Angry Thoughts On A Tired Subject
A rant today, if you'll allow me. Earlier this morning I posted, on the 21st Century fuckfest that is Twitter, a link to this article at The Daily Mash. As per usual, it was both very funny and incisive, addressing the recent change in legislation with regard to illegal downloading. I can't say I'm a huge fan of either Mandleson or Geffen, and the propsed legislation is dubious both in origin and content. The part of the article that I enjoyed the most was the satirization of the common adolescent justifications for illegal downloading (or, as I prefer to call it, "theft"). My post gave rise to a deluge of replies on the subject, some heated exchanges, and basically ended up with me wanting to smash through the 140 character barrier and say what I think here.
This is a tired subject, and I don't want to rehash the whole thing. Obviously you can't un-invent the internet (nor would I want to, it's one of humanity's highest achievements), and obviously illegal downloading happens, and is here to stay. To be philosophical about it, the industry structure that has successfully rewarded musicians and others (engineers, producers, PRs, agents and so on) for their labour since the 1960s is in the process of dissolving. I'm confident that the wonders of capitalism will, within a few years, throw up a new system. But that hasn't happened conclusively as of yet. The basic fact of economics is that we reimburse people for enjoying the fruits of their labour. A situation where people labour and are not reimbursed is untenable and unjust.
So my thoughts for the day are these. Firstly, while I am confident that we will realign, it'd be naive not to notice the danger that a generation of people are coming up who do not understand why they should pay for music at all. It seems churlish to restate, but let's put it this way: recording isn't free, instruments aren't free, session players, producers, engineers, artists aren't free. My time isn't free either - I work hard and I expect to get paid for it. Maybe we are heading for a world in which all recorded music is free, but if so, be prepared for gig and T-shirt prices to rise.
Secondly, the idea that by stealing music from the internet you're somehow crusading for justice against the big bad record labels is absolute fucking bullshit and needs to be stamped out. Britney Spears and David Geffen aren't going to downsize their condo's because you didn't pay for a Fugazi album. The people hit first and foremost are the low-level workers in the industry and smaller or independent artists. Telling yourself otherwise is, in my opinion, more often than not a lame attempt to salve a guilty conscience.
This brings me onto point three: most people don't know very much about the mechanics of the music industry, but feel qualified to theorize about its economics at length. I actually find this pretty insulting. I don't spend my time wandering into hospitals / shops / schools / banks telling staff how much they should be being paid, or how much they should charge for any good or service, because I don't know enough about it. Having worked in the music industry for a few years, I do a fair bit about it, and I think illegal downloading is a bad thing. As a point of proof, find me any indie record store or independent artist who thinks that file-sharing is a boon for them and their career. QED.
Point four is just a reply to one point someone made to me earlier. They said that by "stealing" my album they'd come to buy gig tickets and T-shirts which they would not otherwise have done. First up, lose the quote marks, it's stealing, plain and simple (basically shoplifting for cowards). Secondly, that's like saying it's OK for me to steal a car because I'm going to put petrol in it. Duh.
Finally, if you're going to be a thief and enjoy the products of the labour of strangers without paying for it, don't fucking tell me about it! I know people are going to nick my music, at the end of the day. But fuck, don't email me about it!
End rant. Sorry to go on and on about this. But like I say, I wanted to get it off my chest. Carry on.
This is a tired subject, and I don't want to rehash the whole thing. Obviously you can't un-invent the internet (nor would I want to, it's one of humanity's highest achievements), and obviously illegal downloading happens, and is here to stay. To be philosophical about it, the industry structure that has successfully rewarded musicians and others (engineers, producers, PRs, agents and so on) for their labour since the 1960s is in the process of dissolving. I'm confident that the wonders of capitalism will, within a few years, throw up a new system. But that hasn't happened conclusively as of yet. The basic fact of economics is that we reimburse people for enjoying the fruits of their labour. A situation where people labour and are not reimbursed is untenable and unjust.
So my thoughts for the day are these. Firstly, while I am confident that we will realign, it'd be naive not to notice the danger that a generation of people are coming up who do not understand why they should pay for music at all. It seems churlish to restate, but let's put it this way: recording isn't free, instruments aren't free, session players, producers, engineers, artists aren't free. My time isn't free either - I work hard and I expect to get paid for it. Maybe we are heading for a world in which all recorded music is free, but if so, be prepared for gig and T-shirt prices to rise.
Secondly, the idea that by stealing music from the internet you're somehow crusading for justice against the big bad record labels is absolute fucking bullshit and needs to be stamped out. Britney Spears and David Geffen aren't going to downsize their condo's because you didn't pay for a Fugazi album. The people hit first and foremost are the low-level workers in the industry and smaller or independent artists. Telling yourself otherwise is, in my opinion, more often than not a lame attempt to salve a guilty conscience.
This brings me onto point three: most people don't know very much about the mechanics of the music industry, but feel qualified to theorize about its economics at length. I actually find this pretty insulting. I don't spend my time wandering into hospitals / shops / schools / banks telling staff how much they should be being paid, or how much they should charge for any good or service, because I don't know enough about it. Having worked in the music industry for a few years, I do a fair bit about it, and I think illegal downloading is a bad thing. As a point of proof, find me any indie record store or independent artist who thinks that file-sharing is a boon for them and their career. QED.
Point four is just a reply to one point someone made to me earlier. They said that by "stealing" my album they'd come to buy gig tickets and T-shirts which they would not otherwise have done. First up, lose the quote marks, it's stealing, plain and simple (basically shoplifting for cowards). Secondly, that's like saying it's OK for me to steal a car because I'm going to put petrol in it. Duh.
Finally, if you're going to be a thief and enjoy the products of the labour of strangers without paying for it, don't fucking tell me about it! I know people are going to nick my music, at the end of the day. But fuck, don't email me about it!
End rant. Sorry to go on and on about this. But like I say, I wanted to get it off my chest. Carry on.
posted by frank at 1:40 PM
117 Comments:
Spot On Frank, Agree with it all, think it will be interesting to see what/where the Music Industry will evolve into.
Cant believe the person told you about nicking your tunes...muppet!
HURRAH! Been saying this for years, especially when I worked for HMV and had to constantly hear people moaning about how much CDs were and how they could download it for free. Thankyouverymuch for openly stating you wanted to put me out of a job.
Completely agree with you Frank.
Hayley x
I agree with you, I hate readings blogs on websites like torrent sites about how there doing the "goodfight". You wouldn't walk into there place of work ans start stealing there pc's or bank detail.
Thank fuck there are still some intelligent people in the music industry, eh? A well reasoned, well constructed point like that is going to change the minds (and ways?) of far more people than a Lars Ulrich style hissy-fit ever would. Nice one.
"Maybe we are heading for a world in which all recorded music is free, but if so, be prepared for gig and T-shirt prices to rise."
I think we are, and we already have. That also means that someone who just wants to make an album, and that is as far as their talent extends (not live shows, not graphic design etc) will no longer be able to make a living as an artist...
Hit the nail right on the head my good man. I've done work in the music world and have seen how hard musicians and industry types work alike, adn your right in saiying it'll be the little people who get this in the neck. And lastly, where's the enjoyment of downloading 10 mp3's when you could be holding a pristinely packaged work of art in your hands that is yours to enjoy, keep and stick back on your stereo 2 years after you've bought it when you find it in the boot of ya car!!!
All the best
Tommy
AMEN TO THAT
This post has been removed by the author.
there definitely is a generation that has no problem with stealing music online. it's a shame that the music "industry" didn't respond quickly enough to changing technology to find a way to serve these people. it might be too late.
lots of kids i know download because they simply wouldn't afford to buy more than 3 or 4 albums a year...im not saying its right but these kids arent maliciously trying to screw you frank and to call them cowardly thiefs is unhelpful...
"I guess I must confess that you are starting to get old..."
I did some research on this a couple of years ago, and I'd be interested to know whether your experiences tally with what I found then - totally understand if you don't want to answer the question, but how does the money you see from a ticket sale compare to the money you see from a CD sale? Considering they're both about the same cost to the punter...
I wrote a blog about it this afternoon, before I read this piece, but some people might find it interesting to read an opposing argument, it's at www.myspace.com/alandhisguitar
Well put.
Though, there is one point that scratches the back of my mind when I think about music piracy. Is it possible for music piracy, as much of an atrocity as it is, to in fact help to lift lesser known artists from the shadows of the back of the shop. In the same sense that youtube is now used as an advertising weapon?
(Just to make clear, this isnt me supporting piracy, just seeing if there is SOME good that can be made from it at a minimal level)
"lots of kids i know download because they simply wouldn't afford to buy more than 3 or 4 albums a year...im not saying its right but these kids arent maliciously trying to screw you frank and to call them cowardly thiefs is unhelpful..."
The point is: no they're not trying to screw anyone, but they are doing and are kidding themselves thinking otherwise. A kid who steals a CD from HMV because he can't afford isn't trying to screw the record industry either, but he is and he's still a thief.
uhm, what about...
- stealing to riches and buying from poors (which translates into: I'm gonna download Neil Young and buy Israel Nash Gripka)?
- stealing "let's write shit money to get another swimming pool" while heavily supporting indie labels/artists/workers (~shoplifting overpriced stuff at Tesco and "keep the change Mr. Organic Farmer")?
