Musicians and Piracy

Okay stop whining. You are a millionaire musician making ungodly amounts of money compared to my broke 18 year old self. So when you tell me I am wrong for downloading your song of the internet for nothing, then sue the pants off me leaving me with nothing left to my name, all over a 99 cent download. Think again.

South Park, a TV show on Comedy Central hit the nail on the head with this one. The boys get themselves into trouble when they download music off of a free file sharing web site. The cops show up to their doors and take them in. The boys respond saying its not a big deal. One of the cops loses it and takes them on a tour of the “suffering” musicians, who can't make ends meet because of internet piracy. The boys end up at Britney Spears’ house where due to piracy she now has to save up to buy all the lavish things she wants. The boys quickly learn their lesson. The makers of South Park tend to have a message behind all of their episodes.

Can you guess the message?

That is right, piracy is not a big deal, and when rich artists complain about not making enough money we need to stop sympathizing with them.

Jack White has had an extremely successful music career. He has been in three bands, (The White Stripes, The Raconteurs, and The Dead Weather) and had a huge solo career. He is considered an incredible musician and has a sound that is uniquely his. He was quoted saying “I don't mind [piracy] that much, really,” later on he explained how he felt that he only wants to have music in its physical form of records and CD’s and how he felt that when buying music of the internet he doesn't feel like he is buying anything saying “you think that its there, but you can't see any moving parts and that's disappointing.”

Neil Young’s approach to piracy is simple “Piracy is the new radio, that's how music gets around. That's the real world for these kids.” He says how piracy is the new radio and how that's how us kids listen to music, and lets face it most of us kids are broke. So when artists expect us kids to shell out 15 bucks for their newest album we might think twice. But think back to the 60’s when certain music was banned from being played on the radio so what did people do? They set up boats and broadcast songs over the radio that people wanted to hear.

So you might be wondering why do they care so much. Because the HUGE record labels behind them care. They don't want some 30 year old hacker in Sweden uploading all their artists hits because they loose sales. And who pirates the most... Teenagers and College Students. Because we either make little to nothing at our part time jobs or we don't work and our parents give us spending money every couple weeks. Us teenagers also love to rebel and pirating music is one of those easy ways to rebel. Record labels could probably solve all their pirating woes if the latest CD was not $15. Because when you market music to Teens and College Students you need to understand we don't have the same disposable income that our Adult counterparts do.

In Flames Biography

                In Flames is a Swedish band that started as Jesper Strӧmblad's side project from a death metal band by the name of Ceremonial Oath. He began this side project in 1990. Jesper is from Gothenburg, Sweden, and this is where he began the project that would become In Flames. In 1993, Jesper decided to break off from Ceremonial Oath altogether, making In Flames his primary focus. The very first singer for In Flames was Jesper Stromblad. At the time, he was the singer for another melodic death metal band, Dark Tranquility. He provided vocals for In Flames, on their first album, "Lunar Strain" and their EP "Subterranean."  In 1996, when their second studio album, "The Jester Race," was made, Anders Friden replaced him as the singer. The album "The Jester Race" was also the origin of their symbol, the Jesterhead, which has become a widely recognized symbol among fans of the metal genre, as something representing the band In Flames. 

Do the poor not deserve the same music as you?

I believe that "inherent value" is an oxymoron, because, if something has value to you, that means that you value it. Nothing just has objective, natural, and irrefutable value by itself, people find value in it, and what one person values, another person may not. Thusly, in my opinion, all value is subjective. That fact does not, however, make things people find valuable any less valuable to those people. Just because value is personal does not mean it doesn't exist.

Music is like an extremely advanced form of communication. It's as if the artist takes a fragment of how they were feeling in a particular moment, or how they imagine someone else, or even a hypothetical person, was feeling, and puts it into the mind of another person: the listener, allowing them to perceive and experience a moment as the original person who felt that set of emotions did. In this sense, music is a means of communication that accomplishes a form of interpersonal empathy no other means has yet been able to, other than visual art. The fact that we still have it today, after all the ages, makes sense, because one of the largest reasons we evolved to where we are today as humans was by being a social species, i.e, communicating.

The ability to recognize and understand such a message in music has many of the same limits as other means of communication. One good example is the ability to comprehend a language; if you were trying to tell something, no matter how much meaning it had to you, to someone else, but you were saying it in Mandarin Chinese, and this person didn't speak Mandarin Chinese, it would seem like meaningless nothingness to them. The message would only be received by those with the wherewithal to do so, i.e. "speaking the language" of that music.

