Will the downloading generation ever pay for online music? | iLounge News


Will the downloading generation ever pay for online music?

The music industry has prodded, begged, educated and sued. But its message that music isn’t free has had only a scant effect on many young music fans who came of age in the era of music downloading.

‘‘You can download 100 songs in a day and not even think about it. ... Everyone knows it’s illegal, but people don’t think (authorities are) going to come after them,’’ said Vanderbilt freshman Elizabeth Dearing.

« Pyrim Announces i-Track Holiday Special

Top ten signs you’re an iPod junkie »

Related Stories




what if when CDs packaged as we know it today becomes obsolete? (that was a rhetorical question incase you wonder - as it’s not a matter of how but when)... people are already seeing the benefit of not having to go to a store and pay for an over-priced CD - also unless you’re a girl (I assume you’re not) who likes to go shopping @ the mall, us guys like to get things done from the comfort of the house to save hassles.

Always thought iPod owners can embrace the future (or at least accept it)... IMO the future will be web-based, no more record companies, only “distributors” such as iTMS where anyone can publish his or her music - I believe better music will be produced, because:

1]. Cheaper, quality hardware and software will land into next-gen everyday musician’ hands (just like the graphics arena becoming today and tomorrow)
2]. a market place that spawn TRUE competition (there are none at the moment, no one is telling Britney she should get another job); and
3]. quality will go up without record companies’ dictation and shite from contracted song-writers, “market research” and billboard chart-crap, people will enjoy their music much like going to galleries, no one is forcing you to look at anything, you buy what you like (without an art price of course as it can be reproduced and sell like 99 cents a piece)...

I think that will be the future, but in a captalist world we live in today, the record companies are not going to die without giving a fight (RIAA is one of such example).


Posted by voodoo on December 1, 2003 at 5:06 AM (CST)



While iTMS files are 128kbps AAC, a lot of them actually sound better than 192 kbps MP3s that you’ll find. It does depend on the song though; there are some bad recordings on the store that sound more like 32kbps. For the most part though, the quality is excellent.

Posted by Andy on December 1, 2003 at 5:14 AM (CST)


I used to download loads of illegal music when i was at university. Now i can’t stand the poor quality you get from most downloads, to the extent where i have now replaced my illegal downloads with purchased copies. The record industry is scared because the individual artists could earn more money without them, charging only a couple of pence for each song!

Posted by Dan Mei on December 1, 2003 at 5:29 AM (CST)


A few months ago, I deleted my illegaly downloaded music. I hadn’t bought a CD in a LONG while. Now I actually have to curb my “music money” (I’m a 20 year old student) I’ll go out, and come home with 3 new CD’s, and $45 less in my pocket. Although I do have to admit, I still love p2p apps for live recordings. Nothing like having Radiohead’s “Street Spirit” as performed in Spain, France, The UK, Saturday Night Live, and Free Tibet:P   lol

Am I against the RIAA? Yes…why have a middleman? But downloading music is morally wrong,  and I’d like to have a clear conscience before myself and God.

Posted by Danny on December 1, 2003 at 7:11 AM (CST)


Trust me, the RIAA Steve isn’t me. I don’t know if that’s actually an RIAA guy or not, but it’s not ME pulling some dumb prank.

Posted by Steven on December 1, 2003 at 8:36 AM (CST)


well im still here no feds at the door yet ;)

Posted by Whistler in Norwich, UK on December 1, 2003 at 9:41 AM (CST)


Why do people continue to get the RIAA’s position confused with what they really do?  The RIAA is not “the middleman”... they aren’t “in charge of music as we know it.”  The RIAA has absolutely nothing to do with the creation, distribution or retail sale of music whatsoever.

The RIAA is hired by (for lack of a better word) lables to protect a labels interests.  The RIAA is 1) A lobbying group to go wo Washington to deal with copyright laws, push for new methods, etc, and 2) A group of lawyers (enforcers) who are paid *BY* the labels to register and protect (legally) that Labels and their Artists works.

You can be a Label and you don’t have to join the RIAA whatsoever.  However, when you find someone is making illegal copies of your work, you can’t call in the RIAA to take care of it for you.  You have to spring for your own lawyer on each and every case.  That gets expensive.

The RIAA is just there to enforce the rules and laws of copyright in music.  Sure, you can relate them to “protection from the mob” or whatever, but nearly every sane human being has a phone number to “their lawyer” in their wallet, for *your* protection when someone tries to screw you.  Why can’t the labels be afforded the same protection?

The RIAA isn’t in charge of the music business, they just uphold the laws against stealing.  Nothing more.

Posted by Rance on December 1, 2003 at 10:19 AM (CST)


“downloading music is morally wrong, and I’d like to have a clear conscience before myself and God.”

When you can show me a clear Biblical prohibition against copyright breaches then I will take you seriously.

Remember, copyright as a concept was only invented over the past few centuries. The recent confusion by various music interests is related to the difficulty in distinguishing between mechanical, reproduction, performance, and broadcasting copyrights.

Posted by Ezekial on December 1, 2003 at 11:43 AM (CST)


the RIAA is a special interest lobby group for all the labels that fall under the umbrella of the big 5 (Sony, Universal, Warner Brothers, EMI and BMG).  they have many attorneys in their ranks but are not the equivalent of a private sector “lawyer”. 

akin to the MPAA, NRA, ACLU, AARP, et al. the RIAA has successfully championed the rights and goals of huge corporate conglomerates much to the dismay of private citizens and more importantly consumers. 

the RIAA has employed dubious, fascist scare tactics in order to maintain the status quo of the big corps they represent. 

i am not sympathetic with the RIAA or the music labels.

Posted by lo on December 1, 2003 at 3:13 PM (CST)


I wholeheartedly agree with Io.  He’s got it right.  The more power any given entity has, the worse it can abuse its power (although not all powerfull companies are abusive).

Just to give one example, when cds were first became dominant in the early nineties, record labels SWORE that within less than five years the price of cd manufacturing and distribution would go down and that brand new releases would cost no more than just a couple dollars.  Over a decade later the price of a new release is still $14-$18.

The point of this is that if there’s profit to be made, lebels will capitalize on that profit through any means necessary.  So when filesharing became a major threat, of course the labels weren’t going to come up with alternatives (such as the iTunes Music Store), they were going to use the RIAA to beat down random violators and use them as examples.  They have that kind of power. 

On top of this, artists get a lot smaller cut of profits from a cd sale than they definetely should be entitled to.  Most of the money does not go to artists or manufacturing costs, instead winding up in the wallets of very wealthy label executives.

So yes, downloading songs off a P2P network is, by definition, illegal.  But P2P network creators are the Robin Hoods of our day.  They took from the wealthy and gave to the middle-class, ultimately infuriated the rich and powerful because it challenges the very thing that they take power from.

Posted by Zim on December 1, 2003 at 4:05 PM (CST)


make cd’s 5$ and people will buy them.
Stupid money hungry fools dont get the idea that less money + higher sales = greater profit.

Posted by foofoo on December 1, 2003 at 4:44 PM (CST)


i think they worry about the wrong people, who cared if i have 10gig of mp3’s for my own personal use. Im not they guy i saw on his market stall today with hundreds of copied CD’s for sale at

Posted by Whistler in Norwich, UK on December 2, 2003 at 3:04 AM (CST)


whistler, exactly!


Posted by lo on December 2, 2003 at 8:35 AM (CST)


My hats off 2———>rance———->zim—————->foo foo—————>whistler———->lo. All of you people have very good points.

Posted by nthamix on December 2, 2003 at 9:45 PM (CST)


We don’t need the RIAA as the middleman, i think you will all find that music sharing has breathed new life into a stagnant industry. A friend of mine put his bands demo (called :Crash T.V) on kazaa, after 6 months 30,000 downloads had been made. He was thrilled and has had many encouraging e mails; so he went from obscurity to relative fame through file sharing. I guess now he’s ready to make a fortune from the T.Shirt sales!

Posted by Man in the woods on December 6, 2003 at 10:05 AM (CST)

Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2

If you have a comment, news tip, advertising inquiry, or coverage request, a question about iPods/iPhones/iPad or accessories, or if you sell or market iPod/iPhone/iPad products or services, read iLounge's Comments + Questions policies before posting, and fully identify yourself if you do. We will delete comments containing advertising, astroturfing, trolling, personal attacks, offensive language, or other objectionable content, then ban and/or publicly identify violators.

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.
Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter


Recent News

Recent Reviews

Recent Articles

Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter


iLounge is an independent resource for all things iPod, iPhone, iPad, and beyond.
iPod, iPhone, iPad, iTunes, Apple TV, Mac, and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc.
iLounge is © 2001 - 2014 iLounge, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy