Slashdot Mirror
Myspace to Sell MP3s From Unsigned Bands
soldrinero writes "Yahoo! news is hosting a story about a new competitor to Apple's iTunes Music Store. Nearly all the other iTunes competitors have been strongly controlled by the music industry, shackled in DRM, and giving little back to artists. The new MySpace music store will feature vanilla MP3 downloads at prices set by the individual bands (3 million of them!), all or nearly all of whom are unsigned musicians with no industry affiliation. Is this the example we have all been waiting for of how the Internet will obviate the business model of the recording industry?"
... people won't buy! Unsigned bands have enough trouble getting their music heard when they're GIVING it away!
"The dew has clearly fallen with a particularly sickening thud this morning"
Reminds me of mp3.com which was quite neat back in the day and made a few unknown bands rather rich. I remember reading one success story of some jazz musician that was bringing in about $20000 per month from CD sales on mp3.com. Anything that loosens the grip of the Recording Industry Ass. of America and international equivalent is very welcome. Just dont let the myspace users design their own store areas like the horrific myspace personal pages :)
Warhammer forums
No, it is well known in most advertising circles that word of mouth advertising is the most effective around. Especially, when dealing with the rebels, a real advertising campaign smacks of effort (he tries too hard, whatever !). If you're thinking of anything other than teen-pop (of the Hillary Duff flavour), that's probably half your market. And it does work too, very well.
All in all, myspace is looking for ways to leverage the community network. And IMHO, iTunes has proved that the first requirement for a store is a player :)
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur
Because pretty soon there will be pressure on RIAA bands who are on myspace to start selling their songs! This is definitely the revolution we are talking about where the RIAA record companies go bankrupt. Ironic that it will take a major multi-national corporation to do it!
I guess that means Non-DRM'ed MP3...
Wincopy
No DRM,susre, that's great. But these files are hosted by MySpace...I can see my ipod actually melting in my hand while trying to parse all 97 pieces of malicious code tacked on to the file while it sat on their server.
In case you haven't heard of it, there is http://www.podshow.com/ selling tracks at 99c a throw. There is a huge amount of stuff in there. Some of it is good but someof it does not appeal to me at all!Maybe it is bad, or maybe it's just not my taste.
Or are people here avoiding it because Adam Curry is not suitable for nerds? I like his show anyway.
I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
FTA: "Songs can be sold [...] in non-copyright-protected MP3 digital file format [...]"
This is a perfect horrible example of a 'innocent' slip which conflates DRM with copyright; it cooperates with the corporate worldview that DRM is necessary to protect copyright. I don't know how to get in touch with the author but I would really love to set this kind of thing straight.
RMS may be a freak but I think he's right in that we have to be careful about the language we use; it defines and affects the thought patterns of both speaker and listener.
If you could just get logged into it on a regular basis.
What the slashdot crowd fails to see is that the majority of people out there are NOT aware of issues like DRM, and are NOT anti-RIAA. The RIAA still has a huge impact with stuff such as MTV and Radio, so it doesn't really change the model of how things work that much... it just chips away at it.
Music and Hollywood have the same mode of operation. There are a TON of talented actors out there who never make it to the big screen and never make million dollar salaries. In fact, many of these actors are more talented than the ones who are rich and famous. It's just the fact that the actors who are rich and famous are the ones that are in demand, and therefore can demand 10 million / movie. Much in the same way that Britney Spears could get 100 million for pushing pepsi, when there are thousands of women out there who look just as good, and can sing better than she can.
The problem is society in general. People want to see movies with specific actors. People want to listen to specific musicians, not bands that are just like them.
/^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
On the other hand i could see the Record Industry just sitting and watching to see which band seems to be doing the best and then bum-rush them with a contract for them to sign so the RIAA can cash in (as we know they so love to do) on this fresh artist (that already has a decent fan base). Basicly they are letting Myspace do all the hard work of promoting the band and they will swoop in at the end snag up the band and then squeeze every last penny out of them and us when the band release the studio record through them.
now if myspace really wanted to appeal to artist they should set up a recording studio and allow there artists they support to release records under their label.
it be a win for both seeing how the artist get a cheaper studio to produce in and release under and mysapce makes some extra cash flow....yeah i know it probly won't happen but its just an idea.
