Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Andy

Debate #7 - Music Royalty Rate may rise

Recommended Posts

Andy

The National Music Publisher's Association has asked for a 66% increase in the Royalty Rate paid out for the sale of digital music.

Apple have spoken out against the proposed increase, saying they would rather close it's iTunes service than increase the price tag of the tracks, as such a rise in royalties would otherwise mean they would have to operate iTunes at a loss.

:>:http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/inde...lty-rate-rises/

:?: Are Apple right to speak out against the rise which would affect customers of the world's most successful digital download music store?

:?: Or are they just using their corporate might to bully the music industry?

:?: Would you be willing to pay more at the iTunes store?

:?: Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chickenman

I'm gonna defend Apple on this one, as the music industry is (as usual) the bully in this case. Of course Apple has the right to speak out against something that can adversely effect a critical component of their company. I don't buy music off of iTunes very often, but I think a dollar per song is a perfect price. It's not so high that it's a pain, but it's not free either, and is about what you'll get if you buy an entire CD at a store, a little less. If the price were to increase, you'd see a lot more people bittorrenting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mara

I don't buy digital music, so it doesn't bother me.

I actually think there does need to be an increase, as I'm sure digital sales have also increased. As long as a lot of it goes back to the artists who deserve it.

Whether it needs to be 66%, I'm not sure. But it probably should be equivalent to the increase of sales.

And I personally think Apple is being a whiny baby about this whole thing. No profits? Wahh! Seriously, I'm sure they more than make up for it in other sales.

And whether or not they close iTunes, probably won't have any effect on the industry. There are lot of other sites you pay for songs as well. Don't hear THEM whining.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chickenman

I don't buy digital music, so it doesn't bother me.

I'm not fighting in Iraq, so it's not that important an issue. ;)

I actually think there does need to be an increase, as I'm sure digital sales have also increased. As long as a lot of it goes back to the artists who deserve it.

The record companies get a pretty huge chunk, actually. As for the artists getting money they deserve...they won't. They barely make anything off of digital downloads anyway.

Whether it needs to be 66%, I'm not sure. But it probably should be equivalent to the increase of sales.

If the price is too high, people won't buy the music, and thus, sales will decrease.

And I personally think Apple is being a whiny baby about this whole thing. No profits? Wahh! Seriously, I'm sure they more than make up for it in other sales.

Yes...they're acting like infants because they might have to cut a valuable part of their music program. A music program which kinda sorta made the company relevant again in the first place.

"No profits? Wahh!" Really? You do know how a business survives, right?

I'll give you a hint: The answer is profits.

And whether or not they close iTunes, probably won't have any effect on the industry. There are lot of other sites you pay for songs as well. Don't hear THEM whining.

I think iTunes is a pretty big player in the industry, really. So yeah, it will have an effect. I'd say the vast majority of people use iTunes as opposed to Napster or Rhapsody or whatever.

And no, you don't hear THEM whining, because Apple is a business giant, and thus, newsworthy, while Napster couldn't be less relevant now that there's no controversy surrounding them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Radioactive Isotope

i find myself agreeing with Chicken quite a bit these days.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Andy

Yeah, I think Apple are in the right here. Because we all know the artists themselves are not going to benefit much from the deal. And just because iTunes is the one that has spoken out doesn't mean that other sites don't have a similar position.

If prices went up, it's likely that more people will illegally obtain their music, meaning the industry would lose out anyway.

Also, I think the industry should be grateful that people actually pay for music when it is so easy to get it illegally these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Andy

Excuse the double-post. But I just read an article in the Metro newspaper about this.

Apple may want to sell songs cheaply to sell iPods. We don't make a penny on the sale on an iPod.

Well, surely that's a false economy there; and an ignorant statement to make, too. If iTunes shuts the NMPA won't be getting a penny from that either. lol

Edited by Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chickenman

i find myself agreeing with Chicken quite a bit these days.....

Excellent...all is falling according to plan. :evil:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mara

I don't buy digital music, so it doesn't bother me.

I'm not fighting in Iraq, so it's not that important an issue. ;)

I was only saying that if the price goes up, I won't cry about. And I don't think you can hardly compare digital music to WAR.

I actually think there does need to be an increase, as I'm sure digital sales have also increased. As long as a lot of it goes back to the artists who deserve it.

The record companies get a pretty huge chunk, actually. As for the artists getting money they deserve...they won't. They barely make anything off of digital downloads anyway.

