Slashdot Mirror
iTunes Indie Meeting Notes
BWJones writes "The CD baby! site contains notes taken from the indie music meeting recently held at Apple. Interesting statistics revealed were that there are about 500k songs/week being downloaded from the iTunes Music store and that 45% of songs are being purchased as albums. Other interesting items of note are that Apple is treating everyone as equvalents in that all labels receive equal treatment with the same deal, the same agreements and you work with the same team of people. What's more is that Apple cuts a check EVERY MONTH which is huge for the smaller labels." Wired has another story about iTunes which notes that what Jobs taketh away, the community is bringing back.
I don't know which was faster, the information about the iTunes store on the CDBaby site being pulled or the obligatory post about how slow it is to copy files on an 8600/300.
Here
Perhaps the record labels had a problem with the streaming, and so Apple pulled it - expecting that someone would just hack their code to bring it back.
What with all the fuss about internet radio and royalty fees, it's not too far fetched that the record companies didn't like people legitimately streaming the songs they had legitimately purchased.
IIRC, Tivo & others have similar hidden features that the masses are unaware of that would probably annoy the TV companies if it were publicised.
I saw a similar story yesterday on a popular community-driven geek news website.
You should check it out sometime!
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
All the details have been pulled and the following remark inserted:
"And yes, sorry, there used to be more details here. I didn't realize yesterday's presentation was supposed to be confidential. When I found out, I pulled the details. Honest mistake."
Religion and science are both 90% crap..but that doesn't negate the other 10%.
I think that Apple's setting itself up as an honest broker of web services in order to try to stay out of Apple Record's crosshairs. If Apple starts preferring one store above another, one label above another, it can be more realistically be claimed to be in the business and thus afoul of its previous corporate commitments. If what they're doing is just providing a deal for the labels to have their content distributed on Apple's web services platform, it's much more arguable that they're in the music business at all.
They say that 45% of the songs are purchased as albums as if itâ(TM)s a great accomplishment, but doesnâ(TM)t that mean that very few transactions are actually albums? For example, if there were about 10 songs per CD, then doesnâ(TM)t that mean that about 5% of all transactions are for an album. Or, in other words, only one out of every 20 purchases is for an album? Personally, I donâ(TM)t find this surprising, but I donâ(TM)t think that itâ(TM)s anything to be too excited over.
As always, good old MacSurfer toi the rescue with a link to the Gnutella News story.
Lots of interesting details; it looks like Apple is being fair and genuinely trying to help out independent artists as much as possible.
While the CD Baby page has not been taken down, its been neutered - all relevant info has been removed and I think its obvious why.
Apple only gets about 6-12 months to have their innovations be innovations before someone else copies them.. putting out the info now, instead of in the 90ish days when the details will all be public, only gives MS and Real a head-start on their idea copying.
I'm perfectly willing to wait and see.... tho other sources have already noted that Apple has mentioned a iTMS Compression tool to allow Indie's the ability to compress their own music on their own machines to make their music ready for sale on the iTMS.
and if that's true.. that kicks fscking ass.
Go Apple, you guys r0x0r.(note: i'm not bashing their copying of Apple's ideas, i'm only stating fact)
guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
One interesting note I remember from reading it: No independant artists. You have to come in through one of the independant labels. Apple pays the label. The label pays you.
Boom Shanka
I got an invitation to go to Apple's office for a presentation/meeting today (June 5, 2003) about how to get independent artists into the iTunes Music Store. There were about 150 people there, representatives from the best independent record labels and music services, in this invitation-only conference room. Steve Jobs came out and started a two and a half hour presentation/seminar/Q&A about iTunes and the benefits of independent labels making their music available there. I type fast and had my laptop, so I wrote down all the major points of their presentation as they went.
NOTE: I've skipped the super-basic introduction to iTunes and what it does, because that can be found so many other places. This is the stuff that I felt was most important to musicians:
The basics
* The basics of iTunes Music Store are covered in many places, so if you haven't used iTunes Music store yet, read these links first:
* Apple's iTunes Music Store website.
