# Study shows file sharing doesn't hurt music sales **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 31, 2004, 8:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494 "2004-03-31T08:39:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Critical1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/3e96dc/32.png) [@Critical1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Critical1)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 5:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494/101 "2004-04-09T05:46:51Z")
"Can’t hear it anywhere else then online? Bullshit. First go listen to some samples at the link below, and then buy the fucking album or not buy it. [http://www.towerrecords.com/Music/D...al%20Method%20&](http://www.towerrecords.com/Music/D...al%20Method%20&)" ok so you can find Crystal Method on the net, grats thats the place we already decided it was located. now find me a place thats not the net where I can listen to this at my convenience…that means going to a record store with the listening stations and standing there trying to decide if the hour long cd is worth picking up or not…standing there…for an hour…thats not convenient. yes one of the bands listed has plenty of tracks I can check out that are leagal and easy to find ONLINE. Silly Rabit and Pleasure Elite are going to be damn hard to find anywhere online or not and leagal or not they are pretty small bands. “Now how do we define what makes a piece of music shitty? We don’t because we can’t. To someone, else track 1 sucks and track 8 is the best on the album. You should realize that if you think 90%+ of the album completely sucks, perhaps you don’t like that artist and should buy something else.” ok this is a problem, youre right when you say you cant define what makes a piece of music shitty you are wrong when you continue to follow the belief that you should have to shell out 15-20$ for ONE SONG. I dont want 14 songs that suck donkey balls and one thats great. and the industry idea that you should HAVE to buy the whole cd to get one song is bullshit. its alot like some guy trying to sell you a 30 year old datsun that is more rust than paint, runs like shit, smokes like crazy and wouldnt pass emmissions in africa but has really really nice rims on it. the rims you might buy, the old fucked up car that they are attached to isnt. all those wonderful online music stores are great, splendid, and not run by any one in the riaa or are they anything all that new other than itunes. once again the industy fails to lift a finger to fill an obvious market demand for their product. “Fuck that, if the record industry could make a nickel off of it, they would do it in a nanosecond.” I call bullshit on this, the riaa has shown in the past that they posses absolutly no clue how to use the net to make a buck. or have we all just forgot the ludacrious fiasco with net radio? the bill they pushed through congress that put thousands of stations out of business permanently even those that werent makeing any money in the first place. call me crazy but if I were an industry exec and you told me that for the price of some bandwidth and a few servers I could expose every singe artist and band on my entire roster I would be all over it, sony/mca/geffon any and all of those company’s could host their own net stations on already established markets to get virtually Free advertiseing, for 10k and the cost of a t1line every obscure/old/noname/newartist/weird/deathmetal/country/opera/hip hop/band could have instant and easily accessable exposure to a market that has unlimited potential. instead they come along and shut it down. grats they could have made a nickel instead they screamed copyright and ran around waving their arms in the air shouting “MINEMINEMINEMINEMINEMINE” until congress gave them their way. if you werent listening to streaming radio before the riaa bullshit then you really dont know what you missed out on, almost all of my shoutcast stations went offline when the bill went through. winamp has shoutcast, windows media player comes with the netstations built right in. (the ability to search them anyway) there are several markets that the recording industry chose to close down or control instead of exploit for an easy buck. call me crazy but I have yet to see where the music industry has shown even the slightest bit of creativity or initiative when it comes to making a buck online. ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494/102 "2004-04-09T06:29:44Z")
> [@Critical1](#): > > ok so you can find Crystal Method on the net, grats thats the place we already decided it was located. now find me a place thats not the net where I can listen to this at my convenience You want a place that _isn’t_ on the net to go listen to music? Wha? > [@](#): > > …that means going to a record store with the listening stations and standing there trying to decide if the hour long cd is worth picking up or not…standing there…for an hour…thats not convenient. So people are given the chance to listen to something before they buy it (something all you people bitch that you can’t do), but it’s inconvenient because you have to sit there and listen to it? > [@](#): > > yes one of the bands listed has plenty of tracks I can check out that are leagal and easy to find ONLINE. Silly Rabit and Pleasure Elite are going to be damn hard to find anywhere online or not and leagal or not they are pretty small bands. If the music is not legally available online, then tough shit. The first thing that any tiny dinky band does is put up a website with mp3s to DL, perhaps they don’t want their shit out there. There are plenty of people btw that don’t want their stuff floating around. I know that’s hard to believe but it’s true. > [@](#): > > ok this is a problem, youre right when you say you cant define what makes a piece of music shitty you are wrong when you continue to follow the belief that you should have to shell out 15-20$ for ONE SONG. Why not? The value of something depends on the individual. > [@](#): > > I dont want 14 songs that suck donkey balls and one thats great. Then don’t buy it. > [@](#): > > and the industry idea that you should HAVE to buy the whole cd to get one song is bullshit. Going in circles here. If you think 14 out of 15 songs on the album suck then don’t buy it, it doesn’t sound like a good value. I find it amazing that an artist can make a song that you completely love and then everything else they make completely sucks shit. I own over 2000 cds, and yet I don’t think I have an album where there is one great song and the rest of the album is garbage. Usually every song sucks or the entire album is pretty good, with a few tracks here and there I might not like as much as some others. > [@](#): > > its alot like some guy trying to sell you a 30 year old datsun that is more rust than paint, runs like shit, smokes like crazy and wouldnt pass emmissions in africa but has really really nice rims on it. the rims you might buy, the old fucked up car that they are attached to isnt. Well the guy selling the car wants to get rid of the entire car. It’s too bad that you only want the rims, because well, that’s not his problem, it’s yours. If no one else buys the car, maybe he’ll realize that nothing will change and he’ll peddle off the