Mil artist insane Member # 3 posted November 14, 2007 07:57 PM                        Everyone knows unauthorized downloading has long since become a hot button topic of the recording industry. And, while we all know as well that the bottom line of the argument is a matter of lost revenue, I think there are different losses – and gains – to be felt by different parties in (and outside of) that industry itself. That said, as it applies to Michael’s work, I think it’s been well established no one on this board nor any other die hard fan has been or will ever be deterred from buying an official release regardless how many of its songs are already familiar from live shows, may have been debuted on Monday Morning Madness, etc. What’s more, with only 12 or 13 songs being officially released on a new disc every 3 or 4 years, it’s likewise been well established the vast majority of the Monday Morning Madness songs will never be presented in a revenue-generating form, nor would we die hards ever have the chance of hearing and appreciating them were it not for this truly magical bit of weekly “insanity”. Back to the point of the downloading topic having been shoved down our collective throats as a wholly negative practice in regard to its effect on the artist –- which it surely can be -- I would like to urge Michael to consider precisely what it means in terms of effects on him . Since it’s already been made clear these are largely non-revenue generating tracks to begin with, the immediate (or in most cases even eventual) loss of actual money are negligible at best. By “giving them away”, by contrast, they can indeed appear on every diehard’s ipod, and from there most likely make their way to the ipods of various diehards’ friends, potentially create new fans, etc. They can also be used by Dave in England as noted by him to promote Michael’s (shows and officially released) music there, by Marty to do the same in Ireland, and the rest of us to do so here. And, of course, they give all of us who just plain can’t get enough of Michael’s work a pretty fantastic reward for our enthusiasm and loyalty. What might be even more important for Michael to consider, however, is the potential loss generated by NOT sharing these songs – and indeed, by extension, so jealously guarding their distribution. From a wholly mercenary viewpoint, this course seems unwise to me. After all, the more variety of an artist’s work is available to a listener, the less likely that listener is to get bored, if you will – not that any of us are about to tire of Michael’s music, but let’s face it, you can only listen to your very favorite album on the planet so many times in a row. If there are a few hundred McD songs on a fan’s ipod, however, instead of a few dozen from official releases, the more likely anyone is to keep listening to this one artist rather than feeling a need to switch around. With that in mind, why would one not merely invite, but INSIST fans fill even a few albums worth of space on their ipods with the work of “competitors” (which again from a wholly business perspective) other artists are. And, as Steph noted, with the bombardment of stimuli hitting each of us at a dizzying rate and most so soon forgotten, it seems in the best interest of an artist to stay in front of his audience as constantly as possible, and do whatever it takes to achieve that goal. After all, somebody may just fill the space Monday Morning Madness songs might occupy on their ipod with a different artist who they end up searching out more albums from, whose shows they start attending and who therefore may well cut into an individual music budget that might have otherwise been spent in much greater measure on McD. Look at Microsoft if you think that idea seems outrageous. Yeah, they’re selling programs that each indeed generate revenue, not giving them away (and are pretty fanatical about anti-piracy protection to boot). But, they have scrambled more and more over time to become monopolistic in terms of what they offer – and indeed try to make essential – to users of their operating system. In fact, they proceed with something approaching rabid desperation to fill needs once entirely the domain of Mac and to keep users heading further and faster down a blinder-clad tunnel of “services” provided, so that users never need to so much as think the words “Adobe”, “Mac”, etc. The point is, keep the user focused on YOUR product, the less they’ll see other choices. The less they’ll HEAR them also, if they have so much McD music to listen to. Lastly, though this may not be a major consideration to many reading this, and there are certainly different schools of thought on the matter, I’ve mentioned many times that I see art as a spiritual endeavor. It’s the (couldn’t create a thing if their lives depended on it) business people who see profit in the gift of artists by selling it (and who sell to the artist themselves the lie that money should be attached to their works, and feed their egos with regard to how much they deserve from their creations) who turn it instead into an economic one. I further think the overwhelmingly positive reactions to, and stories shared regarding the depth of feeling associated with the song “I Shall Be Healed” back up this assertion. If one looks at it as the artist truly is “gifted” (by God) then it naturally follows “gifts are for giving”. We as artists (musicians, writers, whatever) have a certain social responsibility to fully surrender to that mentality. When we become focused on what we’re individually losing by sharing these gifts instead of what others might gain from them, frankly, it’s my firm conviction we’ve already lost something far greater than money.