Music's True Value

           As a musician, I have a strong opinion on the ownership and the "value" of music. I believe that a song belongs to the sole artist or writer of the song. When a musician writes a song, the song belongs to them. This is because no one else assisted in writing the song, so the writer should receive all of the credit and ownership rights. The song is also the musician’s intellectual property, and no one else should have more rights than the artist for their intellectual property. I feel that the song should not belong to producers or to any others whether they are trying to make money off of the song or sell it illegally.

            I do not believe that a song should have inherent value, or a set price. This is because some songs are worth more than others (based on production costs). Because the cost of production is higher, then the song should be more expensive and “worth” more. If all songs were the same price, many recording companies or artists would be losing money because due to the production being so expensive. They would not be profiting when selling the song. Other recording companies or artists would gain money that they do not necessarily deserve because the cost of production is so low that they would be making a great deal of profit. The only exception to my feelings on songs not having inherent value is when producers increase the price of a song based on the artist. I do not feel that this is morally right because the motive of this is to make money based on the artist’s popularity (they know that many people will buy the song even if it is more expensive).

            I feel that the free distribution of music online is morally wrong and should be considered stealing. Free distribution is stealing because the owner of the music is not receiving any credit or money (which they deserve) from the song. Although I feel free distribution of music is morally wrong, burning CD's is acceptable (because the music has already been paid for). Because I feel so strongly about free music distribution being wrong, I prefer to download music from iTunes. I digitally download the majority of my own music from iTunes. I pay for most of the music in my iTunes library (because I would feel guilty otherwise). I have been shown how to download music online for free (via a YouTube MP3 converter). Not only is this website very temperamental, but when I used to use it I would feel guilty, so now I usually just buy my music on iTunes.

            Overall, I feel that a song belongs to the sole writer(s) and that the writer should be able to make any decisions involving ownership rights. For example, the artist of whom the song belongs to should be able to sell their song for whatever price they feel is necessary, therefore music should not have inherent value. Also, although personally I feel that the free distribution of music online is morally wrong, if the artist releases their song to be free to anyone, it should be allowed. This is because I feel that the musician who wrote the song receives all ownership rights.

                                                http://www.flickr.com/photos/77644644@N00/4085471864