* Great video showing the service.
* NOTE: iTunes is not a website! It can only be accessed from the iTunes software run on Mac OS X (now) and Windows (by the end of the year.)
* I highly suggest trying it for yourself. If you don't have a Mac, use a friend's. Enter your credit card info and actually buy a song. Tell it to store your info for future purchases. Buy a few more songs with the one-click system. I'm serious. You should try it yourself to really experience how amazingly cool it is.
* They're using a DRM called Fairplay to make sure you can't put these songs on the internet and have them play on another player.
Current Stats:
* There are 6-7 million copies of iTunes in use.
* 3.5 million songs sold so far. Selling about 500,000 songs a week now.
* More than 75% of songs have sold at least once. There is a wide breadth in purchasing. This is not only fueled by hits.
* 45% of all songs have been bought as an album. In other words: don't worry about the death of the album format. 45% of people prefer to buy as an album anyway, even though they always have the option to only buy per-song.
* 90% of sales are 1-click downloads. (1-click is where customer has credit card stored on file, so that as soon as they click a song title, it starts downloading and their credit card is automatically charged.)
* 10 previews (free 30 second listen) for every purchase. Meaning: 10 listens per buy.
Price of music on iTunes
* Songs must be 99 cents each.
* Full albums are recommended to be $9.99 or lower.
* Album price must be less than or equal to the sum of their tracks. So if you have a 5-song album, it can't be more than $4.95 to buy the full-length album.
* Apple strongly recommends going even lower than $9.99. They'd like to see that price drop to make the full-album purchase even more desirable.
* Only exception: if a song is over 7 minutes long, they won't offer it as a separate download. It will be available as part of the album only.
* There is no cost to put your music on iTunes.
* There will be no up-front advance from Apple.
* Details on the wholesale price to the label will be mailed to us, later.
Sales report to SoundScan
* Apple is reporting all iTunes sales to SoundScan!
* SoundScan measures per-song not per-album.
* So if someone buys your whole album, each track on the album is reported as a song sale.
* SoundScan requested to do it that way. It was their idea, not Apple's.
About positioning and getting attention on iTunes
* Apple has hired an editorial staff with backgrounds in music to decide what gets featured.
* Editorial team makes decisions every day as to what goes where.
* Big labels don't get preferential treatment.
* "We pick music we like, and we think everyone else is going to like."
* "We've had a lot of people offer money", but A
shame on us / for all we have done / and all we ever were / just zeroes and ones
Cd Baby reports on itunes meeting re: indy music.
Posted by leflaw on June 6, 2003 at 7:44 AM EDT
Apple iTunes + independent music
I got an invitation to go to Apple's office for a presentation/meeting today (June 5, 2003) about how to get independent artists into the iTunes Music Store. There were about 150 people there, representatives from the best independent record labels and music services, in this invitation-only conference room. Steve Jobs came out and started a two and a half hour presentation/seminar/Q&A about iTunes and the benefits of independent labels making their music available there. I type fast and had my laptop, so I wrote down all the major points of their presentation as they went.
NOTE: I've skipped the super-basic introduction to iTunes and what it does, because that can be found so many other places. This is the stuff that I felt was most important to musicians:
The basics
* The basics of iTunes Music Store are covered in many places, so if you haven't used iTunes Music store yet, read these links first:
* Apple's iTunes Music Store website.
* Great video showing the service.
* NOTE: iTunes is not a website! It can only be accessed from the iTunes software run on Mac OS X (now) and Windows (by the end of the year.)
* I highly suggest trying it for yourself. If you don't have a Mac, use a friend's. Enter your credit card info and actually buy a song. Tell it to store your info for future purchases. Buy a few more songs with the one-click system. I'm serious. You should try it yourself to really experience how amazingly cool it is.
* They're using a DRM called Fairplay to make sure you can't put these songs on the internet and have them play on another player.
Current Stats:
* There are 6-7 million copies of iTunes in use.
* 3.5 million songs sold so far. Selling about 500,000 songs a week now.
