More than half a million illegal download attempts on new Tragically Hip single

(Toronto) - Since the Federal Court decision on 31 March, Internet piracy has been rampant. The Tragically Hip, one of Canada's treasured cultural assets, was one of the hardest hit. During a five-week stretch from 30 March to 7 May, there were more than half a million unauthorized attempts to download the new Tragically Hip single, "Vaccination Scar."

Overall, during this period, Universal Music reported 2.8 million attempts to illegally download The Tragically Hip's recordings. During the same period fewer than 1,000 copies were purchased legally online.

The Tragically Hip launched "Vaccination Scar" 10 April 2004 at the second game of the Ottawa-Toronto National Hockey League play-off series as teaser for its upcoming album Inbetween evolution (Universal Music). The lead single was simultaneously released to radio stations across the country and also made available through for legal download at online sites for 99 cents.

"Any reasonable person will be staggered by the disparity in those numbers," commented Gord Sinclair of the Hip. "The grim economic reality aside, it shows how widespread the practice of downloading has become. Don't get me wrong. Anything that gets people into music is okay with me, but at some point people have to recognize their role in the creative process. To me it's an ethical question. If you hear something you like, go out and support the artist. Tell your friends, see a show and buy their records. Your support helps the artist continue to create and it funds the discovery and development of new artists and new music. If you do your part, we'll all benefit," he concluded.

This news follows hard on the heels of a recent national survey by POLLARA Inc. * conducted between 12 and 19 April and released by the Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA) 3 May 2004 * showing that approximately nine out of ten Canadians believe that recording artists and songwriters have a right to copyright protection, and that a significant majority of Canadians believe that it is illegal to upload music files on the Internet, despite the recent Federal Court decision to the contrary.

Juno Award winner Jann Arden reacted to the news, saying, "Downloading music from the Internet is ironically the hope, and alarmingly the impending decay and destruction, of the music industry. Unless these downloads are monitored and artists are compensated for their work, there will be NO work to download. None of us, as writers and performers, can afford to keep making the music that has always, and will always, make the world a little easier to swallow in troubled times. We cannot play if we are not paid. Illegal downloads must be halted and those offenders punished in a court of law. This issue is very serious and should be given much more respect and attention than it has received in this country. Canada is a country that produces some of the world's biggest selling artists; artists who pay a hell of a lot of taxes. Tell me that it is not in the best interests of this government to go after their lost revenue."

"Everyone seems to think this is just hurting the labels and the superstars, so who cares? Wrong. People who download music have friends playing music in clubs in their hometowns and those people are never going to get record deals because record companies won't have sold enough records to support a new artist," added Kathleen Edwards, a prominent Canadian recording artist.

Ed Robertson of The Barenaked Ladies, expressed these views: "I'm totally fine with people downloading music, as long as they steal everything that they want. If you want pants, go steal them. If you need gas in your car, you should steal it, because you can. As long as people are consistent I don't have a problem. As long as they see themselves as thieves in general then I don't mind if they steal everything that they like. But it irks me that it's only okay to steal music."

"If an artist goes to the trouble to pay for the recording and manufacturing of a CD, you can bet they're expecting to sell them. What are people thinking? When, exactly, did it become alright in our society to select one group of people and openly, specifically, declare that their work is, literally, worthless? Something that costs nothing has no value * by definition," said Mike Campbell, manager of The Joel Plaskett Emergency.

"This is one of the most blatant illegal online exploitations of a single recording in the history of the Canadian music industry," commented Brian Robertson, CRIA President. "It underlines, again, the vulnerability of our artists, creators and producers to the lawlessness of the Internet in Canada and the need for federal politicians and bureaucrats to move far more expeditiously than they have in the past to update Canada's woefully inadequate Copyright Act."

"The current situation is particularly harmful to Canadian artists as well as the thousands of Canadians whose livelihoods and businesses are linked to music," says Puretracks co-CEO and founder, Alistair Mitchell. "Our political leaders need to stand up for Canada's cultural heritage while we continue our work to build a legal digital download business based on respect for artists' rights."

The Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA) is a non-profit trade association representing the interests of Canadian companies that create, manufacture and market sound recordings. CRIA's membership includes the major record companies, leading independent labels, and all manufacturers of compact discs and tapes. In all they represent 95 per cent of the sound recordings that are manufactured and sold in Canada.

-30-

Media contacts: Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA)
Catherine Allman & Julie Wright
hawkestone communications - public affairs
tel. (416) 485-4606; info@hawkestone.com



--

Catherine Allman

hawkestone
communications - public affairs
Suite 3F, 99 Crown's Lane
Toronto, ON, M5R 3P4
T. 416-485-4606
F. 416-485-2243
Check out our new look --
http://www.hawkestone.com

public relations for arts and entertainment

bullshit...no such thing as music piracy...

Stealing, rampant piracy, illegal. those phrases are used over and over in a country where the courts say it's ok.

"...those people are never going to get record deals because record companies won't have sold enough records to support a new artist,..."

just shows that most artists in the industry still don't see the benifit of marketing their product over the internet. getting a record deal doesn't make them a star or rich.

most of these artists don't realize it's a public backlash against the industry they support. Like the crew of the titanic cursing the iceburg while the ship sinks. get some damn life boats and save yourself

"most of these artists don't realize it's a public backlash against the industry they support."

That's a justification, an excuse. Downloaders do it because they can, not because they are on some sort of moral crusade. LOL

bullshit, I know a great many who do it out of spite.

Spite? What on earth do you mean? Downloading helps record sales - right? Hee hee!

"...those people are never going to get record deals because record companies won't have sold enough records to support a new artist,..."

This statement combined with their intelligent way of measuring sales as items shipped as opposed to items sold, says everything about the dinosaurs.

So in other words, if they make 5 million copies of something lets call it "crap" (going forward), and I as a consumer am solely responsible now to purchase atleast 1 copy of crap, irrespective of demand. Or else someone either looses their job, or they dont sign new artist, so its basically my fault for not supporting crap. Ok yeah that makes perfect sense.

Canada is a country that produces some of the world's biggest selling artists; artists who pay a hell of a lot of taxes. Tell me that it is not in the best interests of this government to go after their lost revenue."

I'm surprised she feels this way, as we pay the artists fees included in cd sales, pc sales, burner sales, etc, etc, we pay a h--- of a lot of extra fees as well. I think they keep forgotting about that, either that, or else the industry is holding onto to those fees as well. But that's not the consumers problem. We pay upfront, in good faith!. ~pepe~

Downloading music from the Internet is ironically the hope, and alarmingly the impending decay and destruction, of the music industry. Unless these downloads are monitored and artists are compensated for their work, there will be NO work to download.

If the record industry had it their way there would be nothing to download.

"So in other words, if they make 5 million copies of something lets call it "crap" (going forward), and I as a consumer am solely responsible now to purchase atleast 1 copy of crap, irrespective of demand."

It's not about overproduction of copies. It's basically how they built the game. First, the A&R's don't really know what they are doing. They only have confidence in signing bands if other labels are interested. This results in bidding wars with millions of dollars going to the bands just for signing. Then they have to pay for the expensive recording studios. Then they have to pay for the latest hitmaker producer. Then they have to pay for the expensive video. Then they have to pay for the independent promotion for the radio. Then they have to pay for tour support. It is these upfront costs that the labels are now having trouble paying.

I think most of the recent research has shown that file sharing has little or no effect at all on record sales. In other words, for every person that just doenloads to get something for free, there is an equal number that discover something they really like and go download it. Not to mention those that download because they can but would have never paid for the music if it wasn't free.

All this to say that this article is a biased piece of propaganda released by the CRIA itself.

I think most of us would agree that a system which fairly compensates ALL artists needs to be in place. What we do not want is that the Majors control the means of distribution and choose what we hear.