individual parts. The important thing to remember is that it’s _his_ choice. > [@](#): > > all those wonderful online music stores are great, splendid, and not run by any one in the riaa or are they anything all that new other than itunes. once again the industy fails to lift a finger to fill an obvious market demand for their product. Well you should call a VC and start a company. > [@](#): > > I call bullshit on this, the riaa has shown in the past that they posses absolutly no clue how to use the net to make a buck. In the past? This is the first time they are dealing with the issue. > [@](#): > > or have we all just forgot the ludacrious fiasco with net radio? the bill they pushed through congress that put thousands of stations out of business permanently even those that werent makeing any money in the first place. > call me crazy but if I were an industry exec and you told me that for the price of some bandwidth and a few servers I could expose every singe artist and band on my entire roster I would be all over it, sony/mca/geffon any and all of those company’s could host their own net stations on already established markets to get virtually Free advertiseing, for 10k and the cost of a t1line every obscure/old/noname/newartist/weird/deathmetal/country/opera/hip hop/band could have instant and easily accessable exposure to a market that has unlimited potential. instead they come along and shut it down. grats they could have made a nickel instead they screamed copyright and ran around waving their arms in the air shouting “MINEMINEMINEMINEMINEMINE” until congress gave them their way. Well if you know more then sony/mca/geffon I suggest you go into business ASAP. ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 8:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494/103 "2004-04-09T08:23:04Z")
You complain about having obscure tastes? I am the queen of obscure. Can anyone here help me find a CD of Ennio Morricone’s _Marco Polo_? Anyone? Because I’d love that—it’s one of the most beautiful things I’ve ever heard, but I can’t seem to buy it anywhere. I’ve got a ton of weird-ass, oddball, off-the-wall, obscure shit that I’d _love_ to get, but it’s damned difficult to find. But that’s how it goes. Most of you who are bitching about how obscure your tastes are really don’t know how easy you’ve got it. Buncha whiners. I just wanted to smugly point that out. 😉 > [@Critical1](#): > > I dont want 14 songs that suck donkey balls and one thats great. and the industry idea that you should HAVE to buy the whole cd to get one song is bullshit. Then perhaps you should acquire a better taste in music. Or perhaps you should boycott bands that are only capable of producing one good song, and are trying to pawn off a bunch of inferior crap for the sake of that one song. I know I wouldn’t put up with that, if most of my music purchases were like that. Seriously. I don’t know why you guys put up with it. I don’t know why any of you _ever_ put up with it. If that’s how your favorite bands operate, where they only can manage one or two good things per album, then they _suck._ Dump them. If Ennio Morricone or Jerry Goldsmith or Jean Sibelius could only produce one good piece per album, I wouldn’t be such an ardent fan of theirs. Because I know a lot of other so-so composers who can occasionally do something decent, but I don’t usually buy their albums, I just stay away. Because they don’t “do it” for me. Or, if I love that sole piece on an album _that_ much, I’ll buy the album anyway. I just decide whether it is worth it to me or not. Like I mentioned before, that’s what my dad did. He wasn’t around for the Napster days, and somehow he managed. He loved Jean Sibelius’s work, but Sibelius had died in 1956 or 1957 so it wasn’t like he was going to make anything new. But whenever someone decided to record some 3 minute obscure piece by Sibelius, my dad got the album, even if everything else on it was something he already had. Because he decided that it was _worth it_ to him. So, suck it up and do the same thing. Or just start expanding your musical horizons, so you don’t keep on pining over marginal bands who can’t seem to get it together enough to do more than one good piece at a time. Because you don’t have a _right_ to dictate to the artists or creators how they release their work. Would you tell an author that you only liked chapter 2 of his book, so he’d better release a version of his book that only has chapter 2? Or would you tell him that you want to see the book in electronic (PDF) form, so he’s gotta do that, 'cause that’s what _you_ want? How well do you think that would go over? How arrogant do you think that would make you sound? Sure, you can ask, but can you demand? Expect it as your due? Not bloody likely. ---
**Author:** ![Dead\_Badger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/848f3c/32.png) [@Dead\_Badger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dead_Badger)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 10:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494/104 "2004-04-09T10:43:27Z")
> [@Critical1](#): > > ok so you can find Crystal Method on the net, grats thats the place we already decided it was located. now find me a place thats not the net where I can listen to this at my convenience…that means going to a record store with the listening stations and standing there trying to decide if the hour long cd is worth picking up or not…standing there…for an hour…thats not convenient. yes one of the bands listed has plenty of tracks I can check out that are leagal and easy to find ONLINE. Silly Rabit and Pleasure Elite are going to be damn hard to find anywhere online or not and leagal or not they are pretty small bands. Did you read my post? What did I say? What did I say? Oh, yes: > [@Me](#): > > And if you’re planning on picking me up on the semantics of “going online”, it really ought to be clear from the context that we’re talking about filesharing here. So don’t be a dickhead. You do not need to steal the Crystal Method’s music to hear it, which is what this entire thread is about. And moreover, just because you find it more convenient to steal something than actually get off your arse and slope your gargantuan sense of self-importance down to the store does _not_ make it just dandy for you to go thieving. And if those last two bands are so hard to find anywhere, including online, then … just what was your point again? > [@Critical1](#): > > all those wonderful online music stores are great, splendid, and not run by any one in the riaa or are they anything all that new other than itunes. once again the industy fails to lift a finger to fill an obvious market demand for their product. What in the spleen-haemorrhaging fuck are you on about? Listen, dear; the RIAA are not a band. They are not even a label. They do not run a business. They are a lobby group for the music industry collectively, in the US. The labels license their records to these shops - that is how there is what we call “music” available on these shops. The same labels belong to the RIAA. Now, could you please explain to me what your deliciously incomprehensible pseudo-english gibberings actually mean, and what your problem is with all these stores? How can “the industry” not be lifting a finger when there’s **all these fucking online stores**!? Who the fuck do you _think_ is running them, the fucking underpants gnomes? ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494/105 "2004-04-09T12:35:16Z")