Well, then maybe the chunks need to be reserved, then.

Whether it needs to be 66%, I'm not sure. But it probably should be equivalent to the increase of sales.

If the price is too high, people won't buy the music, and thus, sales will decrease.

Because nobody buys hard copies: CDs and records, any more.

Maybe not as much as digital, but I don't think increasing digital prices to $2 or $3 a song or whatever will do all that much damage. There are always people out there who don't give a damn about prices and will buy what they want, for whatever they want.

And I personally think Apple is being a whiny baby about this whole thing. No profits? Wahh! Seriously, I'm sure they more than make up for it in other sales.

Yes...they're acting like infants because they might have to cut a valuable part of their music program. A music program which kinda sorta made the company relevant again in the first place.

"No profits? Wahh!" Really? You do know how a business survives, right?

I'll give you a hint: The answer is profits.

No matter what happens, they will still make money. They will always have profits.

It's unlikely that iTunes will go bankrupt in the foreseeable future.

And whether or not they close iTunes, probably won't have any effect on the industry. There are lot of other sites you pay for songs as well. Don't hear THEM whining.

I think iTunes is a pretty big player in the industry, really. So yeah, it will have an effect. I'd say the vast majority of people use iTunes as opposed to Napster or Rhapsody or whatever.

And no, you don't hear THEM whining, because Apple is a business giant, and thus, newsworthy, while Napster couldn't be less relevant now that there's no controversy surrounding them.

Maybe we should stop catering them and take them out of the news. And focus on more important things.

To be quite honest, in my opinion, digital music should never have begun in the first place. Yeah, I suppose it's more regulated than it used to be, but there are still flaws.

Maybe all this will convince people to actually buy CDs so companies don't waste their own money by producing products nobody wants to buy because they have to leave their computer to do it.

I'm not saying that Apple is completely in the wrong here. Nobody wants to have to pay more for products.

But nor are they completely in the right. It's like anything. Prices of production go up, so must the products. And Apple is just like any other company.

Let's wait and see if the increase passes, then see what Apple actually does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chickenman

I don't buy digital music, so it doesn't bother me.

I'm not fighting in Iraq, so it's not that important an issue. ;)

I was only saying that if the price goes up, I won't cry about. And I don't think you can hardly compare digital music to WAR.

No, you can't. I was exagerating. Hence Mr. Winkyface.

I actually think there does need to be an increase, as I'm sure digital sales have also increased. As long as a lot of it goes back to the artists who deserve it.

The record companies get a pretty huge chunk, actually. As for the artists getting money they deserve...they won't. They barely make anything off of digital downloads anyway.

Well, then maybe the chunks need to be reserved, then.

Show me a rich record executive who's willing to cut into his own take, and I'll show you a bottle of wine that used to be water.

Until I added wine to it, anyway.

Whether it needs to be 66%, I'm not sure. But it probably should be equivalent to the increase of sales.

If the price is too high, people won't buy the music, and thus, sales will decrease.

Because nobody buys hard copies: CDs and records, any more.

Maybe not as much as digital, but I don't think increasing digital prices to $2 or $3 a song or whatever will do all that much damage. There are always people out there who don't give a damn about prices and will buy what they want, for whatever they want.

But all of this extra money is going to those SOBs that run the record companies, men like Mr. S. McDuck, President of Atlantic Records. And yes, people will continue to buy music, but more will just download through torrents, limewire, etc. Meaning that artists will go from making little money on their own work to making no money on their own work.

And I personally think Apple is being a whiny baby about this whole thing. No profits? Wahh! Seriously, I'm sure they more than make up for it in other sales.

Yes...they're acting like infants because they might have to cut a valuable part of their music program. A music program which kinda sorta made the company relevant again in the first place.

"No profits? Wahh!" Really? You do know how a business survives, right?

I'll give you a hint: The answer is profits.

No matter what happens, they will still make money. They will always have profits.

It's unlikely that iTunes will go bankrupt in the foreseeable future.

I'm fairly certain businessmen don't wake up each morning and say "You know what, I think we can lose the Tokyo Branch and still keep the company afloat."

They will make money, but they won't be making as much money. That is a threat to any business, and halts growth. So yeah, you can understand that they might be a little put off by a development such as this.

I'll be right back, I just had to defend a corporation and I need to wash this funny taste out of my mouth.

And whether or not they close iTunes, probably won't have any effect on the industry. There are lot of other sites you pay for songs as well. Don't hear THEM whining.