* More than 75% of songs have sold at least once. There is a wide breadth in purchasing. This is not only fueled by hits.
* 45% of all songs have been bought as an album. In other words: don't worry about the death of the album format. 45% of people prefer to buy as an album anyway, even though they always have the option to only buy per-song.
* 90% of sales are 1-click downloads. (1-click is where customer has credit card stored on file, so that as soon as they click a song title, it starts downloading and their credit card is automatically charged.)
* 10 previews (free 30 second listen) for every purchase. Meaning: 10 listens per buy.
Price of music on iTunes
* Songs must be 99 cents each.
* Full albums are recommended to be $9.99 or lower.
* Album price must be less than or equal to the sum of their tracks. So if you have a 5-song album, it can't be more than $4.95 to buy the full-length album.
* Apple strongly recommends going even lower than $9.99. They'd like to see that price drop to make the full-album purchase even more desirable.
* Only exception: if a song is over 7 minutes long, they won't offer it as a separate download. It will be available as part of the album only.
* There is no cost to put your music on iTunes.
* There will be no up-front advance from Apple.
* Details on the wholesale price to the label will be mailed to us, later.
Sales report to SoundScan
* Apple is reporting all iTunes sales to SoundScan!
* SoundScan measures per-song not per-album.
* So if someone buys your whole album, each track on the album is reported as a song sale.
* SoundScan requested to do it that way. It was their idea, not Apple's.
About positioning and getting attention on iTunes
* Apple has hired an editorial staff with backgrounds in music to decide what gets featured.
* Editorial team makes decisions every day as to what goes where.
* Big labels don't get preferential treatment.
* "We pick music we like, and we think everyone else is going to like."
* "We've had a lot of people offer money", but Apple refuses money, and has no plan to ev
Man, I hope CD Baby works out a licensing deal where CD's from CD Baby's catalog are also sold on iTMS. I plan on selling an album through them this summer and I would love for it to be available in iTunes as well.
(a little OT)
Thanks to companies like Apple, the smaller labels will really reap the benefits of getting their music out there without heavy tampering to 'prevent' piracy.
I work for a music publication, and it's interesting to see which companies ignore the 'threat' of piracy, and which ones try to fight it.
For example, the new Cradle of Filth arrived with a hand-signed number on the CD, and a b/w CD case with a skull and cross bones on it, warning me (the music critic) that "this disc is watermark protected" whatever that means.
Meanwhile, the new Type O Negative arrived with a 10 second commericial attached (i.e. spliced into) each song ("Your listening to the new Type O Negative, in stores next month"). This CD will NOT get press in our publication, since it's hard to get into a CD when every 3-4 minutes some recorded message comes on; nice job, record executives. Way to prevent piracy!
One of the things I've been wondering is, if an indie label wants to make their own songs available without DRM, will Apple let them do so on the iTunes Music Store, or is DRM absolutely required? What if the band wants to sell unrestricted AAC files? What about MP3?
Of course I expect most of them to want the DRM, but some may not.
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
What is it with people wanting to make a good thing unavailable? The streaming capability of iTunes seemed pretty sweet to me. But, of course, some jackasses had to figure out the way to use that capability to further steal music. Why? What the fuck is your problem? Are you a kleptomaniac? An anarchist? You just hate other people and don't want them to enjoy things? You're not cool. You're a retard. You are the reason that good things get taken away. Dude, cut it the fuck out. You're no different than the jackass that first took a hair dryer into a shower.
Go ahead, flame away. Mod me down. I have the karma to burn.
-
According to a post in the MacRumors forums from CDBaby the details were pulled and here's why:
--------------
It wasn't wrath or lawyers that asked me to pull it. It was a friend of mine that works there.
I sincerely didn't know yesterday's presentation was supposed to be confidential. In fact I thought it was like an indie-music press conference.
Nobody's mad, though. Honest mistake.
Sorry guys!
--
Derek Sivers, CD Baby
http://www.cdbaby.com
--------------
But.... here it is anyhow...
