I remember Michael Jackson's Thriller being released. It was massive. The cost was huge and if I remember correctly, (I was quite young) it was the most expensive music video ever created up until that point. Jackson himself was not known for doing anything halfway, so when it came to the release and distribution of his music, the costs were enormous. All big acts back then were like that.
Music labels and movie production companies would spend a fortune not only creating, but promoting their products. Imagine the costs involved in the promotion of albums like 'Like a Virgin' by Madonna in 1984, U2's Zooropa tour in 92 or the movie Terminator 2. These acts were already massive but promotion still had to take place to attract an audience to cover costs.
Think about where they would advertise. Billboards, radio stations, TV commercials, magazines and the list goes on. There would be local promoters doing the rounds in each country, each city. What was the reach? How many people were influenced by this? How much of a role did word of mouth actually play?
I remember sitting with a little C-tape player, waiting for my favourite songs to come on the radio and pressing record at just the right time to maximise the song and minimize the radio DJ talking over the top. And the annoyance when they would fade the song out early and talk some nonsense.
I remember an early underground of Amiga games being sold with titles that were not available locally. People recording their favourite movies onto VHS tapes labelled with markers in a slanting text as they tried to write onto the narrow sticker.
Those days are long gone.
The internet brought with it the ability to get all of this almost for free. I remember waiting for the first downloads to come in and the ecstatic feeling if the speed reached 4k. Only 4 days left at this speed!!
Those days are gone too.
I understand the arguments against piracy. It takes food out of the mouths of the artists etc. But is this actually the case? Before, the promotion costs and the impact they would make on the market have been replaced with online marketing, automated systems, social platforms, global media, fan lists etc. Word of mouth that may have been met by a few close friends ears is blogged to millions globally. A poster deemed too racy for a wall at the supermarket now reaches 4 billion online eyes. A new band that would have had to do the hard yards playing bars and nightclubs makes 100 million on their first tour. All of this happens almost for free.
It is not free of course, but when it comes to bang for the buck, the internet has provided more channels and a massively amplified market to target through ads designed for specific or likely fans, sensational news stories about what a famous person ate for dinner, movie trailers online and private people acting as publicists for their favourite bands sharing the latest tour info to their friends. For free..
And they complain about piracy. Game of Thrones I think is the most downloaded show. Are the makers and main actors starving? Taylor Swift made 170 million according to Forbes. In a year! I know they work hard for what they do and have skills (in varying degrees), but complaining about illegal downloads may be a little bit greedy.
Back in the early 90's I started to get into Photoshop. It was v2.5 if I remember correctly and obtained on the underground. I was 12ish. What 12 year old would have parents that would purchase very expensive editing software for something they didn't understand, for a kid? I had friends that did the same. Now, A couple of those people are making 3D development for Summer blockbusters. I am pretty sure they aren't using cracked versions now. These pirating kids turned cracked software into careers and became lifelong customers of a massive set of Software tools. I am sure it is the same for some of the Cubase pirates who went on to become producers and recording artists.
I wasn't very good at editing. I bought a Canon (now an Olympus) and learned another skill set instead.
I have a Spotify account and one for my wife. It is pretty cheap to get access to lots of music. That is 200€ a year. 15 years ago as a poor student, I wouldn't have been able to do it even if it existed. I would have been inclined to download an album I was interested in and give it a listen. I worked in a CD store for a while and bought an album a month with my 15% discount. In those days, not many would buy an album before spending 20 minutes skipping back and forth while leaning against the headphone post. While my wife was pregnant I was able to get VIP tickets to an Adele concert in Stockholm for my wife's birthday. 500€. And it was quickly sold out. All of the concerts were.
These pirates may download a lot. But take away the pirating and they are very unlikely to have bought the album to begin with, would never have gone to all of those movies or started using the software in the first place. Many like myself, once there is enough money, have shifted to not pirating and subscribing or buying instead. But take away the pirating and you lose a massive amount of word of mouth, facebook shares, interest and concert ticket sales. Each download is not a lost sale, it is a potential sale, and when it comes to what people truly appreciate, they will pay.
The first CD I bought was when I was 13. Ice Cube: Lethal injection. I listened to it over and over. Every word and beat became familiar. When people download, it becomes a low cost consumable that they may not even consume. But when they find what they like, they will extend their investment, go to a concert, buy a shirt, tweet about it.