I think iTunes is a pretty big player in the industry, really. So yeah, it will have an effect. I'd say the vast majority of people use iTunes as opposed to Napster or Rhapsody or whatever.

And no, you don't hear THEM whining, because Apple is a business giant, and thus, newsworthy, while Napster couldn't be less relevant now that there's no controversy surrounding them.

Maybe we should stop catering them and take them out of the news. And focus on more important things.

Never going to happen when you have a sensationalist media that jumps onto news trends and rumors rather than do sound investigating on one side, and nerds fighting over which operating system is better on countless forums across cyberspace on the other.

News media was dead the day the networks assigned more reporters to cover the Kobe Bryant rape trial than investigate whether the President might have lied about our rationale for going to war.

It all worked out in the end though, cause Kobe got off!

...innocent, I mean.

To be quite honest, in my opinion, digital music should never have begun in the first place. Yeah, I suppose it's more regulated than it used to be, but there are still flaws.

What are you talking about?

Maybe all this will convince people to actually buy CDs so companies don't waste their own money by producing products nobody wants to buy because they have to leave their computer to do it.

The market is moving towards technology faster and faster each day. There are huge problems as well as huge benefits to that. But you're not going to be able to reverse that process.

It looks like these feelings stem from an intense hatred for digital music itself, and a fierce protectiveness over compact discs.

Do you want to talk about it? :(

I'm not saying that Apple is completely in the wrong here. Nobody wants to have to pay more for products.

But nor are they completely in the right. It's like anything. Prices of production go up, so must the products. And Apple is just like any other company.

What prices of production? If that's your case, then the increase in should be going to CD sales, not digital downloads. CDs cost more to make, cause they're, you know...physical objects and not just data. The only change happening here is that record executives are going to need bigger wallets.

Edited by Chickenman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Andy

To be quite honest, in my opinion, digital music should never have begun in the first place.

What, we should all still be using vinyl or having to go watch live performances? :|

Maybe all this will convince people to actually buy CDs so companies don't waste their own money by producing products nobody wants to buy because they have to leave their computer to do it.

I don't quite understand what you are saying here.

Why should companies make things that nobody wants to buy... So why bother making CDs at all? lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ana

I'm surprised to hear people comparing iTunes to Napster. iTunes is the top music retailer in the US. While Napster had its time, it probably rates somewhere down there just above Rasputin Records (a Bay Area-based independent music store).

CD music is, while still widely accepted, slowly being phased out, like VHS was. Like it or not, digital music IS now. The idea of the largest music sales company in the US going out of business because record execs want to get the primo-deluxe personal jet is something that could really overturn our economy. I think the last thing we need right now is rising music prices. IF someone can show me the numbers that prove that the money goes straight to the artists and support staff, I could see doing a small hike. But 66%? With this economy? Dwaisyhoops, I say!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chickenman

I was using Napster specifically to show that it wasn't a major player in anything anymore. :p

And Mara, why the hatred for digital music? I can see the preference for CDs, I prefer them too...but it's like you're taking a damned stance.

"They never should have invented the telephone in the first place! This is going to ruin the telegraph industry!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Drake

Yeah, get with the times. I laugh at the people I see on the train who still bust out the discman. I laugh harder when those people are punky teenagers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ender

I still buy mostly CD's, just because I like the tactile quality of it, and I'm a liner notes junkie. But I always download them to my iPod. I really only buy from iTunes when there's something that I'm just dying to hear right that moment, or if I don't have the time to get down to my local record store.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Princess

I still love my CDs because you can't get an MP3 autographed. I tend to use iTunes when I want a single or can't find an album in my local area and don't feel like paying shipping for it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mara

I was using Napster specifically to show that it wasn't a major player in anything anymore. :p

And Mara, why the hatred for digital music? I can see the preference for CDs, I prefer them too...but it's like you're taking a damned stance.

"They never should have invented the telephone in the first place! This is going to ruin the telegraph industry!"

I don't really know exactly. It's hard to put into words. Maybe part of it is the fact that it's abused so easily. And that it's lazyifying our culture so much. People don't have to go to stores anymore.

Which is why you can disregard the rest of my argument because, honestly, I have lost sight of it, and it no longer makes sense. I was tired when I wrote that, probably, and distracted.

I'll just say that, no, I don't feel sorry for Apple and leave it as that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Princess

Yes, because you can't go to a store to put music on your mp3 player. That's the whole point of mp3s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.