Steve writes: The actual CD costs less than your quoted $2 to make when made in large quantities. When you start talking about several thousand copies, you begin to talk about marginal costs of quarters and dimes. And the artist’s portion? Often it sits around 50 cents per CD. Often less. So where is the rest of the cost of a $20 CD going? profit, shipping, advertising, profit, advertising, and (according to the RIAA) paying for the 90% of bands that are not profitable.

It should cost roughly the same amount to produce, print, package, label, and ship a classical CD as it does for a pop CD. However, I can buy some classical CD’s (which may not sell many, and so are working with unfavorable economies of scale - higher production costs, low marginal costs) at the corner store for $4, but the HMV Top 20 (which are all working with favorable economies of scale) cost $20. You tell me what the difference is?

Brad agrees. I was just going to say that. Hmm….

The same is true for books (though paper and ink prices are outside my scope of knowledge) DVDs (not considering production costs for video far exceed that of the average CD, yet for some reason the prices are very similar) and software (but then those of us who humble to GNU free software would wonder what the point of costly software is - even if we do know and benefit from those swimming in the industry)…

I think the idea here is that of content versus value: who is setting the value of the content that we consume and assimilate? There a natural market for art, literature, and media outside the realm of the Internet - this market is based on such things as production, distribution, retail, availability, and quality. Online, however, most of these factors are non-existent, the production, distribution, and availability controlled by vastly more expandable and adaptable personal means. Of course the industries that have been born from these factors and until recently have had exclusive control over them are not going to like that they are suddenly losing control of their business models. But who are we protecting here? Are we protecting artists - of who only a handful are ever found “worthy” of signing with a “professional” distributor - or the consumers who are suddenly benefiting from an open market where content can be assimilated beyond the context of what a those formerly in control think is worthy of our consuption?

If we are told what to think in politics, we call it a dictatorship: if we are told what to think in culture, it is called business.