Filed under: Miscellaneous
Just this evening I’ve read a few comments/posts where the issue of whether providing access to whole albums is a good thing or not. This is something that I have thought about a lot and would be interested to know what people feel about it.
On the one hand, posting these albums provides exposure to an artist and may encourage people to buy their records, go to see a live performance or spread the word amongst their friends. Word of mouth is a powerful force and it could be argued that bloggers provide a kind of advertisement for recording artists that ultimately provides them with financial rewards. Many of these albums have been long forgotten about by the masses (if they knew that they existed at all) and blogging provides them with a fanbase that perhaps they may not have had. Recently, one of the members of Yaggfu Front dropped a comment after I had posted the album showing love for the exposure of his music, so it is clear that some artists are more than happy for this behaviour to continue.
On the other hand, it is of course providing people with decent quality copies of music that they may not subsequently buy. It could be said that blogs harm an artist’s financial growth and limit them in the future. Perhaps online file sharing IS killing music, and we should not shoot ourselves in the foot by harming the genre by sharing it so freely.
What are the rules exactly? Does something have to be out of print to be ‘postable’? Should it be more than ten years old? Does posting new/old albums work in or against the favour of the artists in question? Should record companies step their game up and make their products more desirable? Is file sharing going to bring down the record industry and destroy music? I would be very interested to know people’s thoughts on this one: you know what to do.