- and countless others like "try before you buy"?
of course, these are very conscious stands that I guess don't come often across the average youngster's mind - but remember that, just to draw a parallel, when you refuse violence at all, you're delegitimating the French Resistance against the Nazis as well - so a more complex opinion could encourage people to think with a bit more complexity in mind.
That said, I know it's difficult when the ass is yours, so you're entitled to your anger, of course. :)
I remember you saying at your concert with The Gaslight Anthem in Cologne, that you like the idea that folk-music once written belongs to everyone. I can't quiet remember which song you played after this, but I do find some videos of you covering Bruce Springsteen and others on youtube. Did you pay money to Mr.Springsteen for playing these songs to an audience?
I don't think so. You are a thief Mr. Turner.
Next time you are really pissed about something, don't write an article insulting most of your listeners to be "thieves" and "cowards". As much as I do appreciate your honesty, I don't think that you were any better when you were young.
I do buy the music I love and I did buy you're album back then in cologne. I intend to buy the rest when you are heading here again in december.
Only the best wishes for you Frank, Tobias!
Frank,
Personally, I like to maintain a distinction between theft and copyright infringment, not in an attempt to justify one over the other, but because they do have different properties and probably need to be addressed differently. Having said that, the merit in closing the gap between the two terms might be to help the stupid understand why both are unethical.
I made a post on your board a while back with a quote from an MP in the 19th century who had something quite insightful (in my opinion) to say on the topic. Not sure if you saw it, but no need to repeat it here, it's out there already.
I don't really know the best way to address the problem (if I did, I suspect I would be a rich man), but what I do know is that I have no compulsion to download your stuff illegally (I am force to admit I have done this in the past, judge me how you will, but I would rather be an honest arsehole than a lying saint!), so you are doing something right. As you say in one of your recent recordings, "If you are so fucking different, who cares what you have to say!". Hate to subvert the lyric, but perhaps that applies to opinions on why someone's work shouldn't be ripped off too. Rightly or wrongly, people are usually more comfortable ripping off big faceless corps, perhaps they feel the same way about musicians. Although, I suspect you could personally buy everyone in the world a pint, and some would still rip you off. Getting mad about that might be warrented, but not productive I suspect.
The other thing is, in a world where most musicians put a chunk of their music on their myspace, where you can listen over and over for free, I can see that in some (simple) minds, that might ease the guilt about downloading the same songs.
It is a tricky problem, and I have no answers. I can fully understand why you are pissed off about it. If it is any consolation, I have a sneaking suspicion that you are going to do very well off the new record, piracy or not. Seems to be quite a buzz building.
As always, all the best.
Wez
Al - read your blog, interesting. We come from different political angles. I actually can't talk about the details of my deal publicly, but the figures you have for royalty rates are for major deals only. Indie deals are generally 50/50 splits after recoupment, which is much more favourable to the artist. The amount I make from shows and records varies, but I don't view the income streams as interchangeable, personally.
Covering someone else's song is totally different to owning their recording of it. And anyway, Springsteen gets PRS royalties when I cover him live. Like I said in my post, it's helpful to know what you're talking about.
I have no idea what any of this has to do with violence or the French Resistance.
I'm not trying to insult or partonize anyone, except for those people who steal from me. Which I think is fair enough, personally.
Alright, I'm also not advocating piracy to make that point very clear...
However, as for the "SOME good" coming out of it, I can see that point very minimally. I will often download a song or two from an artist I've never heard in order to determine if the CD is worth purchasing. So yes, I can see how that can boost lesser known artists. However, normally it's the lesser known artists that are offering these songs up for download to promote their music.
I personally am still one of those music fans that still likes having a CD case in my hands. I love opening it and reading through all the liner notes and playing it on repeat at least three times upon first getting it.
However, I don't need every CD in hand and there are plenty of viable options for affordable downloading...take for example Amazon.com, where you can get $5 albums on Fridays, as well as 100 $5 featured albums each month. Not to mention affordability of regular albums at $8.99/$9.99 a piece. Also IMEEM is a great way to preview entire albums before you buy 'em.
Point is, don't kill the independent musician. They provide the happy moments in my days and I don't want that taken away. Think of it as art, think of it as a service, think of it any way you want, so long as it's deserving of your spending.
Thanks Frank for sounding off on this.
x
I completely agree with you, Frank.
It's a shame that I can't find Reuben's In Nothing We Trust anywhere for sale anymore, basically since it didn't sell enough. or something like that, don't know. Still it's artists like you, and even smaller artists that get hurt the most.
But I do admitt, I don't have enough money for every record I want to hear. I buy the ones from artists that I really respect, or the ones that I love dearly. And sometimes I can't buy them straight away, because I just lack the money. But I will buy them eventually, I am working hard on my CD collection. If you want to call yourself a fan of an artist or band, you should at least have the cd's/lp's in their original state e.g. showing support, right?
What I miss the most is that I grew up in a world where you can't eagerly await a release anymore. A few weeks ago I read a blog by Portugal. The Man at their facebook, remembering the time that they ran to the cd-store first thing in the morning to get their hands on a cd. I never experienced that, because at the time I got into music in a serious way, leaks would be all over the place. And when you have read about your favorite band recording, writing and everything that comes with it for the past few months/weeks/years, it's hard to resist a leak as a fan. I would love to experience the feeling I had when I first saw Incubus live, when I run to a cd-store. The excitement, the joy, the nerves; 'How will it sound?' 'What will it be/feel like?' That's what you have when you first hear your favorite band live, but not anymore when you buy a cd. I would love to experience that. I can't miss it because I've never felt it, but it feels the same nonetheless.
all the best Frank, and see you in November in Amsterdam!
Jelger
I can't say that I'm completely innocent in this matter - not many people interested in music who use the internet are - but I do believe that if you're a fan of music, you should buy it, simple as that. These days, there's no excuse for downloading when bands offer up free previews on sites like MySpace and Last.FM, even entire albums at a time so people can make up their mind as to whether they want to buy it.
Admittedly, it can be very offputting when you go into a record store and see an album you want for extortionate prices - I once paid £15 for a Black Flag album from my local record store and believe me, I'd be reluctant to do it again - but there's plenty of indie record stores like Rise in Cheltenham who sell albums for fair prices. It's just about taking the time to shop around, which unfortunately, a lot of people aren't prepared to do. I don't know, I guess 'fans' don't care enough about the people they're listening to any more.
I should start by admitting I've stolen several albums of the internet, and when younger did try and use the "well I go to their gigs, and the ones I steal don't need the money" excuse. My attempt at moralising that led to me thinking it was okay to steal albums from those on record labels, just not people who paid for it all themselves. I'd still always buy CD's of those I truly loved, as it's great to be able to hold a physical copy in your hands, with inlays and the like.
In fairness this attitude was helped by hearing several bands I like talk about doing it themselves or not seeing much money from the record label from sales. In the end, it all stemmed from my love for music being disproportionate to my bank balance - not an excuse by any means, but a reason. I think there's no honest way to justify it, but the savings, ease, number of co-offenders, and likelihood of being caught combine to negate guilty feelings. It's not okay, these people work hard to do this for a living, but human nature being how it is probably means it'll keep going on regardless.
Luckily, I'm in a position where once out of university, I have a guaranteed job with a nice income, so once the financial reasons disappear I fully intend to buy all the music I like and want. In light of the crimes committed against artists I like, it's the very least I could do.
Frank,
After first hearing about you, someone downloads an album or EP and enjoys it, they then begin to listen to it more and more. At some time in the future they hear that you're playing near them and decide to buy a ticket. At the show they buy another album or EP. Due both to having more of your material and having such a great time at the show they become big fans, and pre-order your next release as soon as it's announced.
What do you say to fans like this? Do you shun them? Are they evil for initially getting into you through illegal channels? I assure you that many of your current fans have gone through a process similar to this.
I appreciate where your anger comes from, but it does have a flipside. This is what the previous person's French Resistance comment is pertaining to; while as a rule illegal downloading is wrong, it has positive uses and effects.
I totally agree with you Frank.
But from having similar discussions with various people on this subject, i've seen it justified as 'borrowing/sharing'. The argument goes something like this:
If person A lends person B a cd to listen to, has person B stolen it? People have the capacity to lend their friends CDs all the time. Essentially the problem here, is that the internet has allowed us all to become immediate friends, whilst providing a means to 'borrow' or 'share' music.
obviously, it makes no difference how its phrased. I can imagine it is a horrible feeling being an artist and realising less people are buying my music, because the people who originally bought it have decided to share it.
Perhaps this is where the problem lies? The sharing (uploading) of the music in the first instance.
A world where music is free but shows are ridiculous prices scares me quite a lot.
I agree that musicians and those who work around them should be paid fairly for their work and own the copyrights for their labours, as a writer this seems a just exchange. The internet has changed the rules, writers and photographers have their stuff ripped off all the time and it is nigh on impossible to police, music is a little different because of the method of its transmission but peer to peer filesharing has flourished and something does need to be looked at to prevent record companies trimming off the smaller and less successful artists in any cost-cutting exercise.
However I do believe that the music industry moguls have had it their own way for a long long time and made substantial hay whilst the sun shone. The exhorbident price of music in its physical form is a huge deterrent to people buying it from conventional means, and call me cynical but I do not believe the distribution of that £12.99 (or £16.99 for those of us who still like vinyl) is primarily for the benefit of the artist. I'm afraid it is tantamount to the oil companies claiming its the governments fault for petrol prices being so high whilst they rake in profane profits from the exploitation of common resources.