I got an invitation to go to Apple's office for a presentation/meeting today (June 5, 2003) about how to get independent artists into the iTunes Music Store. There were about 150 people there, representatives from the best independent record labels and music services, in this invitation-only conference room. Steve Jobs came out and started a two and a half hour presentation/seminar/Q&A about iTunes and the benefits of independent labels making their music available there. I type fast and had my laptop, so I wrote down all the major points of their presentation as they went.
NOTE: I've skipped the super-basic introduction to iTunes and what it does, because that can be found so many other places. This is the stuff that I felt was most important to musicians:
The basics
* The basics of iTunes Music Store are covered in many places, so if you haven't used iTunes Music store yet, read these links first:
* Apple's iTunes Music Store website.
* Great video showing the service.
* NOTE: iTunes is not a website! It can only be accessed from the iTunes software run on Mac OS X (now) and Windows (by the end of the year.)
* I highly suggest trying it for yourself. If you don't have a Mac, use a friend's. Enter your credit card info and actually buy a song. Tell it to store your info for future purchases. Buy a few more songs with the one-click system. I'm serious. You should try it yourself to really experience how amazingly cool it is.
* They're using a DRM called Fairplay to make sure you can't put these songs on the internet and have them play on another player.
Current Stats:
* There are 6-7 million copies of iTunes in use.
* 3.5 million songs sold so far. Selling about 500,000 songs a week now.
* More than 75% of songs have sold at least once. There is a wide breadth in purchasing. This is not only fueled by hits.
* 45% of all songs have been bought as an album. In other words: don't worry about the death of the album format. 45% of people prefer to buy as an album anyway, even though they always have the option to only buy per-song.
* 90% of sales are 1-click downloads. (1-click is where customer has credit card stored on file, so that as soon as they click a song title, it starts downloading and their credit card is automatically charged.)
* 10 previews (free 30 second listen) for every purchase. Meaning: 10 listens per buy.
Price of music on iTunes
* Songs must be 99 cents each.
* Full albums are recommended to be $9.99 or lower.
* Album price must be less than or equal to the sum of their tracks. So if you have a 5-song album, it can't be more than $4.95 to buy the full-length album.
* Apple strongly recommends going even lower than $9.99. They'd like to see that price drop to make the full-album purchase even more desirable.
* Only exception: if a song is over 7 minutes long, they won't offer it as a separate download. It will be available as part of the album only.
* There is no cost to put your music on iTunes.
* There will be no up-front advance from Apple.
* Details on the wholesale price to the label will be mailed to us, later.
Sales report to SoundScan
* Apple is reporting all iTunes sales to SoundScan!
* SoundScan measures per-song not per-album.
* So if someone buys your whole album, each track on the album is reported as a song sale.
* SoundScan requested to do it that way. It was their idea
Found this on the macnn boards:
Sorry - I took the details down from that page. It wasn't wrath or lawyers that asked me to pull it. It was a friend of mine that works there. I sincerely didn't know yesterday's presentation was supposed to be confidential. In fact I thought it was like an indie-music press conference. Nobody's mad, though. Honest mistake. Sorry guys!
-- Derek Sivers, CD Baby http://www.cdbaby.com
but the article said that in 20 years Apple has never sold an icon to a desktop in their operating system. This may be true but if you install OS X you will be asked to sign up for an Earthlink account. To me that sounds like advertising sold to Earthlink to place their company ahead of others. Just a thought.
___ Shout Central - Crushes your nuts!
The "What Jobs taketh away.." article refers to Andromeda, a $35 web-based file streaming program.
There is a free GPL'd alternative, ZINA (Zina Is Not Andromeda) as well as other solutions. A search of freshmeat.net for "jukebox" will reveal even more...
W
-------------------
This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Okay I take the bait:
You are running an OS that was written 13 years before you bought your Mac and was updated with more and more features, meaning in many cases unoptimized bloat. I am guessing you are running MacOS 9, and this does not have many of the low-level features of a modern OS. The multi-tasking used by the OS is cooperative, so if one process hogs the CPU no other app gets a chance. Other things to take into account is that the OS has virtual memory (the OS doesn't differentiate between what is real and what isn't, when allocating memory) and not swap space, so this can also affect performance if you are trying to do a lot at once.
