Trent Reznor Favors An ISP 'Tax On Music'

In a recent interview with C|Net, Trent Reznor says he likes the idea of an ISP tax to cover music downloading off the internet. What do you think? Is he onto something or just on something?

Reznor: For me, I choose the battles I can fight. In my mind, I think if there was an ISP tax of some sort, we can say to the consumer, "All music is now available and able to be downloaded and put in your car and put in your iPod and put up you're a** if you want, and it's $5 on your cable bill or ISP bill."

Click to expand...

if 5 bucks a month would really cover it...

then i'd say go for it...

but i really don't think the RI would be happy with that

i don't think they'll ever be happy

but then you get into the fight of how it will be distributed to artists (if at all) and also people that don't download music are going to put up a stink about it and bitch and moan.

They already have formulas in place that determine how much royalties go to each person.

That would kick ass. Hell I would pay $20 if it meant all media.

It's definitely a much more reasonable approach to actually dealing with the issue. What's happened to the music industry actually makes me sad. Where i grew up, media play was the place you got your music. Probably a quarter to half the store was shelves of CD's. All of a sudden it started happening every month a couple shelves would disappear. Music section kept shrinking. Eventually the store closed up. Not only have the chain stores shrunk the CD section to only a couple rows, but mom and pop music stores have virtually become non-existent. Times have definitely changed. The problem is that the record industry has been too slow to react. This would definitely be a modern approach.

goodcooper said:

if 5 bucks a month would really cover it...

then i'd say go for it...

but i really don't think the RI would be happy with that

i don't think they'll ever be happy

Click to expand...

Realistically, as unfair as it is to the artists, It's 5 bucks more than they are getting now.

Rampage1329 said:

They already have formulas in place that determine how much royalties go to each person.

Click to expand...

great, that makes this idea even more asinine, i pay $5 a month to ISP to download as many NIN songs i want, NIN and only NIN, yet that $5 doesn't go directly to NIN (and people related to getting those NIN songs to me, producers and such), it gets put into a formula that gives a couple pennies to billy ray cyrus and vitamin C? where do i sign up.

I don't care what taxes are made, I'm here to screw the RIAA.

uhh wtf the EFF has been pushing this for years

pigpen said:

Realistically, as unfair as it is to the artists, It's 5 bucks more than they are getting now.

Click to expand...

not really... what abotu all those people who buy music on itunes store? think they'll still do it if this goes through?


naaa

Its would be a bullshit tax, i already own a lot of the music i would listen to, a lot of the new junk doesnt even interest me that much and with the exception of 3 or 4 tracks i havent paid for any music in the last 3 years.

So now i would also have to pay $5 a month on top of my ISP bill, what a crock. You can see what would happen......5$, then it raises every year with inflation and crap and in a few years your paying 20$ a month to listen to crap you probably already own.

Then i wonder how many other organisations would jump on the bandwagon? How about an extra $5 tax on my ISP to the movie industry and an extra $5 tax to the TV companies as well, after all there stuff is getting traded online as well.

cerebrex said:

I don't care what taxes are made, I'm here to screw the RIAA.

Click to expand...

QFT

really, I have played in bands, i have been on cds. I make more money doing shows or selling shirts than i ever made through cd royalties (unless you count the ones we sold directly at shows).

when it comes to music, i get my music however i want, i never pay full price, opting for used if i want the original disc...and other means if I do not care or I cannot find it anywhere (obscure metal is a pain, There is stuff that i can't even find on amazon).

That being said i would rather walk into a show and hand the band 10 bucks than get my music from a retailer or from Itunes

bigted said:

great, that makes this idea even more asinine, i pay $5 a month to ISP to download as many NIN songs i want, NIN and only NIN, yet that $5 doesn't go directly to NIN (and people related to getting those NIN songs to me, producers and such), it gets put into a formula that gives a couple pennies to billy ray cyrus and vitamin C? where do i sign up.

Click to expand...

I mean they use Statistical Sampling to already determine it. As far as I know, the royalties are all payed to their Union into a general accoutn and then they use sampling from radio, tv, record sales to divy upthe profit. I don't really have a problem with it, and apparently they don't either since they agreed to this method.

Plain stupid. How does putting a tax solve a market problem. Trent needs to get out and more or talk to more people that don't just "yes" Mr. Reznor.

Stick the music kid, thinking ain't your bag.

For that to work would mean a single organization to cover all of it and pass the money back to the people who wrote, preform, sing, whatever in said song. Pretty much the riaa but with even more power. I'm not for this.

Also you have subscription music services that will allow most people to download almost anything they want. I mean isn't the zune one like 15 bucks a month? I know a few companies do it. Whats the difference other then the isp would be collecting the fee? The ISP wouldn't have to host it themselfs?

Anyway another issue is that people just refuse to pay for shit. I'm shocked how many machines I've seen over the years with hacked versions of winzip on them or where someone copies a 10 dollar game for their friends. They just don't care. Hell MS could sell windows and office for 20 bucks together. You'd still have millions of pirate copies. The music scene is the same way.