The internet has provided a massive opportunity to artists. Unknowns can upload a video to Youtube and become known overnight. Labels find talented artists that they would have otherwise no way to find and professional software companies can develop their next lifelong professional customers and word of mouth sellers. The cost is that some of it gets pirated. It was always the cost.
There are big benefits for these people and companies, but they expect no downside. But without the downside, the massive upside that they enjoy would not exist to the extent it does. They should see piracy as an investment with a very large return rather than counting an often imaginary loss.
There are of course other arguments out there and starving bands. But there always were bands that didn't make it. Not every band will be Nirvana or Pearl Jam, but hey, they got their start doing the hard yards playing dives before the internet kicked in to a full-blown marketing machine.
As age wears on, I don't have the time to spend downloading torrents. I don't have the time to even watch TV that much. When I do have the time, we Netflix a movie or show, I take my wife to the cinema and a restaurant. A concert every now and again if we can afford it. Or I write for Steem.
Experience trumps volume.
I wonder what the promotion costs would be if they had to micro pay private people for every instance one of their products was shared, tweeted about or Instagrammed? After all, it is advertising isn't it? Advertisers leverage the crowds, is it time crowds leverage the advertisers?
Tomorrow I am planning to have a look at the New EU directives. I have a feeling, they are shooting themselves in the foot for a short term gain but like all short-term movers, they might not realise the chain reaction they have started.
Taraz
[ a Steem original ]
You're right about Piracy in a sense. Not everyone even has €200 a year to pay for songs or subscribe to Netflix or whatever, especially in the developing World, Especially when it comes to books.
Piracy may be wrong, but I can't quite shake the feeling that a lot of people will lose access than they envisage if it is totally eradicated.
As for the EU laws, we await what individual countries will do. They may have just taken the World back 100 years or so and probably do not realize it
The people lose access, the artists lose access to an audience too.
Perhaps. I have to think on it. I have a feeling on first glance that there are some opportunities.
I think you're very right about piracy - you may get a new customer or you may not. I would've never gone to all the concerts I've been to if it wasn't for pirating websites. Besides, I don't understand (at least with music) what the big deal is anyway - most music is available on YouTube already, each song with more than one video. It's not like I can't take my music from there, you know...
As for movies, most of them are crap. As you say, I would've never gone to most of the movies I watch online, so it's not like they lost me as a customer.
Pirating may be flawed, but that's because the system we live in is flawed also. I think things in the real world should be like on Steemit, only more honest - you view/listen/read and then, if you like it, you pay. Because it's an unfair trade. Normally, in other professions, I would know what I'm paying for, what kind of service I'm getting. But with books or movies or songs, you don't know, so you're supposed to pay beforehand and hope for the best. How's that fair? And how is it the merit of the actors? If I go see something, I either go because I like one of the actors (rare, there are so few good actors around) or because of all the hype created around it (more likely) which is marketing, thus not the actor's merit.
Maybe they shouldn't allow piracy, fine. But they should change the system. Because it's just as wrong as piracy is.
Are they going to refund if you don't like the movie or book? You are paying for a product after all. Perhaps there will be a blockchain for class action suits for refunds for crap movies, albums bought, concert experiences, books.
The pay if you like model is gaining momentum and not just on blockchains. There are several large podcasts that are moving to it.
Exactly - you pay for a product for which you'd get a guarantee, but you don't. Well, I hope we move to the pay if you like model soon.
I mean I get it, there could be potential draw backs, such as people liking it but not holding up their end of the bargain, but then again, they're pirating your stuff now, so you're not runing a worse bet.
the first original album I purchased was sam smith's in the lonely hours on itunes after years of purchasing pirated cds. that was because I could afford it. I think no one in their right senses will go through the rigor of downloading pirated songs if they had the money. so the said pirates provide products/service to persons with low purchasing power, who make the bulk of the artiste's fans. and these set of persons help push the records which invariably helps the artiste.
most artiste gain more from shows and endorsement deals, this is as the result of the hype they get from oridinary fan who may not be able to afford their music
Hi taraz. It will be interesting to see what is hidden in that. What and who benefits for law changes and the ramifications it could cause.
yeah, I am going to have a decent read and think about it tomorrow. I have a feeling there are some opportunities in there.
Piracy has been part of my history. I regret those days... I was struggling to function. Now I give things away to Steemit. I reap tiny rewards, but there is pride when something is appreciated.