I have downloaded music both legitimately and illegitimately, and it has been very often as a precursor to buying a single, or an album, sometimes when music is made widely available it can reach an audience that would not otherwise have access to it. In the old days many artists used to make their music available to download and this was an excellent way of shaking up your playlist and gaining some insight into many new and alternative bands that would otherwise never have had the exposure. Since myspace was purchased by News International this practice has been stopped.
There is in my view little point in merely trying to fire-fight such an issue for you will always be playing catch-up to the latest methods of hookey distribution, the industry with the strong input of the artists needs to overhaul the methods of distribution and payment so that it is fair to the artist and the consumer which I'm afraid would mean that the middle man who has no creative input or interest other than profit-making might lose a little of his top-slicing and I'm afraid that is why this will not happen.
This is another example of 'Thatcher fucking the kids', you reap what you sow, the cult of the individual and the me me me culture leads everyone to believe that not only can they try to get something for nothing but that this is the very zenith of achievement if they should be able to do so. The needs and desires of those disadvantaged by that are seen as of no importance these days.
Thank you Frank. That was a very nicely written rant. I agree perfectly. You need to be paid for your work or you will not be able to do it.
Just because someone loves your music and listens to it all the time does not mean they will be able to see you on tour, even if they want to, so if they don't buy your cds they will not contribute anything to you. For example I own all your cds except that rare split but I've only seen you once and it was when you were in Million Dead.
Well said Frank...Never downloaded, just can't beat the Saturday afternoon in the music shops bringing home new albums feeling,
See you Friday!!
Hey Frank!
First to say, I don't think I could ever bring myself to illegally download your music. I respect you far too much for that and I also love owning the CD. On the other hand, would I download an album by a major band, or one that is now dead (and thus with extremely rare/expensive music)? Yeah, I think I would.
Secondly, I'd be interested to know your thoughts on the Featured Artists' Coalition?
Thirdly, because I'm sure to have an argument with my friend (who is much more pro-piracy than me), is there absolutely no truth to the idea that small bands are benefited from increased exposure?
Finally, great set at Beautiful Days!
Your loyal fan,
Daniel
Whilst I agree with Frank on a number of points about torrents being stealing, I also agree with the points put by rotorbaron. The cost of music is disgraceful, inflated by a bloated wasteful industry with the artist seemingly at the bottom of the pile when the money is shared out. Those of us that remember prior to the internet, HMV/Our Price et at were happy to flog us CD's for £14.99/£15.99, telling us that this was the cost. Then retailers such as Play.com, CD Wow and Amazon came along and supermarkets such as Tesco started selling CD's at lower profit margins so HMV etc were suddenly "able" to drop their prices. Chart CD's used to be £9.99-£11.99, surely with inflation etc taken into consideration, the prices should be higher, not lower like they are now. Just an example of the fuckwittery of the music industry exploiting the fans.
The music industry and music retail industry is grotesque. A friend of mine used to be at a senior level at a high street music retailer and he got an essential car users allowance as part of his package, even though on appointment they knew that he was going to be walking to work and not having to leave the office on business. Who pays for this - the customers. Add onto this all the freebies (CD's, dvds, gig tickets, free meals, taxis, nights out etc) that the retailers and industry types enjoy, all courtesy of the punters and seem to expect things to rumble on as it did before. If downloading is a problem, then surely record companies need to find the solution. They're taking fuckloads of money off the artists and the customers, surely they can use some of this money to work out innovative ways of stopping it.
I download music but I do buy a lot as well and spend money on t-shirts, gig tickets etc. However when I was at school in the 80's there were people who never bought music, they taped off the radio and recorded other peoples lps/cds/tapes etc. Most teenagers in the 80's had a tape to tape that they used for naughtily recording music they shouldn't. Home taping is killing music is what I remember the slogan as being in the 80's, yet the industry has survived, despite what they would have us believe.
Personally.. I'm really not a fan of the file sharing thing. A while ago one of my friends asked if he could give me an external hard disk so I could copy my music for him, and was very shocked when I said no.
I don't think he understood that each folder of files, that just happen to be in some kind of audio format, is part of story for me. There's the albums that I've waited for and been there stood outside my local record store to buy on release day. There's albums that have been given to me, as gifts, or I've inherited in sadder circumstances. There's albums that I've bought as my parents only had them on vinyl and no one has yet worked out how I can carry a record player with me at all times. Likewise there are also albums that I've had to save for, as I couldn't afford them.
There are plenty of outlets for listening to new material from artists without theft/piracy. The web provides myspace and last.fm, not to mention radio shows now available on the web. There are quite a few record companies who provide samplers which have tracks (Sideone dummy have provided one recently!!) There were several CD's worth of music on the FatWreck site to get people interested in music.
I know there are people can't afford to buy every album they want (I'm one of them), but surely there are opportunities to get these without stealing??? Thats what I used birthdays and christmas for!
Also check out charity shops.... you might not get the latest album, but you might get a real gem!
You don't have to ilegally download an artist's music to get into them though. Personally, I first heard about Frank by downloading a free song of his off iTunes which I assume he had allowed to be up there. I then went out and bought both of his albums.
There is also myspace for listening to music so you can decide whether it is good enough to buy, so you dont have to illegally download it.
I can understand people having limited amounts of money to buy music but I don't think the "try before you buy" argument really works as it usually leads to "try and then just download some more".
Can you or any commenters recommend ways in which people not involved in the music industry can educate themselves in the mechanics (as you put it) of how it works at a reasonably detailed level?
I enjoy music. I accept that I don't really have a clue about how the money from CDs, gigs, merch etc gets distributed, but I'd like to know more in order to better contribute to the ongoing global discussion. Since I don't have much chance of any first-hand industry experience at present, what would you suggest I do?
I'd like to think in these fluid times for the industry that the consumers should be allowed to have some input to the discussion of how the product may be accessed, rather than leaving it exclusively to those who already have a foothold within the industry.
I'm not really a post a comment sort of person but this discussion has really made me want to weigh in. I'll admit that I don't know that much about the music industry but it seems pretty obvious to me that the people who suffer the most from illegal downloading are the smaller artists and labels.
I agree completely with Kit Fletcher, there are so many opportunities to sample music legally before you buy that to use that excuse is ridiculous. So too the point about lesser known artists, when you can listen on myspace or lastfm then there is really no need to illegally download an artist's music to see if you like it before you buy their record.
No music lover is going to be able to afford to buy all the music they could possibly want immediately, but likewise no art lover is going to be able to buy all the paintings or sculptures they want. Especially not the older and rarer ones. And no one would expect to be able to. It seems to me that the problem is that some people seem to think that music is their right, not another art form that should be supported and cherished. Try saving up for something you really want, it'll make it a whole lot more precious to you.
I think I get the point about the french revolution but I think it's a wrong analogy. An absolute ban on stealing music compared to an absolute ban on violence. I agree the point has relevance to intellectual property debates but it's more relevant to life an death situations; like patents on anti-retroviral drugs than it is to music. No one is going to die if they don't get to hear a song immediately.
Obviously the law needs to come up to speed with the technologies it is policing but that's not really a good excuse for harming the art form you claim to like.
I think that Frank is totally justified in his righteous indignation towards those who do not appreciate that this is how he makes a living and do not respect the work that he does.
And as to folk music belonging to everyone, I don't think anyone is saying you can't sing a song you love yourself, just that you should respect the original writer enough to not steal their version.
That's my rant over...
Best of luck with the new album,
Roisin
The Daily Mash gets it right about all the products and services people don't feel the need to pay for. I produce an event that has an entrance fee, and fully 50% of the people who participate in it crash it and don't pay. (It used to be 5% 10 years ago.) It's financially impossible for us to 'police' this or lock people out of it due to the huge numbers of people, so the event suffers. There's a reason there's a fee to participate--it so we can put the event on. As much as we try to explain this fact to people, we get the 'your corporate-owned' or 'you've got sponsors so you must be rich' blather, which is crap. That only goes so far. We lose so much money every year that the event will eventually just go away, and then we'll be accused of 'killing it.' (Have you noticed that it's never the responsibility of the non-payer!?) Unfortunately, we live in a culture of entitlement, and I don't see it getting any better. People want what they want when they want it, and they don't see the connection between product/service and payment--why that exists. It started with music and movies, and as the The Daily Mash satirizes, eventually it'll be cars.
If I had to decide to buy material based on one or two songs I would be in far more debt than I currently am.
I suppose illegal downloading enables people to take fewer risks when it comes to buying albums. When I buy an album now I know that I want to support the artist and that I think they deserve it.
I'm 28 and when I was a teenager we had no internet or downloading!! We had to go out and buy the singles or albums if we wanted to listen to a band or singer we liked (I suppose you could have taped the songs off the radio but the quality was always crap!). CDs used to cost between £12 - £16 no matter how new or old they were - thats about twice the amount they are now!!! If people complain they can't afford a CD I would like to put them a time machine back to the mid 90s when music much more and music was on the whole a bit shite!