Windows NT on the other hand had a lot of new code and was essentially a new OS and was written with many of the modern features you would expect from an OS. I am not so sure Windows 95/98 would be performing as well on this machine. One thing you don't say is how much memory you have on that PC, since memory make a LOT of differnce.
MacOS X is the Apple's new OS and has plenty of modern facilities, which should make it fly. The problem is the eye candy and all the other GUI stuff which adds an extra load to the CPU. The OS is improving and is getting faster. In theory if MacOS X had the same GUI as MacOS 9 (in other words one which requires less processing), I am sure that you find it running fast ion the 8600.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
It's my prediction that they'll start seeing album sales drop rapidly as people finish "switching" their music collection to the new format. Once you've got all your old vinyl in AAC, you'll probably not want to risk the $10 on a new, untested album.
DataSquid.net, a little about me.
It's truely amazing how Apple has managed to hit the nail on the head while the RIAA keeps swinging away futily. The RIAA keeps trying the closed fist approach to stoping mp3 piracy. Shut down as many services as possible. Sue everyone. Badmouth music fans. Unfortunately, any scholar of the internet can tell you that the more somebody tries to force out a popular service, the more the community will fight back with new sites, programs, hacks, etc.
So Apple has come along with the open hand approach. They aren't insulting the music fans. They aren't insulting the technologically advanced community. They're co-existing. Download what you want. Hell, burn it if you want. Get the entire CD cheaper than it will cost you at any store. You can still love your music, download what you want, keep it, and support the musicians. And hell, now they're even saying they aren't playing favorites. IF you're telling me that the RIAA aligned groups get the same cashflow program as small indie labels, then I'm buying.
We've been waiting awhile for a new "music delivery model" that pundits have been pushing for. I'm not saying Apple has the whole thing nailed down. But they're soooo close. They figured out the key of existing without being a slap in the face to the people they want to use their service. And now the RIAA has their tail tucked between their legs, trying to figure out why a bunch of hippies at Apple figured out something their teams of lawyers and PR consultants couldn't: Don't insult your customer.
It's not stupid. It's advanced.
Why is this so hard to believe?
.99 cents a month on a song. Take into account that occaisionally a record gets bought which would decrease the 1 in 6 number even further.
Assume Apple has 3 million OS X computers with iTunes installed. I'm guessing that number is larger, but lets go with that.
They are averaging 500k songs a month. That means 1 in 6 users is willing to spend
The reason the iTMS is doing so well is that it's very easy to get into, and very non-binding. You don't need a monthly contract, there's almost no barrier to entry, you just pick up a $.99 song and you're done, with no hassle. You come back, or you don't, but because your information is all ready to go, and the store is built into your player, it is very easy....tempting even, to return and get another song for just $.99 later on.
Also, this caters to impulse buying big time. If I hear a song that's good on my way home from work, I can fight traffic and get to the CD store and plop down $12-$15, or I can wait til I get home, get the song I liked, and preview the other songs to make sure it's worthwhile.
Honestly, maybe its hard to believe how easy it is to get lured in until you've actually used the service and seen how easy it is to use, but 1 in 6 buying a song a month seems very believable to me, and I bet it goes up once the selection gets a little bit deeper.
-SC
I wonder how the math works for the music industry. Are they afraid that they're going to start losing money from individual songs sold direct at .99 each, or would they prefer to sell a full album at 9.99 each, full of filler that most people don't want? It could be a whole new market for them, or at least restoring the old market that was lost when people stopped buying 45 RPMs. There never was a successor to that format that caught on, although clearly there is a demand for being able to purchase the 'hit singles'.
Apple has somewhere around 15 million unbelievably loyal customers in the United States. Of these, about five million have seen the light and upgraded to OS X. Of these, probably three million are actually using iTunes 4. Of those, maybe half (1.5 million) are actually buying from the iTMS.
