Slashdot Log In
Music Industry Conflicted On Guitar Hero, Rock Band
Posted by
Soulskill
on Wed Feb 25, 2009 03:03 AM
from the we-all-know-how-quick-they-are-to-adapt dept.
from the we-all-know-how-quick-they-are-to-adapt dept.
Wired is running a story about the friction between the music industry and music-based games, such as Guitar Hero and Rock Band. Despite the fact that these games are very successful and are drawing a great deal of attention to the music represented in the games, the industry is not pleased with the licensing arrangements that allow the games to use their songs. Quoting: "Putting the brakes on music gaming would hurt everyone in the ailing music industry. Instead of demanding greater profit participation, Warner should be angling for creative participation. Thirty years ago, Hollywood took a similar threat — the VCR — and turned it into a new source of revenue, building customer loyalty in the process. The music industry could use new games the same way — but its track record suggests that it won't."
Related Stories
[+]
Warner Music Playing Hardball With <em>Rock Band</em> 86 comments
We recently discussed the fight brewing between the music industry and the popular music games, such as Rock Band and Guitar Hero, over the licensing fees paid for songs used within the games. Well, Warner has stepped things up and denied access to future songs without a payment increase. "Once the already-agreed-upon music runs out in the Summer however, the two companies will have to hammer out a new deal that's amenable to both. If MTV Games ends up giving Warner a larger slice of the pie, you have to think that the rest of the labels will begin asking for the same cut." The Rock Band games have seen a steady stream of DLC additions to their song libraries, the most recent being Stevie Ray Vaughan's Texas Flood album. Activision has been busily working on new Guitar Hero content as well, revealing details for Guitar Hero Greatest Hits, which is due out in June. Ben Heck (of Xbox 360 laptop fame) has just put together a breath controller for Guitar Hero World Tour's bass drum, for those unable or unwilling to use the standard pedal.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
The music industry (Score:5, Insightful)
The music industry shooting iself in the foot?
Colour me surprised...
Re:The music industry (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, they are. And yes, this is unbelievably stupid.
Guys? A clue for you. You've got me paying for music again. The Napster generation, the whole Gen-Y pirate crowd, people who habitually download entire band discographies from The Pirate Bay - these people are falling over themselves to pay you well in excess of the iTunes price per track, because you've made it interactive, you've made it cool. You've worked out how to sell music in the 21st century, and now you're about to break it. Unbelievable.
Parent
Re:The music industry (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, and paying something like $2.50 PER SONG, as far as downloadable content. I'm pretty sure I paid more for the Rock Band song downloads than I did for the game itself.
Parent
Re:The music industry (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Stupid (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe they'll get a clue one day?
Just to be prepared, I've patented a pig repellent. Never know when one of those obnoxious pigs might fly in through your window.
Parent
Re:Stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
Thirty years ago, Hollywood took a similar threat â" the VCR â" and turned it into a new source of revenue, building customer loyalty in the process.
I'm sure most people here know it, but Hollywood didn't take the VCR and turn it into a new source of revenue. Universal sued Sony over the Betamax, hoping to litigate it into oblivion, lost, and were dragged kicking and screaming into a new era and way of making money. Remember Jack Valenti's comment about the VCR being to the film industry what the Boston strangler is to the woman at home alone?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Over the objections of its tech-savvy students, the morons leading Houston's School of Communication actually renamed their college after that technophobe.
http://www.class.uh.edu/comm/
http://www.class.uh.edu/comm/pages/files/Jack%20Valenti%20media%20hits%20summary.pdf
It makes me exceptionally embarassed to be one of their graduates. Here I am trying to work to make the world BETTER for copyrighted works, and there they are enshrining someone whose entire point of view was "fuck the consumer."
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yeah yeah yeah... (Score:5, Insightful)
Let me rephrase and re-summarise the article:
Games like Rock Band and Guitar hero are now incredibly popular, so the music industry wants to cash in on it and fleece everyone for every single penny they can.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh and I forgot to add: They're all greedy, money-grabbing bastards.
