or everyone downloads 4-5 songs ... then they would HAVE to buy the album if they liked what they heard. THAT would help the band. I disagree entirely that an entire album is needed to "spread the band's music" - I usually known within 2/3 songs if I like a band or not.

[Jason Tate]

i've read this entire thread and NO ONE has mentioned this....

has anyone else noticed that the rise of the internet (it seemed to really get going about 1996-ish) was nearly simultaneous with the rise of "our genre of bands" into the mainstream?

since a lot of other genres hit the mass media in pre-internet days, my question: why is it that it took "our genres" until the last couple of years to finally really hit the mass media? (examples include good charlotte, simple plan, fall out boy, hawthorne heights)

check out these events in chronological order (though i cant remember the exact dates, these are in order)

1) internet becomes mainstream [96ish]
2) blink's josie is a hit. doesnt spawn a punk-rock craze though... hm... [98ish]
3) napster gets popular, people can get music for free *gasp* [99ish] (and here comes the turning point for our bands now...)
4) sum41's "fat lip" is first ever "punk-rock" video to hit TRL [01ish]
5) good charlotte hits the radio in a big way [01-02ish] (and yes, before 'lifestyles of the rich and the famous' hit the radio, you wouldve considered good charlotte in "our genre". anyone who remembers that song 'little things' knows what im talking about)
6) blink gets really popular somewhere around this time period, cant remember what song finally did it
7) simple plan.
8) you guys know the rest... fall out boy, hawthorne heights, etc

all right, now my point. i am trying to say there is no coincidence between the rise of downloading and the rise of "our bands" into the mainstream. and i highly doubt it was just advertisements on the internet that helped these bands become popular. being able to download these bands' music sped up the process of getting punk/punk-rock/emo/pop-punk/etc bands into the mainstream.

i dont know if downloading is hurting the music industry these days, i havent seen any statistics or anything. but downloading got "our music" into the mainstream. plain and simple. and i, personally, find that to be a very good thing that most of the country is being exposed to this wonderful music.

lastly, think about this...

why didnt this whole craze for AP.net-related music begin when blink's dude ranch came out, close to a decade ago? it was on the radio. people were hearing it. but that style of music didnt take off like it has in the last couple years.

so why not? my answer... downloading wasnt popular back then. all people knew was blink. they couldnt further their interest in this new style of punk-rock by downloading "joe schmo's garage band" that resembled blink's new age punk rock. (i say new age punk rock because punk rock used to have a whole different meaning way back in the day)


(ps- you all know what i mean by "our bands" or "our genre", dont get technical about that)

If by the rise of our genre you mean the 8 or 9 bands that are actually mainstream now, then I guess you have a point. But when you look at the fact that the biggest bands in our scene don't even sell as much as the littlest bands in country music, I think you have to toss our most of your argument completly. The internet DOES help bands, downloading CAN help bands, but I will continue to say that an ENTIRE ALBUM over a month early - DOES NOT. People that are downloading music now aren't downloading a garage band. I mean, come on. They're downloading Acceptance, Cartel, Hit the Lights, Saves the Day, Brandtson, etc. --- bands that are not garage bands, they're medium sized bands that need album sales like a crack whore needs rock.

If 5 million people were sharing Cartel's new album, and 5 million people also then went out and bought it ... I'd see your argument. But when 40k people download it from one site, and only 30k or something have purchased it ... I don't see how your argument stands up at all.

[Tristan Needler]

If what you're saying actually did happen on a large scale, we wouldn't be having this discussion. It's this mentality that leads to the problem because kids think, "well, I'm helping the band by spreading their music, someone's going to buy it" - which I think the numbers have proven to be completely false. Sure a % might, but if you share 4 songs with a friend or everyone downloads 4-5 songs ... then they would HAVE to buy the album if they liked what they heard. THAT would help the band. I disagree entirely that an entire album is needed to "spread the band's music" - I usually known within 2/3 songs if I like a band or not.
that is a hard point to argue against.

that being said, i download a lot of music, so mleh. i used to be pretty hard against downloading without buying and i wouldn't even download a lot of cds at all even if they had leaked.

but now i'm broke in college, and can't afford to buy every cd, or the money it costs me for the bus to get downtown to buy the cd. but i don't want to not hear any music just because i can't get my hands on a cd. i like listening to full albums and not just songs on theit own.

do i think downloading hurts bands? yes, it hurts a lot of them. do i prefer buying records to downlading? yes. am i greedy and do i download even though i think its pretty wrong? yes. will i stop? no. am i doing a bad thing and hurting bands i love to listen to? probably.

meh. i'll continue. chances are very good i'll never buy these cds that i've gotten during these times, but i know for sure that once i can afford to again, i'll buy cds again.

hey, at least i'm honest and not trying to say what i do is right.

[Tristan Needler]

If by the rise of our genre you mean the 8 or 9 bands that are actually mainstream now, then I guess you have a point. But when you look at the fact that the biggest bands in our scene don't even sell as much as the littlest bands in country music, I think you have to toss our most of your argument completly. The internet DOES help bands, downloading CAN help bands, but I will continue to say that an ENTIRE ALBUM over a month early - DOES NOT. People that are downloading music now aren't downloading a garage band. I mean, come on. They're downloading Acceptance, Cartel, Hit the Lights, Saves the Day, Brandtson, etc. --- bands that are not garage bands, they're medium sized bands that need album sales like a crack whore needs rock.