1.5 million highly intelligent, mostly creative people who love things like music and movies and art.
I don't find it at all surprising that 1.5 million people can buy a three million songs a month. That's only two songs ($2) per customer per month average.
In particular, if you look beyond the "rock" genre and "current" stuff, you will find a wealth of really outstanding older material (not as much as one might wish for, but a HELL of a lot more than any record store has!).
For example, I've been using the iTMS to cherry-pick my own "compilations" of the best of Ella Fitzgerald, Frank Sinatra, Lena Horne, Duke Ellington and others. I'm never going to buy the "greatest hits" because they never have all the songs I want, nor I am prepared to spend $12-15/cd on "old" music like this. But for around $12 I can grab 12 of what *I* think are each artists' best efforts and make my own unique compilation.
(PS to audiophiles: Fuck off! It sounds great!)
It's well worth the money to me, and allows me to "catch up" on great artists that are hard to find/don't need every little thing/out of print etc.
"Check" (the noun) in this instance is an incorrect spelling of the word that has become so ubiquitous it is now considered an alternate spelling. For Americans, it is becoming the only recognized correct spelling.
"Seems to suggest that "check" is the correct modern spelling and that people writing "cheque" are just weird, or "chiefly British"
Case in point (your link to Merriam-Webster is an American dictionary). Along with the weird "cheifly British" folk you can also include Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders, Indians, South Africans, etc... almost the entire English-speaking world outside the US.
Actually, I have a number of albums (yes, vinyl) that I haven't replaced with the CD version. When iTMS was up, those were the first I looked for. I've taken "ripped" some of the vinyl to mp3 or ogg but considering what my time is worth iTMS is much cheaper.
Most of my vinyl is available as CD but now I doubt that I'll ever buy it as that. I can buy the AAC's from iTMS and then burn a CD from my playlist (which I have done). The sound -- while admittedly not CD quality -- is better than my ears are and I have yet to find any sonic imperfections. And, it's better than the quality of my albums no matter what. (Yes, I took very good care of my albums but you pick up hiss and scratches no matter how careful you are!)
I've also purchased new music that I have neither the CD or album for. It was a quick, simple, and inexpensive way to get the music and I got to sample it first. I doubt I'll buy many more pre-recorded CDs now that I have this option.
My point is, yes it is an economical solution for replacing pre-owned music in some formats. For people like me, it's an easy way to "switch" my music collection to a digital format.
"There is no spoon." - Neo
"Spoooon!" - The Tick
I'm trying to figure out what the big deal is.
Apple makes a freely available "QuickTime Streaming Server". Download it, install it. And stream your music through it. Its not that hard. Anyone with quicktime can then connect and listen to the music stream. Its not like apple really "forced fed anyone shit."
They just made it slightly harder for the RIAA to hold them accountable.
The music companies and Microsoft are pretty much unwilling to let go of DRM. Microsoft builds DRM they way they do because that's what music companies thin they want. And then the music companies use that DRM because it's there.
And meanwhile Apple cleans up on all of the online music business because they are the only ones trying to build something the customer will want to use instead of the music companies. So even though another company could come along and undercut Apple (like RealMedia is trying to do) they always present some aspect to their system that screws things up and makes the service unappealing to consumers.
Also, the secret spice in Apple's store is that it's not web based and uses a custom interface. So you get not only easy searching and purchasing, but management of your songs all at once. Kind of the way IE came into being as the dominant web browser, it was just there with the OS... and the player you use for music has more music waiting to be bought and enjoyed right there.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
From the notes:
"Rights are a 3 year term. For iTunes only, of course. This is totally non-exclusive."
Apple apparently asks that you license them to sell your song for 3 year stints, but non-exclusivity means you can also sell your music wherever and however else you want.
One of the things that MS has going against it is that such deals are predicated on trust. The labels have to trust the technology vendor not going to screw them. Putting aside the jihad of whether or not it is deserved, MS has a well established reputation for shady and illegal business practices. Why would you ever do business with a company like that if you don't have to?
