RIAA vs music trading

[SilvorX]

I have to write a debate at school about how MP3 trading is wrong (we're supposed to defend an issue that we're against), and is there anywhere on the net with stats, info, etc about how p2p caused a loss in sales in music cds?
although i believe that when napster came out, it actually boosted the sales of cds (from what i heard)
thanx

[Taft]

Originally posted by SilvorX
I have to write a debate at school about how MP3 trading is wrong (we're supposed to defend an issue that we're against), and is there anywhere on the net with stats, info, etc about how p2p caused a loss in sales in music cds?
although i believe that when napster came out, it actually boosted the sales of cds (from what i heard)
thanx

Do a search on slashdot. They have discussions on this topic all the time and often have links to other publications.

For the industry's opinion, go to the RIAA's site. They put a lot of information against mp3's on there (watch out for propaganda and misinformation though).

Its hard to find objective information about this subject. Everybody has an interest on one side or the other.

Taft

[NavyIntel007]

All I know is I bought a lot more CD's when napster was around than I do now.

[SilvorX]

Originally posted by NavyIntel007
All I know is I bought a lot more CD's when napster was around than I do now.
same here

[NavyIntel007]

And it's funny how the RIAA blames the slumping sales on Napster and not the slumping economy... :confused:

[scem0]

I try to only download songs from people who are too rich for
their own good - mainstream artists. I buy CDs for smaller, or
local groups though.

[Stelliform]

I have read that the music industry is putting out less music now than they were when napster was around. They are trying to focus on fewer artists and get everybody to buy them.
That is the probably reason for the slumping sales. Their sales have dropped in proportion to the drop in new releases.

Slashdot (http://www.slashdot.org) is the way to go for research on this one....

[alset]

An interesting, often overlooked stance would be restructuring the royalty system between artists and labels. You can make a strong case by pointing out how the artists are already being robbed blind by their labels and how people who think it's a victimless crime (i.e. the record industry is bloated and won't notice a dent) are actually causing record labels to clamp down even tighter on new artists.

Dan

[guitargeek]

Aye, I used to always check out bands with napter. Now that it's gone, no longer, unless someone who already has a band's CD sends me an mp3.

I got into Dream Theater, Symphony X, Porcupine Tree, JAZZ (in general... many artists), King Crimson, Liquid Tension Experiment, Spock's Beard, Transatlantic, and MANY OTHER bands all because of Napster. I've bought probably 100 CD's because of what I checked out first. Now that it's gone, and there hasn't been a suitable replacement since, I'm not buying as many CD's because I can't check them out first (unless it's of a band I know I already like).

[alset]

I agree that sharing is a great way to check out artists that we might not be inclined to front money for, but the reality is that many of the people who claim to buy more music as a result of sharing are either rationalizing or flat out lying. This is not directed at anyone in this thread, just an observation.

Dan

[timbloom]

Originally posted by scem0
I try to only download songs from people who are too rich for
their own good - mainstream artists. I buy CDs for smaller, or
local groups though.

I agree with this philosophy, if I download something I really like, I buy it.