Could $5 a month save the music industry?

By - jigz -
in Back Page News

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

Rudy

Posted
Posted
This scares me, as it sounds like a slippery slope.

It starts with a fee for music, but it opens the door for:

  1. Movie fee
  2. TV fee
  3. Software fee
  4. Book fee
  5. Pictures fee
  6. News fee
  7. etc.

And then what about studios / artists / developers that aren't a part of the organization getting this money? Can they require ISPs to charge another fee? Will I be required to pay an HBO fee because in theory, I could download HBO TV shows?

The answer, for me anyway, is no.

However, I will happily pay a reasonable monthly fee to the music industry for the right to download and copy music (for personal use) whenever / wherever / however I please. But I don't want DRM on it.

I was going to write the EXACT same thing, if they allow this for music then why not movies etc... then we could all pay 100-200$/month for internet :x

Grand Master

Xero

Posted
Posted

If it was properly organized and the funding was actually going to proper people instead of all to those dammed RIAA, I wouldn't mind paying a little more considering all the downloading I do.. I mean don't do.

I commented before reading the few posts above me. If that actually happened, I'd probably murder someone. Dammit.. I mean, not murder someone.

Mentor

The Gunslinger

Posted
Posted

Hell no...!!!...

I will not subsidise a dying industry, that brought about its own demise!

Whats next? Coca Cola and Pepsi, adding a $5 charge on my water bill because they are losing profits?

The fact is, that they are an industry, if they are losing money, or going under, they have no right to ask us to subsidise their stupidity!

And what of the people who dont download music? Are they required to pay this tax as well?

In theory, the industry can stagnate after this is introduced...think about it, they are producing crap right now, so what incentive will there be to produce good music? None! Seeing as they will be guaranteed your $5 at the end of every month! Hell we can go so far as saying, that they dont EVER have to produce ANY new music! They will still be guaranteed their money!

Grand Master

Matrix XII

Posted
Posted

Fine, whatever

Not like we don't have too many ridiculous taxes around here anyways.

Environmental tax, carbon tax :blink:

I think CD sales are down becuase it is a dying format and people are using MP3 players now etc

Veteran

CelticWhisper

Posted
Posted
I like this idea. $5 wont hurt me at all. Plus the music industry will be helped out.

See, that's the problem though. I don't mind paying $5. However, I want the $5 to go to musicians, and absolutely NOT the music industry.

I want to hurt the music industry.

Grand Master

Crazysah

Posted
Posted

I totally agree Celtic Whisper. I also don't mind paying the 5$ but I want equal distribution of all 5$ collected to musicians and not the music industry. Good idea nad mostly all people would accept it if it went ot the musicians!

Grand Master

MR_Candyman

Posted
Posted

See, the problem I have with this (that a few people have pointed out) is that we already pay a levy on bland media, be it cds, dvds, hard drives, mp3 players, flash drives, sd cards and the like. We pay a LOT already for these levies. It started with those, then move on to $5 a month on your internet, then what next?

Grand Master

+Audioboxer Subscriber²

Posted
  • Subscriber²
Posted (edited)

I do agree the industry has to "accept" this fate.

Times have changed and people much prefer Mp3s on an ipod, than a CD with a cd player. Yeah cds will be bought by people as gifts/others interested in the artwork and/or for the free DVD/making of... But a large % of the consumer base just wants the music, in a digital format and thats it.

I prefer digital distribution full stop. The only time I ever use cds is in my car, and even that is changing with an ipod connection being fitted soon.

Right now though digital distrubution methods are poor. There is no "online store" im aware of where you can buy UNCOMPRESSED music such as WAV/FLAC and then choose to compress it yourself if you want to. You're force fed crap encodes, especially on iTunes - How about sorting that out "music industry" before complaining.

However nearly everyone is part of the "grey area" of piracy surrounding music. The majority of you go mental at the RIAA, say everyone is greedy, and yet you do still "steal" music at the end of the day - It's a vicious cycle where no one wants to take the blame, and IMO no one really can take the blame outright - Everyone is the problem, as much as the solution.

I also say it's a grey area as some indie artists say hey go download our music, WE give you permission - spread the word of our band, and other big artists, RHCP anyone? chuck hissy fits when they don't earn 8 million, but only 3 million.

Being an artist/musician, unless you "sell out" to being involved in magazines/press and photo shoots/massive arena tours is NOT an easy way to make a main income nowadays.