"This news follows hard on the heels of a recent national survey by POLLARA Inc. * conducted between 12 and 19 April and released by the Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA) 3 May 2004 * showing that approximately nine out of ten Canadians believe that recording artists and songwriters have a right to copyright protection, and that a significant majority of Canadians believe that it is illegal to upload music files on the Internet, despite the recent Federal Court decision to the contrary. "

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Does anyone here really believe these false statements by the CRIA? Give me a break!! Talk about propoganda. Our government should hire these guys and be in charge of propoganda on behalf of the U.S. Oh yeah, that's right, the RIAA already OWN our government, don't they?

Some very good points there mroop. But lets face the fact that there is nothing that is going to stop any die hard fan from downloading whatever they want to. Sorry to say not even the FBI...I rarely use P2P these days.....I dont have enough money to pay legal fees...I got kids to feed and bills to pay. I agree artists must be paid for their hard work......but we want flexibilty with the music we purchase!

I found a new band on DMusic yesterday. My son downloaded it last night on his computer. There's not much information about the band. They are called Deadlogic. My favorite of the three is "User". Listen to them! I really like them.

Yep. It's that old argument again whereby they use a 'lie' that says that by downloading the song it equals a lost sale. Which is complete crap of course. You *CANNOT* I repeat *CANNOT* correlate downloads of a song illicitly (Note how I use the term illicit rather than the term illegal here) with actual sales had that ability been denied to downloaders.

They seem to play it like they have some 'magical' ability to predict the outcome of a different imaginary scenario like it's reality .

The idea of lost 'potential' sales I find both laughable and offensive to my intelligence.

The trouble is so many idiots actually believe anything that is put out my corporate and political 'yes' men.

I feel a rant coming on...

" Unless these downloads are monitored and artists are compensated for theirwork, there will be NO work to download. None of us, as writers and performers, can afford to keep making the music that has always, and will always, make the world a little easier to swallow in troubled times. We cannot play if we are not paid. (insert extra BS)"

We can't play if we're not payed?! WTF! It reeks when someone feels it's a god given right to always play and make half a million dollars off one damn song. And why is it that the CRIA (very close to CRAP) is saying they now have the biggest selling artists when the RIAA (close relation to CRAP) says they have the biggest and best artists? Here's a promise, when our band hits next year, do whatever you want with the music. Just as long as you come to the concert and have a good time. If we made you forget that your boyfriend's an ass, if your mom's being mean, or if you just need to mosh, then that's what me and our band (due to no copyright on our name, it shall not be given at this point in time)

""Everyone seems to think this is just hurting the labels and the superstars, so who cares? Wrong. People who download music have friends playing music in clubs in their hometowns and those people are never going to get record deals because record companies won't have sold enough records to support a new artist," added Kathleen Edwards, a prominent Canadian recording artist."

So why not support yourself. It's called having a backbone. That and hardwork will propel you that much further.

Disco, they won't rest until they get just that, a control that they have lost and will most likely never regain. They can throw all the money they want to Congress or a Senate body or whatever. But you can't make a criminal of over 1 billion people who have decided how they want to get their music. Sure, some people are still behind in the times. But as demonstrated recently with Jack Valenti, it's never to late to learn.

The most honest part of this article is on why the government is involved. Not for the kick backs, but tax revenue. When you download, you not only don't pay the RIAA/CRIA but you bypass the tax revenue on sales tax and/or taxes paid by the RIAA associate companies. Tack on the income taxes for the employees (artist and others), you are suddenly talking real money to the government. I wonder what the losses in taxes add up to in the states.?

If it was in america, the RIAA would consider those 2.8 million downloads as 2.8 million lost sales

people download for three reasons. spite, to get something for free and to sample something to see if it's worth buying. those who download for spite just want to hurt the record lables. those who download because they can get it for free do it for a viriety of reasons and those who want to sample are interested in buying. Just because I said I know many who do it for spite doesn't mean I agree with it or the logic. I just stated a fact.

the reason you're so hated personally here is because you can't seperate what is said from your own personal judgmental attitude towards people who don't agree with you.

mroop but the record cops make them pay it back from artist royalties. and they do not get to keep the master recording.

JC123;

I wish I could hug you! Your post is just how artists should think and behave! If I knew who your band was, or if I ever find out, I am coming to see you! Uh, wait, only if you rock and roll, or play the blues that is, no rap or hip-hop! Sorry, can't even stand to be on the same planet with any of that! I would morally support you on your beliefs though!