Whether or not all music should be paid for by its listeners is an entirely different question. When it comes to this matter, I support the decision, largely, being up to each individual artist. It is definitely hard to protect each individual song or track down each illegal download or streaming of music, which could make the following method complicated to execute, but I think that, if a specific artist is ok with his or her music being shared freely, then this decision should be respected, and if an artist wants the purchase of their music to be protected, then it should be protected, as such. There are many examples of artists from the sixties that had a very relaxed approach to the sharing of their music, and, in many cases, encouraged it, because what mattered to them was getting the meaning, message, and feeling of their music spread around, for all the world to hear, the way that works of art of the ancient masters are appreciated by everyone today, and not how much they profited from it.

It is, of course, true that this is not exactly the trend today, and although this may largely be attributed to the advent of the internet and subsequent ease of piracy, I still think it's fair to question what the grander implications of this are. Do modern musicians largely care more about how much money they're making for their next song than whether or not it reaches someone, means something to them, or helps them? This was absolutely not the case for the aforementioned artists from the sixties. Is this due to the advent of the internet, or is there a bigger issue going on here? There are actually a few examples of artists with more relaxed views about how their music is spread today. Although their motivations for this attitude vary from being a band still in the early stages of its development in desperate need of publicity to more philosophical thoughts, these bands do exist. One such band is System of a Down, or at the very least, they were one such band back in their third album. This is the cover of that album:

Music Piracy: What's Up With That?!

Music piracy is, whether you want to believe it or not, a sensation that's sweeping the nation. A vast amount of artists see piracy as a theft of their intellectual property, and therefore an irredeemable deed. Some however, embrace this new method of music distribution and how it may help spread their sound. Hayley Reardon, a junior at Marblehead High School and professional musician, has her own opinions on music piracy. I had a brief interview with Hayley on her opinions, of which she had many:
Me: What genre of music would you say you produce, and why?
Hayley: I’d classify my music as singer/songwriter - mainly because it gives me the most freedom. I feel like I can create anything I want to under that title.
Me: In your musical career, what is your largest source of income (ex. CD sales, merchandise)?
Hayley: Live gigs for sure. Partly due to ticket sales but also because it’s really the only setting I’ve found where people are still willing to purchase physical CDs.
Me: What methods do you use to promote your music?
Hayley: I use your typical social networking sites (Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr) to keep people updated on live shows and new music. I also collect email addresses and send out an email newsletter with all kinds of info.
Me: Do you use any services provided through the internet to distribute music?
Hayley: Yes! Definitely. More recently Soundcloud and Spotify have been some of the most important tools for me. People used to say “so can I find your music on iTunes?” and now all I ever hear people ask about is whether or not I’m on Spotify. But I also continue to use iTunes, Amazon, and Nimbit Music.
Me: Where do you stand on the balance between the importance of spreading your music, and making money off of it?
Hayley: I think giving away music can be a really good marketing tool to get your music heard by more people and I’ve done it myself many times. I also believe, however, that art is worth something. So in my mind it’s about creating a balance between giving up sales when you know it’s going to gain you some new fans, and charging for your art when you know there are people out there who love it enough to pay for it.
Me: How do you feel about fans of your music obtaining it without paying for it, such as pirating songs and burning CDs?
Hayley: Its always a bummer to have people getting your music for free when they could be paying for it, but I don’t take it personally. I’m thrilled to have people listening to my music regardless of how they get their hands on it. As I said, I have pretty much come to accept how integrated into our world music piracy has become. I’m always on the look out for new, creative ways to subsidize my music and make up for the free downloading that goes on. There are musicians out there handling the issue in a really creative, positive way and successfully facing the challenges of making a living off of music in a changing digital world. That’s my goal - to focus less on how to stop people from illegally downloading my music and more on new, creative ways to fund what I love to do.

Along with Hayley, many professional musicians have strong opinions on piracy. Pop star Lady Gaga doesn't mind fans pirating her music, saying "...[Y]ou know how much you can earn off touring, right? Big artists can make anywhere from $50 millon for one cycle of two years' touring. Giant artists make upwards of $100 million. Make music--then tour. It's just the way it is today," and dismissing the concerns of artist who claim to suffer due to piracy. Paul McCartney, however, had differing opinions on the matter. McCartney says "If you get on a bus you've got to pay," saying that fans have to pay for their "ticket" to get on the metaphorical bus of music. McCartney and fellow Beatle Ringo Starr also allowed for their music to be used in the Music Matters anti-piracy campaign

Piracy: Plague or the Wave of the Future

Though we as the consumer may have opinions that vary greatly, at the end of the day, it is the artist whose music it is, and so we must listen to their demands and take into account their opinions.  They are the creators of the music, the owners of the intellectual property, and so to truly create a fair system where both parties can reach an agreement, we must listen to their voice.  Many artists are vocal and passionate about the topic of musics role in today's world  on both sides of the issue.  Many artists support greater availability of music to the general populace where as others favor strict guidelines in response to piracy.  The two opposing camps are often diametrically opposed; even within musical groups band members may disagree on the topic of music piracy.