There's a great value added benefit to dealing with a technology company that is headed by an entertainment company CEO (Steve Jobs, of course, runs his own movie studio called Pixar). As long as Steve continues in his post, Apple will continue to be able to extract a few pennies extra in profit versus any deal MS will be able to make.
Exactly the point. If us lowly mac users everybody shits on can generate this much talk (and this much real profit for record labels), just think what'll happen when iTunes for PC hits the market.
I'd also love to see iTunes on setup top boxes. God, the thought of a big white multimedia box with a few hundred gigs of space and a high def display, digital output and a friendly engraved apple gets me all excited about my sound system again.
Hey freaks: now you're ju
Hmm, 6-7 million iTunes 4 users and you don't know how they could sell 500,000 $0.99 songs per week? That doesn't seem that unreasonable to me -- I don't buy much music (maybe 5 CD's per year), but I've already purchased 94 songs from iTunes, as of today (maybe 40% of those were full album purchases).
To me, iTunes is like the 7-11 -- CONVENIENT. I have two sons (aged 2 and 4) and a full-time job, so I don't often have time to go wandering around a store browsing for music usually not able to find what I want. I can count half a dozen purchases (maybe half of all the 94 songs) since I started buying music from iTunes that I never would've bought if I didn't have access to iTunes -- I'm stuck at home with the sick kids because my wife has to work, I'm watching a music awards show or music video at 8pm on a weeknight, I see during lunch at work that a hot new artist just released a new album I can get without leaving work, and on and on and on...
I think this is just a revolution of convenience that the music industry needed very badly. Or maybe this is just proof that the Mac market IS actually viable -- you know some people will just refuse to like or accept THAT!
Actually, a quote earlier indicated that Apple didn't want to deal with 200 lawyers. That, as much as anything, explains why they are channeling things through labels and partners.
It also mean fewer checks that need to be cut every month, fewer reports to be generated, etc.
Obviously, if they wanted to deal with CD Baby (who does all the essential services of a label, but will work for anyone for $35 plus $4/album), they aren't trying to shut people out.
As for the paradox, the quote from the article says that you can't insist that your album be sold album-only. However, I assume that in the case of an album with over-7-minute songs only, it would be sold as album-only.
This is a good thing, though, when you think about it... We're all pissed at the big labels for their game of one or two singles and tons of filler and then insisting we buy the whole album. Steve stepped up and said no, you can not make an album to be sold album-only (although, you could simply make all the songs really long... but the labels aren't going to do that - they still want radio airplay, which means shorter songs). The no-album-only sales simply prevents 'filler' albums.
-T
This is insightful?! Ok, so he was right up to the "too expensive part". But those of you who think that Apple's are too expensive, should go check out the price of iBooks. Starting at $999 for a loaded packge including DVD/CD Burner combo, firewire, a *really* nice keyboard, OSX, a high powered 3D card, and of course iTunes itself.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
The really cool, really good thing Derek is doing is that he is providing an early path for everyone to get their music onto iTunes.
I totally understand Apple's position on this. They don't want to get swamped by tens of thousands of indie labels seeking individual contracts for their music. A lot of artists these days are self-publishing, and Apple doesn't have the ability to deal with each of them individually.
The big question in my mind is how CD Baby is going to be able to afford to submit their artists' materials to iTunes. Will they charge an up-front setup fee? Will they snag a commission on each song sold? It all remains to be seen.
My guess is that they'll charge a few bucks to encode your songs into the iTunes format and submit them, and then take $0.05 to $0.10 per song sold to help with processing checks and such.
I guess we'll all just have to wait a few months for this all to get sorted out.
Most of the music you can buy from iTMS is already on the P2P networks. Given the choice between some Spyware-laden P2P software trying to hit 20 different hosts until one lets me download, then finding the song mangled or cut short, all the while having the RIAA breathing down my neck, and simply paying 99 cents for a high-quality copy, I'll gladly pay the 99 cents.