Of Offloaders and uploaders

Oh, how the perpetual battle between these two groups never seems to cease.

By uploaders, of course, I’m referring to the masses around the world that transfer music over such peer-to-peer file sharing networks as KaZaA and iMesh, and in some cases enable otherwise never-heard artists such as Canadian independant group Moxy Fruvous to gain some level of public exposure beyond the occasional track that would list them as the ever-laughed-at “where are they now?” status of the one-hit wonder.

but offloaders, you ask?

I’m sure by now many of you have determined that the offloaders I refer to are the executives in the recording industry, even if the question still exists as to what exactly I mean by this term.

Recently, coverage in the Canadian newspaper The Globe and Mail has followed the attempts of the Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA) to force five Canadian ISPs to breach privacy and overturn the names of 29 users accused of mass uploading of music — merely another phase in the ongoing battle being waged by the recording industry, citing a loss of $425 million over a five year period.

It seems rather interesting that the industry is now taking such a harsh stance, given a few points of reference from the past.

Consider that when audio cassettes first emerged as a recording media, literally millions of people utilized the ability to create their own compilations or utilize the media format to make backups of other formats which were quickly becoming obsolete. From time to time, people would use the format in order to make a full copy of an album that they didn’t own, but overall, the sales figures of the record industry increased with the introduction of cassette tapes.

Much the same phenomenon happened in the infancy of Napster, which was originally designed with the purpose of users being able to sample the music before going out and spending hard-earned money to buy an original copy [note the oxymoron between those words — I’ll address that some other time]. In a study at the time, it was found that on American college and university campuses where file transfer software was permitted, record sales among college students were up an incredible 75%, as opposed to a deficit of 25% at those institutions that banned the use of Napster on their campuses. Yes, some were still using the new technology to create full piratic versions of newly released albums, but mostly Napster was being used with the intent in which it was designed — to try before you buy.

In response to these few, the industry has raised prices, sought lawsuits, and even enacted the use of song-scrambling software, transferring files of white noise around the internet.

now, Offloaders, you ask?

yes, Offloaders.

One of the largest problems existing in the “war” between song-swappers and the industry is that the industry has taken it upon themselves to forget who puts the bread on their tables. Every shot that the industry has taken to stop what was formerly the minority of listeners who made full-version piratic copies of albums has only further restricted those who formerly bought the music — Who’s going to spend $25 for music that they may not even like? And who’s going to support an industry that slaps them in the face with extremely high prices and an inability to sample what you’re buying? Money isn’t a high commodity for many in today’s times, and as such, thrifty people don’t want to waste it on a CD that will sit in it’s case on a shelf 5 minutes after it’s been bought.

Unfortunately, the record industry doesn’t seem to understand these points, and would rather intrinsically point the finger at people whenever there is a slump in their profit margin, offloading their responsibility to perform quality support analysis and improve their customer service.

Ask the average music buyer what they like and dislike, and how much they’re willing to pay — you might be surprised how listening to your funding source increases the flow of the proverbial gravy train.