How has the online distribution of music, both legal and illegal, changed the expectations of music audiences?
824524
Artist wont be able to have 2 or 3 songs on a cd and toss in a bunch of other crap and get $17 for it no more.
717005
You have to be more specific. What type of membership or downloads are you talking about? \n\nIf you mean music downloads, there are some sites that offer free downloads of music for you to try, but most commercial music that you would buy at a store or on iTunes is on a fee-based system for a reason. The musicians, record companies, etc all expect to get paid at some point, and the way that happens is when people pay for their product.\n\nSome bands will put free downloads on the web so you can download and spread the word about them, giving something away now so they can sell you an album or tickets to a concert later.\n\nThere are products that will let you download copyrighted music, videos, or other files, but just remember that if you are taking these without paying for them, it is the same as going into the store and stealing something on the shelf.
100392
Regarding The Beatles and Zep, both became HUGE, way beyond big, way before merchandising, marketing and publicity became standard practice in the music industry. The Beatles and Zep were 'grass roots' as we call it today. That means in the early days, they put out a record, toured, put out another record toured, showed up for press, radio, and retail events. All of this in hopes of selling more and more records, with the utmost minimum dollars being put into, marketing, promotion, and merchandising. All success for these two and bands like them came from blood sweat and tears - hard work. Recognition was the end result. Today, most record companies looks for a band thats like ANOTHER band. No more individuality or sounding different, or even being unique. My point being that the record companies will spend millions on press, publicity, and marketing in hopes you will see it everywhere, hear it everywhere, and want to buy it. The harsh and unfortunate reality is 'cash rules everything around us'. MTV is pay for play. Radio is the same. You need to have sold LOTS of records, or show significant sales increases daily, to even get airplay on major radio or mtv. So to sum it up, it's all marketing and promotion. - not so much the band (remember Paula Abdul? She can not sing). Let me know if I can help further.
1176793
Plenty of free and legal music can be found, if you read this text.\nhttp://baseportal.com/baseportal/goodsounds/howto\nEnjoy the world of free and legal music, instead of the music that is forced down your throat by the radio stations.
331602
Napster was a site that people shared music through illegally. Then some music artists decided to sue Napster, because their music was being obtained for free. Now, Napster charges a small fee to download music, so as of now, it's legal.
969809
If you stopped to think how many people out there are downloading music you would not be so worried. How many people do you know that have actually been fined or jailed for downloading music. I know none.   "PEACE"
553109
You could mention the price of downloading a song legally - that puts people off\n\nThat kids and teens don't have credit cards so downloading illegally is the only option they have\n\nIf c.d's weren't so expensive to buy people wouldn't need to download
1133010
If you don't pay for it is is illegal. But I can't really see too much of a problem with it. The artist get so little of the money you would pay for it you're not stealing from them, just from the record companies. Furthermore there is a small legal loophole. Downloading and Sharing are different offences. You usually only get a warning the first time around too-but don't get caught!
140037
Different people will view it in different ways. Some people will dislike the artist because they will assume that they are bad because their song got banned while other people will want to hear it to see what the fuss is all about. It would probably have a positive affect on their career as any publicity is good for them, even if it's bad publicity.
742979
My thought is that with how many ways we have to listen to music today like CDs, MP3s, radio, clubs, ringtones, and the like that the popular music gets so overplayed that we just get sick of it.  Classic music wasn't broadcasted all over the place so people didn't hear it every second of every day.
357434
it is illegal and people are putting out a program that would "track" the computer that would download those illegal songs. So it is easy for someone to get in to trouble a lot easier.
33845
It was never wise to do.  In addition to being illegal, it was also a mecca for hackers.  P2P has become one of the leading "release points" for computer virus.\n\nIn addition, both RIAA and MPAA have joined forces to catch people that use these services.  Early on, they concentrated on people who were shareing files.  However, they are more and more doing "reverse stings", where they themselves put something out to share.  They then sue anybody who tried to download it from them.\n\nStay safe and legal, use a "fee" based legal system like emusic, itunes, or something else.
195737
You're using some words that are almost always mutually exclusive.  Those are "free" and "legal".  If you want legal music then it either has to be stuff that the artists/producers/labels want you to have for free.  That's pretty rare unless you're talking underground or independent artists.  If you want popular hit music that's commercially available, then either you have to pay, or you have to get it illegally.\n\nI'm sure someone else can recommend a free-but-illegal method of getting music.  Here is a free-and-legal link site, but it probably won't have what you want.
105806
Today's music sucks so much because: \n1) Record labels are looking for hits, not albums.  \n2) "Talent" must always LOOK marketable.  \n3) Too much of the recording industries' troubles are being blamed on "illegal downloading", rather than taking the responsibility themselves for putting out crappy music.\n4) ALL (yes, ALL) new rock acts today have nothing new to offer.  Everything put out today is a ripoff of 90's alt-rock. (Example - Nickelback, Staind, etc...EVERY song uses that same minor-key harmony that originated with Alice In Chains).\n5) Most people are sheep and will listen to whatever a record company shoves in their face.\n6) Nearly every song has the same pattern...a light opening, then blaring guitars midway through the first verse, then a catchy and annoying chorus.  In other words, it's PREDICTABLE!\n\nOverall, there's a BIG lack of originality in today's music.  The "talent" isn't talented...just good at ripping off whatever has already been done.  I understand having influences, but these bands literally play the SAME thing.  As a huge music fan, I've been largely disappointed since around 1998.
855546
Yes it is.  \n\nYou're buying music overseas.  Just because they don't pay the RIAA lawyers doesn't mean that it is not an effective loophole. \n\nBesides, they say that they DO pay royalties, right there on the website.  Good enuf for me.\n\nI've downloaded about 100 albums there, and have suffered no consequences.
680681
What people do with Limewire is distribute music files to everyone who wants them.  This is piracy of copyrighted property (the songs).
234490
I believe sales of the hard product are declining i don't believe its down to the rise in downloading because people have been doing that for years back when people used tapes in the millions its simply down to the record companies and the artists putting out a substandard product.\n\nImprove the music improve sales.\n\nI only buy cds of artists i REALLY like which is not that many so it'll be rare if i buy 4 albums a year and this coming from someone who used to get all the new releases without question.