Stop Thinking of Yourself as a Good Person: The Ethics and Economics of Music Streaming

http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/811#Shaftesbury_5987_284

sorry for libertyfund link

I HAVE often thought how ill-natur’d a Maxim it was, which, on many occasions, I have heard from People of good understanding; “That, as to what related to private Conduct, No-one was ever the better for Advice.’’ But upon farther Examination, I have resolv’d with my-self, that the Maxim might be admitted without any violent prejudice to Mankind. For in the manner Advice was generally given, there was no reason, I thought, to wonder it shou’d be so ill receiv’d. Something there was which strangely inverted the Case, and made the Giver to be the only Gainer. For by what I cou’d observe in many Occurrences of our Lives, That which we call’d giving Advice, was properly, taking an occasion to shew our own Wisdom, at another’s expence. On the other side, to be instructed, or to receive Advice on the terms usually prescrib’d to us, was little better than tamely to afford another the Occasion of raising himself a Character from our Defects.

In reality, however able or willing a Man may be to advise, ’tis no easy matter to make Advice a free Gift. For to make a Gift free indeed, there must be nothing in it which takes from Another, to add to Our-self. In all other respects, to give, and to dispense, is Generosity, and Good-will: but to bestow Wisdom, is to gain a Mastery which can’t so easily be allow’d us. Men willingly learn whatever else is taught ’em. They can bear a Master in Mathematicks, in Musick, or in any other Science; but not in Understanding and Good Sense.

otm

i feel like this whole debate is pretty much typical of modern capitalism, huge corporations construct a system that's a massive scam then all the blame is placed on individuals for their small, insignificant little choices within that system.

like i saw someone post a thing to facebook about like "IF YOU EAT ALMONDS IT'S YOUR FAULT CALIFORNIA HAS A DROUGHT" like really? my fault they let nestle suck their water dry and wouldn't even impose fucking lawn watering bans until it was too late?

also otm

UMS OTM

do people really have music they stream every time they want to listen to it? The hassle of that is prohibitive imo - I often have shitty wifi. If I really like something I want to make sure I have it for keeps.

I'd say I'm streaming 90% of the time I'm listening to music at home.

I'm only 10% of a good person.

David Byrne weighs in:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/02/opinion/sunday/open-the-music-industrys-black-box.html?_r=0

I usually will stream a full album from youtube because it is quicker to type in "_____ full album" than to wait for iTunes to open and search in there.

do people really have music they stream every time they want to listen to it? The hassle of that is prohibitive imo - I often have shitty wifi. If I really like something I want to make sure I have it for keeps.

― kinder, Thursday, August 6, 2015 9:52 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yea i pretty much only stream at work, and use streaming only to discover new music and check things out i've heard about. at home & in the car it is music i own. i think if i had an aux port in my car though i would stop buying music and just do spotify premium for the download-to-phone option

wow, this Richard Street-Jammer post on Invisible Oranges really opened our eyes

It's kind of hard for me to attach any moral dimension on streaming music. Knowing the history of labels screwing artists over, all kinds of dirty accounting tricks, albums 'falling off the back of trucks', artists getting screwed out of money even when they have supposedly solid deals, etc.

It's not artists making deals with the streaming services, it's the labels. It's not consumers deciding what amount goes to artists, it's the labels. The moral imperative to treat artists well should fall on labels alone imo. The idea that the consumer is morally responsible is great for taking that load off the labels. Now they have multiple scapegoats: streaming services AND consumers.

I asked Apple Music to explain the calculation of royalties for the trial period. They said they disclosed that only to copyright owners (that is, the labels). I have my own label and own the copyright on some of my albums, but when I turned to my distributor, the response was, “You can’t see the deal, but you could have your lawyer call our lawyer and we might answer some questions.”

Insane that this is David Byrne, one of the most well-known musicians in the world, and a smart cookie who has given lectures and written books on the topic. And even he can't penetrate the fog.

I buy albums first. Then I stream them anyway. I'm a very good person, obv.

how do you DJ with streamed music? how do you sample streamed music?

my listening habits, for a long time, have involved making myself gapless mixes of recent listening or based around a theme. that's a big part of why i can't stand a stream.

how do you DJ with streamed music?

use a hard wired ethernet connection, not wifi :)

how do you sample streamed music?

analog output to digital recorder

how do you get your hair to shine like that?

here's the pertinent graph:

http://f.cl.ly/items/2n2e0L1V1z1m161j153y/ClouDrop%206%20Aug%202015%2015%3A44%3A16%206%20Aug%202015%2015%3A44%3A16.png

interesting timing on that drop there around 2007, I wonder if any confounding factors could have caused it

http://i.imgur.com/dKoBZl7.png

MORE VINYL IS BACK THINKPIECES WE NEED MORE VINYL IS BACK THINKPIECES

That slope is probably an inverse curve of piratebay traffic numbers.

http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/history-pirate-bay-will-return/

I dunno, that chart is saying CDs were outselling cassettes as early as 1985. That can't be right, since CDs were still twice as expensive, and players were REALLY expensive (and not nearly as ubiquitous as cassette players).