(From the Addy & Julia website with permission of the owners)

I interviewed Addy Sleeman, a local student musician and one half of the group Addy & Julia along with classmate Julia Taliesin.  The group is a singer/songwriter duo hailing from Marblehead who perform both covers and their own original work.  When I asked Addy about her opinions on music piracy and the increased availability of music on the internet, her beliefs were short and sweet: "I don't have much of an issue with it, as I think it is a way for people to share music.  As a lesser-known artist, it's important for someone like me to have exposure rather than money!"  Addy's opinions are a perfect characterization of the camp of musicians that supports music proliferation and piracy.  She supports increased awareness of her work over strict pricing, and is a firm supporter of the idea that it is more important for music to get exposure—to have fans listening to it—than for every single copy of a record to be paid for.  "Musicians should focus on the music they are producing and not the profit.  If we worry about income and make music solely for that purpose, the whole joy of the creation disappears" she quips, sounding mature beyond her young years grasping macro level concepts about the role of music in today's world, even weighing the balance between economics and passion.  Yet she still manages to be a normal youth and is in touch with the way music is consumed in a modern digital world.

Many musicians share Addy's belief, prioritizing the joy music brings over economic endeavors.   There are three core tenements supporting a belief in greater music availability.  The first is that all people deserve the right to music in their lives: "It's the democratization of music in a way.  And music is a gift.  That's what it should be, a gift" (Huffington Post).  The previous quote is from Latin pop
sensation Shakira, and is a perfect summation of the idea of the inalienable right to music—this idea that by providing music on the web, then people who may not have the money to access the music otherwise can still listen.  Norah Jones eloquently states this belief, saying: "I think it's great that young people who don't have a lot of money can listen to music and be exposed to new things." (Huffington Post).  The second argument is that through greater availability (in part caused by piracy), artists get greater exposure.  The argument goes that this is especially beneficial to up-and-coming artists where exposure is key.  Additionally, this exposure can lead to these fans supporting their favorite musicians in other ways: "[Pirates] might not buy an album, but they're spending their money buying concert tickets, a T-shirt, whatever" says Ed O'Brien. (Huffington Post). This is especially important in a world where record sales are no longer the major source of income for most musicians: "Make music—then tour.  It's just the way it is today." counsels Lady Gaga (Huffington Post).  The paradigm has shifted; the record industry is no longer the same, and artists like these are recognizing this.  The third core argument is that technology is constantly evolving and we cannot stop progress; the music industry is changing, and so instead of fighting the tide of progress artists must: "I have concluded that we can only look to what Internet and mobile users are doing or want to do, and then note how their actions drive technologists to provide platforms for them." says Dave Allen, a blogger and musician.


(Flickr Creative Commons)

Though there is great support for greater freedom and access to music, some artists still feel that piracy is stealing.  Lily Allen has started a campaign against music piracy and has urged a coalition of artists and government officials to come together to fight piracy.  She has been quoted describing piracy as a "disaster" and that it "it is making it harder and harder for new acts to emerge."

As is by now clear, this is a polarizing topic and there is no one "right" answer.  Each artist has their own interpretation, and as we move into the future opinions and arguments are sure to change.  Hopefully, through discourse and compromise, artists and law makers can reach new agreements to suit everyone, providing the joy of music to all those who will listen.

Artist's Opinions On Piracy

During the week, I got time to sit down with Marblehead High School's very own Sophia Capalbo, also
known as, Fia James. Fia and I have been friends for years but she has recently blown up in the music spotlight. Her passionate singing and song writing skills have really stood out around the school. Sophia has lived in Marblehead her whole life. She plays the guitar and sings. Interestingly enough, she can not sell her own music yet because she is waiting on copyright privileges. Another way she promotes her music is through recordings. If someone asks for a recording she will send it via the internet or she will burn a CD for them. Fia also claims she does not care if people were to download her music illegally. She said "it's really easy to download illegal music so I don't have a problem with it." However, Sophia ultimately believes in buying artists music. She states that it is acceptable when a band is new and trying to boost their popularity to download illegally at first, but to switch to purchasing the music soon after. Sophia has been performing at small local venues recently and is hoping to extend to larger venues as soon as possible. Fia James is currently in the process of creating her own website but for now can be reached through her Facebook page Fia James Music or through YouTube.

