Whatever helps you sleep at night..
You're a criminal in both cases..

You should not have to be sorry for claiming your view, BUT (there's always a but)

The "reality" you state is the key point in my argument that I must have muffed.

I believe that the most significant effect of illegal distribution of music files is NOT a cut in distro costs, it is the strengthening of existing marketing. This is a catch 22 for the filesharers that was hoping for the forthgrowing of a new and indipendent music scene/market. Thus, as stated in the OP, the filesharing community are merely amplifiying excisting marketing of major labels, rather than supplying any significant corrections. This is based on the arguments of the filesharers themselves about filesharing also being "free" marketing, which I happen to believe is (to a far degree) true.

I agree that there is a significant reduction in distro costs, but its absolutely wrong to claim that the price of a digital copy therefore will end up at zero.

First of all, distro/copying accounts for very roughly 50% of the price paid by customer in a regular physical market. You still need to spend time and money on production, on marketing, on taxes and on administration. So given that distro costs was reduced to zero, the price to the consumer would only be reduced with about 50%.

It might be different in bigger markets like the US, but here in scandinavia prices on downloading a record are usually MORE than 50% lower than buying the physical item.

I still believe prices could be reduced more due to the fact that you can more easily reach out to a bigger market and thus make up for some additional price reduction by adding volume. However, stating that the price should be zero due to the customer/ISP covering the costs of distro only shows a lack on knowledge on the costs involved.

As I have stated in other posts here, I think filesharing COULD have brought forward marketing effects to royalty-free and legal music, but opposed to you I find that to be something that should be brought forward by the filesharers, not the music biz.

One way, to repeat myself from earlier posts, would be to make a service that gave the listener viable and legal alternatives when they searched up copyrighted music like Britney Schmears on TPB or the likes. In this way one could use the market power of the majors to promote artists without such leverage. Hopefully by the end a system like this would be self-containing and without the need of any major label music at all to "lean on"...

THAT would kill the majors, the Status Quo of today will not.

I might lack humor, but i value my time too much to bother much about people that makes post where their only point is that they want evidence, and then mucks me when i state the simple fact that I based my observation on the arguments brought forward by filesharers.

As said, you are merely stating the point in my OP, thanx for helping out. Sorry for not laughing.

We are loosing track on what I wanted to debate.

You dont know anything about my label, and opposed to what you seem to be thinking, It was a success. I've had MTV award nominations, big tuopr support gigs and the works. I don't feel like going into the biz again for other reasons, so your 1.0.1 on marketing is not what I want.

Im trying, in my limited english, to point out

1. We are strengthening the majors if we believe in our own arguments about the effects of filesharing.

2. We should develop countermeasures to turn this development around and use the massive filesharing community to bring forth a new music scene.

One way could be to implement user generated matching to (main stream) artists that are being searched up on the filesharing services, and in this way present the user with FREE an LEGAL royalty free alternatives. If the user still choose to DL the illegal stuff, then its a lost case. If the user cares and want to be on the right side of the law, we have both stolen a potential customer from the majors as well as helped bringing forth a new artist. WIth time such a system would hopefully be self containing.

So I disahgree that we have to accept that the one with the most bucks always have to be the one sitting on top, (not when it comes to beer, but when it comes to digital products. Beer is good btw. ;-) ).
Or at least I think we have the possibility to rock their boat pretty heavily. It merely takes creative thinking, and the right people picking up on the Idea. TPB would be a nice place to start, although i frankly dont think those guys gives a hoses ass about anything else than themselves after listening to the embarasing streaming of the trial...

Yes you are right, my intentions with the post kinda got muffed due to me having a bit of problems communcating in english as its not my first language.

Reposting more solid suggestions is definitely worth trying, if I can make it pass the almight moderators again. This is not the easiest place to get articles that could be read as critics to the filesharing establishment accepted... But I'll give it a shot once I have managed to weed out the good and valid stuff that was posted to my OP :-)

I saw your other post, and dont worry about the flames. I had it coming, and I knew.
I think I have actually gotten treated quite well given where I am posting and my background... :-D

I posted the article, and im not here to be captain obvious. English is not my first language though, and its a shame I didnt get my point out more clearly, as I really wanted to get people started on how we can change this trend.