Re:Yeah yeah yeah... (Score:5, Interesting)
This is great though, for the public. The reason is, because the RIAA is treading on *dangerously* thin ice here, and apparently they aren't aware. These games work every bit as well and are every bit as fun even if every single song is from an indie group that no one has heard of before. If they don't watch it, they might just get what they're asking for, and they're going to suddenly find the masses discovering whole new sources of indie music that can be had legitimately at a fair market price without hassle, and the RIAA will start to die sooner rather than later. I really hope they do try to push the music game developers. The only people they can possibly hurt are themselves.
Parent
Re:Yeah yeah yeah... (Score:5, Interesting)
This is true, actually. I believe the first two guitar hero games came with bonus tracks from some of the developers themselves (I couldn't reliably name names, but I think "Freezepop" was one of them) and they were just as fun to play (if not more) as the rest of the songs on the game.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
This is SO WRONG.
I just play the games to listen to music.
Re: (Score:2)
Freezepop is a real band. I remember getting an album of theirs sometime around 2000/2001 from a roommate.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Indeed they are and one of it's members is a producer for Harmonix.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Freezepop was one of the highest profile groups to give blanket permission to Flash Flash Revolution to use their songs, granted back in 2006:
http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/vbz/showthread.php?t=50599 [flashflashrevolution.com]
(FFR is, as you might expect, a rhythm game written in Flash patterned after Dance Dance Revolution, except you use arrow keys instead of your feet. It's more fun than it sounds.)
Full list of artists (mostly independent, to go along with the GGP's point) that have given blanket permission to use their song
Re:Yeah yeah yeah... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Yeah yeah yeah... (Score:5, Interesting)
Sure, and I'm not saying that's not the case. But if you think the next Rock Band and Guitar Hero games won't sell millions of copies because they didn't use any RIAA songs, you're lying to yourself. People will discover that there's damn good music out there that's not from the RIAA, and that's a genie that is impossible to stuff back into the bottle. Plenty of school kids will buy and play the games regardless of where the music comes from, and word-of-mouth will do the rest.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This song is your song, this song is my song
It's not an ASCAP or a BMI song
It's not a song that demands a royalty
This song was made for you and me.
Re: (Score:2)
That's up there with Richard Stallman's song:
http://www.gnu.org/music/free-software-song.html [gnu.org]
Wish I could rid my memory of him singing "Join us now and share the software; You'll be free, hackers, you'll be free."
Re:Yeah yeah yeah... (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you are giving school kids too much credit. They want teh newest and hottest artists. The ones that get advertised to death. The ones all their friends are listening to.
I've been talking to my 16 year old daughter about music recently. Her latest 'musical coup' among her friends, was to take some of my Led Zep CDs in to school. Her friends have been bringing in other music from their parent's collections. Yes, they listen to some of the new bands, but when it comes to what they actually spend most of their time listening to, it's 70's to early 90's. They all say there's too much crap, and not enough music coming out now, why not go back and listen to all those years of good stuff.
It's still big music industry bands, but not the stuff that's supposed to be marketed at them. The manufactured music bandwagon seems to have finally lost it's way. And if the kids are deciding that anything that's heavily advertised at them must be crap, that's an opening for the indie bands to move into.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
These games work every bit as well and are every bit as fun even if every single song is from an indie group that no one has heard of before.
Well, this is true to an extent, but not entirely; I'll give three (related) reasons why I partially disagree:
1. I tend to have more fun playing songs that I like -- not to say that I won't like whatever indie music they put in (I've found a couple songs I liked because of GH and RB), but you have to be careful about putting a lot of unheard of stuff in there because o
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's their job, though (Score:5, Interesting)
That's their job, though. They're supposed to make the most money they can for their shareholders, not run a charity. If they think they can sell something for more money, well, they're _supposed_ to ask for more money.