I, too, loathe any link that leads me to MySpace.
But I loathe the RIAA more.
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
""Everyone we've spoken to definitely wants an alternative to iTunes and the iPod. MySpace could be that alternative."
This statement sounds really uninformed in its context in the article. There are a lot of alternatives, but most people don't want them. Anybody who has any tech savvy needs to take their head out of their ass when they come up with ideas like this. The reason why people put up with Apple's DRM'ed technology is because its easy to use. Non-tech people can and do use it, and those same people avoid the other options because they are confusing. Now, I understand that selling a DRM-less MP3 will work with the iPod, which is very important to compete, but how will it be delivered to the user? Will it automatically show up in a playlist in a program such as iTunes so that a non-tech person doesn't have to search for the downloaded file and put it where it belongs so he/she can immediately play it after its done? There are a lot of little details that Apple paid attention to that contribute to its success with this industry. Until someone can come up with a total solution that plays as nicely as iTunes and works with the iPod, they will all be dead in the water.
As technical people, this news sounds great, but we are a relatively small population compared to the rest of the world. In order for an idea like this to work on the level of iTunes/iPod, the less-than-savvy need to be addressed.
Sound waves should be free!
Through listening to various podcasts, such as "Insomnia Radio" and NPR's music show and some others, I've actually increased my music purchasing of these indie bands - especially when they were on the iTunes store.
Most of the bands that I hear through indie Podcasts have Myspace pages, and that would make it a *lot* easier to pick up their songs as MP3's - especially if they were decent quality (like 192 or above).
So I'd say that while the amount of music won't be as high as, say, Britney, for some bands it could be a take off point - though the real winner would be Myspace through good old Mr. Longtail.
Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
I actually go on MySpace for a reason. Shocking, isn't it? I enjoy such crappy social networking? Anyway, MOST of the 'artists' on MySpace are actually just uploading songs from their MP3 collection (That they didn't make), so that it can be played on their MySpace profile.
I'm sure the RIAA will love people getting money for filesharing.
Such a service would only ever work with listeners whose musical tastes are still forming, and who would see the net as the authoritative place where new music can be found.
As it turns out, this describes MySpace's audience perfectly, so yes, this could work.
With MySpace's ranking system, they only need to find a few dozen bands with real talent to make it a success. With a population of 300M bands to draw upon, that should be possible.
The record labels will never, ever give up their right to control distribution. It is the only thing they truly own. Any new licensing model will only work with new bands and new fans.
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
I hope people would eventually become aware that you don't need to listen to some MTV established musicians to feel good.
...from 6 years ago. Still trying to figure out that second step looks like.
This is a big step, because it cuts out the Labels entirely. I'd love to see this grow, and I think with the popularity of MySpace, it's a real possibility. I won't buy an DRM encumbered music, because you're really only renting it. There's no guarantee that you'll be able to play that music in the future. For example, if you at any point stop paying your subscription, you won't be able to play that music on any other device, so at that point you'll only own that music for the life of the device.
This isn't the first legal music site that doesn't use DRM, though. eMusic also uses restriction-free MP3. It's a subscription model, rather than pay-as-you-download. They also don't carry most of the popular current bands, so if you're looking for the latest song on pop radio, you won't find it. They do carry lesser known artists, and their classical and jazz sections are actually very broad, including a lot of well known artists.
This is why there is DRM . So if you get ONE copy for your own use , you don't get to make more copies or give it to anyone else to use .
DRM is not "necessary" to protect copyright , but it is it's purpose to do so .
Sure , the current DRM technologies do more harm than good , but in the future everything will be DRMed , and the hardware will enforce it (look at the current HDTV DRM stuff) .
My Starcraft 2 Blog
1. Myspace is BIG, one of the most frequented sites on the internet.
2. Lots of teenagers/young people.
3. Store.
4. Profit.
I was waiting for them to come up with a store for ages now, that is the sensible business decision, the only part that has suprised me is the unsigned bands. Pretty much the way to make the RIAA hurt. All copyright infringement in the world didn't hurt RIAA this much as this simple move!
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
Netflix does the same thing, only they sign unsigned movies that play at Sundance and the like, and give them non-exclusive DVD distribution deals.
The real key? Once on Netflix, they get pushed as a new release over the recommendation mechanism. So, heard of or not, they get exposure and an audience quickly.
MySpace has nothing like that to push unsigned bands, except to offer a sales/download link from all pages using the song. Also, Netflix hand picks each indie film, whereas MySpace is not hand picking indie bands and their songs.
Honestly, I don't see the advantage here from the band's perspective. Selling a Vanilla mp3 is not hard for even the least qualified web tech using any e-commerce storefront. There's no DRM to fool with, so all you have to do is take an order, and offer a random url download or e-mail the MP3 directly to them. But, since its on the honor system, why not just let everyone download all the mp3's, and put up a paypal link as a "Tip Jar".
I8-D
The point of the GP , protected by DRM or NOT, are STILL copyrighted material. Heck, even a simple .txt file is a copyrighted material. It does not matter that it ain't DRM'ed encrypted or whatnot.
And in this , the author of the article should get a smack on the head.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
I know what you're saying, but once it's sold, certain metrics can come into play. Now numbers of sales and downloads can be measured, which will help potential consumers and listeners ascertain what is good/bad/will be popular. When your giving something away, who cares how many are using the product? When it's being sold, these numbers start to take on a new significance.
SEO Copywriter. Just Say ON
One of the things about "DRM" and audio, is that it is very easy to remove. For apple, just burn and audio cd. Ta-da DRM free music. unless you think cds won't be around much longer.... Every other audio format is subject to the "Analog hole".
Video is another story. Harder to remove the DRM, when they won't let you burn to DVD.
Your right about emusic.
Actually, I don't find iTunes easy to use at all. I spent a good two to three minutes trying to figure out how to add a podcast in iTunes. Eventually, I gave up and downloaded Juice. My podcast was downloading in Juice in less than I had spent mucking around with iTunes.
The only people I know who use iTunes are those that have iPods. The only reaosn I have iTunes is the damn thing comes pre-installed with Tiger.
Plenty of confusion here...people have already commented to clear up the DRM confusion, let's take a look at the industry:
1. The label signs the artist.
2. The label pays for expensive studio time.
3. The rep from the label contacts the program directors at radio stations to get airplay. Sending your demo tape to a station will not get you on the air...reps who offer tickets at concerts and coop opportunities for bigger artists get airplay (because payola is technically illegal).
4. The label pays for CD duplication, printing, distribution.
5. The label sends your CD to the music outlets.
6. The label arranges concerts, merchandising, etc to make you rich (because we all know artists make nearly nothing on the music itself).
In this day and age, computers and very inexpensive technology have somewhat eliminated the need for expensive studio time...but you can't cheap out on a real producer and real mastering engineer. Regardless, let's assume you have a decent recording. Instead of radio airplay, you go for popularity on myspace. You have no costs for CD duplication, printing, distribution or the need for agreements with music outlets. You arrange tshirt/mug/hat printing from an online business.
So...we're basically outdating the labels and the radio stations.
There was no mention of the terms. Ebay/paypal have already got a service called payloadz which would let you sell MP3s (even off your myspace page) for 15% commission or less (compared to iTunes' ~50% r something). Maybe this will be similar because they are partnering with paypal?
Anyway, all this is good - it's removing the crap between the artists and listeners, and that's good for the small guys.
Of course, it's still all about promotion, but every little helps.
ccalam - acoustic versions of new songs.
I hate MySpace as much as the average slashdotter, but last week I discovered a new band called "No Bra", they only have released a couple of 12' (that's vinyl), no albums, no CDs, no MP3s. You can't download the songs they put on their MySpace page (yeah, I tried the various hacks to get them).
.99c a track too.
So I would have been happy to buy their stuff, and way more than
I bet these "MP3s from unsigned bands" won't play in Vista x64 Edition...
It's a matter of security, you see.
IMPEACH XENU
I wonder what is going to happen to these unsigned songs when the band is signed and wants to use these songs in their first album. Will MySpace own the music?
Just yesterday, my son (17) said that there still was music being made as good as classic rock, it's just that it is all underground by bands that no one has heard of. The kids are finding this stuff on MySpace and letting each other know about the good music...the word gets around. There are a lot of unsigned bands out there; it will all depend upon how good their music is. If they strike the right chord with other MySpace users, there is plenty of room to be successful in selling their wares.
you are deluded.
my password really is 'stinkypants'
I mean, while were at it, a flippable cassette would be nice. Perhaps Bengie's rotating drum technology would suit us now.
Well, I know that if the Norweigen band Katthult is going to be one of the 3 million bands on MySpace Music then I'll be buying every album they offer because you can't buy their physical albums in the USA and I don't wanna buy them on iTunes.
... and in the DRM, bind them.
last post!
Another interesting business model for helping unsigned bands is SellaBand. They provide mp3's for free, and if you like a band enough to think they have a shot, you can pledge money on $10 increments called 'parts'. Once a band racks up $50K in pledges, they get real studio time, CDs pressed, etc. Then a portion of all CD sales goes back to the 'believers' who pledged. Supposedly, one can revoke their pledge at any time before it reaches $50K.
And it reminds me of IUMA.COM that came before MP3.COM. The whole purpose of which was to "Obviate t he business model of the recording industry" as the post puts it.
Looks like its finally down, although it still shows up on Google. (note, I went to school with some of the guys who started the whole thing way back before MP3s even existed)
Their site can barely serve webpages with Flash content...good luck. I'm glad to see MySpace "helping" out in the indie music arena.
I have nothing clever to put here...
If they're smart, Myspace will create a way for these downloaded songs to be added directly to iTunes or make them easily transferable to the itunes library. Average users don't want to scour their HD's for songs or use multiple players because they want their COMPLETE collection to play in one player.
http://today.reuters.com/HelpAndInfo/ContactUs.asp x
Click on 'Contact a Reuters Editor', third option down.
*Still* negative function...
How does MySpace plan to police all the mp3s offered for sale? I'll be damned if they're going to review the songs, and even if they did, they'd have no way of knowing if they're actually from a legitimate artist who puts out his/her/their own CDs. Ex: Teen A sets up a profile as 50 Cent (MySpace does not review new profiles), offers 50 Cent songs for sale (MySpace wont review the songs--there will be too many of them), and profits. It will be endemic. On top of that, Teen B will be selling Obscure Artist A's songs, and MySpace will have no way of knowing that it isn't music produced by Teen B on the off chance that they actually do see the profile.
Sounds like a great way to download DRM-less music for less than you'd have to pay for a restricted copy from iTunes.
Isn't this what mp3.com did?
Then one day they shut down and wiped all the music, slighyly pissing off people.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
"The problem is society in general. People want to see movies with specific actors. People want to listen to specific musicians, not bands that are just like them."
And why do you think they want to see these actors and listen to this music in particular, who gave them the idea? Who controls what they get mostly exposed to? Who?
If you can excuse the hideous page layouts and occasional idiots who have 4mb images as their background myspace isn't terrible. They need to have a better directory sorted by genre>artist>title as is basically the norm right now. Right now I use their search with genre and bio or influences and take a look at the play count to find music to listen to. A lot of it is pretty darn good. If you like the social networking aspect you do have a bonus in that you can actually interact with the artist. Some of them have music to download and theres no DRM.