Hi guys. That is all. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494/106 "2004-04-09T15:38:36Z")
> [@Princhester](#): > > Hi guys. That is all. 🙂 Hey you. Nice to see “charter member” under your name. ---
**Author:** ![Critical1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/3e96dc/32.png) [@Critical1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Critical1)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494/107 "2004-04-09T18:55:24Z")
ok you guys are either missing my point or just ignoring it completely. if I want to buy new rims for my car I can do that. if I want to buy 1 single spark plug I can do that. if the auto industry were run like the music industry I would have to buy an entire new car in order to get just one piece I want. why does this make sense? what reason is there for people to put up with this? oh yeah, its because its always been that way. even though its completely outdated by todays technology. as to the stealing crystal methods music crap, how is it stealing if I buy the cd’s? explain this to me? I realise its not leagal, I realise that SOME people just download everything they want and never pay a dime. those people arent me. if I use the only means I have for listening to obscure or just hard to hear music in order to make my decision about a cd I honestly couldnt give a fuck about the legality. and I really fail to see why the industry is shitting abrick over the subject instead of finding a way to use it as a business model. no i dont mean they should just host the entire cd for free unlimited downloads but it would be nice to be able to hear some of the stuff they have without the hassle of leaving the house, going to the record store, and spending hours there listening to music trying to choose something to buy. I usually Dl HOURS (as in 3-5 hours) of new music to sort through at a time, drop it all in winamp and go about my business. delete the crap, set aside the stuff I am undecided on and find out where to get the stuff I liked. my favorite bands dont put out albums with only one good track. that doesnt mean those albums dont exist. and it still doesnt justify the industry standard of all or nothing. Ennio Morricone has some amazing music, I love alot of his stuff. but youre right, hes about as obscure as it gets. now tell me why you cant find his music for sale anywhere? its because whatever label has his music is to fucking stupid to make a few high quality mp3’s and host them on a server somewhere for a buck apiece. would you not pay for that? “Well if you know more then sony/mca/geffon I suggest you go into business ASAP.” sure thing, you drop me the cash for the t1 and the servers then get me the copywrites to any major labels entire library and I will find away to make sure I see profit from the increase in sales due to the exposure created. nice answer, considering I have trouble with my car payments atm. "Quote: Originally Posted by Critical1 all those wonderful online music stores are great, splendid, and not run by any one in the riaa or are they anything all that new other than itunes. once again the industy fails to lift a finger to fill an obvious market demand for their product. What in the spleen-haemorrhaging fuck are you on about? Listen, dear; the RIAA are not a band. They are not even a label. They do not run a business. They are a lobby group for the music industry collectively, in the US. Quote: my suggestion to the riaa is to drop your retarded lawsuits and spend your energies on something constructive like joining the 20th (yeah I know thats the last one) century. its past time for the recording industry to pull its head out of its ass and act like the internet actually exists as a possible source of new income instead of a threat to the industries very existance. What, like opening online music stores and suchlike? Gosh, the very idea of it!" um those are both your posts Badger, it sure looks like you understood the message in the first one only to list a bunch of places not run by any riaa member, since I clearly stated that the riaa members were the ones NOT doing anything to fill an obvious demand for their product and since it was also clearly stated that the MEMBERS of the riaa were the ones fucking off not the riaa itself I am finding your confusion confusing. the industry is doing everything in its power to stop people from filesharing EXEPT (as in the one thing they arent doing) offer a fucking alternative. they piss off large parts of the customer base, they shut down people who were PAYING money from their own pockets to get music out to the people who want to hear it. in short they STILL HAVENT FUCKNING OFFERED US ANY REASON NOT TO USE FILESHARING. other than the oh no not a lawsuit because someones 12 yr old was hosting songs on kazaa. because you know there arent a dozen other p2p networks out there already. can anyone here tell me that the cost of hosting a cd for download would be less profitable than manufactoring the cd/liner, shipping the cd, putting it on the shelf, and selling it to the public? I dont want p2p to be leagal, but to be honest I couldnt give a crap if its not. when I have to search my ass off to find tracks from some obscure ass band, then special order the cd and wait 3 weeks (or just be told they cant get it at all) for it to arrive, I am nothing but THANKFUL for p2p, I love my copy of Evolution Ending from Naked Funk. without p2p I woundt own it because I would never have heard it. without some way to replace the power of p2p the riaa companies are just fucking themselves over. instead of finding a way to sell those obscure artists to people who want the music but cant hear it any where convienient. hosting netstations is cheap, compared to the advertising money the riaa crew already spends its fucking FREE. hosting high quality mp3’s is massivly cheaper than manufactoring/shipping/retailing cd’s will ever be. yosemitebabe could get all the Ennio Morricone she wanted if they hosted their own damn music. its not like they lose any money by hosting obscure shit, memory is cheap, servers are cheap compared to the cost of all the other advertising they do. bandwidth is also cheap. shipping and handling and shelf space arent cheap. the math is simple shelf space costs money, trucking those things all over the country costs money, hosting the mp3’s is cheap as hell. so cheap in comparison that its mind boggling that they still havent tried that route. I dont like the fact that the best way to find new music is also illegal, its not like I am sitting at my pc giggleing over my amazing powers at computer theft. the truth of the matter is that until the option is there people are going to fileshare, and nothing NOTHING the riaa does will ever shut down illegal filesharing. the technology has exitsed long before napster and will continue to evolve and change. the riaa will never be able to keep up, as it is they are already several steps behind and falling fast. the riaa can call me a thief all they want. you can consider me a thief if thats how you feel. I am personally satisfied with my record of buying the music I find when I like it. I have orders placed at used cd shops for obscure crap (thats how I got my copy of Silly Rabits “Dirt” Cd) I couldnt care less if some other people are flat out stealing music from the p2p networks. no more than I care if someone is doing 70 in a 65 anyway. its trivial bullshit that the riaa companies are making a shitload of noise over instead of sitting back and taking a calm look at things and even attempting to make a dime off of this new market. (new as in what? 10 years old now?) my opinion would probably change if they werent such asshats about everything. ---
**Author:** ![Dead\_Badger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/848f3c/32.png) [@Dead\_Badger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dead_Badger)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494/108 "2004-04-09T20:03:37Z")
> [@Critical1](#): > > um those are both your posts Badger, it sure looks like you understood the message in the first one only to list a bunch of places not run by any riaa member, since I clearly stated that the riaa members were the ones NOT doing anything to fill an obvious demand for their product and since it was also clearly stated that the MEMBERS of the riaa were the ones fucking off not the riaa itself I am finding your confusion confusing. the industry is doing everything in its power to stop people from filesharing EXEPT (as in the one thing they arent doing) offer a fucking alternative. You have transposed the quotes in time. The first came after the second, as well you know. Please don’t dishonestly quote people. Now, here it is in baby steps: **Q:** What is in those online stores? **A:** Music. **Q:** Who makes the music? **A:** Musicians. **Q:** Who pays the musicians to make the music? **A:** Labels. **Q:** Who therefore distributes the music? **A:** Labels. **Q:** Who therefore is cooperating with each and every one of these stores? **A:** Labels. **Q:** Who are the members of the RIAA? **A:** Labels. Now, if you understand this testicle-bogglingly simple chain of reasoning, then that’s where it gets really weird, because it then seems that your entire complaint is that the labels aren’t running the stores directly. Is it? Because I have to say, that’s almost as stupid a justification as Blalron’s old biddy. For starters, it isn’t even relevant - who _cares_ who runs the stores, hmm? - and furthermore, it’s a [crock](http://news.com.com/2100-7353-5137127.html). Sony have been planning their online store for ages; Virgin are launching one soon. But really, this is irrelevant; why on _earth_ is it important to you that the labels directly control the distribution channels? Does it bother you that Bon Jovi doesn’t work checkouts at HMV? Do you want David Geffen stacking shelves at Tower Records? And if so, why the fuck? The reason I listed all the music stores I did is because I truly cannot comprehend what meaningful distinction there is in your mind between a store to which the labels license music and one run directly by the labels. Please, explain. Please. With capitals and punctuation, if possible. And please, _try_ and bear in mind that the RIAA _is not a business_. It is a lobbying organisation set up _by the labels_ out of political expediency to serve their common purposes, namely ensuring that their assorted work is protected. It does not exist to create, publish or distribute music. That is what the labels do, and as has been repeatedly pointed out, they are doing it, both online and off. What more do you want? ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494/109 "2004-04-09T20:38:13Z")
> [@Critical1](#): > > why does this make sense? what reason is there for people to put up with this? oh yeah, its because its always been that way. even though its completely outdated by todays technology. You can’t _demand_ that artists distribute their work in a format of your choosing. You don’t get to call the shots with _their_ work. > [@](#): > > Ennio Morricone has some amazing music, I love alot of his stuff. but youre right, hes about as obscure as it gets. now tell me why you cant find his music for sale anywhere? Actually, I’m not doing so badly; places like [Intrada](http://www.intrada.com) carry a lot of his stuff. But he’s so damned prolific, that’s the problem. It’s hard for any label to carry every piece he’s ever composed simultaniously. And you know what? I am surviving the trauma of not having every single Morricone piece I want, on demand, on my terms. Sure, I’d love it if I could download anything of his that I wanted at any time, but I don’t think I should take his choices away (or whoever owns the copyright on his works) in order to have what _I’d_ like. ---
**Author:** ![Critical1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/3e96dc/32.png) [@Critical1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Critical1)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494/110 "2004-04-09T21:23:20Z")
“You have transposed the quotes in time. The first came after the second, as well you know. Please don’t dishonestly quote people. Now, here it is in baby steps:” I posted them in reverse order because that made sense, you wanted to know what I was going on about when your previous post seemed to make it clear that you already knew. sorry if that looked like I was trying to make you look bad or something. my complaint isnt that the companies arent running the store directly, its that the only response they have shown to the internet it to lobby for new and very bad law and to push lawsuits for people using the net in ways thay have a very very questionable effect on music sales. its great that people are selling music online, its great that they are even offering songs for single download. my biggest problem with other sites doing that vrs the companies themselves is really just the lack of choice. we get to purchase this song but not that one? this cd but not the other? it makes no sense, they seem to have convinced themselves that the net is evil incarnate and left it at that. the riaa expends an incredible amount of money and the biggest effect it has had so far (at least that I can see) is to piss off music lovers the world over. its even been stated in this thread “I loathe the riaa but stand by their right to defend their copyrights” (sorry cant remember who said it and I am out the door very soon) I dont have a problem with them defending any of their rights, I do have a problem with the way they have gone about it. instead of offering an alternative they go balistic. no one sympathises with a truly giagantic corporation driven group who prosecutes children, old people, and collage students over something that hasnt even been shown to have this huge effect on sales to anyones satisfaction. bleh ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494/111 "2004-04-09T22:18:14Z")