Now whether they're smart about it, is a whole other question. (E.g., too often I see companies shooting themselves in the foot for millions so some department can save cents or so the CEO's shares rise 2 cents in the very short term.) Whether their means are acceptable is another good question. (E.g., the RIAA lawsuit carpet bombing) But acting as if wanting money was a by itself a capital sin is kinda missing the point.
Parent
Re:That's their job, though (Score:5, Insightful)
That is all well and good, but they are actually responsible not only for getting every greedy dollar they can, they are forgetting that they also need to keep their eyes on the horizon and to maintain a connection with their consumer base and this is where they are failing miserably and what many see as the ultimate, though gradual, cause of their downfall.
1. They sue their customers
2. They don't give anything away
Specifically, to address point 2, it is well known in the marketing world that "free" is the single-most attention getting word in advertising and marketing. It motivates people to participate in the market. And it is also well known that they should give away the razor in order to sell more razorblades. And in a case such as this topic, it is obvious what they should do but are not doing. They should set up a deal with xbox live and whatever other console gaming networks allow downloadable content and start sponsoring the development of free guitar hero and rock band games that allow for subscribed content. Free games, subscribed content. On the surface it would seem to be an obvious and very good model... and I know for certain that I'm something of a dumbass, so if I can see it, either I am very wrong or they are far more stupid than I am.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
So why allow your music to be in the game? (Score:2)
I'm really lost with this one. For the music to be used, the developers of the game would require permission from the two copyright holders - publishing and recording copyrights.
They agree on payment and royalties when they seek copyright permission. So why the fcuk are they moaning after?
I also wonder how much money is made by labels and publishers in royalties, bet it is a lot more than selling CD a digial versions.
Re:So why allow your music to be in the game? (Score:5, Insightful)
They agree on payment and royalties when they seek copyright permission. So why the fcuk are they moaning after?
They're moaning because they think they deserve more money from their obsolete business model. They're moaning because they think there's potential here for them to get a lot more money from the games than they are. Problem is, they are 100% wrong. They don't realize it, but these games don't need their songs, not even a little bit. And if they ask for more money, the developers of these games will (hopefully anyway, because they *should*) tell them "sorry, we don't need your songs", and then proceed to use excellent music from dozens of indie bands no one has ever heard of before, which will in turn lead to those bands gaining popularity, people searching for music from those bands online, finding the free (or at least non-DRM) distribution sites that have that music, and discovering a whole new world of alternatives to RIAA music.
If they do this, they truly will be blowing off their last foot. They'll still try to hobble around on their stumps for a while, but this will be the beginning of the end for them. I hope they do it.
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:So why allow your music to be in the game? (Score:5, Insightful)
A compromise will likely end up being made between the music industry and the game companies. If the music is the reason these games are selling, then they do have legitimate reasons to want more of the profits made from these games. If you read the article, they even mention that the NFL makes 30% of the profits from the Madden series. I imagine where the big discrepancy lies is in aftermarket content for the game. For instance if the game publishers are charging $3 to download a new song (I have no idea what it really is), and the music industry only gets $1 of it, I can see why they're complaining. This content is almost entirely their own, and they legitimately want some of the profit.
Phil
Parent
Because they are getting fucked by their own law (Score:5, Informative)
The music that is used in games like that is rarely the original version. What it is instead is a cover. A cover is where another band redoes a song. They are quite common. Sometimes they feature stylistic changes, like a rock band might cover a jazz tune in rock style, sometimes they are just a different band doing the same song. In the case of these games, the bands are doing their very best to imitate the original sound, and doing a rather good job at it. Not as hard as you might think these days given the amazing things you can do with a digital audio workstation.
Ok, so why does this matter? Well many moons ago the recording industry lobbied for, and got, a law that established statutory cover fees. See they wanted their popular artists to be able to cover old songs. However it wasn't always easy or possible to track down the original artists and secure licensing rights, but the songs were still copyrighted thanks to industry's lobbying for copyright extensions. So their plan was that a statutory fee would be established. Thus you pay a fixed rate for covers. This allowed them to have their popular artists cover songs as they pleased, and they never had to worry about what they payout would be, it was defined in advance.