I don't think this will kill iTunes because there are still too many people who get their musical tastes from MTV/VH1 but if you'd like something more original and small scale and you are sick of DRM and being called a pirate then this is not a bad idea. I'd actually also be interested in the economics that will happen when myspace does this - it might go some way towards figuring out what the musical quality-price tradeoff is and I'm sure the RIAA will want to know that.
There are too many people out there who learn how to make music - and a lot of them are very talented. The net makes the distribution cost virtually zero. Recording equipment is becoming cheaper and even without the greatest setup you can do well enough for a lot of people. You have to have exposure and some way to search for music but thats what a site like myspace is doing albeit in a manner that could do with a lot of improvement. Effectively this will drive the price of music down and will probably lead to a system where theres greater musical choice but fewer large bands. If the recording biz wants to survive they have to make their money of concerts and sales of higher quality recordings to fans. They are going to shrink and they know it.
Reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.
...but not for others, depending on the quality of the material. My thinking is that you must give them a reason to pick you, so you give a few tracks (or lower quality mp3s) for free, familiarizing your prospective audience so they have a reason to give you money for more (or better quality). At least for a while, music can be dissassociated from the industry, but expect harassment from them, scrutiny for copyright infringement, for instance. If good quality artists use good quality equipment to record good quality (regardless of genre)material, the RIAA can be brushed off.
The "iPod generation" is really just a continuation of the "mp3 generation".
This talk of "iPod generation" was just PR.
as much as I love music (my number 1 passion), I will never buy anything that generates revenue for fascists that directly aid and abet the propaganda campaigns of immoral governments that wage illegal and unjust wars that kill tens of thousands of innocent people.
Any anyone who mods this offtopic is an uniformed fool.
1.Recorded music for given for free as advertisement. (people would get it free anyway)
2.Tour with high ticket prices.
3.Profit (for either artist or record label).
I assume that record labels will lose becuase artists would rather make money and really, what do artists need record labels for anyway if the labels can't sell records for them? I see smaller independant acts being more popular. Small labels that figure out how to make money while giving away the recorded material online will flourish.
Just a guess. We'll see.
JJJ is THE best radio station. No ads, good music and lots of support for local artists. They recently opened a site for bands to get exposure through free downloads - lots of good talent on show!
l -28218http://www.triplejunearthed.com/>
ahref=http://www.triplejunearthed.com/rel=url2htm
At one point I had a featured track on mp3.com and it made me a good bit of cash compared to what i was making at the time. Before mp3.com went public and ended up the shareholder run crap that it became, it was a great vehicle for up and coming artists. Putting mp3's for sale at myspace is even better because the audience is already there. Mp3.com was pretty much a bunch of musicians trading music between each other. I see plenty of good things from this(especially with my new album coming out in 2 weeks). Of course, it'll be a revival of the "anyone with a computer can make dance music" swarm that happened at mp3.com but it doesnt mean that people have to buy that crap. Anything that saves a musician from having to seek big-label affiliation or spend every cent of their hard-earned just to push a risky album is a blessing. DRM and piracy were never issues with the indy bands that I've met anyway. So cheers to myspace(the shithole that it is) for becoming something other than a haven for pedo's and army recruiters!
along with mandatory broadcast flags. Both of which are nuts and are really designed to raise the entry fee. The RIAA will get their pound of flesh one way or another. We already subsidize that bunch with the tax on blank recording material.
What?
I totally agree, but if they have any kind of rating system system at all (voting, most downloaded, whatever) then the cream WILL rise to the top. It might be a very thin layer, but it will be there.
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
Well, I look after my unsigned band's myspace profile. (For those who hate myspace, we also have a website but I'm slightly loath to link there from a place like slashdot as it's a bit of an embarrassment ;) That site is several years old and in bad need of an overhaul - I've nearly but not quite finished the brand new shiny xhtml/css version... honest...)
Anyway, last time myspace came up here, I posted this comment which earned myself a +5, several agreeing replies, and even a couple of CD sales for the band. So I thought I would pitch in here.
Firstly, this isn't exactly new, as other posters have mentioned bands can already get their music sold on sites like CDBaby. However I don't think you should underestimate the likely impact that comes from conveniently having something all-in-one-place. Because ultimately people are lazy!