If 5 million people were sharing Cartel's new album, and 5 million people also then went out and bought it ... I'd see your argument. But when 40k people download it from one site, and only 30k or something have purchased it ... I don't see how your argument stands up at all.
i have a question.. why are labels so terrible at preventing leaks? it doesn't seem like it would be that difficult.. i mean sure the album gets tossed around to some places, but those places should be professional places that will review them, not spread them around.

[Jason Tate]

i have a question.. why are labels so terrible at preventing leaks? it doesn't seem like it would be that difficult.. i mean sure the album gets tossed around to some places, but those places should be professional places that will review them, not spread them around.

Because what happens is say The Militia Group is promoting a new album, they send out an advance to the webzines and Kid X gets the CD. He promotes it on his webzine and gives it to his best friend, who gives it to his best friend, who then leaks it.

Either this or the band has a copy and they give it to a friend, who gives it to a friend, who leaks it.

The only way to prevent leaks is to not give ANYONE a copy until it goes to the stores. That's what FOB and P!ATD did with their albums, and they only leaked a week before retail (because once they hit stores, no one can stop it).

There are too many webzines with no integrity, or they have some warped belief that they are helping the band by giving it away, or they just don't know how much it actually hurts the band.

[Jason Tate]

that is a hard point to argue against.

that being said, i download a lot of music, so mleh. i used to be pretty hard against downloading without buying and i wouldn't even download a lot of cds at all even if they had leaked.

but now i'm broke in college, and can't afford to buy every cd, or the money it costs me for the bus to get downtown to buy the cd. but i don't want to not hear any music just because i can't get my hands on a cd. i like listening to full albums and not just songs on theit own.

do i think downloading hurts bands? yes, it hurts a lot of them. do i prefer buying records to downlading? yes. am i greedy and do i download even though i think its pretty wrong? yes. will i stop? no. am i doing a bad thing and hurting bands i love to listen to? probably.

meh. i'll continue. chances are very good i'll never buy these cds that i've gotten during these times, but i know for sure that once i can afford to again, i'll buy cds again.

hey, at least i'm honest and not trying to say what i do is right.
Which, in a way, at least I respect. I have the hardest time with those who don't understand what they're doing is wrong. At least if people know what they're doing is wrong, and they've made that choice - I can't do anything else about it. I just don't like when people hide behind the guise of helping an artist or that it doesn't really hurt anyoen.

[Tristan Needler]

Because what happens is say The Militia Group is promoting a new album, they send out an advance to the webzines and Kid X gets the CD. He promotes it on his webzine and gives it to his best friend, who gives it to his best friend, who then leaks it.

Either this or the band has a copy and they give it to a friend, who gives it to a friend, who leaks it.

The only way to prevent leaks is to not give ANYONE a copy until it goes to the stores. That's what FOB and P!ATD did with their albums, and they only leaked a week before retail (because once they hit stores, no one can stop it).

There are too many webzines with no integrity, or they have some warped belief that they are helping the band by giving it away, or they just don't know how much it actually hurts the band.
yeah, i understand, i'd just think a friend of the band would have a little more sense than that, and the labels could look at which webzines had better integrity, just be a little more careful and discerning. i guess that is impossible in this day and age though.

or the label could even just send out a sampler of maybe half the songs, or put some big fucking noise in the middle of the songs so reviewers can get the idea, but people will still have to buy it even if that version does leak. i mean sure, there's not way to prevent it after its in stores, but i think there are ways to keep it better protected pre-release.

[MotionIsntMeaning]

Canada is of no use to the world. They are to the world what North Dakota is to the United States...a wasteland that is nice to visit once in a while but god knows why you would ever want to live there.

Therefore, I will take this study with a grain of salt.

you're a retard.

[kg00d]

you're a retard.

I second that, just get off this website if you believe that.

[ForeverInADay]

Although the Canadians have about the population of NYC living in their country. And about 10 of those canucks own a computer. Therefore I could see how it wouldnt hurt downloading.
Canada is of no use to the world. They are to the world what North Dakota is to the United States...a wasteland that is nice to visit once in a while but god knows why you would ever want to live there.

Therefore, I will take this study with a grain of salt.
Hey, way to not sound like total ignorant assholes. Good job, ass hats.

SO MANY IDIOTS ON THIS BOARD. Think about what you are saying...god dammit you are fucking stupid.
You could have used this advice before you posted twice.

[ForeverInADay]

I second that, just get off this website if you believe that.
seriously.

[Teoa_Fes]

Canada is of no use to the world. They are to the world what North Dakota is to the United States...a wasteland that is nice to visit once in a while but god knows why you would ever want to live there.

Therefore, I will take this study with a grain of salt.

again...some americans are as dumb as a brick wall. amazes me.

[TommyGunn]

and yours is so much better?

seriously, read that post and tell me you truly believe what you said about canada. if you take it back, maybe i can afford you some respect, but if you believe that honestly, seeing your points is not worth the time it takes to read them.

OK, I take it back.

[TommyGunn]

Which, in a way, at least I respect. I have the hardest time with those who don't understand what they're doing is wrong. At least if people know what they're doing is wrong, and they've made that choice - I can't do anything else about it. I just don't like when people hide behind the guise of helping an artist or that it doesn't really hurt anyoen.

Holy shit, Tate and I agree on something.

What he just said Is exactly how I feel.

[TommyGunn]

Hey, way to not sound like total ignorant assholes. Good job, ass hats.


You could have used this advice before you posted twice.

humor people, humor.

[TommyGunn]

again...some americans are as dumb as a brick wall. amazes me.

This was a joke, but for the record, I am from Canada.

[Tristan Needler]

OK, I take it back.
This was a joke, but for the record, I am from Canada.
okay, i didn't know that, sounded serious to me.