Slashdot Mirror
MySpace Teams With Record Companies To Create Music Site
The New York Times reports on a deal between MySpace and three of the four major music labels to develop a new music website. Users will be able to stream songs for free, purchase downloadable tracks, and (possibly) pay a flat monthly fee for unlimited access. From the Times:
"Exact terms of the deal and details about the new site, like prices for downloaded music tracks, were not disclosed. But MySpace did say the site would offer songs free of digital rights management software or D.R.M., which is used to prevent illicit copying but can create technical hurdles for buyers. The songs would be playable on any portable music device, including Apple's iPod. For the music industry, the deal is partly born of desperation. In the face of widespread, escalating online piracy, music sales dropped to $11.5 billion in 2006 from a peak in 1999 of nearly $15 billion."
There's a few things like this and I've seen several people attribute them to the iTunes 'stranglehold' on the market.
I think its sort of awesome; we're seeing more variety and more competition in the market now than ever before. Of course that's not saying much when before was more or less == 0, but hey - it's a start.
While I have long been skeptical of the record industries ability to do anything other than try to ream consumers, the fact that they seem finally willing to ditch DRM en masse is certainly giving me some hope for the future.
Doesn't last.fm already offer this, save the monthly fee?
Ten years ago I predicted .04 cents per song to be the natural price for an mp3, and that's all they need to do to get me to pay.
Who wants to keep track of all this crap on your hard drive? I'll pay four cents every time I want to hear most songs.
And if, for some reason, I want to save it as an mp3, I expect to be able to do so, with no arguments.
You serve me, RIAA bitches, not the other way around. Maybe you're starting to understand this you stupid fucking bastards.
expandfairuse.org
There, fixed it for you.
I don't know about anyone else, but I don't think piracy is to blame. Its the music industry's inexplicable urge to present themselves as greedy, morally bankrupt fat cats who don't care about the artists, or anyone other than themselves really. I just can't bring myself to financially support those assholes, so I don't buy music.
Cry me a river 'industry'. If there was an objective way to measure the quality of music coming from the big labels, I'm sure it would be would be in the red as well. The only good music I'm hearing is odd little acts going it alone, and mostly by choice.
The new indie is no record. Just free tracks, and an invitation to come to a show. Sadly, even doing this is a incredible money sink. Driving an hour to shows is ridiculously spendy; my drummer lives over one hundred miles away as well! Since we don't play covers, we draw less than your AC/DC/Zepplin/80's/Classic/Rock band. A crap economy, DVDs, PS3s, and other distractions don't help either.
I say, ignore this site - why again would I make someone buy a track, or put any obstacle in the way of more people hearing my music? Since it's a label partnership, the 'names' are going to get pushed, and get preferential placement anyway.
Support your local band and buy a t-shirt! It's pretty much the only business model left.
I think this is too little, too late on the part of MySpace. Their site fell out of fad (in favor for Facebook, but Facebook will eventually be a fad too), and was and still has a terrible site design.
Last.Fm will be a tough competitor to face off against, especially if the same "brilliant" minds behind the MySpace site layout try to crack Last.Fm's bread & butter.
The statement in the article seeks sympathy for an industry that needs none. Read enough books about the business aspects of record deals and it's clear Major Labels are scumbags.
When the industry thinks of the billions lost do they even take into account the amount of independent artists that are booming right now? Their website says "RIAA members create, manufacture and/or distribute approximately 90% of all legitimate sound recordings produced and sold in the United States" which is pure malarkey. Independents have a bigger slice of the pie and this also doesn't take into account many international artists. These self-produced, sometimes even self distributed, artists gain respect all around because they know some jerk with a ponytail didn't tamper with the creative talent that makes good bands, amazing. This is the age where you can spend a couple thousands of dollars or less, in recording equipment, to produce a semi-professional album. Kids don't need to beg Record companies to back them financially for studio recording sessions, they do it themselves, drop $900 to manufacture 1000 professional CDs, and sell em for $8-$10.
