Slashdot Mirror
Why Starting a Legal Online Music Vendor Is Tough
Hodejo1 writes "Former MP3.com CEO Michael Robertson offers commentary at The Register saying any attempts to build a sanctioned digital music site today is doomed from the outset. 'The internet companies I talk to don't mind giving some direct benefit to music companies. What torpedoes that possibility is the big financial requests from labels for "past infringement," plus a hefty fee for future usage. Any company agreeing to these demands is signing their own financial death sentence. The root cause is not the labels — chances are if you were running a label you would make the same demands, since the law permits it."
FTFA: "The root cause is not the labels - chances are if you were running a label you would make the same demands, since the law permits it."
Unless, of course, you didn't. The law also permits playing a guitar exclusively in a soundproof booth in the middle of nowhere so that no one will ever be able to hear your music, much less consider purchasing it, which seems like the business model the major labels are moving towards.
You could, for instance, start your own label specifically to avoid this, avoid DRM, allow anyone to stream your catalog as much as they want, offer a variety of formats and purchase options, etc. I think the law permits that too.
As for viability, it might have some issues, but Magnatune has been doing that for five years now and doesn't seem about to stop.
http://www.magnatune.com/
Err, no, it is you that is wrong.
Whilst this may apply to trademarks, it certainly does not apply to copyrights or patents.
That movie is an exercise in propaganda. He purposefully ate too much in order to gain weight and make a sensational movie. I would take a lifetime of Big Macs any day. Nobody ever said you had to eat the whole thing.
In Soviet Russia meme tires of you!
Any label is not a monopoly.
Any copyrighted work is a government protected monopoly on its own, which makes the distinction harder to make.
While an airline (or two different airlines) and a bus may get you to your destination, the fact is, despite the significant attempts to make everything sound the same, different songs are not the same destination. And you can't (generally) buy the same song from different entities.
they're allowed to collude all they want and nobody bats and eye.
See, the trouble is they don't really need to collude. Monopoly pricing is set in relation to available disposable income; it's a function of what the consumers will spend. You maximize your revenue when you raise prices to the equilibrium point where higher prices mean lower income (as the higher per-unit revenue wont be outweighed by the lost sales), and not a cent below. (This point tends to be at a level where a significant number of customers cannot afford the product, and is also the main reason for things like region coding and parallel import prevention in other similar product areas)
As the monopoly pricing is set as a function of the same thing, all the players will end up with very similar price points. After that, the main competition going on is exposure and channel control (well, apart from friendly copying).
In essence, monopoly rights are irreconcilable with a free market economy. The business logic when you have a protected monopoly simply doesn't work the same way as competitive industries, so there's a permanent conflict of interest between the bigger players and everyone else. A conflict that is unlikely to be resolved until monopoly rights are restructured as non-exclusive revenue share rights, which simply is unlikely to happen any time soon.
Let us put that in perspective. At 10-15 songs per album, that is 200-300 million albums. Even at 20 songs per album, this would mean 150 million albums.
Deduct the 88 million less sold is an increase of albums sold of 62 million.
So instead of the decrease in albums sold, of 88 million, there is an actual increase.
I knew you were right. I just wanted to make it less dramatic and not compare oranges with apples.
And we do not even talk about the extra income from ring-tones. Something that did not happen in the past.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Apple is now the biggest music retailer in any medium. If they are making any profit on sales (I vaguely remember reading that they make something like 10Â per track) then the iTunes store is raking in money. The iTunes store and Apple-branded accessories (they don't break them down on the balance sheet, there's just iPod and 'other music-related products and services) are bringing in around $800m per quarter in revenue, which probably equates to around $100m in profit.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Then there is also the problem of perception associated with the source. I could pay to self-publish a volume of my poems, but it'll be ignored by critics, unavailable to most readers and, ultimately, be a waste of money on my part. If I can't get in a literary magazine or picked up by a traditional publishing house, then the perception is that I'm not any good.
Well, this man, who has written a series of very successful novels, would most definitely disagree with you. (I can say that because I've met and talked with Merv at length about this very subject). His novels sell remarkably well in bookstores, on Amazon, and plenty of other places.
Oh, did I mention that he is a self-publisher? Yeah, that's right, his publishing company, Willow Tree Press, is him. (He outsources the printing, of course.)
My blog
I thought I had read this before so I did a search and came up with this: http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/10/2/103735/275 This post was made in 2003 (and references a previous post on Slashdot, so it could easily be older than that.) You are simply reposting a 5 year old story word for word. I somehow doubt that you are the original author (which would, ironically, make that post copyright infringement ;-) ).