I have a few thoughts myself, one is to use the searches in TPB and the likes to plug good, legal and royalty free alternatives.

Different from you, I think its definitely possible to use the marketing of the major labels against them, for instance in the way stated above. If such a system was buildt, it would (hopefully) be self containing after a while, and would serve the listeners with a viable option to violating copyright law and having nightmares about RIAA lawyers on their doorstep.

I used TPB merely to state my point. In the future id like to something like this born:

1. A user generated system is implemented that lets people list good and royalty free music, with links to similar major label music. Kinda like matching on last.fm

2. When recieving a search for Britney Schmears this could be used to give the listener alternatives, as well as the original searched item.

3. This could then hustle on major label marketing until it was self containing.

So my point is not that water is wet, but rather that I find it pretty concerning as well as ironic that the oh-so-sure-of-the-major's-close-death filesharers actually has turned the services into marketing centres for the major label music and perfected it as well, while there is close to impossible to find a good service taking care of royalty free music and promoting it to the masses.

There are several explanations to this I guess, and a good few of them are presented by insightful replies in here.

However it ended up as a debate about semantics and the TOP100 lists of TPB while what i hoped to trigger was a debate on how we can make a new era start. NOW.

I realise its mostly because i muffed my argument in the OP, Im having trouble getting my point out with my limited english vocabulary. But interesting points has been made (without my Karma becoming blown to smithereens, even).

I humbly disagree.

I could at least hope that we could use the masses of TPB and the likes to gather up the cream of the crop and for instance use people's searches to present them with good alternatives that are royalty free and legal. Kinda like last.fm, but hustling on the marketing of major artists.

In this way people would get a valid choice, and it could fule the growth of a new music scene that are based on word of mouth and user generated marketing.

I am not, if you think so, surprised that the bay is filles with major label crap, simply because in the 10-12 years the debate has been rolling the initiatives for establishing an alternative to the excisting market has been rather few and poor.

So my OP was meant as a call out for this to happen, NOT as a whine about my personal experience with filesharing.

Thanks for clearing out my points, Im having trouble living up to slahsdot semantic standars as enlish is not my first language. Also, look at my reply to the Flawed premise OP

ALso:
Im sad to report that this was implemented some time ago. Especially in Hip Hop there are plenty of examples of product placement in the lyrics, not to mention the videos. I think we are likely to see more, but primarily in the most mainstream parts of the biz (I hope).

As mentioned in the OP, im not here to state the obvious. Even though i realise you all prolly hate me now for mentioning I have been in the biz, id love to see this clearification modded up so that people don't spend their time assuming that Im here as Captain Obvious or as the failed emo-label dude... ;-) I already know water is wet, so more posts on the subject is really not needed :-)

But IF we are right in assuming that filesharing has a marketing effect, a claim most of us have made earlier, we might very well be strengthening the majors and their marketing or at least killing them with a toothpick. This was my concern, not that my indie didn't get to the top100 of TPB.

And even if they (the majors) die it still raises the question on how we can put together a service to replace them. I say we shouldn't wait but start now, and slashdot definitely have the resources needed.

For instance, why not patch together a service that suggests good and LEGAL royalty free alternatives to whatever majorlabel crap people search up on filesharing services? In that way we could even hustle some marketing effect from the majors, as well as educate the masses on the fact that there is plenty of good and free music out there...

I know this, and it applies for copyright free artists even more than for indies. So it still raises the question that was supposed to be the main point of my OP:

What can we do to change this?

I know i will annoy some people by posting this same excerpt several places, but since SLashdot won' allow me to post as many replies as required, and I don't think most people will read all posts, im gonna take my chances:

IF it is true that filesharing strenghtens an artists sales, then TPB and the likes are strenghtening the major biz, not weakening it. I belive it does strenghten sales, and if I owned a major label, I would not lift a finger to change the ongoing situation.

Thus, I am calling out for the filesharing community to take counteraction. In a perfect world I would like something like this to be implemented:

A) When attempting to download Britney Schmears, you'd be warned that her music is copyrighted, and that you would actually support the major biz by DL'ing and seeding it...