Stevie Wonder is a famous musician. He has been blind since birth but still manages to feel the music through his body and rock the stage. When asked about copyright laws Mr. Wonder said this "Record companies, publishers, radio stations, retailers, artists and others in our industry must take a very strong position against the stealing of our writing and music or else those writings and music will become as cheap as the garbage in the streets." What Stevie is saying is that once people start "stealing" music, it loses the value that it once had. When an artist creates music it is made with extreme value. Many times the song is a story of the artists life, struggles, or accomplishments and for someone to download that for free is disrespectful to the artist. I also completely deteriorates the music itself making the music "cheap as the garbage on the streets."



Another artist against music piracy is Brad Paisley. A country singer who who has had 10 songs hit number 1 on the charts. When asked about music piracy Paisley said "My producer, my co-writers, my musicians have a big part in my albums. When you download music illegally, those folks don't get paid." People do not think of the men and women working behind the scenes. Paisley brings this to light in his quote. Many think that these big name musicians do not need anymore money, however, it is not just the artist getting paid. Everyone the artist is associated with is impacted by music piracy. From the manager to the person in charge of special effects. More than just one person is affected by piracy so stop music piracy. It is unfair to the artist and everyone associated with the artist.

Artists on Piracy and the Value of Music

In my previous blog post I talked about piracy and my opinion on it. This time I'm looking at other artists opinions on the matter of piracy and music's intrinsic value. What I found is that like a lot of things, lots of people have no problem with piracy and or encourage it, and there are a lot of people who completely disagree with it. Not surprisingly, it seems like majority of music piracy's supporters are younger artists who are just starting out; although bigger artists like Lady Gaga and Jack White also agree with piracy.

Dave Grohl of the Foo Fighters had a somewhat vulgar but good comment supporting piracy that does a good job summing up what is probably a lot of artist's view on the topic: "I think it’s a good idea because it’s people trading music. It has nothing to do with industry or finance, it’s just people that want music and there’s nothing wrong with that. It’s the same as someone turning on the f***ing radio, it’s the same as someone putting a cassette in a cassette deck when the BBC plays a special radio session. I don’t think it’s a crime, it’s been going on for years. It’s the same as people making tapes for each other. The industry is more threatened by it because it’s the worldwide web and it’s a broader scope of trading, but I don’t think it’s such a f***inghorrible thing. The first thing we should do is get all the f***ing millionaires to shut their mouths, stop b****ing about the 25 cents a time they’re losing."

A very different quote from Prince, who completely disagrees with piracy states: "The industry changed. We made money (online) before piracy was real crazy. Nobody’s making money now except phone companies, Apple and Google. I’m supposed to go to the White House to talk about copyright protection. It’s like the gold rush out there. Or a carjacking. There’s no boundaries. I’ve been in meetings and they’ll tell you, ‘Prince, you don’t understand, it’s dog-eat-dog out there’. So I’ll just hold off on recording."

Both of these quotes from artists today are reasonable, Dave points out that it has been happening forever just in different ways than it used to. While Prince believes that no one is making money off of the internet other than the large companies that drive it. In a way he is correct in saying this because these companies do make lots of money, but that doesn't mean he won't make any money if he puts his songs up for download on the internet.

Last I would like to mention electro funk artist Kill Paris's opinion on piracy, while I did not get to fully interview him he did tell me his opinion on how music should be distributed: "I think the biggest thing is to just make good music, give your music away for free for, as long as you can. Or as long as it takes and even after that, keep giving stuff away for free... If the music is good and it's a free download. People are gonna download and listen to it and share it with their friends. I think there is definetely still ways to make money off of music nowadays, but that shouldn't be the way you try to do it right outta the gate. Even the first couple years, shoot I've been making music for 10 years and only started selling it like a couple years ago."

Kill Paris's current soundcloud
profile picture

Kill Paris basically believes that it's better to just share music than try and sell it right away. He has a growing fan base of around 75,000 people as of right now and you can listen to his music on soundcloud, where he gives most away for free and sells his music on iTunes and Beatport. 

From what I have heard from several artists on the web, it seems majority cope with piracy in some way, whether it be give most of your music away for free or simply just not make any more music. It seems like more and more artists support piracy and free downloads the longer it occurs even with many of them against piracy.