I'm not going to get into long-winded arguments re: the rights and wrongs of downloading music, but I personally, like a lot of people, use downloading music as an avenue to hear new things, like the mix-tape/CD was in the pre-Napster days (just like yourself Frank, First Four Years and Minor Threat discography on a tape, I assume you didn't pay for those? ;) )If I like the music, I'll go buy some stuff. If I don't, I'll delete it. Admittedly, there's a lot of little scroats out there who'll queue up GB's and GB's of the stuff without a second thought for the artist, but it's wrong (although tempting) to tar all downloaders with the same brush. I own everything you have released, both CD and vinyl, but the first time I ever heard you was when I downloaded the Jonah Matranga split to see who you were. I've since been to see you about 8 times and enjoyed every time. Now Spotify has come along and Last.fm has evolved, more and more of us "previewers" (I dunno if that's the right thing to say) are using those resources rather than downloading stuff to find out about bands, which (hopefully) will only leave the hardcore file sharers on the torrents sites etc, which can only be a good thing, as more and more of these sites will disappear.
Basically, what I'm saying is that file sharing is just the new medium of home taping, admittedly on a bigger scale, but please don't demonise every kid that's downloaded a bunch of Linkin Park singles or the people that download to hear a new talent before spending their money.
Ben
I agree with somethings you've said but I do object to one thing: "My time isn't free either - I work hard and I expect to get paid for it."
I don't doubt you work very hard but at the end of the day its a labour of love and I imagine you'd be doing it even if no one was listening. It's hard work but its a fuckload better than laying concrete or being a nurse or something mate. I know everyone needs to eat but 'expect to get paid' sounds really ungrateful, I personally have bought everything of yours I own and i'm a bit insulted by the way you've expressed you're self there.
You say you're a big fan of Converge, I've read interviews where Jacob Bannon and Kurt Ballou mention that Converge doesn't pay their bills their other work does, be it Godcity or Design work or whatever but I'm sure they work just as hard and theres no expectation to be paid for what they do as musicians.
Otherwise I agree with what you're saying, people should pay for music, reward the artists they love, if only so they can continue creating music for a living, but I found that point a bit distasteful.
i did write a huge rant but the web didnt load!
Basically, the government needs to fund independent record stores in citys, its impossible for me to get a CD without ordering it from USA and waiting 2 weeks or going a hour n half to brighton just to buy a CD its a disgrace!
HMV is shocking they stock nothing of any independence in any form!
Bring back record stores or we are left with no choice really!
Frank - Your car/petrol analogy is pretty weak. Two reasons why: cars are way more expensive than petrol, and the car manufacturer doesn't receive any of the petrol revenue.
If a punter steals your first album, and loves it so much s/he then goes on to buy the other two albums, a t-shirt, and tickets to two shows, then that means revenue of about 5x the value of the original stolen item.
If you asked a car dealer how they felt about a £20k car being stolen, IF it would later turn into £100k of income, they'd certainly give it some thought.
I'm not saying the initial theft is justified by that, or that every theft will be so lucrative in the longer term, but your dismissive car/petrol analogy isn't really addressing the point very well.
Well said, my man. Well said. Nothing wrong with expecting to get paid. People who want to hear new things, and justify illegal downloading in this way, need to sign up for Rhapsody instead. Guilt-free listening.
fuck off its stealing! That's such a load of bollocks, I suppose we now believe that Frank has never stolen anything! Does he honestly believe that someone illegally downloading something is the same as shoplifting!! I mean how moronic is that. And we all do have a right to talk about the music industry because the majority of us do fund it. All this bullshit about illegal downloading killing the medium was said when there was radio taping.
This is just another benial rant which is not going to change anything.
Seriously naive, dude. Response here:
http://www.simonfairbairn.com/uncategorized/thatcher-fucked-the-kids-then-the-kids-fucked-frank-turner/
Touché Simon
Wow, with all these experts on the music industry commenting no wonder it's dissolving rapidly.
Seriously though, the songs belong to the writer, he/she whoever owns them. Chances are they are very precious to that person and if they want you to have them for free - then they will. Otherwise pay for them like every other fucking product or service out there. Illegally downloading it doesn't automatically build more money into a gig or a T-shirt, so show the man some respect and buy it properly.
Frank chooses that industry to work in, he knows the score. Sadly people WILL steal/borrow/trial, whatever the hell you want to call it, and that is part and parcel of that particular industry. It's not right, no, but don't expect us to feel sorry for you- there are plenty of other more secure industries out there to work in...
Frank said "most people don't know very much about the mechanics of the music industry, but feel qualified to theorize about its economics at length."
See the link from Simon Fairbairn above for evidence of this.
@Simon Fairbairn
Interesting post - seems you're a musician with thee opposite opinion to Frank. I haven't decided what I think about all of this yet, they seem to be a lot of grey areas.
Wow - Frank - I think this is the most replies to one of your posts ever. I think a lot of people dont really understand what it is like to be a musician and how it all works. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, view, etc
But at the end of the day you would not go into HMV and walk out with an album - downloading it is exactly the same - ie - you are not paying for something = theft!
I would like to send you an amen on this. I can only hope that more people will think about all the people that are being affected by the at of downloding music from the internet and now I know I was not crazy in my thoughts that supporting musicians not only would help them but also everyone involved in the making of not only an album but just one song.
Can of worms much?
Illegal downloading is stealing. Simple as. It's just stealing in a way that you are pretty much guaranteed not to get caught.
And Simon, your analogy about the box of cereal is terrible - if there were a 'magic' box of cereal in Tesco's, it would still mean that Tesco's lose money what with far less people buying their lines of cereal. So if you look at it that way, you're putting forward a point for Frank.
Man i love your music to death, and hearing your new record is one of the best things that happened to me in the past month, but that a side, i really feel for you and do actively go to EVERY show i can, make shows happen, etc...sorry i do have it "illegally" but i will also go to your free show in Berlin...is that sealing, and will go to your paid show in Hannover...and wend Epitaph releases the record on vinyl i will buy a copy because i love it so much....like i do to EVERY band i love...i mean i love some records so much that i pay 30 to 40 bucks on them on ebay when they go out of print...love, Nate
Frank,
Is there a price point that when the purchase of a cd or other item is so inflated (i.e. imports not available in America) that the illegal download is justified, provided the downloader purchases a hard copy of the cd/record/etc, once it is available in his native country? I own over 2000 cd's and am a big supporter of musicians and want them to earn as much as possible, but there has to be a price point, right?
ok, i was gonna stay shut up, but some comments just made me post it.
from the comfort of your UK/US houses, it might seem that everyone on this planet can easily listen to any myspace or lastfm (or other legal free streaming) sample of music.
believe it or not, there are places where internet connections are not so great, not existent, or simply too expensive (=unaffordable, really).
it's kind of a different thing in my eyes when someone gets a not-purely-legal permanent copy of music then. don't you think? is it still very wrong when i burn cd from my iTunes library for my internet-deprived friend with the music, that is otherwise available for free for the more lucky part of the world?
Such a dumbass
Once again, copyright infringement and theft are not the same thing. It is not the same as walking out of HMV with a CD, it is the same as buying the CD, taking it home, copying it, then bringing it back for a refund. These are *different things*. Nobody is being deprived of physical property. The artist *might* be being deprived of a sale and therefore cash, but probably not in most cases. Many people would just not listen if they couldn't download.
Once again..... COPYRIGHT INFRINGMENT AND THEFT ARE DIFFERENT!, and should be handled differently.
@Francis Yeah, I know. Most of my analogies are terrible, unfortunately. It's a curse.
Thing is, though, everything on the internet is basically a magic box of cereal (excluding bandwidth and storage costs which, these days, are basically negligable).
You're right, though. Stealing, like doing drugs, is against the law. Totally right. It's considered bad by our democratically elected lawmakers.
But, and this is the crux of what I'm suggesting, file sharing can be seen as a blessing or as a curse to the working musician.
I do think that saying "these young 'uns, they got no respect for property" is pretty unfair. An entire generation is also a very bold claim (I got called out on my site for not having references in my post), and calling people names ('cowards') really doesn't raise the debate any (again, I'm also guilty, but whatcha gonna do, right? I'm only hooman).
Anyhoo, a government-sponsored survey suggests that P2P sharing has no effect on CD sales (it's Canadian, so it must be right):
http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/ippd-dppi.nsf/eng/h_ip01456.html
Also, thanks to Wez, where do you draw the line? Is sharing a CD with friends OK, but sharing with strangers a no-no?
My band were subject to a premature leaking (ooh dear) of our second album in December last year, 3 months before it came out.
Aside from any financial implications this might have had, we'd been planning the release for months, everything was going swimmingly, and then someone thought it prudent to just give away our new stuff, thus completely fucking up everything.
When I was told about it, I didn't understand how it could have happened, I thought it was a joke. I don't think I've ever been as devastated in my life, it was like splitting up with a long-term girlfriend or something.
The buzz of having an album people wanted, sitting there in my house waiting for people to hear, was awesome, and it got ruined in one fell swoop. I have no doubt that the sales may have suffered because of it.
And again, the money is one thing (being on tour all the time costs money, and if you make any it's not often very much...at least not at the moment!), but the art is another. I want people to have the cd cover I slaved over, the full package with lyrics and words from the band, a full concept that isn't meant to be randomly downloaded and forgotten about.
My point being that illegal downloading has a lot more implication than just the (justified) financial ones - it's someone's art, someone's life work. It's something that has to be perfectly executed and not botched out or it can fuck it all up bigtime.