If you have a myspace profile with some tunes in your player, then some text underneath saying "if you want to buy full quality MP3s of the tunes..." then a link through to any other website, I would bet that only a tiny % of profile viewers bother to do so. If on the other hand you have little "buy" icons on the myspace music player itself I would imagine the "conversion rate" to be much higher.
In that regard this is a very interesting development. Part of my shiny new band website will be an integrated shopping cart for MP3s (I'll be using Cubecart unless anybody replies to this post telling me about something better), so we can sell them ourselves. However I wouldn't rule out simultaenously offering them for sale on Myspace, as it is my belief that website visitors and myspace visitors are generally two relatively separate demographics.
The one thing that concerns me, and means I won't be rushing into this immediately, is this comment. A fair point - there's already something of a storm around the myspace "EULA" for music, which basically says "all your base are belong to us". Read literally, it suggests that they could, for example, use your music in a major 20th Century Fox movie soundtrack without even asking your permission let alone paying you a penny (er, cent). On the other hand, you can read it as being boilerplate and just the minimum needed to make sure they're not breaking the law by spreading your tune across their server farm, and of course in practice they wouldn't use it on Fox's TV or movies because they only have a crappy 128kbps version.... But, call me cynical, I'm not one to give Murdoch any blind trust or benefit of the doubt.
"Is this the example we have all been waiting for of how the Internet will obviate the business model of the recording industry?"
No,the future of music sans industry is artists promoting themselves(individually or collectively)giving away mp3s and making up the money selling the only real product music has ever really had! PERFORMANCE.
The landscape of music is changing,no one wants to pay for intangibles.Can't say I blame them much.Guess its time to evolve.The emperor wears no clothes!Cats out of the bag!Musicians are payed to play. If you like the songs,go see the band.simple.
As for all the "poor" industry people out of work....Go get real jobs and lives." The world needs ditchdiggers too." "need fries with that?"
I suppose I could write a detailed politically correct response and sound full of thoughtful insight,but that is no fun,unmemorable and just not how I feel about the subject.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
The recording industry as we know it now will mold and adapt into something else and businesses will adapt to whatever the new model may be. It might not be the RIAA next year, but it'll be something else that the thieving Slashdotters amongst us (thankfully a minority) will be bitching about. "Sticking it the man" is a dangerous and narrow minded approach to take with any industry.
The reason why people put up with Apple's DRM'ed technology is because its easy to use. Non-tech people can and do use it ... a DRM-less MP3 will work with the iPod, which is very important to compete, but how will it be delivered to the user? Will it automatically show up in a playlist in a program such as iTunes so that a non-tech person doesn't have to search for the downloaded file and put it where it belongs so he/she can immediately play it after its done?
If it does not show up in such a list, iTunes is not easy to use.
Amarok is easy. You dump your music into any directories you chose and Amarok scans it into a database. The interface then presents it to you in about 14 different ways all searchable, by Artist/Album or any combination of tags, file system, radio stream and context. Context view pulls up a list of your collection of the current artist, and has tabs for artist and lyric info from the web. It will eat any format of music you throw at it and spits it out beautifully. Scripts are available to load both nice iPods and cheap ass mp3 players.
The only problem remaining is not one for this service, limits of available mp3 players. The mp3 player scripts, unfortunately don't yet keep track of the format your player needs, so the $50 player from walmart will limit you to transcoding to mp3, which is a massive pain if you have any other kind of music and want to use such a cheap player. Non technical users mostly have mp3 and will feel no pain.
Technical users have options that will get to others later. OpenZaurus will play ogg, mp3, aac, etc, so it is easy. Soon enough, players as easy as OpenZaurus will hit the market. Trekstor already does it, but is difficult to find in the US. At that point, the world will be easy and iTunes will look very difficult.
