Digital dilemma: Weighing the artistic and commercial ramifications of music piracy
Editor’s note: To protect privacy, ThreeSixty Journalism has changed the name of Abigail in this story.
Two years ago, Abigail started using Real Player, an online software to download music illegally from the Internet.
Like other teenagers, she was strapped for cash. Although Abigail would rather respect her favorite artists and pay for their music, she didn’t have the money.
In recent years, more teens like Abigail have been getting their music online, both legally and illegally. Now the 15-year-old Twin Cities resident has moved onto Spotify, a free and legal music streaming software that, some musicians argue, still doesn’t compensate artists fairly.
The ability to access free music digitally is taking a toll on brick-and-mortar record stores, not to mention artists — especially those on the local scene — who aren’t benefitting financially from their art. Abigail wants to support musicians, but it’s also hard to beat “free.”
“(I think music is) something worth owning, because then you can always bring it with you anywhere, and share the joy that music brings you. I mean, the artist worked on it super hard to make a living,” said Abigail, a fan of Broadway showtunes, who figures 30 percent of her music library is from illegal downloads. “I’d rather honor and respect that, but (I wish) it was less of a hassle for money.”
TO STEAL OR NOT TO STEAL?
Music pirates don’t always consider the consequences of illegal music downloads. According to Thomas Cotter, a professor of law at the University of Minnesota, the consequences for music pirating can be fines anywhere from $750 to $30,000 per song, and up to $150,000 for every album.
In one of the country’s highest profile digital piracy cases, Jammie Thomas-Rasset of Brainerd was sued by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) for downloading 24 copyrighted songs illegally and sharing them with millions of people on Kazaa, a peer-to-peer (P2P) software. After spending eight years and three federal trials fighting the lawsuit, she ended up with a fine of $220,000.
Cotter said he believes the RIAA stopped going after individuals in 2008, but still doesn`t think it`s a good idea to download music illegally, as there still may be risks.
“People probably don’t get caught in a very high percentage of cases,” Cotter said. “But yes, the more you download, the greater the risk, and the penalties can be substantial.”
The digital music debate first generated headlines in 1999 when Napster, a P2P software where copyrighted songs were shared for free, exploded in popularity among computer users. With the click of a mouse, music fans could access entire albums without paying, some before they were even released in stores.
Though Napster eventually experienced legal difficulties, P2P software opened the door to a wave of similar platforms like Real Player, LimeWire, The Pirate Bay, Kazaa and others. One of the most popular formats today is Spotify, which is legal but only pays artists $0.004 per play, leading musicians like The Black Keys and Coldplay to boycott the streaming service.
ART V. COMMERCE
Dan Rodriguez, a Minneapolis-based musician, is more forgiving about piracy than other artists. Although Rodriguez is an advocate for fans coming out to live shows and buying CDs, he recognizes the benefits of digital music, both legal and illegal.
“Digital music has changed the playing field completely, and the act of music pirating has completely changed the game for myself and the independent artists who are trying to build a fan base,” he said.
“I feel like sharing that music for free, and people just sharing with each other, is a very key, important part in spreading the music. If I don`t make the 99 cents off of each song that each person has, that`s way less important to me then that people are listening to it and sharing it.”
The artist versus access debate reached a fever pitch on the Internet in June 2012 when Emily White, an intern at NPR, wrote that she has only paid for 15 CDs in her life and didn’t think her generation would ever buy music. In an online rebuttal that went viral, David Lowery, the lead singer of ‘90s alternative band Cracker, took up for musicians by pointing out the moral and financial implications of White’s “free culture” attitude.
Those same artistic interests extend to distributors of music, like local records stores, which aren’t as frequently found these days because of digital piracy and iTunes sales. If White’s generation continues to value convenience over the physical act of purchasing music, “that’s what would put us out of business,” said Martin Devaney, manager at Eclipse Records in St. Paul.
“We cater to the customers who do care about the physical media, and we hope to win the other people over,” Devaney said. “Having a physical artifact and artwork are part of the listening experience. Coming from an artistic side of things, they put a lot of work into the presentation of their music and packaging, as well as the songs on the record.”
A frequent customer at Eclipse, Sophie Gleekel, 16, of Woodbury, is an advocate for record stores, and more than half her music comes from them. She worries that won’t always be the case.
“I feel really sad that there aren’t as many record stores as there were when my parents were going to college,” Gleekel said. “I hear a lot about record stores that my parents loved going to. I’d be really sad (if a record store closed). I find a lot of joy going to places like the Electric Fetus and Eclipse Records.”