> [@Critical1](#): > > ok you guys are either missing my point or just ignoring it completely. Nope, I think I get your point loud and clear. You have a serious ax to grind against the RIAA, of which you are obviously unaware of what they do. You have a highly misplaced sense of entitlement, where unless the music is hand delivered to you, you will go ahead and steal it. And finally, you simply know not of what the fuck you’re talking about. > [@](#): > > if I want to buy new rims for my car I can do that. Yup > [@](#): > > if I want to buy 1 single spark plug I can do that. Yup > [@](#): > > if the auto industry were run like the music industry I would have to buy an entire new car in order to get just one piece I want. Well for starters they’re two, totally different industries. There also is a bit of a difference between buying a $15 CD for a song you want, and buying a $10,000 car for a $5 sparkplug. There are also a few other trifling differences such as a car needs parts replaced over time and so forth. I can’t recall the last time I needed to replace track 7 on my Deftones disc. > [@](#): > > as to the stealing crystal methods music crap, how is it stealing if I buy the cd’s? You know, if everyone was downloading the music and buying the album I wouldn’t have a problem with that, but we know human nature. If you actually own the CD to _every single_ mp3 on your computer, kudos to you, you’re of a slim minority. > [@](#): > > I realise its not leagal, I realise that SOME people just download everything they want and never pay a dime. those people arent me. Yeah yeah that’s what everyone says, I call bullshit. > [@](#): > > if I use the only means I have for listening to obscure or just hard to hear music in order to make my decision about a cd I honestly couldnt give a fuck about the legality. You make it sound like no one every listened to music before p2p, which of course is stupid. > [@](#): > > and I really fail to see why the industry is shitting abrick over the subject instead of finding a way to use it as a business model. I’ll tell you why the industry is shitting a brick. Because once an mp3, a single mp3, is loose out in the wild, the cat is out of the bag. You can create an unlimited number of pefect copies from it and mass distribute it to the furthest reaches of the globe, all in insanely short amount of time. They are essentially in a no win situation. No matter what secure system they come up with, I can bypass it in 2 seconds simply by recording it to analog and then re-encoding it. So as long as it makes noise, they are fucked. This is why they are shitting their pants. There is no way to secure their product. > [@](#): > > no i dont mean they should just host the entire cd for free unlimited downloads but it would be nice to be able to hear some of the stuff they have without the hassle of leaving the house, going to the record store, and spending hours there listening to music trying to choose something to buy. As we’ve pointed out over and over and over again, there are plenty of places where you can sample thousands of albums right now. In additions to such websites, there are tens of thousands of bands with their own sites, where they are more then happy to offer files. Is this completely lost on you? Everyday more and more places are cropping up, not less, so I don’t know what you are bitching about. As for having to actually go outside to a store where you can try before you buy, well, there are millions without web access, more without broadband, and even more that aren’t capable of doing anything more then printing out a word doc. Somehow they manage just fine, and in fact have some have pretty badass music collections. > [@](#): > > I usually Dl HOURS (as in 3-5 hours) of new music to sort through at a time, drop it all in winamp and go about my business. delete the crap, set aside the stuff I am undecided on and find out where to get the stuff I liked. So say you want a new car, do you go steal one for a test drive before you buy, because going all the way to the dealer to test drive is a pain in the ass? > [@](#): > > my favorite bands dont put out albums with only one good track. that doesnt mean those albums dont exist. Sure they exist, what’s your point? > [@](#): > > and it still doesnt justify the industry standard of all or nothing. Pssst, I’ll let you in on a secret. It’s not an industry standard to make one really good song and all the rest are shit. It’s an excuse _you_ use to rip off an artist. Is there some magical formula for making a song good I’m unaware of? Are you suggesting that “the industry” (which doesn’t write the music btw) has the capability to make every song good, yet for some dark nefarious reason they choose to not to do so? If so, wouldn’t it be in their best interest to make _every_ song good? Pretty fucking stupid when you think about it eh? > [@](#): > > Ennio Morricone has some amazing music, I love alot of his stuff. but youre right, hes about as obscure as it gets. now tell me why you cant find his music for sale anywhere? Try his website, you know, the first place you should look. You can buy whatever you want there. > **[Home](http://www.typi.it/)** Took me about 10 seconds to find it btw. > [@](#): > > its because whatever label has his music is to fucking stupid to make a few high quality mp3’s and host them on a server somewhere for a buck apiece. would you not pay for that? Would you like to sample _every_ song off his album, from the comfort of your home? Try here… [http://www.towerrecords.com/product.aspx?pfid=2947307](http://www.towerrecords.com/product.aspx?pfid=2947307) Took me about 15 seconds this time. You are really running out of excuses. > [@](#): > > sure thing, you drop me the cash for the t1 and the servers then get me the copywrites to any major labels entire library and I will find away to make sure I see profit from the increase in sales due to the exposure created. If you seriously believe this, you should make an appointment with a venture capitalist, or you should contact the major record labels, they really would love to hear your ideas. See on the surface its easy to be an armchair CEO, but once you get out into reality you’ll find it’s a bit harder to pull off then you think. In any case, if you have the answer for Sony I suggest you call them up. I’m sure the people successfully running the company for the last few decades and their hundreds of lawyers who know every nuance of the legal aspects would love to hear from some crazy loon like yourself. > [@](#): > > um those are both your posts Badger, it sure looks like you understood the message in the first one only to list a bunch of places not run by any riaa member, since I clearly stated that the riaa members were the ones NOT doing anything to fill an obvious demand for their product and since it was also clearly stated that the MEMBERS of the riaa were the ones fucking off not the riaa itself I am finding your confusion confusing. So stop saying the RIAA this and the RIAA that, you don’t even know what the fuck your talking about. The RIAA keeps tabs on legal issues and copyrights for the US music industry. It’s the labels that are dragging their feet in coming up with a better system to disseminate music, in fact the RIAA doesn’t really have shit all to do with it. Make sure you’re angry at the right people for god sakes. If you’re mad at the lawsuits, then get mad at the RIAA, that’s fine. To be honest I don’t really see what there is to get mad at them about. You’ve admitted that downloading music is illegal, and they’re only going after people who participate in said activity. Anyone that is not involved is perfectly safe. So basically