I got this from www.savethemusicfan.com
I might have already blogged about it, but I just read this again and you really need to check it out.
The passionate message of music is in the magic of the “song.” The more it’s consumed, the more it nourishes. Music is ubiquitous; it’s a utility like “water,” it’s not a pair of pants and as such we need to stop treating music like a product that needs to be controlled. My reason for agreeing to pay the legal fees of the Gruebel family is quite straightforward, to stop all litigation of music fans; the reasons are as follows:
1) The RIAA has relied on data provided by Pew Internet & American Life research to claim that the litigation is working to deter illegal file sharing, stating that broadband Internet penetration is growing faster than the measurable base of P2P file-sharers. Consequently, this litigation is forcing the music fans to use technologies that are not measurable or traceable, such as “instant messaging” and “BitTorrent,” the latter of which now accounts for somewhere between 60 to 90 percent of Internet traffic (Slyck.com Feb 7, 2006). So in fact, we are not deterring file sharing, just deterring our ability to track it and as such our chances of monetizing it.
2) Millions of Americans, including the majority of those in the music business, have shared music. This dates back to mixing one’s own cassette tapes in the 70’s. Breaking the law has never been about volume. Teenagers today are simply using the technology at hand, similar to how we did when we were teens.
3) These same file sharers are great music fans and are breaking new artists with little or no mainstream media support. For example Clap Your Hands Say Yeah, Arcade Fire, Sufjan Stevens-not to mention the Arctic Monkeys in the UK-all owe thanks to this grassroots community of file sharers for the fact that they are selling hundreds of thousands of albums
4) The music market is down not due to P2P “piracy,” but for four simple reasons: a) stiff competition for the entertainment dollar with formats like video games and movies, both have much larger marketing spends; b) the replacement cycle is over-digital music does not scratch or wear out like past formats; c) one now has the ability to purchase and listen only to the great songs without filler; and d) mass-merchant retailers today carry only the current hits, with little to no catalog.
In conclusion, the RIAA’s litigation policy has no upside. It is destroying our ability to monetize the P2P market by chasing music fans even further underground. It’s hypocritical because we have shared music for decades. It distorts the focus from the real reasons for the decline in music sales. And most disturbingly, it undermines the importance of these file sharers. They represent behavioral marketing at its best and as such should be embraced, not sued.
Litigation is destructive. We are a creative community, so this approach makes no sense at all. I cannot envision any artist who I have the privilege of representing suing a fan for sharing their music.
take care…
Terry McBride
CEO Nettwerk Music Group