Maybe you could start a seminar or something to educate other "artists"!

you guys are over looking one small detail. if people are downloading their music they must like it right? if they like it they probably go see the shows? if they go see the shows the artists get paid. if the artists don't perform and expect to make a living off of what the label pays them yeah, they are going to starve. at least I think that's how it works.

captdunsel that is the best overall summary of this I've heard. excellent

Ed Robertson of The Barenaked Ladies, expressed these views: "I'm totally fine with people downloading music, as long as they steal everything that they want. If you want pants, go steal them. If you need gas in your car, you should steal it, because you can. As long as people are consistent I don't have a problem. As long as they see themselves as thieves in general then I don't mind if they steal everything that they like. But it irks me that it's only okay to steal music."

god mr. robertson, you must be a f**king idiot. in case you haven't realized this by now, there are other ways to support an artist, other than buying a cheap overpriced piece of plastic. concerts are one. and at the ridiculous rate at which you greedy bastards charge for seats, you'd think you'd already have enough money. tshirts are another. most of these are overpriced as well, especially at concerts. posters, keychains, etc are another. yet again, more overpriced items. my girlfriend went to a depeche mode concert a couple of years ago, and bought a poster (12" high and 22" wide)... $35! for a piece of way-too-thin cardboard with ink on it. and you assholes call US the theives? ha!

it's comments like mr. robertson's that make people like me what to download purely out of spite.

If it was in america, the RIAA would consider those 2.8 million downloads as 2.8 million lost sales

In theory maybe, but the reality of it is that those who don't/didn't have the money to purchase it, would not have done so anyway. So that means in some cases, there never would have been a sale in the first place to lose.

you guys are over looking one small detail. if people are downloading their music they must like it right? if they like it they probably go see the shows? if they go see the shows the artists get paid. if the artists don't perform and expect to make a living off of what the label pays them yeah, they are going to starve. at least I think that's how it works.

Also bear in mind that the Independant artists probably make most of their money performing in concert etc. rather than CD sales. One of the ways Independants get exposure is thru the downloading process. They don't have the so-called luxury of the "industry", but also seem to be able to do it much cheaper and have the same, if not better, quality than that of the "big label studios". Bottom line too is that most of those fees mentioned above are really paid for by the artists, not the labels.

"mroop but the record cops make them pay it back from artist royalties. and they do not get to keep the master recording."

I understand - that is why it's called an "advance". However, most bands never earn back the advance.

"captdunsel that is the best overall summary of this I've heard. excellent"

LOL It figures you would say that. What about the songwriter who is not a member of the band? For example, Elton John had Bernie Taupin. The Grateful Dead had Robert Hunter and John Barlow. Frank Sinatra had Sammy Cahn, etc.

once again you assume too much. I simply think it is an excellent summary. Just once I would like to see you state your comments without insulting people. Just because I don't agree with some of your comments doesn't mean either of us are wrong. If you don't like what I say and can't comment without insults then just shut the hell up or ignor me. My attitude toward you isn't at your ideas or arguments, it's at your disrespectfull attitude toward the people you disagree with. to me that's far more important. when faced with an arrogant know it all like yourself I usually respond in kind and mimick your views but NEVER is it a part of my nature like it is yours. you still haven't figured out why people like me hate lawyers with a passion. We treasure the good ones when we find them but the ones we don't know we view with suspicion until they've proven themselves. Unfortunatly people like you created that environment.

having said that here's a possible solution open to discussion. Why can't songwriters get a piece of the royalties from performance revenues if they wrote the songs. sure that's something that has to be negotiated with the performers and promoters and it may require changing how some things in the industry are done (that's what we all want, except you) but it is possible.

see solutions can be found without being an ass about it.

"If we made you forget that your boyfriend's an ass, if your mom's being mean, or if you just need to mosh, then that's what me and our band (due to no copyright on our name, it shall not be given at this point in time)"

AH! someone who understands and puts fun first and money later!
If you think music is just about money to you, then you have already lost.