The artists and musicians who become rich, probably earn more money being "famous" than they do from their actual music.

Some of the artists also need a bit of a reality check, being "talented" on an instrument does not equal instant cash and a rockstar way of living. Keep your day job, go to University, and create music as your hobby in the meantime - You hit it big, well done, but don't go in as a minow expecting hundreds of money, and then start kicking and squealing, blaming piracy/ect when you don't earn "much" - People like you are disgusting, and I doubt your actual interests in creating music as opposed to just trying to get rick quick.

This is the downfall of the disgusting part of the music industry which is explotation, mass revenue, and basically money coming before the most important thing, which is the music itself.

Music is an art, a creation of "beautiful" sound which stimulates us and makes us feel emotion. That is the most important thing, not money or greed.

Of course, being talented in a profession should earn you some sort of revenue as a reward for your hard work, but as I said above the music industry is changing, and expectations will have to as well.

Edited by Audioboxer
Grand Master

tiagosilva29

Posted
Posted
Internet users who do not download music - paid or otherwise - will balk at paying an extra $5 a month.

Bingo.

See, that's the problem though. I don't mind paying $5.

I would mind. It would be coercing people into paying for something that they don't use.

Grand Master

ThePitt

Posted
Posted

the music industry used make billions. A lot of money using the artist as an excuse to make even more money. Now they want to keep that going or make even more.

Why would I pay $5 more to MY isp? Even if I dont download anything. Why would I support an indrustry that try to destroy me?.

All the artist should put their work online (without DRM of course) and charge what they think their work worth. And of course they will make more money they used to do with that piece of **** called RIAA. Those man in the middle are the real problem in here and I hope all the ppl who lives of music finally wake up.

Grand Master

DrunkenMaster

Posted
Posted
I was going to write the EXACT same thing, if they allow this for music then why not movies etc... then we could all pay 100-200$/month for internet :x

This is the way the special interest / lobbiest groups want it. Its obvious - it was "their" idea. And yes, its a slippery slope. WE already pay royalties on recordable media. I want to see proof that artists are paid with these royalties before any other talks. There's already mounting evidence they're not being paid out at all or appropriately. This is better than mutli-million dollar suits as we've seen in the states but a better solution should be presented.

Neowinian

Skydaemon

Posted
Posted

There's no way this will ever happen.

First of all their sales have only declined about $150 million in canada, these multi-billion numbers being spewed are complete nonsense.

Next up, the reason their sales have declined is because they're delivering a technologically obsolete offering, while giving their customers the finger. I bet Sony felt bad about betamax getting wiped out too, but they bucked up and innovated instead of whining like a spoiled baby that the market left them behind.

Next, p2p filesharing of music is perfectly legal in canada already. This same group of losers lobbied to add taxes onto cd's etc in exchange for legalizing it. That was done in 1998, and it was what they wanted at the time. There is zero reason to re-have the same discussion.

Frankly, this group should be wiped off the map and all the crud they call music too. There is already a sizable group of independent music being offered separately already. The market will thrive without them, and the barriers to entry for new artists will drop immensely.

Mentor

Typhon

Posted
Posted

Bad idea. Why force others to pay for others mistakes. Its like saying ok guys there is allot of piracy out there so here music industry please add $5 to my already expensive internet bill to make you happy. And while your at it let Millions of others pay as well I hope your happy now cause any problem can be solved by making people pay more for something.

It is discriminatory to do that. To say every one that has an isp steals music. Thats like going to the movies and paying $5 on top of a $10 or $15 ticket to pay for the people that bring video cameras to record the movies. Now if this $5 thing is choice I have no prob with it.

Grand Master

Berserk87

Posted
Posted
When's the next plane to Canada from New Zealand, I wonder.

lol.

your sitting there right now dreaming of downloading Gb after Gb of music right now arnt you?

i know a couple people that have 80Gb ipods...and there filled.... oO

Grand Master

MR_Candyman

Posted
Posted

no, see, it will work BECAUSE WE'RE ALREADY PAYING A LEVY ON ALL BLANK MEDIA, INCLUDING HARD DRIVES AND FLASH DRIVES. There's no reason at all to incorporate an internet tax for the same reason. You buy an ipod, you pay a tax, you buy a hard drive, you pay a tax, you buy a blank cd you pay a tax. They're probably already making more from all these taxes than the difference in the declining sales.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.