Well now that same shit is working against them. A game company wants to use a famous song. The recording industry decides since it's famous, they want $10 million dollars. Ok no way the game company is paying that, especially if you are talking many songs. Instead they hire a cover band and a good recording engineer for much less, probably under a million. They cover those songs, and then pay the statutory fee of 8.5 cents per song per copy sold.
This little loophole that they created for themselves is now becoming a real problem. Back in the day there was probably no worry. After all recording was real expensive, not the sort of thing you did outside the recording industry much. Now, heck a few grand gets you all you need to get started. Also the technology out there allows you to adjust things in amazing ways, and thus more easily replicate the sound another band gets.
This would have to stop at games. It would be possible for bands to cover popular bands and sell their work. So music industry band A releases a popular song. Cover band B makes a cover that sounds almost identical. Cover band B then sells that cover for less than the music industry does, but enough to cover the statutory fees and make money.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
A cover is a good idea, If you cover a song the record industry gets nothing in return.
However, if you cover a song, you still need the publishing copyrights. The fees and royalties for these rights are far more expensive than the recording rights. You'd probably find the rights are owned by someone like a Warner Publishing company so in the end your in a no win situation. D'oh!
Hey, you wont get the RIAA on your back for your own recordings though.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, that's not true. For covers, you pay money to the copyright holder and you can publish your songs commercially. For an in-depth (but not legal advice!) breakdown in plain English, I recommend CD Baby's How to Legally Sell Downloads of Cover Songs [cdbaby.net].
However, I'm not sure that it applies to video games:
This Compulsory License is only available for sales in the United States. Other uses of masters, such as streaming, conditional downloads, and the like, are not subject to a Compulsory License. A separate license from the publisher is needed in those cases.
Re:Because they are getting **** by their own law (Score:3, Informative)
That's Thick (Score:2)
Thanks for the highly informative post, by the way. That's a nice little gem I would have otherwise known nothing about.
Can we get rid of the music "industry" soon? (Score:5, Insightful)
The music "industry" is not music. It's just middle men. They create drag, friction, between the musicians and the fans. They are an unneeded artifice, a relic of an earlier age, in my mind. For instance:
"Despite the fact that these games are very successful and are drawing a great deal of attention to the music represented in the games, the industry is not pleased with the licensing arrangements that allow the games to use their songs."
Does anyone here think "their songs" refers means "the artist's songs" or does it rather mean "Corp X's songs". Their original argument in the opening salvo of their war against the internet was "think of the artists!" Well, apparently they don't abide by their own logic (nor have they ever). From the very same article:
"Music games are proven earners--Aerosmith has reportedly earned more from Guitar Hero : Aerosmith than from any single album in the band's history."
Fuck the music industry. Please, just die already.
Re:Can we get rid of the music "industry" soon? (Score:5, Insightful)
Or this here, also in the article:
Yet it doesn't detail why the artist should give a cut to everything. Perhaps a $10k higher advance? Or does it become like the contracts all employees have to sign these days, with non-compete clauses, and other filled-to-the-brim bullshit which "everyone signs" because their peers do it - with no actual value added ever to the weaker party, everything always going for the stronger party in this case?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
For better or worse this is exactly what happens. The one musician that sticks his or her hand up and says "Hang on a minute, lets negotiate this contract a little bit" gets quickly shown the door. The big labels really don't care, there's another thousand hopefuls in the queue ready to sell their soul for their 15 minutes.
Here in Asia a similar thing can be said for your typical call centre job, or rather, it was this area of employment that kick started the draconian employment contracts which are now rap
Re:Can we get rid of the music "industry" soon? (Score:4, Interesting)
To my mind, the base of the problem with the recording industry is that the labels are seen as some kind of conferrer of magical "blessed" status -- that if you work really hard, maybe some label will come and "sign you": sweep you off your feet to a wondrous world of superstardom, like you're Cinderella or something (not the band).
