[aldo_14]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/09/23/ifpi_boss_keynote/

The UMG boss had little sympathy for the twelve-year-old girl in a New York housing project who had harbored an MP3 of the theme tune to her favorite show on her computer, and had been sued by the RIAA. Her family paid out thousands of dollars in a settlement. She was a "serious file sharer", insisted Kennedy.

But he had even less sympathy for songwriters, who receive only a small fraction of royalties that recordings owners receive. that was fair, he insisted, as hits were down to investment in marketing, he said. At Polygram (which became Universal), Kennedy had stopped the practice of chart-fixing, he said, "because we were so bad at it. Songs that were supposed to chart at No.6 were coming in at No.34".

He'd be more sympathetic to songwriters, he said, the day that record companies had "50 per cent margins". In fact, he claimed that record companies spend more on R&D than technology companies, because of the marketing spend required to create a hit

• . The implication was clear: the success of an artist was down to the Shock and Awe bombing of the record company's marketing team, which is very expensive.[/i]

[kasperl]

Well, got news?

Really, the article on how the industry could get payed without suying kindergarten kids, was a lot more interesting.

Mind, the whole music industry is going to far, but I said that before.

[vyper]

Without musicians, these tossers wouldn't have anything to market...

[Zarax]

They'd still sell plenty of stuff *points to dance *****

[beatspete]

If a cd's worth buying then I'l buy it.  If the music industry wants people to stop downloading, either make it easier for people to listen to new bands for free, or make CDs better value and cheaper.

[Flipside]

Lyricless or low-lyric music is actually not selling too well on the market. The money from those are made from Nightclubs etc.

Also, most entry level musicians are urged to opt for single-payment, not royalties, I know I was, until you can be sure of selling enough stuff to make royalties worth it. Sometimes you can lose out big time, but more often than not, you'll draw even. So this whole thing about depriving up and coming musicians of the future is balls, if anything, it does far more to spread unknown names than strangle them.

[Martinus]

[color=66ff00]Indeed, my mate Baz got signed to Rephlex by putting his stuff out via a local (Irish) site called electrotoxic.

He plays drum 'n bass/funk and all sorts of electronic jiggery-pokery.

On doing a bit of searching I'm not finding his stuff . I'll have to upload an mp3 for you to hear at some point.
[/color]

[IceFire]

With this sort of attitude...its only a matter of time before they topple under their own weight.

[Flipside]

Also, I note this guy is only looking at record sales.

Theres also, Concerts - Incuding food+Merchandise, Celebrity Appearances, Advertising appearances, T-Shirts, Baseball Caps, Trade Cards, Calendars, Airtime fees for Radio stations, Compilation re-releases, Remixes + Special editions, Mobile phone cases etc etc etc.

Trust me, the Music companies make a lot more money from these than from the Recording itself. As do larger artists who are complaining about 'losing revenue'.

[01010]

Can you hear that? It's the sound of progress bringing the monolithic money grabbing ****s to their knees.