I don't think you're reading that graph right. Looks more like around 92-93.

the height of curves in that chart is cumulative, so in 1985 CDs are the tiny light blue segment on top of an even split between cassettes and vinyl.

I'm thinking that as digital music gets sorted out and services gradually up their price and ad rates, it will get to about where the early 80's collapse was, and flatline there, 8.5 billion. No more Saturday Night Fever or format change anomalies.

most people i've met who make music for a living (or are involved in the production of music, live or recorded) pulled themselves up by their bootstraps

man, feel old saying this, but "what are the trends with the young people" in regards to purchasing digital music/subscribing to streaming services vs. just downloading it somewhere or going to youtube? my guess is that anyone who came of age after early 2000s is pretty used to easily getting what they want for free at this point. might be hard to ever get them back to the idea of paying for it on a regular basis.

for my kids it's all youtube. they're happily amazed when I provide them with mp3s they want but it's totally unnecessary for them

when I was my oldest's age I was already scamming/being scammed by BMG/Columbia House. those were different times...

I don't think you're reading that graph right. Looks more like around 92-93.

― schwantz, Thursday, August 6, 2015 4:30 PM (27 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

the height of curves in that chart is cumulative, so in 1985 CDs are the tiny light blue segment on top of an even split between cassettes and vinyl.

― juggulo for the complete klvtz (bendy), Thursday, August 6, 2015 4:33 PM (24 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

OK, yeah, that definitely makes more sense.

for my kids it's all youtube. they're happily amazed when I provide them with mp3s they want but it's totally unnecessary for them

― droit au butt (Euler), Thursday, August 6, 2015 4:48 PM (11 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

My dad has a pekingese and I don't think he even cares about music at all!

does he like pugs?

my mother in law is thinking about getting a pug. she just got an iphone too! don't know what her position on streaming music is.

your moms like my pug

That graph is fascinating -- I hadn't realized that there had been a brief period where CDs' dominance meant massively more spending than ever before on recorded music.

Also interesting that CDs are still well ahead of streaming, though probably not for much longer

i mean it is crazy - someone was just talking on twitter about how almost 15 million people paid between $12-$16 for hootie and the blowfish's first album.

Great interview with a Columbia House insider about that 90s CD $$$$ heydays

http://www.avclub.com/article/four-columbia-house-insiders-explain-shady-math-be-219964

stop telling me how to think, and how to feel. there is too much second-person directive since the beatles broke

with a love like that, you know you should be glad

yeah yeah yeah

you've hypnotized me with those crazy eyes of yours
you've cracked me open like a coconut
you've got me crawling round and round you on all fours

yes yes yes yes yes

you are inside a building, a well house for a large streaming

watch out
you might get what you're after

A Kiwi perspective, Russell Brown is pretty otm as usual

http://publicaddress.net/hardnews/friday-music-not-just-consumers-but-patrons/

I always use Bandcamp if I can. Monetarily for small artists, the margin between streaming and piracy seems so tiny as to be negligible. I was surprised that it took so long for Apple to encroach onto Spotify's turf (streaming). Is there any sign that Spotify will retaliate by offering paid downloads?

my guess is that anyone who came of age after early 2000s is pretty used to easily getting what they want for free at this point. might be hard to ever get them back to the idea of paying for it on a regular basis.

i'm likely to pay for spotify and apple music in the longer term because they both offer their own unique discovery features (curated playlists based on my tastes, radio-like streams &c.). i can't speak for ~the youth~ obv but imo it's that sort of play that will keep subscription services going. not everyone will pay but that's been the case since compact cassettes.

not everyone will pay but that's been the case since compact cassettes.

Those bloody compact cassettes! You make a good point - lots of this stuff has older equivalents. People find a way to get more music for less money. (No judgment on them, I include myself in that.)

Just like how 2nd-hand record buying has existed ever since Edison sold off all his old wax cylinders. There's not really a way to measure how much money from all 2nd-hand sales goes back into buying new music... hopefully more than 0.5c per track, but it's not a great benchmark.

It annoys me that Spotify, etc, are acting as if they think the way forward is streaming without owning music. It's disingenuous on their part. If they offered paid downloads alongside streaming, it would benefit all parties, as far as I can tell. And it would put downloading back on the agenda, at least.

I just can't foresee a time when everyone will be paying $10/month, even people who barely listen to music, or wouldn't listen online. It's a great deal for some, but meaningless to others.

What is the target number of subscribers to make the business model work? (i.e. replace music sales :-)

HoC going to take this up:

Streaming has changed the music industry - but do the economics of music streaming work for everyone?

We're launching an inquiry into the economics of music streaming today and want to hear from you.

Find out more and submit evidence here: https://t.co/tj3lUEVnZ2 pic.twitter.com/7fov9s99of

— Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee (@CommonsDCMS) October 15, 2020

forgot about this thread.

so did we get this sordid

This sounds like a cool idea: https://pitchfork.com/thepitch/inside-the-fight-to-fix-economic-inequality-in-dj-culture/