That said, there are a couple of big holes in this story.
The author admits to not knowing why people aren't buying CDs, but then immediately jumps to the "inescapable truth" that Internet piracy is to blame. It isn't because the selection isn't to the buying public's taste, or because a Walmart opened down the block with better prices, or because people were buying more DVDs/video games/etc. Nope, it *had* to be Internet Piracy! And why?
Not to overuse a XKCD meme, but: Citation Needed. So I did a Google search and came up with this article: http://www.ifpi.org/content/section_news/20050623.html
Ok, the article is 3 years old, but let's let that slide for a bit. The piracy that the article speaks of is commercial CD pressing. You know, the folks who obtain one CD, burn a hundred copies, and sell them on the street corner for $1.50 each. That is a completely different form of piracy than the guy who clicks "share this folder" in LimeWire/Kazaa/etc.
Yes, the Internet does make piracy (of the P2P sharing kind) easier than it used to be. It does also have the potential to destroy the music industry as we know it now. However, many new technologies are disruptive events. The industry either has to adapt or die. When cars first came out, it was disruptive to the people in the Horse and Buggy Industry. We don't hold technology back simply because one industry doesn't want to change how they operate. For an example of how the music industry might adapt, look to eMusic and Amiee Street. As far as local record stores go, they either find a way to adapt (perhaps kiosks selling personal mix CDs) or they die out. It's just a fact of business life.
In the years since this post was originally written, advances in book piracy have been made.
As for the National Register of Pirates idea, it is quite obviously a bad idea. The original poster of this seemed to be of the opinion that the courts were taking too long so pirates should just be added to a list without a trial. Let's put aside the question of how the RIAA would get the pirates' identities and how it would be enforced for a moment. (Big questions, mind you, but let's assume some process gets put into place.) How will the list be kept focused on pirates and kept clean of the falsely accused? We have only to look at the No Fly List for an example of how a blacklist with no oversight or clear removal process can wind up triggering many false positives. If some other Jason Levine pir
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Start with google.
search terms... "self publishing"
http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&=&q=self+publishing&btnG=Google+Search
lulu is a good self publisher and known in a lot of places. if you want to get into book stores you gotta buy a ISBN number and have it on your book.
do not waste time and money on "self publishing books" Everything you need to know is on google with the above search term.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
>The service just isn't attracting users at all, in spite of the marketing major label WMG has committed to do
They may have "committed" but I've never heard of Lala and I'd be interested in using it. All I can say is that WMG is doing a terrible job marketing this. I have the feeling they *want* it to fail, as a propaganda stunt. It's the only explanation. WMG has bottomless pockets. If they wanted it to succeed they'd be killing everyone in the online music business with their catalog.
In fact in a search for Online music download Lala's not on the first 5 pages. A comparatively small payment to Google would ensure page rank or at least advertising on the results. Not surprisingly an Apple ad (the destination of which shows has a link to iTunes on the landing page) is at the top. They are actually trying.
Nada...
Here's what does show up:
1.
Download music online
Groundbreaking technology like the
new Genius feature. iPod touch.
www.apple.com/ipodtouch
2.
Zune Music Player
Get your ears ready for
the ultimate music experience.
www.Zune.net
3.
Download/Play/Burn Music
Legal Access to 5,000,000+ Songs.
14 Days Free then only $12.99/mo!
www.Rhapsody.com
4.
Napster® Official Site
Listen To 6 Million + Songs
With a Free Trial - Napster®!
Napster.com
5.
Download Music Online
As low as $.27 per song!
25 Free MP3 - No risk 7 day Trial
www.eMusic.com
6.
Top 3 Legal Music Sites
Top 3 Music Download Sites Reviewed
Download All your Favorite Music
www.Real-Music-Reviews.com
7.
Download Online Music
Unlimited Free Music on AOL® Radio
Find Music You Enjoy on One Site!
Radio.AOL.com
8.
Top 5 Music Sites
Top 5 Music Download Sites Reviewed
Download your Favorite Music Now
www.HotMusicDownloader.com
DRM free with lots of options and great music. The only thing killing Lala is WMG. They've got Led Zeppelin, the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, Aerosmith, Rush, and the White Stripes for crying out loud! Their catalog is unmatched.
I just joined ;) At $.89 per song too. I think the author has a warped sense of what "committed to marketing" means, or didn't bother checking for himself. If I was a WMG executive, I'd have the marketing VP in a meeting finding out what the hell he does 8 hours a day.
-Viz
Don't kid yourself. It's the size of the regexp AND how you use it that counts.