It doesn't matter if production prices fall 50 or 80 percent: if revenues are zero, then the musician is still screwed. So you agree that musicians are getting screwed by music labels. CD sales have always been a promotional tool to get fans to go to live shows, not a revenue source for the artist (but it's a huge revenue source for the labels).
Widespread filesharing decimates potential profits because many of those that otherwise would have the album don't. That's the whole point of embracing file sharing as a method for releasing your music, so that people discover your music who otherwise would never have found it. And don't forget, the musicians don't get profits from CD sales anyway!
> It doesn't matter if production prices fall 50 or 80 percent: if revenues are zero, then the musician is still screwed. So you agree that musicians are getting screwed by music labels.
Err, no. I don't see how you make that deduction. I would agree that there have been many cases where musicians haven't gotten the best possible bargain, and there are indeed some particularly egregious cases. Still, there is plenty of law (e.g. undue influence) and precedent in place to protect musicians at least from egregiously unfair contracts.
Widespread filesharing decimates potential profits because many of those that otherwise would have the album don't. That's the whole point of embracing file sharing as a method for releasing your music, so that people discover your music who otherwise would never have found it. And don't forget, the musicians don't get profits from CD sales anyway!