They should be thought of (and hired as) service providers: consulting, recording, reproduction, distribution, marketing. These are services they should simply charge set rates for to anyone who wants them and forget about controlling artists or enforcing (or holding) copyright. They (and we) would have a lot fewer headaches this way, I'm sure.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I was thinking the same thing. Why is it the "Music Industries" music, not the song writer's or artist's music?
For bonus points, did anyone watch the Academy Awards this year? Generally they trot out that that piracy takes food off of tables or that Hollywood produced film keeps the tired, depressed masses from putting a bullet in their collective heads. This year it was that movies are produced by professionals. Even though it wasn't stated explicitly, it seemed to imply that non-cartel produced material w
Re: (Score:2)
I think we still need a "music industry" (by which I mean music labels). Their purpose has just shifted. Once upon a time, if you were part of a band and wanted nationwide (or worldwide) distribution and marketing, you needed to go to a label. Only they had the resources to record your music, press your albums, distri
Re: (Score:2)
I'm glad you posted this, you beat me to it.
Music industry is flying at the moment. Record industry is dying a slow and painful death, unless they sort their business models out ASAP.
I am also not satisfied (Score:5, Interesting)
The music that comes from the music industry on DDR games or Hottest Party is the boring part of the game (well, not all of them, but most). Why not eliminate these tracks and put more native JPOP stuff on it that really makes fun? I would buy the games also without the music of the people who complain here. I've already ask Konami about it before. And now I'm even a bit happy that the music industry wants more money. This will perhaps minimize the impact of them on the music style. NAOKI and others, make more music for DDR!!
Also... I haven't bought any music CDs for more than a decade, because I am very picky (I cannot really find what I need) and I don't like the greed. Some few licensed music tracks from the games (that also are sold by the music industry) are really good and I have actually considered to buy them. But I am seeing this greed again and I have enough for another decade. They cannot offer almost anything for me and complain.
And let's not forget. On DDR/HP (I don't know guitar hero and stuff like that) the licensed songs are only covers, because the originals sound poor to me.
Coincidence? (Score:2)
Anyone besides me think it's interesting to note that even though the music industry keeps bitching about new ways to distribute their music, they keep putting out the same old crap? Spending millions on a "star" personality marketing them to everyone and their dog seems to be the only way they expect to make money, while history shows that its the small-time surprise artists that make the enduring impact on the industry? If they would quit manufacturing superstars and start focusing on bringing GOOD musi
Re: (Score:2)
Spending millions on a "star" personality marketing them to everyone and their dog seems to be the only way they expect to make money, while history shows that its the small-time surprise artists that make the enduring impact on the industry?
Sadly, it has never been about enduring impacts or quality of music. They create personalities because they're profitable during their lifespan.
"Warner" != music industry (Score:2)
It's just Warner in the article.
Since Guitar Hero is owned by Activision / Vivendi Universal, I'm pretty sure they're OK with it.
Note to Warner, and anyone else for that matter (Score:4, Funny)
Dear Time-Warner:
1985 called. It wants its business model back.
Change or die. You are irrelevant, and that's why you're seeing less money from licensing deals. Y'all should get down on your knees and thank God that industry publishers can still make money off of properties like "Welcome to the Jungle" and "Talk Dirty To Me."
Embrace it, or wither and die.
--
Toro
Boston Strangler? (Score:3, Insightful)
Thirty years ago, Hollywood took a similar threat -- the VCR -- and turned it into a new source of revenue, building customer loyalty in the process.
Actually, they fought it as long and as hard as they could, and only embraced it when it was clear it was going to happen.
I distinctly remember comments comparing the VCR to the Boston Strangler. I'm too lazy to track it down, and most of you should remember...
Keep in mind, this is Hollywood's attitude (and the Music Industry's attitude, incidentally) towards the ideas which ultimately provide them the most value. The music box, the phonograph, VCRs, digital audio tape, DVDs...