I hope in time the giving away will return for you also :)
If back in the 80's or 90's people would have had the social media platforms/ networks, imagine the world would have seen far more talents and legends, I imagine.
Definitely. The kids have it too easy these days ;)
Yep!
Sourced a lot of my games from overseas, re-using discs, packaging, and stamps..
Then when I could afford games and music, I'd buy it. Not having the options above may have not drawn me to either as a child, and then an adult. So yeah, i see what you are saying :)
They are looking at a narrow result, not the entire pipeline. They are playing a game that might backfire on them.
For some reason, some morning while I was waking up in the woods on my bicycle tour, I had MJ's Thriller playing in my head. I think the music video and choreography are badass.
But regarding that EU directive: I don't think all the people understand the realities of Internet if their trying to ban memes because copyrights. Even less they understand about potential decentralization in the future where a site "owner" cannot censor illegal copyrighted material, because a central power does not exist.
Even less they understand about potential decentralization in the future where a site "owner" cannot censor illegal copyrighted material, because a central power does not exist.
they are chasing ghosts but, they will punish individuals hard in this case perhaps. Not sure yet.
what they lose in revenue from pirates, they make up through social media. Sometimes you have to give it away to create the foundation for growth. It is part of a normal business model. So too has become the music industry. Thanks for a great read my friend @tarazkp
Especially if it is sight unseen beforehand like a movie.
I guess you could say the same would happen if Steemit allowed posting partial news content with links to the whole story. There are a lot of people out there that just like to blog on current news events, this would bring more people aboard and basically do the same you claim with artist by drawing new people to those news sites when they click on the link to read the whole story. Those new people would also discover other topics of interest from those contributing their writings to steemit.
I think there might be some advantage in the new EU laws coming where artists and consumer are more naturally matched. Not sure still :)
As a DJ & promoter myself I need to say, that we used to hope for sales, now we pray for attending, so everybody can promote their stuff.... FOR FREE! ;)
Products & services have to be rewarded ALWAYS in some kind of currency, to create value! It may be even a barter...
Much like here :D
This is the thing. What they are doing will severly reduce the reach of their brand names as artists while some are likely to wave the payment and let their links fly. This will mean that they have to compete less in the advertising space as those who charge will not be there. I feel that this will further speed the pay for what you enjoy models. like here :)
"Tomorrow I am planning to have a look at the New EU directives."
I agree with the tenor of your article. I checked out those directives, and the onus they put on sites to police content will kill free promotion for content providers.
Maybe you'll have a different take on it.
Luckily, those directives aren't due until January. I think they'll have realized it's a bad idea by then, and the directives will never come into force. We'll see.
The artists think they are going to get more but what they are doing I think is going to lose is distribution channels as the large platforms will just block sharing of links of people who are not willing to sign up and exclude themselves from requiring payment.
Ahh that brought back memories XD
I pirated a lot back in the day as well. I didn't end up buying/subscribing to Photoshop as I actually hate subscription models for software but it did get and keep me going in digital art. Similarly people I know pirated various expensive things they wanted to use, then grew up and either bought it or demanded their studios buy the tools they were familiar with.
A potential lost sale from lack of piracy happened with ZBrush. They didn't have a trial version (they seem to be trying to pass Sculptris off as their trial version and I've been using Sculptris before ZBrush ate it and they're nothing alike interface wise XD) and I didn't want to pirate it to try it out so I ended up buying 3d Coat instead.
Though having just typed that I'm now wondering if maybe they didn't have a trial version because they're expecting to be pirated? XD
Interesting idea about micropaying people to do things they'd normally be doing (free promo for their favourite things), wondering if that would be like sponsored blog posts/videos in a way, and if it would make those infomercial accounts better or worse XD
It would make it insanely bad. There would be links flying everywhere and they will get drained of all value ;)
I'm internally crying already just thinking about it XD
lucky we live on a decentralized platform that can do all sorts of cool things given the right incentives :)
Hi @tarazkp!
Your post was upvoted by @steem-ua, new Steem dApp, using UserAuthority for algorithmic post curation!
Your UA account score is currently 6.105 which ranks you at #255 across all Steem accounts.
Your rank has improved 1 places in the last three days (old rank 256).
In our last Algorithmic Curation Round, consisting of 434 contributions, your post is ranked at #17.
Evaluation of your UA score:
Feel free to join our @steem-ua Discord server
You got a 28.18% upvote from @ocdb courtesy of @tarazkp!