The man behind Camper Van Beethoven and Cracker responds to a piece on NPR in which a reporter/Intern defended/rationalized the unauthorized downloading of 11.000 songs. He makes an incisive, compelling case about the ethics and morality of the situation -- looting, he calls it -- and of the potential long-term consequences. Read it here.

Thanks for the article. Great though provoking stuff. Those of us who grow up paying for music don't understand the new generation of gimme gimme's. They're the same kids wanting free health insurance. Sure! But where's it coming from and what is it hurting on the other end.
Posted by: wadkc | June 18, 2012 at 01:49 PM
I'm from the generation that pretty much pays for all it's music although in my day we did save some $ by making tapes for each other, but I guess somebody at least paid for that initial album/tape/CD. Even today, while I don't buy alot of digital downloads (still a CD guy), I just purchase them via iTunes or Amazon or what have you, just like I would a record at a mortar and brick store.
While I've had similar debates with younger folks about this issue, they're generally pretty fruitless as on this topic we just will never understand each other. It was kind of interesting to hear the artist's perspective and although I'm a huge fan and have tons of respect for Mr.Lowery, does he really think his manifesto is going to make one bit of difference with the music fan's of today? Oh well, keep fighting the good fight, Dave.
Posted by: pellboy | June 18, 2012 at 01:56 PM
A well written and informative article. Like PB and wadkc, I have always paid for my music. I also generally try and buy a CD when I see a band perform. I figure $15 for a CD is a fair price and it is worth it to me to have something to remember the performance as well as knowing that there is NO middleman involved taking a cut. That will buy a few gallons of gas for the band to make it to the next show or buy a sack of burgers along the way. Every little bit helps!
Posted by: onthemark | June 18, 2012 at 02:47 PM
I can see both sides of the argument here, PB. Yes, we grew up paying $5.99 for vinyl which somehow around 1986 jumped to $10.99 for the same exact thing on disc (sorry but the incremental cost of putting out something on CD vs. vinyl is not $5 per unit). Like you, I learned to live with that record company ripoff just like we have both learned to live with the doubling of concert ticket prices every 3 years (well ahead of the rate of inflation).
It's interesting to hear Lowery say that being on the road is a loss leader. I've heard the exact opposite from touring other musicians. At least the established ones. In fact, many bands I know make their living by touring, not by record sales anmd encourage fans to trade downloads of shows in an effort to expand their audience (WSP and Phish are prime examples of this business model).
Personally, I have never downloaded anything without paying without artist authorization. But in this day and age of $60 - $80 ticket prices for shows we spent $6 - $8 for at the Garden or the Capitol, I can see why there might be some sense of entitlement for downloading music for free. Let's use Lowery's $18 per month as an example. 20 years ago, that price point bought me a CD a month plus a major concert every 2 months (@$20 a show). Today, I might be able to attend a major concert every 4 months and nothing else. That's not a whole lot of music and it seems to me that the consumer, not the artist has taken the biggest hit.
Bottom line is I think everyone is being a little greedy here.
Posted by: NEW | June 18, 2012 at 03:35 PM
I would do the math in regards to indie acts, not the 1% who can charge 60-80 per ticket. That is where Lowery is from and likely who he is talking about. It's also who the gal likely has on her ipod.
Posted by: gsp | June 18, 2012 at 03:51 PM
I was a big fan a Camper Van and Cracker in the late 80's & early 90's. I haven't kept up on them lately though. Lowery was or is one of the grittiest, least politically correct songwriters out there. Dude certainly wrote his share of catchy tunes.
Posted by: Steve | June 18, 2012 at 04:48 PM
Fair enough GSP. I was just trying to illustrate how prices for mainstream music (especially mainstream concerts) has increased disproportionally to the CPI and I think that might be driving pirating to a certain extent. Several of our fellow posters and I often jest how we can see 10 shows at Davey's or the Record Bar for the price of a Sprint Center show which echos your point.
But I also stand by my statement that there are a ton of indie bands rely on money from touring and merc and I have seen data to back that up so I am not buying into Lowry's statement that touring is a loss leader.
Posted by: NEW | June 18, 2012 at 05:15 PM
When it comes down to it, it's simply electronic shoplifting if you are not paying for your downloads. And if it's truly good, original & fresh, you're likely stealing from someone who is not (at least yet) a megastar richbitch.
Imagine how the average guy/gal would feel if you reached into into their pockets and took what scratch they fed their families with....
Posted by: MetalHEAD | June 19, 2012 at 12:33 PM
I can see both sides of this argument. On the one side, you shouldn't download every album a band/musician has released. However, downloading a few songs for free can convince someone to purchase more of that band/musician's stuff.
Posted by: LiveMusicFan | June 19, 2012 at 02:01 PM
But that's just it, LMF, in an effort to combat or just give in to the illegal downloaders, most artists (except maybe a few really big ones) do offer some sort of free download via the band or record label websites or even thru a pay service like Amazon. In fact I have an entire stick made up of only FREE downloads that I acquired this way and yes, in turn I've often purchased additional music from said artists or made a point of seeing them perform live.
Posted by: pellboy | June 19, 2012 at 02:08 PM
I'm a huge fan and have tons of respect for Mr.Lowery, does he really think his manifesto is going to make one bit of difference with the music fan's of today? Oh well, keep fighting the good fight, Dave.
Posted by: chaussures air max | June 20, 2012 at 04:05 AM
I'll have to admit to being out of touch with what's going on right now. I illegally downloaded a lot of songs back in the Napster days, but 90% of them were songs that I couldn't purchase anywhere. Now I get all of my music from the Live Music Archive, etree, and one or two other torrent sites, but again that's audio or video that I can't purchase anywhere. I do purchase cd's or dvd's occasionally, but I mainly do it at a show to support the band I'm seeing and to encourage them to come back to town. Sometimes I even buy cd's that I already have just to support them. So my advice to bands is, tour more and play more shows. If people like you they'll buy your t-shirts and cd's at your shows.
Posted by: LiveMusicFan | June 20, 2012 at 11:12 AM
I can honestly say that websites like Napster, Spotify, and Oink led me to spend much more money on music than I would have had the websites not been there. Bands like Clutch and Fu Manchu, who got absolutely no play on the radio stations that I grew up listening to in rural Oklahoma. I would read about these bands or here about them from friends and then try them out on download sights. If I liked them I would wind up purchasing one, or in many cases all of that bands albums. I can definitely see a benefit for streaming sites, provided they are used responsibly.
Posted by: Pbt | June 21, 2012 at 01:49 AM
Gawker.com provides a rebuttal to David Lowery's comments.
http://gawker.com/5920376/david-lowery-might-be-right-about-some-things-but-hes-wrong-about-streaming-money-and-artists?tag=music
Posted by: Vandelay | June 22, 2012 at 04:11 PM