I'm interested!

If i KNEW and i mean IF I KNEW that MY MONEY was going STRAIGHT to the ARTIST and not the fucking cock loving RIAA pockets... Then i have no problem with a tax for music downloaded.

Toytown said:

Then i wonder how many other organisations would jump on the bandwagon? How about an extra $5 tax on my ISP to the movie industry and an extra $5 tax to the TV companies as well, after all there stuff is getting traded online as well.

Click to expand...

You forgot about the industry whose benefit from the tax would eclipse all others, pr0n

Read my Lips----- NO NEW TAXES!!!!!!!! there are enough taxes hidden in things like your cell phone bill to finance every third world country known for the next 100 years. And screw the RIAA, I haven't bought a cd in 3 years and it may be 20 years before I buy another, the bands and artists the "elite music media" force on us suck ass for the most part.

Interesting idea. I'm glad some artist are thinking about working with the monster they cannot stop. The only downside is, for me, is that my service provider already has out the wazzo prices - damn you Time Warner.

No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No

That's letting a PRIVATE COMPANY place a tax on a service. Worst idea ever.

bigted said:

great, that makes this idea even more asinine, i pay $5 a month to ISP to download as many NIN songs i want, NIN and only NIN, yet that $5 doesn't go directly to NIN (and people related to getting those NIN songs to me, producers and such), it gets put into a formula that gives a couple pennies to billy ray cyrus and vitamin C? where do i sign up.

Click to expand...

okay, just because trent reznor agrees with the idea doesn't mean it's completely focused around him or his music, you're being ignorant.

I'm already being taxed to death in all ways.

I do not download legal or illegal music over the internet. Why would I want to pay a freeking tax on something I don't do?

You should pay for what you buy and use.

We already do that with health insurance, and we all know how crappy the United States health insurance is. Take a look at France or Canada, everybody pays, nobody complains, everybody wins.

Trent hasnt made a good albulm in over 10 years whats he talking about charging my cable bill for?

everyone has their own opinions.

I already get raped by my ISP because I live in an area that does not have access to a major provider, the last thing I want is a tax due to freeloaders.

So my deaf friend would get the pleasure of paying a tax to support the music industry? Stupid.

I own all the music I want. I haven't gotten a new song/album in over a year, and when I did I bought direct from the artist at her concert (Loreena McKennit). Why should I pay a new tax?

Am I misunderstanding this?

Really, I don't care if the music industry completely fails and musicians all have to return to real jobs or doing live shows. I sure as hell will be pissed if I find that I get to pay a tax to support a completely superfluous industry.

Morazl said:

We already do that with health insurance, and we all know how crappy the United States health insurance is. Take a look at France or Canada, everybody pays, nobody complains, everybody wins.

Click to expand...

I live in Canada. Despite what people seem to think, we do have a tiered healthcare system. The general population goes to public hospitals, the wealthy go to the US. Even our politicians travel to the US for significant care. Wait times are absurd, and their biggest concern is getting you out the door because they're out of beds.

Besides, the hospitals aren't private companies. They're owned and operated by the government of Canada.

What SHOULD be done with Canadian healthcare is they should allow all the private practice they want, but make no tax breaks of any kind for it. That way those that want to pay for better care not only generate more taxes for Canada (income tax of the employees, etc), but also reduce the load on public healthcare.

That's why he is a musician and nothing else.

Stick to music, Trent, you sound like a moron spouting off about shit like this that you know nothing about (government, economics, etc)

Anyway, back on topic. The music industry bribed enough of our government to put a policy like this in place years ago. CD's, minidisks, mp3 players, are all levied by our corrupt government and given to private corporations. I've paid hundreds of dollars in levies for music I don't even listen to.

We wouldn't need a tax is if we just take out the Middleman (RIAA). The savings from that alone will make every starving artist rich. I want to see a major artist sell his new album via a webpage(etail) he had made for him personally. Finding someone to press and prepare the cd's is not that difficult. Just have it mail order straight from the artist, and I will start buying CD's again.

I don't know. I like it but I don't. Regardless, I think it should be Opt-In. Meaning if you Opt-In to pay the tax, your ISP would allow access to site with the music or something to that end. I know, it's not a real clear solution but it's an idea. Inevitably, there will always be loopholes but what can you do.

What a self-centered, short-sighted, and just plain idiotic comment by Trent. As if the Internet is *only* used for Music Downloading. Ok, lets follow his reasoning, we have an ISP tax to cover the lost revenue of recording artists. What about the Movie studios, don't they need compensation too? Ok, another tax. What about photographers, writers, or anyone else posting anything of intelectual value on the Internet, do they get their own tax too?

I've got an idea for Trent: Make good music, make it available without restrictions for a fair price, then enjoy the fruits of your labor.

That's an idiotic tax. First of all, the number of persons who illegally download music is, statistically speaking, quite small. Second of all, does this mean that iTunes and all those other music download services are going to start giving away music?

Third of all, if they tax this, should there be a "Shoplifting" tax at the store to pay for all the items that people steal?

