Do you remember "
Copy kills music"? That was a campaign of the
German department of the
International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), an umbrella organization "representing the recording industry". In 1999 the campaign tried to prove with a ludicrous reasoning that copying kills music. What they actually meant and even said so in the text is that it endangers the earnings of the recording industry. The consequences read as dramatic as follows: The recording industry will no longer be able to finance risky projects off the mainstream and so the musical landscape will become desolate.
In my opinion it's the recording industry itself or better said its major players that needs to be blamed. Which were the last 5 qualitative albums released by major players? Nobody needs to wonder at the decreasing earnings which is caused mostly by the copying as I admit. But in the meantime you have to pay around 16 to 18 € for any CD in Germany in a shop, Amazon is around 2 € cheaper. And
they missed the move to the internet. If there would have a been a platform like iTunes right from the beginning I claim they would have not these problems nowadays. By the way, this is no call to copy music. Just to mention it: I have far more than 400 original audio CDs.
Now it was Elton John who said that the
Internet destroys music. At least he refers to the creativity not the money. The internet is supposed to be preventing people from going out and being creative. This results in only 10 fantastic albums per year - while there have been 10 per week in the early 70s. Maybe it's only the taste in music that has changed a lot in the meantime? For sure I don't consider many of those fantastic albums as fantastic as Elton John does. Anyway, he wants to shut down the internet for 5 years and expects better music to arise! And:
Hopefully the next movement in music will tear down the internet.
In my humble opinion both the IFPI and Elton John just don't understand what the internet is about - but on completely different topics. Elton John asks the people to communicate since this results in creativity. I say there is no better communication platform than the internet. Face to face would be better of course but there is not somebody for every interest around.
The IFPI says the internet endangers the recording industry's earnings and so the jobs. I say I don't care. This does not mean I don't care about the affected people - it's simply from an economic point of view. Or in other words: Who cared about the gunsmiths when they got obsolete? Things just change. And yes, I consider the recording industry being obsolete in its current form. I don't need their talent scouts and their marketing for mainstream music. They should only focus on the production and distribution of the actual recordings. Then they would not need to care about copying and to
lobby for
more restrictive laws. They require to access the internet connection data which internet provider need to store for 6 months in the near future in Europe (for those that like the lengthy German words it's the so called
Vorratsdatenspeicherung). Those data were targeted for anti-terrorism investigations and should now be misused for civil law cases. That means I have to relinquish my
fundamental right for privacy for a purely monetary interest of another party. In my opinion not even the so called
war against terrorism justifies those restrictions of the fundamental rights since their effectiveness is
at least questionable. You might remember that the US authorities had actually very many data about the 9/11 terrorists but this could not prevent their attack. But I completely digress ...
Back to the internet killing music in concerns of creativity and earnings. There is already an example that belies both fears: open-source software development. Who claims there is no creativity involved makes him/herself ridiculous. And there are also
a lot of successful companies which base their business around open-source development. The
secret is that they add value to the simply copyable source code by providing services, training or more trivial things as discs and documentation.
I really can't see why music should be so different from software. So what can the music industry learn from open-source software? How will it look like in the future? Actually we just need to look back before the arising of a music industry. Probably the music itself will get less important from an economic point of view. It's the additional value that will matter in regards of money. People will still buy audio CDs as they do now despite the possibility of just downloading the music. The performances/concerts will also get more important.
First steps have already been done. Most famous example of a successful career started in the internet are for sure the
Arctic Monkeys (though I don't like the music). Another band following this example is
Clap Your Hands Say Yeah (I really like it a lot). Furthermore the recording industry seems to
recognize that any attempt to prevent copying is doomed to fail. (Don't consider Apple and EMI as benefactors, they made it for pure economical reasons.) I guess this change of view started with the huge disaster of
Sony BMG's DRM based on a rootkit. Now only others need to follow and listen to their customers instead of fighting them.
I might conclude with a slightly modified version of the quote of Elton John:
Hopefully the next movement in music will tear down the music industry.
But since I need them for getting my audio CDs I guess it's more appropriate to conclude with a quote of one of their managers named Irving Azoff. Unfortunately I found this quote only used by somebody else
as conclusion of a preview of the music industry in 2010 and have no idea in which context Irving Azoff used it originallybut here it goes:
When all the changes are done there will be still music.
Update: Universal joined the party
The Univeral Music Group has
announced to sell some of their music without DRM - at least for the time being. And Amazon
followed short after EMI what I missed at that time.