you are getting mad at someone protecting their product and going after criminals. > [@](#): > > the industry is doing everything in its power to stop people from filesharing EXEPT (as in the one thing they arent doing) offer a fucking alternative. Um, don’t you consider Itunes an alternative? > [@](#): > > they shut down people who were PAYING money from their own pockets to get music out to the people who want to hear it. People who legally purchased music who then turned around and illegally offered it to the masses? Are you saying since they bought it they have the right to do some mass giveaway now? I hope not, because you must be a special kind of stupid to believe that. > [@](#): > > in short they STILL HAVENT FUCKNING OFFERED US ANY REASON NOT TO USE FILESHARING. Itunes > [@](#): > > can anyone here tell me that the cost of hosting a cd for download would be less profitable than manufactoring the cd/liner, shipping the cd, putting it on the shelf, and selling it to the public? Sure hosting it would be cheaper, incidentally that’s why every major label is at this very moment setting up an online store. > [@](#): > > I dont want p2p to be leagal, but to be honest I couldnt give a crap if its not. when I have to search my ass off to find tracks from some obscure ass band, then special order the cd and wait 3 weeks (or just be told they cant get it at all) for it to arrive, I am nothing but THANKFUL for p2p, What do you do when you’ve found something you really, really like, yet can’t find a place to get the CD? Do you delete it? > [@](#): > > I love my copy of Evolution Ending from Naked Funk. without p2p I woundt own it because I would never have heard it. So either 2 things happened. One day you were sitting at kazaa, and just decided to type in the name of a band _that you never knew existed_. You downloaded it, and it was love at first listen, how cute. Without kazaa you would have never heard of it right? Wrong. More likely you heard a snip of a song, someone mentioned it to you, or you read about them somewhere. You had to have heard the name somewhere prior to looking it up. At that point you decide to go to kazaa to check them out. Of course you could have gone here instead… [http://www.towerrecords.com/product.aspx?pfid=1522852](http://www.towerrecords.com/product.aspx?pfid=1522852) Now explain to me again how you wouldn’t know this band existed without kazaa? > [@](#): > > without some way to replace the power of p2p the riaa companies are just fucking themselves over. Well they won’t replace it, because the power of p2p is that it’s free, nothing else. Say, how is napster doing now that you pay for it? > [@](#): > > instead of finding a way to sell those obscure artists to people who want the music but cant hear it any where convienient. So what you are saying is there is some obscure band out there that _everyone_ knows about and wants to listen to, but their stupid label won’t promote them? First off if everyone knows you, you’re not obscure, and second if an artist has such a following, the label will promote them till no tomorrow, taking in a tidy sum while doing it. This happened recently with 50 cent. He had a huge underground following, broke free from an old record contract was snatched up in about 10 seconds by a major label, and the rest is history. > [@](#): > > hosting netstations is cheap, compared to the advertising money the riaa crew already spends its fucking FREE. Everything is cheap when it isn’t your money. > [@](#): > > hosting high quality mp3’s is massivly cheaper than manufactoring/shipping/retailing cd’s will ever be. Bandwidth, servers, 24 tech support, etc ain’t cheap in it’s own right. > [@](#): > > yosemitebabe could get all the Ennio Morricone she wanted if they hosted their own damn music. She could also get it if he put up all his music on his own site, why don’t you get mad at him too? > [@](#): > > its not like they lose any money by hosting obscure shit, memory is cheap, servers are cheap compared to the cost of all the other advertising they do. We’ll they still need to advertise, it’s not like they can just stop. > [@](#): > > bandwidth is also cheap. shipping and handling and shelf space arent cheap. the math is simple shelf space costs money, trucking those things all over the country costs money, hosting the mp3’s is cheap as hell. so cheap in comparison that its mind boggling that they still havent tried that route. They have gone that route, it’s called Itunes, and people have downloaded hundred of millions of songs from it, _individually_, just like you wanted. > [@](#): > > I dont like the fact that the best way to find new music is also illegal As mentioned above with the Naked Funk thing, p2p is not at all the best way to find out about new music. As I’ve said till I’m blue in the face, with p2p I have to know what I’m looking for ahead of time. This obviously makes it impossible to discover new music, because if I’ve never heard of Naked Funk, I won’t be typing in Naked Funk, and thus they won’t be popping up when I hit search. It’s simply a way to sample music _you’ve already heard about_, which is quite different, considering there are other legal ways to sample the music and determine if you would like to buy the album. > [@](#): > > its not like I am sitting at my pc giggleing over my amazing powers at computer theft. the truth of the matter is that until the option is there people are going to fileshare, The option is there, Itunes and others, you are just blind to it. > [@](#): > > and nothing NOTHING the riaa does will ever shut down illegal filesharing. Unless they give it away for free, or people like yourself exist, no it won’t go away anytime soon. > [@](#): > > the technology has exitsed long before napster and will continue to evolve and change. the riaa will never be able to keep up, as it is they are already several steps behind and falling fast. You just don’t like the RIAA. That and you’re ignorant. > [@](#): > > the riaa can call me a thief all they want. you can consider me a thief if thats how you feel. I am personally satisfied with my record of buying the music I find when I like it. I have orders placed at used cd shops for obscure crap (thats how I got my copy of Silly Rabits “Dirt” Cd) I couldnt care less if some other people are flat out stealing music from the p2p networks. Well I’m sure you won’t care when the Silly Rabits get dropped from their label because the sales numbers were too low. The sad thing is you think this doesn’t affect you. > [@](#): > > no more than I care if someone is doing 70 in a 65 anyway. its trivial bullshit that the riaa companies are making a shitload of noise over instead of sitting back and taking a calm look at things and even attempting to make a dime off of this new market. (new as in what? 10 years old now?) my opinion would probably change if they werent such asshats about everything. Man, you’re a fucking idiot, straight up. ---