Put better than I can:
I'd like a job in which I'm able
To put shoes on my feet, and food on my table
Those nine-to-fivers, they look pretty stable
But I get my wages from my record label
And if you're thinking: So? So? So?
You don't know enough about it.
Joe
Man, I've considered purchasing your record through mutual friends and being stoked to meet you some day, and there is no chance such excitement would have ever occurred if it weren't for illegal downloading. Truth be told, I haven't downloaded your work, and now I definitely plan not to.
I'll continue downloading artists' albums then purchasing immediately afterward, as I have with the albums of Good Luck, Bridge & Tunnel, O Pioneers!!!, Defiance, Ohio, and Bomb The Music Industry!, and countless others in the past few months, many who offer their music for free on their own accord.
There are people out there who don't understand the value of music and the artists who make it, but those people aren't the type who would be moved by your work. Trust in your audience. Give them more credit. I'm offended.
Simon,
Just to clarify my position, none of it is 'ok'. Everybody 'should' be paying for music and other media. I just wanted to maintain the distinction between two different unethical acts.
I thought your blog post got a bad rap, the attacks were unnecessary in my opinion, but you raise some good points elsewhere.
The problem is, our entire economic model is based on scarcity at the moment, and we are starting to develop technology that removes that scarcity. Not just in things that can be digitised (though those are the first to be hit), but other areas too. Hopefully soon we will have abundant energy sources due to developments in fusion, geothermal and solar power. Genetic engineering may well provide abundant food etc. The problem is, what happens to supply and demand when supply is infinite? You get something akin to a division by zero error and everything is fucked up. We *are* going to have to deal with this, and it *is* unfortunate that honest, decent artist such as Frank and yourself are amoung the first to feel that pinch, but we are all going to have to deal with it eventually. Not to sound like a tin-foil hat wearing, conspiracy nutbag, but the world is going to change in a big way in the next century. This is just the tip of the iceberg.
Hi Frank. After reading your "rant", I've come here to post a little proposal: that come album number four (if "theft" and "shoplifting" of your album does not run you into bankruptcy and hoboicy before then), you partake in a little experiment.
Delete your MySpace account and the MP3 samples you offer on it. Delete this blog. Delete your YouTube account, and/or any YouTube accounts affiliated with you. Delete your Twitter. Delete your e-mail account. Do you have a forum for your fans to post on? I'm not really sure if you do, but if you do, delete that. In fact, delete anything on the internet that even slightly resembles some sort of advertisement of your work. Basically, promote yourself and your music, your merch, your gigs, like it was 1972. Get out there and stop being lazy with your resources. You have paper, pens, paints - get making posters by hand and post them up all around the country (by yourself, of course, unless some kind soul has offered to help you or you have asked help from them directly, and in person, without the use of social networking and/or anything else related to communication on the internet). Set up a market stool to sell your t-shirts and sell your CDs through local independent record stores.
You can rant as much as you like Frank, and I know it must be fucking annoying to miss out on however much money you are losing per "illegal" album download, but for christ's sake - man the fuck up. You're doing very well for yourself and you've built a strong fanbase. Don't abuse it. They love you because they have HEARD your music. Isn't that what matters? You pack out venues all over the country but you STILL haven't got enough in your back pocket. Your "holier-than-thou" take on life is starting to become a real fucking annoyance to me, and I know you don't give a shit about a lowly anonymous individual on the Internet but I wish you wouldn't be like this because it is killing my opinion of you and the music isn't starting to feel the same any more.
P.S. I won't be buying your new album because it's NOT THAT GREAT. The first two are stellar, though. Do you really expect me to pay £7.99 on a pre-order and then get it through the post with no expectation of what I've just spent 3/4 of a tenner on?
No thank you, Frank.
This post has been removed by the author.
Gotcha. Just so we're clear, I'm not saying it's OK either, I'm just saying that it is what it is and that smearing huge swathes of people doesn't help the debate about what to do (yeah, neither does what I wrote - mea culpa).
Also, I actively encourage people to share my music. Which raises another interesting question: does encouraging people to share my music (which wouldn't be piracy, as they have my permission) undermine copyright protection?
Would the very act of them sharing my music increase the likelihood of them sharing other people's music?
Will this cause more people on this site to hate me (which I did ask for it)?
I'm a glass-half-full kind of guy, so I'm hoping that we all wise up, share the infinite wealth and enjoy this huge earthly paradise. Unfortunately, even with free energy, internet and music, many other resources are still finite so there's plenty left to fight over...
Out of all the comments, that last one really is the most pathetic yet.
One question though, why is "illegal" in quotes? Even if you do not believe in the law, it IS a law. So why is it in quotes? That confuses me.
I don't give a fuck if Frank has 100 million in the bank, made from the profits of live shows, that STILL does not make it suddenly ok.
Simon - If you choose to give away your stuff for free then in my opinion that is absolutely fine as you are the owner and this was your choice.
If somebody sets a price on an item and you don't pay it that is called theft.
Pretty simple really.
Simon,
Yes actually, I suspect that you giving away your work for free does undermine those that do not wish this, that doesn't mean you are not entitled to do it though.
I am in a similar position. I make a pretty good living by designing and building computer software. I am no millionaire, but I live pretty well. In my spare time, I contribute to free software that can be downloaded and used by anyone for free. One completely legitimate use of file sharing applications is to distribute this software, but there are plenty of copies of 'photoshop' on such filesharing networks. People do not always draw neat lines between the two, many do not even understand that the line is there.
This is a bigger problem than is even painted in Frank's post. For sure there are a few people who just think, "Haha, I can get this for free! Screw you Frank!!", but to some it has become cultural. To them, sharing various media is just 'what you do'. They have little regard for the rules and regulations that prevent it, much like cannabis smokers tend to have little regard for the laws that speak on that. To them, smoking a joint is part of their 'culture' too.
I am certain it is a pain in the arse for people that don't want their work floating around for free. I completely get that, but you cannot fight it head on. You have to innovate. There are hundreds of ways to support people who purchased your work legally (incidentally the MPAA has entirely the wrong approach here, putting unskipable warnings about piracy on legally bought DVDs is nothing short of retarded, sometimes I download the rip of a DVD I legally purchased just to avoid that crap, how to shoot yourself in the fucking foot 101). As someone has already pointed out, the internet has, in many ways, made promoting yourself as an artist a metric shitload easier, but rough with the smooth, might have to go that extra mile to prevent people turning this tech around on your. Frank mentions in his previous post, him selling signed copies of the album... this kind of thing is *exactly* the kind of answer needed.
We can all stand on the beach and order the tide back... A warning though... it totally fucked the last guy who tried!
Dude. Awesome.
One last thing to throw in the bucket before I call it a night.
Where do people here stand on remixes/mashups?
Take remixed music videos. I mean, it's not piracy, but you're still re-distributing someone's work and giving others access to the song for free.
Technically, they potentially violate copyright laws, so from a purely legal perspective YouTube should be buried under lawsuits right now.
Lessig is much more coherent than I am: http://www.ted.com/talks/larry_lessig_says_the_law_is_strangling_creativity.html
Hey Frank,
I do know what I'm talking about. The PRS seems to be the match for the german GEMA, which by the way is a big pile of shit which hinders most artist to make money by making it unaffordable for promoters to do small shows with these artist.
All in all I can understand your argumentation as well as I understand the other side (my side). Actually I think that I am just kind of disappointed by your total lack of understanding for people that download music. Not everyone does it because they don't want to pay for music. Everyone that I know does it because a lot of bands they listen to is really hard to get because they are just to small to put on a worldwide distribution of their cds.
Downloading music is stealing in a black and white world. Unfortunately it is never that easy, but who am I telling this. You are way more in this music <-> business-thing than I am. Just don't let the business part be the bigger one, because that is the point when everything becomes shitty.
I'm looking forward to your album and I think that almost 95% of people loving your music will buy this next album.
all the best, Tobias!
Well, I kinda feel that the whole thing essentially hinges on people not being dicks. In an ideal world, what would happen is that somebody would create their remix, then drop an email to the author with a copy, asking their permission to distrubute. The original author would then give reasonable credit for the changes (which means, if the song is reworked in an interesting way, fine, if a hi-hat is added every 4th bar, no so much!), and just grant permission on that basis. Perhaps that is a utopian view, but I think it is the right one.
YouTube has certainly had its fair share of legal problems. Forget bit torrent and gnutella etc, I suspect YouTube is the biggest pirate website today. Most of the time, you can go and tap in the name of any song from any mainstream artist and find a copy. Granted it might be the original track with somebodies dumb 'sims' video (not what I would call a legitimate piece of fair-use), but you can listen all the same. I recentally read an interview with Eric Schmitt (Google CEO, obviously google own YouTube now), and he said that google actually get sued several times every day! There is a lot of wheeling and dealing going on that we are not privy to, and everybody wants a share of the google, scrooge mcduck style, pile of gold.
will you just diaf
Thank you for that well reasoned, insightful comment Mr brave, anonymous internet warrior, although when it comes to complex subjects such at this one, it is probably better that you just let the adults talk. If we ever find ourselves discussing reasons why brothers and sisters should not reproduce and then provide their incestuous offspring with internet access, we'll give you a call.
You're a fucking retard and deserve to watch your business fail.
