Rants
Who does Napster really hurt?
Ahh yes, the napster issue. Stealing music. But does it really hurt the artists? I don't think it does, and I'll explain why.
First off, let's clarify one point, and that is that artists see a very tiny percentage of the sales of their music. The recording industry giants have designed recording contracts to basically steal the rights to artists work without having to compensate them for it fairly. Artists get shafted and you get over-charged for music, lining the pockets of the record labels.
So napster cuts into their profits?
Not really. CD sales are at an all-time high, and there is nothing to prove that napster steals away from music sales. What the record company is upset about is the Internet, and the possibility that artists will have an alternate way of making it.
See, right now, if you're an artist, and you want to get discovered, you have to play the RIAA's game. They decide who gets promoted, what kind of music is published, and so on. You want to be famous? Then you play the RIAA's game. Their way.
Napster: An alternate way of promoting music.
This is the *real* threat to the RIAA. Now an artist or a group can post music on napster, circumnavigating the RIAA's game. That artist or group can also open a web site, and napster will help promote that web site. The technology also exists for artists to cut their own CDs. So from cutting the album, to promoting it, to selling it, artists can now do it all without needing a recording contract, and *that* is the threat. The RIAA realizing its monopoly, its trust, it's stranglehold on music is in jeapordy.
It's also better for the artists. Under an RIAA contract, an artist may sell 2 million copies of a CD, but only get to keep 10 cents per copy. That's $200,000. But if that same artist sold only 20,000 copies of the same CD (at only $10 per CD) that would *still* be $200,000! Cutting out the "middle man" has its advantages.
What about the recording artists who are against Napster?
Ever notice how the artists against napster haven't done anything worth listening to in a long time? It could be said that these people have nothing to gain from napster, so why support it. Maybe even a "we went through hell so you have to as well" attitude. Sounds like they're treating the whole issue like boot camp, or a college hazing ritual. Or maybe the RIAA is dangling a carrot on a stick in front of them for siding with them, who knows.
The Internet presents the possibility of a whole new way for music to get into the hands of the fans, and napster is just the tip of the iceberg. With napster, artists can promote music. Fans can sample tracks on a CD before plunking their hard-earned cash down. Better for artists. Better for fans. Better for everyone except the RIAA. What a pity.