The funny thing is that M$ could easily unseat Apple if they made a few sacrifices and pulled their head out of their ass. The above grocery list is easy to meet and they have flooded the market with cheap devices that could do it with one or two mods. They are so interested in owning ALL of the pie that they are squandering their chance to own MOST of the DRM'd music market. Silly tricks like moving from USBFS to MTP and trying to force everyone onto WiMP were a waste of their time. The DRM market is going to shrink and vanish as people who publish non DRM'd stuff start making more money than their greedier peers. Even then M$ could still make money as a distributor and promoter but it's doubtful they will realize that in time. Their inability to play nice with others is the primary threat to their customer loyalty. It makes their platform suck and people are moving off it. Their demise in media is a great blessing for every other platform.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
After reading the story I went over to myspace and checked out some of the unsigned talent. I found a really great English folk singer http://www.callaghaninfo.com/site/index.htm that I had never heard before. I really liked the songs and her voice. Thanks for posting this story!
I agree, it takes getting used to. They have just relaunched/expanded their site. It certainly looks much prettier and individual pages are easier to use but I just keep hoping that they don't rate form over function. I am more interested in content than eye candy. There is some pretty good content in there - and some seriously weird stuff too!
I mentioned podshow because they don't seem to be claiming to have invented this sort of thing. They are taking it further.
Myspace is not an innovator. I don't think I like them because of their owner. He hasn't done the media, here in the UK, any good. I hear people saying the same for his companies in the US. I don't want him to be an increasingly big player in the internet as well...
I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
I'm sure there are many others, but for those that want social networking and unsigned digital distribution there is always Subcircuit too! http://www.subcircuit.com/
I'm just sayin', ya know?
for all the hate, you must be the only person on Earth to read each and every thing Twitter has ever written. Where do you get the time and why?
MySpace seems to have gained a new audience. Let us rewind a few days whilest we were (on the majority) complaining as to the intolerable nature of MySpace lest it's popularity. Today, while much of it's content is still intolerable, /.ers on the whole seem to be viewing MySpace in a new light.
Great marketing move!
This is akin to anarchy. News Corp has just bought myspace for 500mil. Received advertising and searching money from google for 900mil. Profit, great.
News Corp is doing what the people want, but in a completely unethical and irresponsible manner. A reason could be that the RIAA will go after News Corp for lost income due to fraudulent behaviour by users. People want the latest Popular Music, they find a profile on myspace and all of a sudden, a flood of downloads.
RIAA takes myspace to court
myspace gets changed again because of court ruling.
News Corp doesn't give two shits about what happens because they're 400million ahead. Take out some court costs and a couple of hundred million dollars in damages which the pop.artists won't see any % of, and we're back to being suckers.
I have an answer though - give me another 12 months or so
Um, I'm not sure exactly what you're getting at, but I also caught on to the News Corp aspect when reading the story. I suspect the real motive here is to build up a music arm of News Corp, as Murdoch currently has lots of holdings in TV, movies, books, and print media, but they don't have much of anything in the music business. If they can build up a business, there's always the chance they'll join the RIAA anyway.
The talent is 99% dog crap. That's the music world. Most of these people can't carry a tune let alone become successful music stars. More power to them, but let's not delude ourselves that the next Queen, Judas Priest, Madonna, Prince, etc., are sitting on MySpace.
Hell many of the mainline bands have a presence on MySpace just to sell more of their discs.
MP3.com used to do, before they sold out to CNet. I became a fan of a couple of dozen new bands through the old MP3.com...But I will not deign to sign onto something owned by Rupert Murdoch. Who knows what nefarious uses he would have for even the browsing info he got from my trips to the site:P.
I pay a fair price for my music (anywhere from 11 cents to about 30 cents) per selection. And I don't have to purchase the entire album. I have the option of listening to the first 30 or so seconds of the music I expect to purchase. What I like about that offshore site, is that the majority of the money goes to the artist. Does it bypass the RIAA, or the other organisations? Well, I hope so, but I do not know. Search for all of mp3 dot com
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
If they are really going to sell non-DRMed music, then this could potentially be devastating to RIAA's push for DRM.