Are you aware of the phrase, 'Ad hominem'? If you have a point to make, please make it. Unless your goal is simply to make me cry...
This post has been removed by the author.
Let me elaborate a bit. To everyone above who said anything about artists "deserving" to get paid, or about production costs justifying consumer costs: you are retarded. This is a free(ish) market. Congrats for being able to sell out your ideas thus far. Thankfully for humanity, information is coming closer and close to being free. It's the greatest achievement of our time.
This is like calligraphers whining that the printing press is putting them out of business. Good comedy, but the fact that people are listening to them is pretty sad.
Let me lay out the market for people that are still a decade behind. The old way, you pay for ads to sell your music. The new way, you pay for music to sell your brand/merch/show.
When you release your ideas into the world (and that's what art is of course--thought, ideas), it's yours, but it is no longer under your control. The End. When I study Calculus, I'm not "stealing" from Newton. When I listen to your music, I'm not stealing it from you. It's still yours.
As an artist you should be happy to get your music to as many people as possible. If you are not then you are less of an artist in my mind--you're a businessman. And a poor one at that.
to the comment above - spot on!
as an emerging artist the most important thing to understand is firstly WHAT you are trying to achieve with your pursit and HOW people consume music and adapt your promotional/business strategies to accomodate.
Correct me if I'm wrong but the goal of most musicians is for their music to be heard. Moreover, the current trend in the consumption of music gears towards digital media, be it legal or illegal.
The reality is that you've just got to work and adapt to the environment you operate in. Life is hard, being a musician is hard, you've just got to deal with it.
Frank, I think you should probably be a little bit more tactful about you say. Yes it's your site, say what you want but I work hard too and my time isn't 'free' but I don't always get rewarded. I've put you up before after a show (as have many others here) and I don't appreciate being patronised that I somehow don't respect your profession.
I know you don't mean it, but you have a loyal supportive fanbase who like you as a person, don't let them turn on you.
It shouldn't be about the money. :(
Honestly Frank, I have no idea who you are. I followed a link from AboslutePunk.net because I saw music piracy in the title. I feel like I would fit into the category of people you smear in your post. Had this been a pro-downloading post, I'd probably go out and download your records. If I liked them, I'd suggest them to my friends. Maybe we'd all come see your show next time you're in town.. probably buy a T-Shirt or two. Oh wait, you were too concerned with the 2 cents you get from me buying your CD on iTunes. Instead, I'll go on not having any idea who you are.
I completely understand your point, but is illegal downloading really analogous to stealing? I'm quoting Wikipedia here:
"In English law, theft was codified into a statutory offence in the Theft Act 1968 which defines it as:
"A person is guilty of theft, if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it". (Section 1)"
It really isn't the same thing as shoplifting, simply because your endless copies of your "intellectual property" can be produced at virtually no cost, whereas the physical property stolen from a shop is unique.
I'm not saying you shouldn't get paid. A friend of mine has written some blog posts about the same issue, albeit from a even less mainstream point of view: The search for the "Music Business v2.0" business model, Freewars, The Long Tail, Agile music.
I bought you first two LP's as (legal) digital downloads and ordered the First Three Years CD from an online record store. (Oh, and bought Campfire Punkrock personally from you as a CDR.) Currently I'm looking for a way to get my hands on your new record. I'm paying for it, of course, when I can, but I don't want to wait.
I was rather disappointed when I read this. Frank, you came off really strong and I was quite surprised after reading your rant. You were blunt to say the least. I am not saying that downloading music is right but Art shouldn't be about the money. I mean this is why we have some many terrible bands and artist in the world; who no longer make art. They are merely an image. I will be honest when I say that I can't afford music. It's really expensive, 10 to 20 dollars for a cd is a lot of money...I am a college student. I don't have that money laying around. If I didn't download music I would have never listen to 3/4s of the bands I listen to now. Which means I would have never bought any merch, never gone to any shows, and never ever told anyone to listen to them. Word of mouth is still probably one of the greatest forms of advertising. There is this band called Defiance, Ohio. They offer all the torrents to their music on their website and they even will make you a shirt for only 3 bucks. It shouldn't be about money at all. It should be about expressing yourself and reaching out to as many people as possible. I hold you in the highest respects Mr. Turner. Your music is some of the most fantastic stuff I have ever listen to and it has helped me through a lot of tough times. But if it wasn't for illegal downloading, I would have never listen to you. And this isn't because I trying to screw over you or your record company; it's because I simply can't afford buying a 15 dollar CD. Music shouldn't be a privilege to only those who have money. It should be open to everyone and anyone. I thought you were more Punk Rock.
Hi Frank,
I don't feel like a thief for downloading, I am not actually taking something that belongs to you that you will never have again.
I understand that musicians have to live, eat, and be allowed to make enough money so they can bridge the gaps between gigs, recording and writing, and to set some money aside for later.
That is why i go to concerts (tickets and or booking fee for artists) where i tend to buy cd's, hoping the artists see more from cd's sold at gigs than they do through other sales channels.
Downloading music is a means to check new music, new bands for myself, so i can get around the hyperbole or slagging of the music press. I will try to see you in Amsterdam or Hamburg later in the year where I will buy your new cd that i have been listening to (illegaly, as a result of theft according to you) for a few weeks now.
I would love to sponsor you more by buying apparel but i've kinda outgrown the t-shirt stage of my life. How about a nice polo with your logo emboidered, something subtle, understated, that one could wear and be taken seriously.
Keep up the good work, please stop calling me a thief. Can't wait for your show!
When I was just a skinny lad on holiday by the sea,
I met a girl in a Rancid shirt, and a tape she gave to me
With the Black Flag First Four Years and the Minor Threat Discography,
And punk rock saved my life.
PIRATE SCUM!
One more thing before I leave this alone.
"most people don't know very much about the mechanics of the music industry, but feel qualified to theorize about its economics at length."
The same could be said about the internet. Also, economic theory is kind of industry independent.
You make stuff. You put a price on stuff. The market responds to your stuff (buys it, doesn't buy it, steals it). Works for cheese just as much as it works for CDs.
But, the internet! Let's look at the mechanics of the digital world.
Virtually everything you do digitally is copied. You don't watch YouTube videos on the internet, they're copied (temporarily, but you can keep them if you know where to look) to your hard drive and played from there.
Even those copy protected DVDs have to go through your computer, which means at some point their data is copied.
Technically, lending a friend a CD and having them copy it is stealing. It says so on the packet.
Hypothetical: What if my friend is on the other side of the world? What if he can't get this CD where he is? If I send it over P2P, is that really the same as maliciously providing all copyright material to everyone? Is that the same as robbing a bank with a gun?
Also, all those people saying stealing is wrong and well done Frank should double check their hard drives for any dodgy goods (including copied CDs from friends) and, in order to avoid cognitive dissonance, get rid of them ASAP. It's for your own mental well being.
Equating morality with legality is easy, but it's flawed. Remember, homosexuality was illegal not so long go.
Don't throw a hissy fit, I'm not saying it's the same thing, I'm just saying that it's not a good idea to define your moral boundaries by what's written in law (nor judge people too harshly that don't agree with your moral boundaries - especially when talking about huge numbers of different people in hugely varied situations).
I'm not saying illegal file sharing is right or wrong, but it is what it is and each case should be looked at individually, as it would be in a court of law, before we pass judgment on huge swathes of people.
And, speaking of law, assuming that the whole of the next generation (what Frank said) thinks that sharing music is OK and assuming that a small portion of this generation become lawmakers (and maintain these views), isn't it likely that the laws will shift towards making file sharing OK?
What about the musicians? Having been brought up in this environment, they're not even going to think twice. Files get shared, that's a given, but that's not going to stop them making music.
To be fair, Frank does mention this, but he doesn't think it's there yet. I think it is. Hell, if you want, the average joe can cheaply run off his or her own branded energy drinks and sell 'em.
The potential is huge - just don't get hung up on one small part that the study I quoted suggests probably don't even affect you - and be grateful for the extra fans it could bring you.
It is not stealing to download a record, for the simple fact that it costs you nothing to distribute it. If anything you should be paying us for the publicity!
If you make a record, that's a one off cost. From then on it makes no difference whether one person downloads it or 1000 people download it, it doesn't cost you anything extra, as opposed to stealing from HMV where each unit on the shelf has associated production, distribution, shelf space, shop staff costs associated with it. Not to mention the added cost of getting the music out there so people don't just skim over your name in the record shop!
The fact is that thanks to sharing your music with my friends for free, between us we have gone on to give you literally hundreds of pounds in album sales and gig tickets, which you would otherwise not have had. You can't pay for that kind of publicity!
People will still buy albums as a physical memento, I in fact came across this conversation while looking for a link to pre-order your new album. I would have paid extra to have it signed too, because I respected you and wanted to support you as an artist.
I am now reconsidering. Hilarious thing is, I might well still download it to see if it's any good!
Muchly agreed. Some people use illegal file sites and some people (like myself) spend my time getting the album in physical format. I just spent £88 on The Stone Roses box set (whether you like them or not, neither here nor there) but there is so much you wouldn't get to see if you illegally downloaded. We're recording soon, and we're not putting full tracks up on the myspace page to encourage people to buy the album and that's not to line our pockets so we can buy expensive gifts, it's just to break even! Pay for your music or even Pay the £60 for LimeWire who hold the rights from the labels! Just don't think every musician on the planet has enough money to swan around in luxury. We're not all The Rolling Stones!