Thats the way I feel.....If I have fun its worth every penny and minute and if I make money off it in the end, well great! but that is not the #1 goal!

I agree, Mroop. Be constructive or quit posting on this site.

Let's stop and sum up....

The record industry tried to use DMCA rules in Cananda.

The Canadian courts said "No,no,no...You already get paid from a tax on media to compensate you for this type of activity. To allow you to go down this path would mean that you would get paid twice for the same thing.

Record industry promises to get involved in Canadian politics to get new laws granting the double dipping (I don't remember seeing an offer to give up the tax anywhere)

Record industry starts the usual "Sky is falling" campaign.

Record industry releases questionable survey results proclaiming that Canadian citizens want them to squeeze every dollar out of every twelve year old in Canada (sarcasm).

Record industry CLAIMS that millions of files are downloaded destroying sales for a band (that I really never heard of, and wouldn't purchase music from since I don't like the company they keep).

Sounds like the beginnings of the (predictable) lobby campaign for more canadian laws to force people to boldster their bottom line.

I don't think that people should simply take the music without giving something back to the artist....Having said that, I also like the concept of try before you buy. I also do not like any system that compensates long after the artists are gone. Everything has a shelf life. In the case of older works of music, there only real market value is the value it gives more current works by not being available as an alternative.

Think about it for a minute. In any given supermarket, you will find literally dozens of packages of cookies to choose from. They are different sizes, shapes and flavors. They are marketed by different companies, and they have different prices. What would happen to the sales of the Chips Ahoy brand chocolate chip cookies if all other cojjies were removed from the shelf? Over time, would people not develope a taste for only this one cookie? How would our children learn about peanut butter or plain suger cookies? Could they even appreciate these other flavors if they were never allowed to taste them?

This is the only real value of these horded works....And why they keep them locked away with perpetual copyrights and law suits.

Sorry fro the stray, but I really think this is at the root of why they want most of the catalogs they keep. They certainly aren't gaining any income from them since they don't really market them anymore.

Illegal-legal downloads- Only in Canada you say?

Pontificating self righteous lawyer...exit stage right!!

?... illegal to download? didnt the copyright board rule it legal?

why do they pay that cd tariff again?

"Overall, during this period, Universal Music reported 2.8 million attempts to illegally download The Tragically Hip's recordings. During the same period fewer than 1,000 copies were purchased legally online. "

what a crock.. let me guess.. the only sales figures were from itunes.ca store?

how about we check the amazon figures, shall we?

how about physical sales?

anyone.. anyone?

""most of these artists don't realize it's a public backlash against the industry they support."

That's a justification, an excuse. Downloaders do it because they can, not because they are on some sort of moral crusade. LOL"

actually, i recently lost a song by clear vision..

im pretty sure they are under an riaa label.

therefore i refuse to buy the album until they stop being moronic.

it isnt the legal action i object to as much as their utter stupidity and disregard for the foundations of capitalism.

"eople who download music have friends playing music in clubs in their hometowns and those people are never going to get record deals because record companies won't have sold enough records to support a new artist"

i refer you to the case of john mayer...
this guy was a veritable nobody.
the only way to get his music was where he played and on p2p.. and he was a local artist.

now, after becomming popular via p2p, he was played continuously on the radio and became more popular than n*sux...

i rest my case moron man..

"showing that approximately nine out of ten Canadians believe that recording artists and songwriters have a right to copyright protection, and that a significant majority of Canadians believe that it is illegal to upload music files on the Internet"

let me guess.. the sample size was only 10 people, and they were all over 40, and they had been fed rhetoric for years and years.. and are still being fed rhetoric by you, our lovely writer.

THIS GUY PISSES ME OFF TO NO END!

