Anderson, Nate. "Free Nine Inch Nails album tops 2008 Amazon MP3 Sales Charts." Ars Technica. 6 January 2009.

This article summarizes experiemental distribution of Nine Inch Nails's new album and the effects the new online distribution model had on sales. Nine Inch Nails released the album Ghosts I-IV under a Creative Commons license, which allows legal free sharing and remixing. Despite this, the album garnered huge profits; both via digital download on Amazon.com, and perhaps more significantly in limited edition "extras" sets. The Ars Techinca article goes on to pose two questions to Fred Beneson of Creative Commons: Why would fans buy the album when it could be had for free, and would Creative Commons Lisencing work for record labels? Bereson addresses these questions speculatively, with optimism as well as some analysis of the factors necessary for the success achieved by NIN.

This is a major success story for Creative Commons, and an example of a profit-making model that still offers free download and distribution of music. The profits of Ghosts I-IV speak to the appeal for a product that is not available for free download (extras, convenience, or the authenticity of supporting an artist directly). Understanding the presence of this demand is necessary for understanding the way people want to consume music in the digital age. Profits can be achieved via different music products and services.

International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI). “IFPI Digital Music Report 2009.” January 2009. <http://www.ifpi.org/content/library/DMR2009.pdf>

This report is a production of the IFPI, a worldwide group for the representation of the recording industry. It offers extremely recent data from 2008 which remarks on the success of different world-wide profit-garnering music revenue models; for example, it reports how much of the international market share iTunes currently holds. It also disucsses the way in which the music industry has already changed in its revenue and marketing structure, and gives statistical evidence regarding the results. The report, dated January 2009, details the way the record industry has seen itself change, and the ways it is looking to maintain its authority.

Clearly, this report is not from an unbiased source like the independently-researched “The Effect of File Sharing on Record Sales.” However, the data is still relevant, and more recent than academic publications. This industry-side discussion demonstrates a contrast to the anti-industry marketing and revenue models that are to be addressed elsewhere. Essentially, it gives an opposing perspective and interesting statistics regarding the effects of file-sharing on international music markests. Finally, it provides some key insights into the ways that the record industry is urgently seeking to maintain control, the ways that intellectual property is viewed by international corporations, and the ways in which they measure success.

This academic journal is published by Cambridge University Press and is a commentary on the first source listed above.  Laing highlights the most important points of Frith’s work, offering his professional opinion in a disagreement, agreement, or clarification in the very least.  A notable quality of this journal is the fact that is it printed in Great Britain; therefore it offers the insight of a foreigner analyzing American copyright law in contrast to that of the United Kingdom.  This perspective draws attention to aspects of the law that may not been previously considered. 

            The essay is short and concise, wasting no words in a full examination of Frith’s work.  He calls into question Frith’s assertion that the copyright system is an “aspect of the competition between different music producers…and…different music users,” and claims that there is much more to it than that.  He acknowledges the complexities in the system in that they do not clearly favor or target neither the creator, nor the performer, nor the consumer.  Slightly outdated, this essay was written before any sampling lawsuits were completed in the courts (at least in Great Britain) however, this serves as a strength instead of a weakness, however, seeing as his calculated predictions can be measured against the results to gauge how scholars viewed the subject.

            This journal is not only an intellectual work in itself, but it is also an intelligent deciphering of some of Frith’s most significant assertions.  This serves the reader well as some of his reading can be confusing and seem contradictory at parts.  In reading Frith’s work, I will be sure to keep Laing’s journal on hand for color and clarification in order to most accurately comprehend the discussion and facts presented.

This book is a guide – as its title might suggest – to all things digital when it comes to music.  It serves as not so much an analysis on copyright in the music industry as a whole, but rather as a set of legal and technical guidelines so that one may participate in the consumption and production of such music without infringing on copyrights.  In other words, it describes for the reader all of the ins-and-outs of the digital music industry so that one may know where in the law his practices may reside. 

            Hill’s book has entire chapters devoted to the assessment of what is legal, what is not, and how to go about participating in said sanctioned musical practices.  He identifies a list of acceptable file-sharing websites, and offers his own commentary on why others are forbidden, as well as why these are acceptable.  The book begins with a basic introduction into the technologies and methods used in the digital realm and then goes deeper to list available services and to comment on the merits of various practices.  His advice is clear and he condones no illegal activity, yet he makes clear why certain people might be motivated to circumvent copyright laws in terms of digital music.  He further lists specific file types and programs that are used in these practices and he identifies useful software.  He finishes the book with another broad chapter about the “Conscience of Digital Music” as a whole as well as his prediction of the future of the industry.

Hill’s technological knowledge is a key aspect of this book that has allowed me to delve deeply into the details of digital music production and sharing.  He explains these issues in simple terms, while still conveying the complexity of their implications.  In writing this final paper, the technological terms and details from this book will provide much-needed expertise in a field that I am not necessarily well-versed in.  In my analysis of the acceptability of digital sampling, I must first know how the practice works and what techniques are involved; this book offers me this knowledge, which is key to reaching a conclusion in my final paper on what sampling is acceptable within copyright law.