Maybe the fact that MP3's are cheaper than CD's period? iTunes has destroyed the album, people only spend $3 for 3 songs instead of $13 for the album. Maybe they'd buy the whole album if many mainstreams bands sucked at creating strong albums. No one wants to pay $17 for a brand new CD anymore because the scam has gone on far too long, everyone knows better, produce a bad album iTunes enforces it and makes you pay.
I'm sure there's a lot of discrepancy in those numbers because of the declining Used CD market as well.
More money is thrown around nowadays but the music market is complicated compared to yesterday. RIAA is just getting hammered because people are spending their money elsewhere and many artists can survive without standing under the RIAA umbrella.
INTERESTING FACTS:
If you are not an artist that pays royalties to the RIAA your money from records sold is not counted in this figure AND if you do not join the RIAA you are incapable of obtaining a Gold or Platinum record, true story.
-AKA
...deserves his MBA revoked. Cut the middlemen. Cut DRM. Team up with a bunch of garage bands, make them famous. They have the popularity to do that, which is precisely what all those unseen talents need...
3 of the 4 major music labels? Make your own!
And give us some GOOD music, ferchrissake!
"It almost sounds as if they are considering treating their customers as *gasp* customers!"
Quote from the Slashdot story: "In the face of widespread, escalating online piracy, music sales dropped..."
To me, that sounds like the music industry saying, "If something bad happens, it must be someone else's fault."
I think the falling sales are the industry's fault. I was supposed to by a Britney Spears CD to hear her singing something about abusing men? If the music industry wants strong sales, it can be kind to the customer and produce something valuable.
So now you have imeem as this monster service where you can essentially listen to any tune ever recorded, and it's all paid for by advertising.
Similarly, myspace has been in litigation with the record labels and has taken a page from the imeem playbook, copying the deal making, the business model and everything else. Only this isn't some tiny startup, this is Fox Interactive with it's massive pockets.
I really hope myspace loses this time.
.04 dollars or .04 cents?
"In the face of widespread, escalating online piracy, music sales dropped to $11.5 billion in 2006 from a peak in 1999 of nearly $15 billion."
This has got less to do with piracy and more to do with Amy Winehouse's crack bill.
Or you could look at it as the target audience diversifying far more than they ever did before.
From the inception of vinyl until the turn of the century, most people just bought pop music, because that was the only music they could hear at the time. There was nothing to compare contemporary music to, so people bought it out of ignorance. Generation gaps, outdated and worn out audio formats, scarcity due to albums going out of print, and a general lack of interest or time/money to sample, kept the majority of listeners from experiencing music's rich history.
Once Napster came about, people suddenly had instantaneous access to almost the entire back catalog of all prerecorded music (or at least all music that was released on CDs). This allowed for a rebirth of older music and genres that hadn't seen as many fans since their industry-granted 15 minutes of fame expired, as well as the diversification and maturing of musical taste in the majority of listeners. Lots of people I know like older music as well as new music, and have a far more diverse set of musical ascetics than any of the generations past. The success of the Guitar Hero franchise is an excellent example of this. Most of the soundtrack is either indie music or music that's at least 20 years old, yet it sells because people have heard a decent amount of the soundtrack before and found that they liked it much better than what plays on today's top 40 radio or what's in the CD racks at Wal-Mart.
The industry is dying primarily because their business model relied on music being disposable and the audience being fickle and spontaneous. Since P2P emerged, tastes have become more engraved in the general populace, and it's usually difficult to get people to stop liking the really good artists just because something new has come out. Now that they can't get people to throw out their old albums anymore for new ones, the industry has lost its moneymaker. Yes, people are now more used to the idea of music being "free," but the real cause of sales slippage is because the industry has failed to diversify as fast as its populace has. It's still trying to market pop idols as if these were the days of old. Not anymore.