**Author:** ![Club\_33](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/df705f/32.png) [@Club\_33](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Club_33)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494/112 "2004-04-09T22:33:59Z")
Here is a hypothetical. I have no idea of the feasability, but work we with me for a minute. ok? 🙂 Let’s say that there was a huge database of music online that you could log into and listen to any song that was available for free. There is only two catches: A) You can only listen to a track once. The system has a built in way of tracking this. B) It is impossible to download the music. You can only listen to it. Would this be a fair compromise and stop your use of p2p? After all, many people are adamant about the fact that they download simply because: 1. It isn’t available to hear anywhere else. 2. They just want a chance to hear it to make a more informed purchasing decision. I would love to hear some honest answers from those that fileshare. For if this system were to exist, there would be no more need to illegally file share, right? Personally, I think if such a system existed, most people would still bitch and moan because what they really want is way to get huge libraries of music without having to make any investment. ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494/113 "2004-04-09T23:02:26Z")
> [@Club 33](#): > > B) It is impossible to download the music. You can only listen to it. The very problem is that I can listen to it. Say I take the speaker plug out of the speakers and plug it into my minidisc player, voila, now it’s mine forever. Perhaps you are allowed a certain amount of sample downloads a month, and anytime you buy something from them you are given another 20? Who knows, the whole thing gives me a headache. > [@](#): > > Personally, I think if such a system existed, most people would still bitch and moan because what they really want is way to get huge libraries of music without having to make any investment. Bingo! ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494/114 "2004-04-09T23:36:00Z")
First off, I have to get this out of my system: [Charlton Heston Voice] Damn you, damn you all to HELL![/Charlton Heston Voice] Damn, World Eater, I didn’t even think to look up Morricone’s site. He’s got concert DVDs and everything. Damn. As if my credit card doesn’t have enough on it . . . However, I think you are simplifying the Morricone issue. He’s been composing stuff since the 1961, and according to his [iMDb](http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001553/) page, he has composed . . . (I cannot believe this) 505 scores or themes. Damn, I knew he was prolific, but, DAMN!!! So anyway, what I’m looking for specifically is his _Marco Polo_ score, from the 1982 miniseries. It was a two-record album (yes, I own the LP version—somewhere) and it has some of the most gorgeous music I’ve ever heard on it. There was supposedly a CD released in Japan sometime in the last few years, but somehow I missed that. So that’s the obscure shit I’m specifically looking for. I’m also looking for a CD of the 1988 Harrison Ford film _Frantic_, which is freakin’ brilliant. (I also have it on LP somewhere.) These are both apparently hard to find. But I’m not bellyaching too much about it. I don’t know why they are not available on the CD format, but knowing Morricone’s fan base (if it’s anything like Jerry Goldsmith’s fan base), eventually some label (maybe Intrada, Varese Sarabande, or Silva Screen) will be able to re-release it. I am patient. Well, impatient, but I’m coping. Maybe it’s because I saw how my dad coped, that I’ve learned to cope instead of having some huge sense of entitlement about it all. He patiently collected all his Sibelius recordings and paid what he had to pay in order to get everything he could. And with him it was even _more_ frustrating, because Sibelius had composed music that no one had recorded. So here was my poor dad, reading about this orchestral piece or that piano composition, but there was no existing recording of it! How annoying is _that!?!_ And yet he coped. I remember when some orchestra _finally_ did a recording of _Our Native Land_ in 1986, (what? 30 years after the composer died?) that it was a big deal to my dad. (And _Our Native Land_ is freakin’ _brilliant_, so I don’t know why it took so long for someone to do a recording.) Imagine having to wait **THIRTY YEARS** in order to hear something like that—something you know existed, but could never hear. That’s gotta take some major patience. So, to those of you who whine because you may have to drive in your car to go to a shop to hear a CD of something, remember that my dad waited **THIRTY FRICKIN’ YEARS** in order to hear _Our Native Land_. So stop whining. Okay, end of this rambling, obscure and exceedingly geeky music rant. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494/115 "2004-04-09T23:39:31Z")
> [@yosemitebabe](#): > > First off, I have to get this out of my system: > > [Charlton Heston Voice] Damn you, damn you all to HELL![/Charlton Heston Voice] > > Damn, World Eater, I didn’t even think to look up Morricone’s site. He’s got concert DVDs and everything. Damn. As if my credit card doesn’t have enough on it . . . > > However, I think you are simplifying the Morricone issue. He’s been composing stuff since the 1961, and according to his [iMDb](http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001553/) page, he has composed . . . (I cannot believe this) 505 scores or themes. Damn, I knew he was prolific, but, DAMN!!! > > So anyway, what I’m looking for specifically is his _Marco Polo_ score, from the 1982 miniseries. It was a two-record album (yes, I own the LP version—somewhere) and it has some of the most gorgeous music I’ve ever heard on it. There was supposedly a CD released in Japan sometime in the last few years, but somehow I missed that. > > So that’s the obscure shit I’m specifically looking for. I’m also looking for a CD of the 1988 Harrison Ford film _Frantic_, which is freakin’ brilliant. (I also have it on LP somewhere.) > > These are both apparently hard to find. But I’m not bellyaching too much about it. I don’t know why they are not available on the CD format, but knowing Morricone’s fan base (if it’s anything like Jerry Goldsmith’s fan base), eventually some label (maybe Intrada, Varese Sarabande, or Silva Screen) will be able to re-release it. I am patient. Well, impatient, but I’m coping. > > Maybe it’s because I saw how my dad coped, that I’ve learned to cope instead of having some huge sense of entitlement about it all. He patiently collected all his Sibelius recordings and paid what he had to pay in order to get everything he could. And with him it was even _more_ frustrating, because Sibelius had composed music that no one had recorded. So here was my poor dad, reading about this orchestral piece or that piano composition, but there was no existing recording of it! How annoying is _that!?!_ And yet he coped. > > I remember when some orchestra _finally_ did a recording of _Our Native Land_ in 1986, (what? 30 years after the composer died?) that it was a big deal to my dad. (And _Our Native Land_ is freakin’ _brilliant_, so I don’t know why it took so long for someone to do a recording.) Imagine having to wait **THIRTY YEARS** in order to hear something like that—something you know existed, but could never hear. That’s gotta take some major patience. So, to those of you who whine because you may have to drive in your car to go to a shop to hear a CD of something, remember that my dad waited **THIRTY FRICKIN’ YEARS** in order to hear _Our Native Land_. So stop whining. > > Okay, end of this rambling, obscure and exceedingly geeky music rant. 😉 Well said. ---