There's one and pretty much only one reason for a band to want to sign with an RIAA-member: the RIAA members tend to have good marketing. For example, you have heard of Britney Spears and Limp Bizkit. But you probably haven't heard of some of the most fucking awesome bands that my town alone (Albuquerque) has, such as Five Minute Sin, SuperGiant, Requiem Mass, Fivehundred, etc, in spite of the fact that they play circles around that pop trash, and bring way more passion too.
The advantage of a good label is that it can disconnent market penetration from meritocracy.
The thing about Myspace is that there are a assload of users. I mean, a metric mega shitload of users, and it's really pretty darn easy for a band to reach those users. A band just has to send a friend-request to someone, and that recipient is very likely to at least look at that band's profile once, and if they have flash enabled, play one of their songs. Prior to Myspace, there simply wasn't any way remotely comparable to that, for a band to get their foot in the door. I can imagine how Myspace can still manage to screw things up, but there's potential here for popularity to at least approach meritocracy, or to achieve it to a never-before-seen degree.
And that totally takes away RIAA members' advantage. You can sell DRMed songs for the same price as your competitors' non-DRM music when those competitors are so obscure that they don't really compete with you. But when the playing field is level, you have to match their features, which means adios DRM. I can see the big labels tripping over each other, wanting to sell their stuff through Myspace, because that's where so many customers are, and if Myspace says no to DRM, then there simply won't be DRM. Myspace has the customers, so they have the strength. Apple had to compromise with iTunes because Apple was sortof a nobody in this context, so if the labels said, "our way or the highway" Apple had to give in, because they want to sell the big names so that people will have incentive to buy iPods and build their market. Myspace doesn't have this concern. If a label says "DRM or else we won't sell" then Myspace can just say, "Ok, goodbye. We'll just sell everyone else's music instead, and Britney can languish in obscurity."
My only concern is that Fox is one of those media megacorps. Will they hold the line on the lack of DRM? It makes sense to not have DRM if you're trying to maximize profits, but the media companies have shown over and over again, that profit is not the goal: control is, either for ego-satisfaction, or for always-unsuccessful attempts to build vertical monopolies (e.g. Sony's repeated almost-comically-bad lame attempts). I'm sceptical that Fox will be an exception. But we'll see.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
I feel a great disturbance in the force. It's as if a million RIAA execs just crapped their pants.
Nobody has addressed who is monitoring what sells. I hear other peoples music with these nonames remaking there own version to someone elses song..whats to stop them from selling not only bootlegs but total copyright infringement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_violation to a artist. If the RIAA doesn't get involved before the first hit single sells on myspace and its a remake with the origanl music from a signed artist..someone is going to be pissed. The reason why it was never a issue before is because nobody was making money off copyright music it was all free. Myspace has opened up a whole new can of worms and RIAA will be right there to Catch them...
>Aye, the problem with being a music publisher or recording studio. I was thinking of starting my own indie label, >but first I would need to find some good bands around here. ;p
t e
I'm pretty sure this will actually be on-topic! I challenge all of those who think that unsigned bands on Myspace are steaming piles of "Fashioncore" turds to check my band out - we're influenced by Soundgarden, Metallica, Faith No More, Red Hot Chilli Peppers, Joe Satriani and more. Heaviness with melody.
For some pretty decent quality demos, check out http://www.myspace.com/kapitate
For Youtube videos of live shows: http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=Kapita
I am as visually disgusted by most band pages on there as the rest of you - we keep it plain and readable. Our actual website is no grand exercise in style, but look at the content. I'd be positively flattered if it was Slashdotted, er, as long as a few hundred thousand got to see us first before it went down, that is.
Regards,
-Kapitate
Nice reply.
I was just checkign my preferences and saw i had a reply to my post.
I never really considered that News Corp would then be a part of the RIAA if that's the way news corp is heading. Kind of interesting considering News wouldn't wanna rock the boat between other heavyweights. The entity (be it corporation, man, family) is very influential.