M6.1

When I purchase music, as opposed to sharing it, my rationalizations are usually come from a strong connection to the music and/or the artist. Not just your everyday CD for the car or mix for the gym. Its something more and its also something rare. With the evolution of music sharing I am much more reluctant in my music purchases and much more likely to share some before any cash purchases.

My practises probably conflict with many of the IP protections of a lot of mainstream music, however, as the readings indicate many artists and groups are moving to different business models to best capitalize on the shifting attitudes about music purchases and attitudes about music sharing. So as time moves forward practises like music sharing are being more and more accommodated to. Popular online venues for music sales such as Bandcamp.com allow visitors to fully preview songs artists have made available and even give artists the ability to use a 'pay what you can' model for any of their songs.

I do agree that copyright legislation in the music industry and the practices of consumers are shifting considerably and seem to be here to stay, largely due to availability of the internet and other relevant technologies. Many outlets for music sharing like Grooveshark.com, Last.fm, etc are filling this gap between technology and demand. So considering the music industry itself, it must find a way to monetize in this new realm, and I think this can be done a few days. Firstly, suing everyone is no longer an option. At its outset, the online music sharing revolution started small and with programs like Napster. Small factions that the music industry could collectively target and eliminate. Now, we know that Napster's downfall was similar to a hydra's head and several more similar outlets for music sharing were already in the works and becoming available to the public. From this point there are two similar options that allow the music industry to maintain power at the top of the food chain in music production and sales. Either buy up all of the aforementioned companies such as Grooveshark, Last.fm, etc and slowly begin to monetize their distribution once again with a focus on ease of access. If its just as easy and with no cost to get music else where, you can be sure people will seek it out. The other option is to strike a deal with these existing companies for the rights to distribution for a premium or royalty fee. Lately, this second option is what seems to be winning out as it is likely less overhead to just charge for the licences and allow these online stream services to exists than facilitate them yourself while essentially owning a monopoly on the right to the music being consumed.

One final point is the effect this online stream/download system has on the artist. So far, it has been acting as a second middle man to the artist, further detaching them from the fruits of their own labour. I'll let this article further make my case. http://www.aux.tv/2014/02/x-royalty-cheques-thatll-make-lose-faith-music-industry/