Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Bye, bye, Miss American Pie (chart)

By Trajce Cvetkovski - posted Tuesday, 4 April 2006


Computer and Internet technologies have also been blamed for the drop in revenue, and the majors insist music piracy ("burning") is the core problem. Combined with Internet downloads, and Peer-to-Peer (P2P) file sharing ("ripping"), the industry's politico-legal representatives estimate music piracy now costs the industry in excess of $US5 billion. To some extent the representatives are correct (I do not know of too many people who have not dabbled in illegal music consumption).

To add final insult to injury, MP3s and related P2P technologies were not devised by the majors and neither were MP3 players. In the world of music evolution this break in the chain is very significant. The majors have always dictated the terms in which records are delivered. They invented vinyls, cassettes and CDs. The devices for these formats have also either been invented or produced en masse by the majors' sister manufacturing subsidiaries. The cause for concern is obvious.

To combat the issue of a slump in music consumption, the majors have implemented four main strategies:

Advertisement
  • drop in price of CDs to make them more attractive;
  • educate the public that it is wrong to "steal" (intellectual) property;
  • anti-piracy protection measures; and
  • police and prosecute copyright infringers (minors included).

The merits of these campaigns have been viewed with mixed results, and in any event, CD prices continue to drop. People continue to consume music at a significantly discounted or illegal rate.

So why is this "music for free" or "small fee" attitude so unprecedented and now so ingrained in modern popular culture and everyday life? I found some clues to the answer while representing an applicant spouse on a de facto property settlement. The respondent was a 72-year-old man who purported to itemise his MP3 music collection (which he had also backed up onto CDs) as part of the couple's joint assets pool. He had valued these downloads at $8,000 (which apparently was at a significantly reduced rate to what they would ordinarily retail, he opined.).

However, all the songs had been illegally downloaded from the original Napster website over several months. The absurdity of his proposition to value his illegal "record collection" highlighted three important issues to me. First, accessing music illegally is a relatively simple task open to all ages. Second, ignorance or flagrant disregard of copyright generally is probably quite prominent. Third, however, and equally significant, is that this person placed a quantifiable value on what these products ought to cost.

That is, had this man in fact purchased these products from a retailer, he would only have been prepared to pay a fraction of their retail price. There appears to be a widespread feeling that the majors have been exploiting consumers for too long. There is strong consensus between the "young" and "old" on this point (especially since, in the case of the former, most parents finance pop culture consumption).

It is this third consideration that, by and large, has been ignored by the majors. On this point, perhaps parents feel so exploited that they turn a blind eye to ripping and burning. And it is not as if illegal copying is a new phenomenon. I do not know of too many people who have not dabbled in illegal music consumption. The parents of teenagers copied cassettes, their older siblings copied CDs and now they compare the size of their iPods.

Advertisement

Technically it is illegal in Australia and the UK to make even back-up copies yet it was more or less tolerated by the majors during the reign of the cassette and to some extent the CD. But when Napster arrived and the first wave of decent Rio MP3 players hit the high streets in 1998, the issue became about control because these were external challenges to the status quo.

I believe the spending downturn in CDs will continue not necessarily because of legislative reform and or the proliferation of burning and ripping per se but because there is a genuine lack of interest in purchasing CDs as consumers spend money on these other more "exciting" goods. Consumer lack of interest (and or distraction) in the delivery of current music products as promoted by the majors is something which has been continually ignored.

What the majors are not prepared to concede is that CDs have simply become second-line cultural products. The ritual of rocking up to HMV and obsessively trawling through stacks of CDs has been substituted for MP3 downloading (ripping) and CD burning. Music consumption has become just another thing to do and the art of prioritising for the purchase of the latest chart music is dead. Consequently, if money can be spent elsewhere on other pleasures, then it will be.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All

First published in the Brisbane Line, on the Brisbane Institute website, on March 29, 2006.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

3 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Dr Trajce Cvetkovski teaches law, policy and governance at the University of Queensland. He also practises as a Barrister. He is the author of Copyright and Popular Media (2013, Palgrave Macmillan)

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Trajce Cvetkovski

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Trajce Cvetkovski
Article Tools
Comment 3 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy