NEWS The British Phonographic Industry has warned UK file sharers watching the RIAA's legal action against music fans unfold in the US that they may be next in line.
While many blame a drop in quality and a lack of original music, the BPI has blamed file-sharing for record labels' drop in revenues.
Andrew Yeates, the director general of the BPI, warned that legal action may be the only option left for a beleaguered record industry.
"The BPI has made no final decision on taking legal action against people using music over file-sharing networks illegally. But the disturbing increase in the illegal copying and distribution of unauthorised music files over the internet is making legal action increasingly likely," he said in a statement.
"A healthy music scene is only possible if the creators and investors of new sound recordings have the protection of copyright law," he added.
"Nobody should be in any doubt that file-sharing networks are harming the health of British music. We will take legal action if we are forced to."
However, Yeates' comments fail to acknowledge the impact that yet another round of Pop Idol will have on consumers' confidence in the record industry's ability to create original music worth buying. Many consumers may doubt whether record labels could innovate even with all the money in the world.
So far, legal action against file sharers has been restricted to the US, where the RIAA has caused controversy with its heavy-handed approach.
Most controversial was its bullying tactics towards a 12-year-old girl and its pursuit of a grandmother, who didn't even own a PC, who it wrongly identified as downloading gangster rap.
Whether the BPI is prepared to risk the same public outcry and negative PR is obviously a matter it is debating internally at the moment. On top of that, there is the issue of how costly and time-consuming individual actions would be.
Concerned music fans may be hoping the BPI decides it's more trouble than it's worth.
Comments
There are 14 comments. Join the discussion
1. me
after being found guilty of runing a cartell and being heavily fined , the music industry is trying to find more revenue .
if they sold music i like i will pay for it the problem is they dont and they will go bust
2. anonymous
* Music giant HMV hits a high note *
The high street music and book retailer has posted a 70% hike in first-half profits.
Full story:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/-/1/hi/business/3398471.stm
What does BPI's Andre Yeates make of the above story. Doesn't seem much like 'harming the health of British music' to me.
3. anonymous
Let us all say a big ahhh for the record industry that has been ripping of the public for years in forcing the public to pay for pure crap that has only to often filled most CD/LP's.
I have a tear in my eye at the thought of any poor record executive that has had to sell his Aston and jump on a bus.
When MP3 emerged they had the opertunity to embrace the technology instead they stayed on the greedy path and are now seeing just results.
Welcome to reality record exec's
4. anonymous
CD sales rocketed 7.6 per cent in the United Kingdom last year, according to Music Week. 121 million CDs were sold, excluding compilations.
So what's the problem?? Are the UK record execs so greedy that they even this isn't enough for them?? Maybe if they spent more time of find new, innovative acts rather than bitching about downloads life would be more pleasant for them.
5. anonymous
Music CDs are clearly overpriced even in relation to many DVD discs let alone the cost of blank CDRs. No wonder their sales are suffering. It is also very easy to record music from FM radio, edit on PC and burn to CD. I am surprised this is not more widely done, but perhaps it will become more popular if they crack down on downloading.
6. anonymous
People have been complaining about the "decline" in quality music for decades, whereas downloading is new. So it's obviously at least part of the problem. Honestly, if you like something enough to download it, you like it enough to pay for it. Turn the radio or MTV on if you're not sure you like a song!
Once iTunes and others are established in Europe there'll be no excuse for p2p theft, and if people get sued by record companies that's their tough luck.
7. anonymous
I love music but mostly as an over 45 year old all I am offered on the high street is old stuff rehashed or modern stuff which is of no interest to me. Even when I do find something new and original and that I like, I hate the price. £15 for 10 short tracks, you are having a laugh music moguls! CD's are overpriced and rarely worth the plastic they are produced on!
8. Rob C
Don't believe the lies ...
.. that the record industry tells you. There is nothing "beleagured" about them. They are making more money today selling ring tones then they ever did selling singles.
The so called piracy is a result of decades of high price fixing by the this very industry. People are tight and lazy, if you give them an easier medium (such as pre-created CD) at a reasonable price then they'll buy it. But if you continue to over charhe them then they'll get creative.
9. UKdave
The legal technology, both hardware and software, is available to all on any highstreet. Anyone can 'burn' a CD with music files and so everyone is fully aware of just how little it costs to 'produce' a music CD.
Anyone can buy a blank CD for about 30p full retail including jewel case and vat. So thats probably 1p wholesale by the million, non?
So, for a £16 CD album, the 'artist' gets, err, £1 - so that leaves....
Everyone can see that the profit margin is obscene. Like greetings cards and post-mix coke.
THERE is the reason people are sharing files. Look no further.
The BPI has given it to folks up the kazoo for years, and now that the technology is here to bypass theire obscene profits, its being used. Big surprise then.
The pop idol winner got to "No.1" with less than 100K sales - because NO ONE ACTUALLY BUYS CD SINGLES.
Duh
10. Darrin Williamson
It was also announced this week that Album sales increased by 7% last year. Perhaps if singles were realistically priced more people would be inclined to buy them. £4-5 for a single compared to £8-10 for an album does not equate well
11. Bassrangerrabbit
So they are still denying the truth.
The growth in the music industry has beeb rock music this yera.Much in the UK down to The Darkness. Did they get snapped up by EMI, Sony? NO they had to finance their album and gig around the country in time honoured fashion. Get real guys. If you find the talent we will buy the music.
Secondly. Many downloads act as samplers for albums. Most of my recent purchases were made after hearing a track or tracks I downloaded from the net.So criminal or good marketing?
12. anonymous
What proved to me that the music business had lost the plot was when I heard (in 2002) that the ringtone business generated more revenue than the CD singles.
If the music publishers had got into downloading as soon as Napster showed there was a market, they could be coining it in now.
Obviously, the creators and performers deserve to make money, but the 'business' doesn't.
13. anonymous
As someone who works in the (Legal) music downloads industry, the thing that I find most frustrating is that the record labels have not yet understood that digital music is actually a lower quality product than a CD. Although most people will not notice the difference, a file that is encoded at 128kbs will lose some of the definition that you have on a CD.
They are pricing it to retailers and distributors at a level that makes the sale price equal to, or in some cases greater than, the price of a CD. This is plainly wrong. I think that consumers would be happy to pay 50p per track and £4.99 for a digital album. My guess is that at this price point, they would sell twice as much.
The second major issue is the Rights Management technology that is being used. If I download protected content from a legal service, the limitations that are placed on what I am allowed to do with the music are too restrictive. They often mean that I would be much better off either buying the CD and ripping it, or downloading an illegal version.
I think that the industry has started from the position that every consumer is a copyright thief and that the only way to stop them is to prevent them from doing anything.
They would be much better off pricing their music at a level at which consumers would use legal services because they are better quality, easier to use and less likely to infect you with viruses and spyware.
Having said all that, I can quite understand why the large record companies are dragging their heels. Their business model is much less relevant in a digital age. The marketing and distribution can be done quite effectively online without their help. Quality artists will always breakthrough.
14. Jonesy
If it was my job to do 10 presentations on 10 subjects for the same audience and they all sounded very much the same or, on average, only two went down well, I would be fired because my boss doesn't like paying for crap. By the same token, if we didn't have to pay for 8 tracks of crap to buy two decent ones then people wouldn't rip off music - and who cares that it's of lower quality - the likes of me is over 40 and will never be able to notice the difference