Chris
Afterlite
Great rant frank.
I'm a graduate sound design/audio engineering student and I can't tell you how much it infuriates me to have my profession devalued buy tools who think they're "helping us out" by "distributing" my work amongst their goofy 13-25yr old friends.
It's entirely unjustifiable and frankly, not to sound selfish, how the hell do these kids think they're helping me out by stealing the CD? I don't get my royalty from the artists shirts or concert tickets, my pay check comes straight out of the CD sales. Do they really think we (the engineers) get enough to live on straight out of the Label. No fucking way.
I am however aware that the industry is facing an enormous shift (it's the focus of my masters thesis). My fear here is that given 10-15 years or less with no real repercussions, people are going to view music as a free commodity (watch as every hippy in the world stands up and screams "that's the way it should be"). This is my job, how would you feel if I suddenly made cars free for everyone, or if supermarkets were no longer allowed to charge for their products, gee you'd be pretty pissed if you worked for Ford or fucking Wal-Mart.
So what makes this different? It feels like a victimless crime, you can't steal a car on the web, you can't steal groceries or toys online. But you can steal music, from some faceless server in east-jesus nowhere and it doesn't feel like theft at all, it's about two clicks of a mouse and you've got it.
And don't even get me started on quality degradation which, IMO, is the bigger problem here. We've got HD-DVD/Blu-RAY, 100+ Megapixel cameras and... and... 128kb/s Mp3's for music, it's the worst music has ever sounded, for free. Wow sounds enticing.
Leave it at this. It IS stealing, It IS wrong and it WILL change. If not, I sure hope all the producers/engineers start working for charities 'cause your precious music sure won't get onto tape/HDD for free.
Fair points, although I have to say (I haven't read everyone's replies yet). Gig prices and t-shirts have gone up. Maybe not so much at the indie level, but Live Nation and the like rarely have a t shirt under $25, or a single ticket under $40 after fees. I agree with this for the most part, even though some artists have a different outlook on it.
To those in the music industry here complaining: How about appreciate the fact that what you have what some would consider a dream job? If you don't like it, quit and work in a cubicle like the rest of us.
I live off 20 pounds a week and love music more than anything, especialy yours. I guess I'm a criminal.
how much money do you have Frank Turner? I'm guessing you woud'nt be in the music industry if you earned as much as I do.
But if it makes you feel any better I'll give you what I owe you if I ever see you. I may have to go hungry for a couple days afterwards though.
i haven't downloaded music illegally in 4 years but after reading your rant all I want to do is deprive you of 14 dollars. don't hate the playa, hate the game.
Frank, I live in Brazil and you´re probably one of my favorites singer/songwriter. I would never know your music if it wasn´t for the internet. After hearing your Sleep is fot the Week, I bought a copy of Love, Ire and Song, and I´ll buy the new one too.
The thing is cd´s are very expensive here, especially if you have to buy it overseas. As a musician, I don´t like the idea of people downloading my albums, but the whole thing brought me the opportunity to play across the country, in places that we don´t even have a distribution deal (as you probably know, Brazil is a huge country). I´m not saying that you´re wrong, just trying to give you another view about this thing.
Well, that´s it...gotta go back to work. Don´t let this shit bring you down.
I buy most of my music, but with that being said if I have never heard of your band and you get recommended to me, Im not going to go out of my way to buy your cd. Im going to DL it first and see what it sounds like in my everyday life (car, work, gym). If I bought the album, and it sucked, are you going to give me my money back? No. If I DL it, and it blows then I can easily delete it from my life. But if I DL it and its good, well then I will probably buy your future work and even pay to see you live.
altough i agree with you at most points i can't help but wondering if you wouldn't have done the same if you would be a teenager and having no source of income, you are just like the rest of us arent you?
dont take this as an insult please, it is not.
i just think it's ridiculous that you'r calling us theives when you would probably do the same if you were raised when we were, because i dont think you are more saint-like then the rest of us are you?
and again please dont take this as an insult. i respect you work and pay for it as well.
-regards from sweden.
I do think you have missed some of the larger points in the argument, though making good points. As megatroplis stores have risen, real music stores have closed. The physical availability of music has diminished at the same time that the price has risen. I would love to buy every single album I have ever loved. However, I'm not going to get a credit card solely to buy them on the Internet for more than is still necessary plus the absurd cost of S&H. I'm not saying that this justifies anything but rather than this is one of the reasons you have missed as to why people download (especially younger audiences without access to credit and cars).
i agree with you when you get mad about people downloading songs for free.
i think illegal downloads is one of the most stupid things ever.
there is no excuse for downloading music for free unless they're a free release anyways.
anyone who do that should be cursed with carrying a weight in their souls for the rest of their miserable lives.
but have you ever thought that sometimes some people don't have other choice?
after a illegal downloaded cd literally saved my life i changed my thoughts about it a bit.
the thing is you can't know the circumstances that made people "steal" music. most times they're just fucking idiots(in my opinion only a idiot would rather have 10 mp3s instead of have a cd in hands) but maybe they don't have other choice.
for example, distribuitors. your cd as another example is not sold everywhere in the world like brazil(where i live). so we have to buy it overseas and you can't do it for less than 50 bucks. and some people just can't afford it.
probably they are not distribuiting as they should because people have started to download music for free and you don't have control over it as much as you should.
you and everyone in the music ind. should be fairly payed for your work at least.
and it shouldn't but it gets to a point of choosing if you rather have 13 bucks or 13 people listening to your work.
it's something you can't control and we have to learn how to keep up with the times(as much as they're fucked up sometimes) trying not to be mad at it even if you every reason to.
Hi, a few thoughts I would like to offer on this subject:
The comparison of stealing a physical object with that of copying files on a computer is a false one. If I steal your car, you don't have a car any more. You are directly inconvenienced by this act. Downloading music causes no direct inconvenience, as you suffer no material loss, so it is a fallacy to equate this with stealing.
Consider the cost of a legal music download relative to the cost of a CD. They are about the same. Then consider the relative costs of manufacture and distribution. The two are vastly imbalanced. Perhaps this is one reason why people use file-sharing services to download music; downloading it legally is simply a rip-off.
It is a fact that many file-sharing services offer a better service than the legal options. They provide higher bitrate and sometimes even lossless files, that are free from the DRM which plagues many legal alternatives and at a price everyone can agree with. If the music industry wants to control the downloading of music, and hence make money from it, all it must do is provide the best service. "The wonders of capitalism", as you put it. As it stands today, they claim they cannot make money from giving away music, while at the same time suing the Pirate Bay, claiming in court that it is a for-profit organisation.
There are other ways to obtain music without the artist receiving any money, yet that are perfectly legal. How do you feel about someone buying a record of yours second hand?
Most people who download music do so because they are fans of music, not because they want to deprive you of money. Why not see the positive side? If I had the talent to make music, I would take it as a compliment that people want to hear it. Many of these people *will* come to see you live, and maybe even buy a t-shirt or a CD. And many of these people
I believe it is simply impossible for everyone who makes music to be able to make a living off it, so perhaps it is foolish to expect to be able to. Do you do it because it is something you enjoy doing? Then carry on doing it, carry on enjoying it. But if you are doing it to make money, I would suggest that you are in the wrong trade.
That's about it from me, I would be interested to hear any replies you may have
I don't want to rehash the same old arguments about this subject but here's my two cents:
Up until a few months ago when I got a job I simply couldn't afford to buy every album I wanted to listen to. I could buy maybe a few a year plus whatever I asked for for Christmas, birthdays etc. I always made sure that your albums were the ones that got bought because not only are you one of my favourite artists but I realise that you're only a relatively small scale operation without masses of major label funding.
But to be honest Frank, there's a lot of kids who are in the same position who don't think of you as their favourite artist or who don't realise that you don't have masses of cash behind you, and if they want to listen to you they probably can't afford the album, so it makes perfect sense to them to download it. Calling them theives and cowards doesn't do anyone any good at all.
Of course I get why you're pissed of, and I realise it must be infuriating to realise that people are enjoying your muic without paying you for it, but the way you're putting your argument across is just going to alienate a lot of people: people who got into your music through downloading (yes, they exist, I know a few of them) and then went on to buy your other records, gig tickets and shirts are not going to appreciate being insulted like this.
And come on, as if you've never downloaded anything (or would've downloaded if it was around when you were a teenager - I'm not calling you an old bastard I'm just not sure if it was or not =P)
Nathan
Amen.
I've returned home from Reading Festival with this debate still in my mind. Stumbling across your perspective was a chance happening but I whole-heartedly agree with your arguments.
I work, indirectly, for the music-industry. We do all the online media stuff (websites etc) for a lot of big and independant labels alike and if the music industry suffers so do we. It's not just the labels who lose out...or the artists. Think Virgin Records or Zavvi and all the employees who lost their jobs.
On the Friday at Reading there was a debate going on in the Alternative Tent. A girl stood up in front of the entire crowd to make a speech that included gems like, "I don't think we should have to pay for music because I am a student and I'm poor. I have to work really hard to buy CD's and I don't think it's fair." She was applauded. To me that seems a perfect example of the idiocy that is unfortunately rampant. Music is a luxury item not a given right. Hasn't anyone heard of a little thing called radio?
It makes no fucking sense to download it illegally... Type in 'Frank Turner' on spotify, there are 107 results, including his most recent single, released yesterday. Everyone has access to his music, for free, more so than most artists out there. If you can't afford it you can listen to it there, on last fm, on myspace. Jesus, I cannot believe how many people on this thread are trying to justify it. I believe most of the complaint Frank has probably relates to Poetry of the Deed, which he hasn't even released, so what fucking right do any of you have to be listening to something that he hasn't issued into the public domain?
As for all of you 'I downloaded your music and now have all your albums so it serves a purpose'. Stop being so subjective, there are a few people who do this, against many many more who do it and do not pay for the album. Just because *you* have brought it does not make the process itself okay. Anyone who has internet access can listen to Frank's music without breaking the law.
It's as simple as: Frank provides a PRODUCT, if you want it, pay for it. If not, shut up, write and play your own shit.
Hit the nail on the head with that last comment. Maybe people don't like the phrase "I deserve to get paid" but its the truth. Music is art, yes but that doesn't mean the artist should provide it for free, he still has bills to pay. I work hard for my money and don't have much but I get alot of enjoyment out of Franks music and I'm happy to pay for that.
Historically, I've tended to not buy CDs from artists I don't solidly know until such time as I've assured myself I can afford to. This is because I spend somewhere in the order of £6,000 a year on gigs, festivals and merchandise. And, yes, I do then buy legitimate music (latest example -- The Temper Trap's album on CD. Actually, I've not even opened the CD shrinkwrap, because I have a set of 320kbps MP3s of the album. But then I'm happy with that, because it means my CD is in unplayed, mint condition).
When I was about this high (*gestures a stumpy youngster*), I used to borrow tapes off mates. I didn't own an original of "Nevermind" for 4 years. Yep, I guess that's wrong, and I genuinely understand the sentiment of both sides (I don't work directly in the music industry, but I work for an employer who is affected by the vagiaries and whims of the entertainment industry).
Home taping didn't kill the music industry. Amstrad's tape-to-tape unit didn't kill the music industry. Video didn't kill the radio star. _BUT_ at some time, people have to stop and take responsibility for their actions. That point for me is throwing away MP3s that I don't listen to, and replacing/supplementing those that I do listen to with legitimate content. *shrugs*
Well done, Frank. I agree completely. Cheers on having the balls to say something like that. It feels like people all over the place are so disenfranchised (sp?) and jaded that they give no thought towards the responsiblity of their actions.
Looking forward to Amoeba and Chain!
I can't believe the amount of comments I have read tried to justify illegal downloading / filesharing.
I will openly admit that I steal music from artists, the only way I personally feel I can justify it is when it is from bands who have split up with records that are out of print.
I feel very bad about downloading albums by artists whose music I love but as a university student without the benefits of my peers (getting a few hundred £'s from mummy and daddy every month) I simply can't afford to buy many CD's. Nevertheless I agree it is wrong, and that it is the problem with the music industry at the moment.
I downloaded your new CD. I didn't like it. I deleted it. I saved myself a tenner. There will always be some pissed off kid in a basement with a guitar or a drum kit who isn't worried like yourself about record sales, downloading or their bank account.
Get a grip........
I downloaded your new CD. I didn't like it. I deleted it. I saved myself a tenner. There will always be some pissed off kid in a basement with a guitar or drum kit who doesn't care about record sales, downloads or their bank balance....
Get a grip......
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha
what if you were to buy a cd and lose it? because if you'd already bought it and then it got lost/scratched/eaten by a bear? after that, it would surely be ok to download the album as the artist would already have recieved the royalties. just a thought. kepp playing man
James
You obviously have no idea who the victim is in a car theft mate.....what a fucking twat! You are a naive little man and I am ashamed to have ever enjoyed a single fucking song that you wrote! I fucking stole yer album from the internet! Then I fucking went out and bought it! Now I'm gonna fuckin sell it! You fucking nonse!
Hey Frank, I just wanted to say I just bought Poetry of the Deed and also have a ticket for your Leeds Met show and was more than happy to PAY for such brilliant music, im with you all the way.
hey frank,
i first found out about you through itunes free single of the week, and since then, i have loved your music, and all my freinds digitally theive their music, and i could have, but i just feel wrong doing it,id like to see you become rich and famous like micheal jackson, your a winchester boy :) but what im trying to say is, id rather spend my money on music than steal and see you fail, which is why last night i went and bought ALL of your albums. was very worth it, favourite song atm is isabel, i love when you do that style, such as isabel, long live the queen, and jet lag, you really excell at the acoustic versions and i appluad you for that. not many artists do.
how do you feel about mcfly giving their album away for free, is that something you beleive in?
p.s do you right this music to get paid, or the create wonderful music expressing feeling?
I don't usually get drawn into these debates but it’s quite intriguing, so I may as well have my two cents worth!
I’m probably a fair bit older than most of the posters on here and as such, I’ve seen similar arguments many times before.
Yes, I’m old enough to have brought all those old Black Flag albums on vinyl when they first came out (at stupidly over-inflated import prices I may add). At the time there was uproar over taping (anyone remember the old ‘home taping is killing music’ campaign?). Basically the record industry expected you to fork out your hard-earned cash on vinyl as well as buying cassettes to play on your car stereo!
Then came ‘the future’ of music in the form of CDs, and I ended up replacing all my ‘well worn’ vinyl with shiny new plastic. If I was stupid/nostalgic enough, I would now chuck out my CDs and replace ‘em all again with nice chunky 180gm vinyl LPs again (at an even more over-inflated expense…).
It didn’t stop there though, as soon as you have the CD, they re-release it, maybe with a new picture, perhaps the lyrics and if you’re lucky maybe a few bonus tracks – another 13 quid, please!
It’s not just the music industry; the movie industry is just as bad. I had all my favourite films on video, then came DVDs and I forked out for them all again – now if I’m stupid enough they’ll have me buy ‘em all again on Blu-Ray to play on a nice new hi-def flat screen TV.
Right or wrong, the music industry has screwed people (music buying public and struggling artist alike...), so many times that now people have the chance to screw them over, it’s no wonder they are!
It’s so easy to buy a second-hand album for a couple of quid on the likes of eBay and Amazon, it’s no more financially rewarding to the artist (royalties were already paid when the album was first sold...), than an illegal download but no-ne seems to have a problem with that!
I don’t know what the answer is but the music industry has a lot to answer for.
The only hope Frank, is artists like yourself that make quality music will always make a decent living...
I appreciate your thought. I wish I could get your Compact Disc. Keep up your work.
Honestly, im a musician (unsigned) and i would love it if people would download my music. I put alot of work into the production of the cd and it just feels like a waste if only 10 of the 50 people that come to my monthly gigs buy the album. I make a killing in merch sales otherwise and its a 30 cent disc after all is said and done. im offering my music as a promotion to get people to my shows to buy my merch and hopefully my album, but if people are enjoying my music regardless and considering coming out im happy. i would rather 1000 fans than a 1000 dollars any day. i suppose that all changes when you get signed but i feel this is fault of the labels killing themselves. a new straregy is needed. this is neither fault to the artist nor the fan. things arent going to change, people are going to downlaod music no matter what any one says. which is why indie labels are the way of the future.
asking your fans to pay a fair price for music, but no-one is making a stand to stop touts stealing from fans... it aint rocket science to make a ticket valid only for the purchaser: footie did it because they were forced to, music can if anyone takes a stand. (clue - artists pressure promoters).
ensure fans can buy tickets at fair prices and we'll be happy to pay for your music. one rule for the artists and another for the fans?
Wow. Reading all that was fun.
This is a matter which goes far beyond music. Our ability to encode any information (music, words, pictures, moving images, news, gossip, fact or fiction) into a digital format and transmit it around the world almost anonymously throws all our cherished notions about ownership and authorship into the air. The technological paradigm has changed so fundamentally that we haven't really thought of a good solution yet.
Regardless of all the ranting and posturing, and the trying to be cleverer than the other fellow, there is a fundamental issue which Frank alludes to, which for me is the only real issue.
What I do for a living, to keep a roof over my head, food in my belly, my kids able to afford to go to University, cannot (as yet) be digitised. Other people could do it just as well, but it can't be encoded and copied and distributed around the rest of the world for nothing. It can't yet be taken away from me. If my employers want it, they have to pay me for it.
As a working person it is the only economic power I have - indeed, not trying to be Marxist about this, it is the ONLY power I have.
If all of a sudden, everything that I do to make my living becomes freely available to all and sundry - then I'll just have to do something else, or starve.
Musicians are just the latest to be faced with this. Millions throughout the world have lost jobs or changed jobs because the service they used to provide (their knowledge, skill, whatever) has been replaced by coded information - whether on the Web or on an automatic production line. Can I remind everyone that even now, we don't actually need people to write music for us.
This is the fundamental issue. If as a society we actually don't believe that creativity, the giving of joy and song, of good times, of new tunes, of listening to music that just wants to make us get up and dance and laugh and cry, is not worth a reward to the creator, then, well, frankly, we're fucked.
Denying a worker the fruits of his labour is just wrong, at least in my universe.
Frank - if your 'fans' don't think your music is worth paying for, then could you please keep doing it fo me?
Post a Comment
<< Home