Are Downloads Really Killing the Music?

Are downloads really killing the music industry? Or is it something else?

The music industry continues to claim that filesharing, and BitTorrent, etc. is killing them. They claim that every file downloaded instead of bought at the local Mediocre Purchase takes a ham sandwich out of their hands. My guess that it would be a pickle taken from the artist, in this analogy?

Well - I found a great story in a British paper that disputes the industry's claim of crying poor. http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog

At least 7 million people in Britain use illegal downloads, costing the economy billions of pounds and thousands of jobs, according to a report.

Shared content on one network was worth about £12bn [24+- US] a year according to the research commissioned by the Strategic Advisory Board for Intellectual Property.

David Lammy, minister for intellectual property, said: "Illegal downloading robs our economy of millions of pounds every year and seriously damages business and innovation throughout the UK. "It is something that needs tackling, and we are serious about doing so."

Hold on, how come the music industry still insists on saying that every download is a lost sale? No one ever challenges their silly claims. I know some folks who 'try out' music and then go out and PURCHASE eighteen times as much music as anyone else I know. They are also loyal to their bands, see shows, buy bumperstickers and expensive T-Shirts...

Now in the olden days, music consumers would have to buy tapes, CD's or vinyl. Mostly because YOU HAD NO OTHER CHOICE except to wait three hours to hear your favorite top 40 song replayed on the radio. You like punk? Bluegrass? Sorry, you're going to have to buy that, or learn to play it yourself. We've come a long way, and the music is more fragmented, but there are many more options and delivery messages. The old model is going away. But is it really because of downloads and pirating?

I agree with the original author of the story - no - I think they're just spending the money on other stuff. See the awesome graph.

However, there are a couple of other factors that were not mentioned, and was lost in the original story -

First, music today SUCKS ROCKS. (ahem) I should say 'popular' music... American Idol? Again, the old model says you can only buy Casey Kasem's Top 40 albums. That's just not happening anymore.

Second, the business model of the record industry peaked in the 80's when everyone was convinced/tricked/conned into thinking that their analog vinyl was inferior to the 'unscratchable' CD's. Everyone converted their old Eagles and Fleetwood Mac albums to CD. So the record industry sold that album twice - and three times if you wanted it on tape. (Not everyone knew how to make mix tapes back then). Obviously, this is an unsustainable music revenue.

Three, and no one ever mentions this one, is that US libraries are the largest consumer of CD's. In the age of iPod and iTunes, anyone who wants an album just needs to truck out to their local library. Ta-dah, the entire Slim Whitman backcatalog is now on your hard drive. You don't want it anymore? Click, punt. Downloading from Pirate Bay, sure, you can do that too... but I'll bet that more 'revenue' is lost through libraries than from fiber optic.