Welcome to April 1997's Network Audio Bits.
The first thing I'd like to do is introduce and welcome Joe Locke to the 'pages' of Network Audio Bits. I've known Joe for a couple of years now. As we have many similar musical interests, we've found ourselves, numerous times, losing an hour or two at a time talking about music. Knowing his interest and enthusiasm for music, I recently asked Joe if he'd like to contribute to Network Audio Bits. I was not surprised when he said "yes". So, I'd like to welcome Joe and thank him for his current (and future) contributions to the magazine.
Addicted To Noise ( http://www.addict.com/MNOTW/97-04-01.html#boot ) and Billboard have both run recent pieces regarding the busts of foreign bootleggers. With 800,000 CDs confiscated in the recent bust and 1.2 million CDs confiscated in 1996 it's obvious that there is a viable market for these CDs.
I am of the opinion that tape trading of live shows and even bootleg CDs of live shows are good for bands. If there's interest enough in a band to generate this sort of activity among fans, I think it should be encouraged. I do believe, though, that anyone selling these sorts of things for profit should be paying royalties to the bands.
With the technology that exists now and the technology the future will bring, the ability to easily exchange quality recordings outside of mainstream distribution is unprecedented. It's only going to get easier as improved technology becomes affordable and obtainable. What I don't really understand is why haven't the major labels, many of whose artists are the ones being bootlegged, just beaten the bootleggers at their own game? Instead of going after them from the legal side of things, why not attack them right where it hurts most - the wallet?
With little or no extra overhead a label could do a pressing of one or more live shows from a band's tour. The resulting live CD(s) could be released with no fanfare, no advertising, no press or radio mailings and at a price that would be consumer-friendly, say less than $10. Would you pay $25 for an unauthorized copy of a live show when you know a legitimately released live show by that same band can or will be able to be had for $10 or less? I sure wouldn't. The foreign bootleggers would be out of business in the U.S. in a heartbeat. While I doubt there would be any platinum sales for these items, there is obviously a market worth tapping. These CDs could become a viable tool in pressing runs from anywhere between 1,000 and 100,000. Bands that sell low numbers of studio albums will probably not sell big numbers of these sorts of live CDs. Bands like Pearl Jam, however, could release CDs of several different portions of each tour and sell quite respectably. These CDs could be a potent marketing tool that would completely bypass established means of reaching fans.
So, why won't major labels do this? Because it's a grass roots, word-of-mouth thing and they probably consider it too small for them too handle. It also makes too much sense. Labels should be able to do this in a fairly simple manner. It should be a fairly simple thing to bring into a band's contract, though the lawyers will probably muck it up. Also, with less overhead, the label should be required to split profits on these releases evenly with the bands. Bands and labels would regain control of some of the material and money they 'lose' to bootleggers.
The playing field for recorded music and its delivery is rapidly changing. Here's a chance for the major labels to gain something. I don't see how labels can really lose. They would gain an incredible amount of good will points from fans. How can giving people what they want (and are obviosly buying from alternative sources) at a reasonable price work against you?
Murph
Michael A. Murphy
Publisher/Editor