B) After giving you this warning, you then get a choice to either download the original crap you searched up OR or a few alternatives that (by users i guess) are tagged as good LEGAL and COPYRIGHT FREE alternatives. Not indie-stuff. FREE stuff.

In this way the major biz would get a kick in the nuts that they actually felt. At the same time, the thousands of free artists out there could benefit from the marketing of major labels, and make use of it to advocate an alternative to the consolidated services we see today.

Is it more clear now what I am advocating? I mean: if noone at /. can make it happen, who can? :-)

I am not an exec. The post clearly states that I have left the music biz and closed down my (otherwise successful) label

I realise that you find it suitable to generalize the Music industry, but its not helping you or the forthgrowing of a new music scene.

I don't see any need to support any evidence, as the argument that filesharing strengthens artists are brought forth by the filesharers, not the biz. I just happen to think there is some truth in it, and with this in mind I made the assumption that filesharers are actually strengthening and consolidating the power of the major labels (biger market shares etc), not weakening it. If that does not concern you, you are merely stating my point in the OP.

OK, last try.

My point is thyat why don't we put systems into action that TRULY makes the major labels obsolete?

I have posted this to a couple of other replies, so bear with me if you already saw it:

IF it is true that filesharing strenghtens an artists sales, then TPB and the likes are strenghtening the major biz, not weakening it. I belive it does strenghten sales, and if I owned a major label, I would not lift a finger to change the ongoing situation. And definitely not sue them... But stupid is forever I guess... ;-)

Thus, I am calling out for the filesharing community to take counteraction. In a perfect world I would like something like this to be implemented:

A) When attempting to download Britney Schmears, you'd be warned that her music is copyrighted, and that you would actually support the major biz by DL'ing and seeding it...

B) After giving you this warning, you then get a choice to either download the original crap you searched up OR or a few alternatives that (by users i guess) are tagged as good LEGAL and COPYRIGHT FREE alternatives. Not indie-stuff. FREE stuff.

In this way the major biz would get a kick in the nuts that they actually felt. At the same time, the thousands of free artists out there could benefit from the marketing of major labels, and make use of it to advocate an alternative to the consolidated services we see today.

Is it more clear now what I am advocating?
I mean: if noone at /. can make it happen, who can? :-)

Thanks for posting.

I might be crazy, but my point was NOT to save the indies. Im advocating that the filesharing community is merely turning themselves into useful idiots rather than using the power they have at hand, and im suprised and let down that it has not happened in more than 10 years now

Im gonna repost a clearification i made to another post, I hope it can make you understand that im not just stating the obvious:

1)IF it is true that filesharing strenghtens an artists sales, then TPB and the likes are strenghtening the major biz, not weakening it. I belive it does strenghten sales, and if I owned a major label, I would not lift a finger to change the ongoing situation.

2) Thus, I am calling out for the filesharing community to take counteraction. In a perfect world I would like something like this to be implemented:

A) When attempting to download Britney Schmears, you'd be warned that her music is copyrighted, and that you would actually support the major biz by DL'ing and seeding it...

B) After giving you this warning, you then get a choice to either download the original crap you searched up OR or a few alternatives that (by users i guess) are tagged as good LEGAL and COPYRIGHT FREE alternatives. Not indie-stuff. FREE stuff.

In this way the major biz would get a kick in the nuts that they actually felt. At the same time, the thousands of free artists out there could benefit from the marketing of major labels, and make use of it to advocate an alternative to the consolidated services we see today.

Is it more clear now what I am advocating? I mean: if noone at /. can make it happen, who can? :-)

Thanks for posting

I hope you are right, and i share your faith in P2P as a distribution channel. This alone should cut costs with about 25%, money that either could be used to sell music cheaper, or even pay the filesharers for taking the time trouble and bandwith of distributing the music.

These are interesting thoughts, but while I had hope that someone would say "hey you moron there is a large project going on right now that does excactly what you ask for" it seems that neither the music biz or the filesharing community has any plans of putting such things into action...

But im still hoping, maybe I will start a project myself one day that aims to do some of this, I have some ideas but lack the dough and the time right now. Slashdot definitely has the people with the skills and the potential to mobilize a large movement towards the one that breaks the code on how it should be done...