The More Things Change
One way or another I came across this ancient - well, 1983 - Usenet post about the then raging debate over the cassette tax levied, meant to offset the cost of piracy. It's so eerily prescient it's like traveling back in time yet arriving in the present.
hao!woods Feb 20, 1983 4:59 am
The problem with a "tape tax" is simply that there are a lot of other
uses for blank recording tape besides copying copyrighted material. Musicians
use it to record themselves, people actually even record things besides music
(God forbid!). It isn't really fair to ask everyone to pay for those who
use the tapes to copy records.
The best solution to sagging record sales is to make the price reasonable.
I stopped buying albums when the price passed $7 apiece. I think it's
outrageous. Concert tickets average around $15 these days as well. Maybe all
the superstars will have to switch from Rolls Royces to Cadillacs for a while
(breaks my heart :-) ). I realize that the non-superstar artists suffer more
than the superstars. I think what we are seeing here is more people want to
be musicians than the market will support, which accounts for the troubles
of the "non-mainstream" artists a lot more than taping records, and the
superstars are WAY overpaid. I love the Stones, but $20 to see Mick Jagger
prance around for maybe 90 minutes is a blatant rip-off. Those of you who have
sent me mail asking why I like the Dead so much, here's one reason. They usually
play for 3 1/2 to 4 hours. Most bands, however, don't even give you 2 hours for
your twenty bucks. Cut down on the number of artists and lower the price of
records. I'd much rather have the album with cover and associated artistry
than a blank cassette with my handwriting on the outside any day, but my
principles take over when the price is up around $8.50 to $12 a record,
I'll buy a blank tape for $2.50 (or even $3 if they imposed a tape tax!) over
paying a ridiculous price for a record.
GREG
ucbvax!hplabs!hao!woods
menlo70!hao!woods
harpo!seismo!hao!woods
decvax!brl-bmd!hao!woods
hao!woods Feb 20, 1983 4:59 am
The problem with a "tape tax" is simply that there are a lot of other
uses for blank recording tape besides copying copyrighted material. Musicians
use it to record themselves, people actually even record things besides music
(God forbid!). It isn't really fair to ask everyone to pay for those who
use the tapes to copy records.
The best solution to sagging record sales is to make the price reasonable.
I stopped buying albums when the price passed $7 apiece. I think it's
outrageous. Concert tickets average around $15 these days as well. Maybe all
the superstars will have to switch from Rolls Royces to Cadillacs for a while
(breaks my heart :-) ). I realize that the non-superstar artists suffer more
than the superstars. I think what we are seeing here is more people want to
be musicians than the market will support, which accounts for the troubles
of the "non-mainstream" artists a lot more than taping records, and the
superstars are WAY overpaid. I love the Stones, but $20 to see Mick Jagger
prance around for maybe 90 minutes is a blatant rip-off. Those of you who have
sent me mail asking why I like the Dead so much, here's one reason. They usually
play for 3 1/2 to 4 hours. Most bands, however, don't even give you 2 hours for
your twenty bucks. Cut down on the number of artists and lower the price of
records. I'd much rather have the album with cover and associated artistry
than a blank cassette with my handwriting on the outside any day, but my
principles take over when the price is up around $8.50 to $12 a record,
I'll buy a blank tape for $2.50 (or even $3 if they imposed a tape tax!) over
paying a ridiculous price for a record.
GREG
ucbvax!hplabs!hao!woods
menlo70!hao!woods
harpo!seismo!hao!woods
decvax!brl-bmd!hao!woods
posted by Josh at 11:46 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home