The fact, plain and simple, is that this is an asinine idea. Music is a on-demand industry, i.e. people only need to pay for it when they want it. I'm willing to pay taxes for roads and such, because I can't even afford to build 5 feet of expressway nevermind the 25 miles I use everyday. I can, however, afford a 99 cent track off of iTunes.

Well I don't think a few albums released under a new, experimental model not selling as much as they thought it would indicates failure.. I think it'll work, but it also has to mature, and it'll be susceptable to economics just like anything else. It might not do too well when the economy is in the process of taking a huge crap.

As far as a new tax. No. Way. That definitely isn't going to fly. Sorry Trent!

WallisHall said:

I do not download legal or illegal music over the internet. Why would I want to pay a freeking tax on something I don't do?

You should pay for what you buy and use.

Click to expand...

Do you ever go to YouTube?

Here's an opinion of someone (me) who has been deeply involved in the industry for the last 15+years and someone very big on consumer rights and privacy:

1) I have five solo releases (I play all instruments), two of which were released on large independent labels (indie does not = not legit; they're "protected" by the RIAA).

2) I've run my own label in the past for almost ten years, though I wasn't involved with the RIAA.

3) Number one and two mean that I've a plethora of experience from both sides of the fence, in terms of releasing music and being involved in all aspects of the industry.

Firstly, I believe it an invasion of privacy if they were to start "filtering packets" to see what sites you're headed to in order to download music. We already have no fucking privacy in this country. Yeah, the "land of the free" my ass.

Second, while I'm a firm believer in, "If you like the music, then go buy the CD to support the artist", both bands and labels alike need to shut the fuck up about all the "piracy" shit and get a grip.

Understand something: the more people download your music, legally or illegally, the more people hear your music, and music is supposed to be about the music, for real artists, anyway.

If you start putting up a fucking fuss about people downloading your shit, whether it's the bands or the labels, all that does is ignite one aspect of the "human condition" in which it is natural to "rebel" against anything someone tells you not to do. Therefore, they're going to do it more and not want to support the band. Get it?

My music is on more fucking torrent sites than I could even count, and you know what? I've still sold CDs. Not easy in the genre of music in which I play, either. For all the years I've played music and the internet being a big thing ever since, I still get "fan mail" and people asking to buy the CDs directly from me and/or the label.

Now, I will mention that the people into my styles of music tend to have a little more depth and respect than your average B. Spears fans et., because those styles of music have no depth or concept. But still, if they shut the fuck up about it, maybe they'd find more people willing to actually pay for the music.

As for ISP's charging extra money "just in case" you download shit, I'll kiss the internet goodbye right then and there. As has been stated, we pay enough in taxes that doesn't even go to what it's supposed to. How do I know? Well, because I worked my ass off since the age of fifteen, so since I was eighteen and legally on the books, I've been working like a horse.

Well, I ended up sick and hurt from a job that involved brain, braun and exposure to chemicals and am now on disability (i.e. Social Security I fucking paid into) and guess what? Social Security pays me in a month what I used to make in a fucking week. Where did all my (and your) taxes go for the truly hard-working folk who really need it?

So, paying even more money than I do for "high-speed cable" (it's really slow as shit) is not acceptable, especially because I do not download music, and them "filtering packets" and having even more assholes watching my browsing habits "in case" I go to download music, is just another sneaky guise for mindless asshats to invade people's privacy.

So, musicians/labels: stop fucking complaining. People will buy your shit if it's good music, and THAT'S what's really sad about the "industry" today: no one writes music from the self, hence music with any substance is hard to find for those of us who aren't just walking fucking fleshbags.

The more you make a stink, the more people will take your shit and not support you, because it's going to happen anyway.

So, ISP's or other institutions: how about we do something about the fact that there's hardly a tax in this world going to the right fucking place in the first place, before we start adding more taxes for bullshit, selfish reasons with things so fucking asinine as music downloading?

I've more than paid my dues in this life, and got fucked in the end when I needed help, because all the taxes I paid over thirty years went to fucking shit. No you want me and everyone else to potentially pay more for internet service because asshole talking monkeys tend to download music instead of buying CDs? Fuck that. If this ends up being the case, I'll go outside and start sending fucking smoke signals in place of email, because I'm not paying for it.

Go... download my music... I condone and support it. If you like it, buy it.

Go... take taxes... but when people really need it some day (like the disabled or elderly) make sure it gets returned/put to use in the right way/places.

Anything other than that, and the music "industry", Government, ISP's, the fucking dog next store... they can all get fucked.

Oh, and this is not a rant, people. It's brutal fucking truth from someone with experience in the music industry and who has been fucked by the concept of taxes. I'm well-versed in dealing with both issues, most unfortunately.

WallisHall said:

I'm already being taxed to death in all ways.

I do not download legal or illegal music over the internet. Why would I want to pay a freeking tax on something I don't do?

You should pay for what you buy and use.

Click to expand...

Ditto.

I don't care to pay for someone else's lack of self control.

Thanks anyway.