**Author:** ![Club\_33](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/df705f/32.png) [@Club\_33](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Club_33)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2004, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494/116 "2004-04-10T03:04:30Z")
> [@World Eater](#): > > The very problem is that I can listen to it. Say I take the speaker plug out of the speakers and plug it into my minidisc player, voila, now it’s mine forever. > Who knows, the whole thing gives me a headache. **World Eater** Hey man, I know it isn’t a feasable idea. 🙂 I just wanted to see if the filesharers would have a problem with it. I expect that they would. The interesting thing is that for all of those that say that their intention isn’t to get free music, they sure seem to have a substantial amount of material on their hard drive. They must be expecting to do a hell of a lot of purchasing. 😉 I always found it interesting that when I checked out Napster in the past, and saw what other users had available for download, it was usually 100’s of MB’s of material, if not gigs. Kind of makes their argument look silly, if you ask me. And just for the record, I am a musician that has played in many bands. I’m also a member of BMI and receive royalty checks. My personal opinion is that file sharing does far more damage than good to the artists. Those that think that the internet is a great way to promote an unknown band are suffering from a delusion. A new band, that doesn’t primarily use other forms of promotion, is piece of a needle in a thousand haystacks. It just isn’t going to happen. Keep fighting the good fight, World Eater, Dead Badger, and Yosemitebabe. I don’t think it will make a lot of difference because many people have come to the conclusion that they are entitled to free music and that is hell of a hurdle. Their justifications give me a headache as well. They don’t seem to understand that it is a business and that people will not invest in a band if that band can not show a profit. Really, they are just reducing the number of new bands that will be offered to them, without even realizing it. ---
**Author:** ![Critical1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/3e96dc/32.png) [@Critical1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Critical1)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2004, 10:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494/117 "2004-04-10T10:30:31Z")
world eater go out and find some reading comprehension please. I have stated several times in reference to the Riaa that I am talking about the companies that the riaa represents, more than once and definitly very very clearly. I dont have time nor the inclination to reply to that unbelievably long post. to make this really really clear yes I do have a thing against the riaa, and more importantly against the companies it represents because in my opinion the behavior of those companies is 100% grade a asshole. lets try another route of comparison software manufacturers suffer from file sharing. they arent suing anyone over downloads nor are they suing over people who alter their software and host it again for others to enjoy. the movie industry isnt suing anyone over filesharing. nor is the dvd/vhs after market suing. the porn industry isnt suing anyone over file sharing. come to think of it I cant think of one other industry that has sued anyone over p2p file sharing. strange that its only one part of the p2p filesharing that causes such an immense problem. I think I am done with this thread, its degraded from posted opinions to personal attacks and its just not worth the headache ---
**Author:** ![Critical1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/3e96dc/32.png) [@Critical1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Critical1)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2004, 10:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494/118 "2004-04-10T10:44:08Z")
and then I go and post without the one reply i meant to make… “As I’ve said till I’m blue in the face, with p2p I have to know what I’m looking for ahead of time. This obviously makes it impossible to discover new music, because if I’ve never heard of Naked Funk, I won’t be typing in Naked Funk,” "One day you were sitting at kazaa, and just decided to type in the name of a band that you never knew existed. You downloaded it, and it was love at first listen, how cute. Without kazaa you would have never heard of it right? Wrong." ah yeah I love that attitude. see theres this CRAZY concept for you, its just fucking BONKERS that anyone could have an answer to your obviously all seeing all powerful insight into the world of music and finding shit you havent heard of before. I hate to break it to you but since Naked Funk is an acid jazz group they have this weird habit of popping up when you search for…you guessed it acid jazz. in 10 years one of us will be clearly wrong on the subject of hosted music and the relative price of bandwith/servers compared to manufacture/shipping/retailing but I’m not gonna hold my breath to find out. ---
**Author:** ![duffer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duffer/32/1026_2.png) [@duffer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/duffer)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2004, 11:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494/119 "2004-04-10T11:38:06Z")
So to get lesser-known/unsigned bands you just have to look for it on the internet and not p2p? OK, tell me if you would EVER find this without a link. [http://www.smalltowndrunk.com](http://www.smalltowndrunk.com) They have some stuff on p2p but it ain’t kazaa or imesh thanks to the lawsuits. So how should they get widespread exposure if they have to worry about the RIAA suing people signing up for service? They’re giving it away for free, but the RIAA still wants some kind of cut?!? Anyone defending the RIAA is hindering their progress as artists. ---
**Author:** ![Dead\_Badger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/848f3c/32.png) [@Dead\_Badger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dead_Badger)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2004, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494/120 "2004-04-10T13:06:13Z")
> [@duffer](#): > > They have some stuff on p2p but it ain’t kazaa or imesh thanks to the lawsuits. So how should they get widespread exposure if they have to worry about the RIAA suing people signing up for service? They’re giving it away for free, but the RIAA still wants some kind of cut?!? Er, what? The RIAA specifically sued to get this particular band’s music removed from Kazaa? Proof, please. Sharing music _if that is how the band want to publish_ is fine, and if they don’t have a record contract it’s entirely legal. I don’t see how the RIAA lawsuits (which, let me remind you, are both few in number and targeted at mass-hoster types) could have systematically eradicated this band’s tracks from P2P. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/study-shows-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-music-sales/237494.md?page=7)