JC123 good comment brother my sentiments exactly... man dont confuse coptright with trademark.. you copright songs but your name has to be trademarked which is a little more exspesive. I think around 500 dollars or so.. man hit me up on the DMusic.. do you have any songs up yet..

also FUCK'EM ALL

i dont know what i like better "coptright" or "copright"

Emeraude, we may make fun of hip-hop, rap and all, but I must say that we'll use that just as much as we'll use (quite heavily) rock n' roll, death metal, or anything else the four of us can think will sound good with on a set of drums, a bass guitar, and two lead guitars.

ronnie71, Most likely getting the website together and all thru Dmusic as soon as I hit stateside. We should be organized by either November or December. But no songs. We gotta all get settled in the same area. Currently, the leader's in one place (Las Vegas area) with the rest of the band (me included) overseas in Japan. When we get down to the nitty gritty of living in the same house or whatnot, health insurance, and upkeep done, we're gonna get to making the songs. Hopefully people will like it.

JC123...don't forget...I plan on gettin' a keyboard sometime in the near future...so I'll prolly be playin' keyboard as well... keyboards can hit certain things that other instruments can't...

Meet remnantzero...
the second guitarist of our band. But believe me, when you all hear our name, you WILL remember it.
and remnant thanks for coming. See ya at work Friday.

When are these artists going to realize music is a free form of self expression. That article was blatently biased against downloaders. It wouldn't be harmful to canadian artists if they were paid their fair share in the first place.

mroop--

ok better late than never right?

A point that most capitolists can't get thru their head is exposure. Sometimes you have to give a little away to get a return. Not everybody who shares music online is a theif. Sometimes people buy music they like after they have downloaded it for free. Sometimes people don't buy it. It's a cold hard fact of business (any business) that you are going to incur losses from operating. Have you ever taken a free sample from the deli at the supermarket and not bought the product? Even if you liked it? That's called promotion - not theft. Sometimes it pays off and sometimes it doesn't. Have you ever given a free consultation to gain a client? Did those people always accept and pay for your services?

The problem starts and ends with corporate greed. A fair deal, a fair price, a fair compensation package and we aren't having this conversation but there is nothing fair about the way the labels have been doing business and now they want to lace the blame on p2p. That's bullshit. Every independent study will tell you just what I've said, p2p doesn't really have that much of an effect on sales.

Sure Elton John had Bernie Taupin. Three Dog Night had Russ Ballard. Lot's of others have had Diane Warren. Big names and yes they have been compensated by royalties paid from record sales. Have they been well compensated? No. More importantly, do you think Russ Ballard has lost any revenue to filesharing. Doubtful. So how much have the people who do these side jobs lost to filesharing? 10%? 20%? more? How much do you think they have gained from the publicity? (gee, madonna's record sales skyrocketed after her little "what the fuck do you think you're doing" bit) How about this? How much do you think those people have lost from being cheated out of their money by the riaa? Ever hear of Gloria Estefan? yeah well the riaa just "forgot" to make their payments to her and a bunch of others but the really bad part is that the payments weren't squat to begin with. Now the labels want us to think that filesharing is what's cheating these people out of their living. I think that's bullshit. Filesharing may have an impact but they're being fucked first and hardest by the labels themselves. Don't blame me for that.

captdunsel, you've hit the nail on the head again. It is promotion, even the moron from Universal labelled this song as a "teaser". It makes sense to give it away to promote the album which isn't out yet. Even our little discussion here has made many of you aware of band that hasn't made a dent outside of Canada. 99 cents is way to expensive a price to pay for a "teaser". Would you pay the grocery lady a buck to taste a new cookie? No way!!! They're wasting a golden opportunity (again) to promote this band ......or are they?

When my CD comes out at the end of this month...I've already told people to copy as much as they please..spread it around.

I actually released a demo of the songs that I recorded at home ..and it has been spread around like crazy already. People are asking me left right and center when the real thing will be released. I have a lot of people already interested in buying it....and i believe letting people pass the demo arou8nd as much as possible has help it happen.

I can't wait to have you guys listen to stuff...I write straight forward edgey rock.

www.jodemusic.com

for the demos...the site is still in update mode and it uses flash.

I really don't understand the recording industry's lack of understanding on how song swapping can actually help their sales. If it weren't for being able to freely download a tune...some of the new bands out there I would have never heard...cuz i don't watch any of the music channels cuz they all seem to favor hip hop and pop...and nothing else.

they do understand it but they dont control it...