Slashdot Mirror
The Music Industry's Latest Shortsighted Plan: Killing Freemium Services
An anonymous reader notes that there have been rumblings in the music industry of trying to shut down freemium services like Spotify's free tier and YouTube's swath of free music. The record labels have realized that music downloads are gradually giving way to streaming, and they're angling for as a big a slice of that revenue as they can manage. The article argues that they're making the same mistake they always make: that converting freemium site listeners (in the past, music pirates) to subscription services will be a 1:1 transfer, and no listeners will be lost in the process. Of course, that's no more true now than it was a decade ago. But in doing trying to do so, the labels will do harm to the artists they represent, and shoot themselves in the foot for acquiring future customers by getting rid of several major sources of music discovery.
That's a good phrase. I've purchased perhaps a third of the music I own because I heard a song (or snippet of a song) in a video or just tripped across something I liked while surfing youtube. "This video has been muted due to an audio copyright claim by FuckMeI'mAnIdiot Publishing" would seem to be quite as self-defeating as normal folks claim.
Yeah as I type this I'm listening to pirated music that I just started downloading due to Grooveshark getting shut down.
On the 30th they shut it down. By the 3rd of May I downloaded 250 gigabytes of pirated music and got back every song I had on my grooveshark playlist.
Now I will *never* use the internet to stream music. I keep losing my damn playlists which took hard work to properly set up. Then whatever site gets shut down or bought and I'm suddenly lost one morning unable to even get my playlists (lost many great obscure songs I loved and couldn't remember the names/bands to)
First I was an Imeem user, then that got shutdown and bought by Myspace. (Fool me once)
Then I went to grooveshark who also years later got shut down. (Fool me twice)
Now I'm just pirating like a mofo and working on streaming software (which I'll be keeping private and not sharing) to give to people close to me (friends, family, etc) which will just provide a front end to the massive collection of music I've pirated. Basically creating my own streaming service which can't be shut down if no one but my close circle knows about or has access to.
Here I thought by disabling adblock on streaming sites I was actually being a "good person". Now I regret that decision after they shut it down anyways. If they don't want me watching ads to listen to music I guess I'll just fucking pirate all of it then... They had their chance.
Now I'm using my prowess as a software developer to stream my pirated collection to everyone I know with a custom program that can't be stopped. Darknets will be built by people like me.
Anyone remember that one no-name company with source code control tools that tried suing the Linux Kernel Developers? I don't either, they prompted Linus to write Git which is all everyone uses these days..... That crappy product from that crappy company isn't at a single place I've worked. Are they out of business yet for their greed?
Depends on how you calculate (as always). Do they get a lot of money from Spotify? No. Would they have gotten more money somewhere if not on Spotify? I don't know, you would have to assume that people would spend money getting the music from whatever non-Spotify source the artist opts for.
There is very little direct revenue in recorded music nowadays. Successful artists make a large portion of their money from live shows. But without popular and wide spread recordings of the music, will anyone show up to the concerts? The market has changed, and only those who adapt to take advantage will be successful. Any attempt from artists or labels to force consumers into something they don't want will fail. The days when a hit song (even a one hit wonder) meant automatic riches for all involved and their entourages may be over...
Apple is one the big pushers behind this move as well as they are about to launch their own PAID music series. They want the free tier killed off so they can be more competitive in music streaming market. Now cue Apple fanboyz to defend Apple for this crap.
Suddenly, I own a focking paid for library of signature party mix.
Best con of all? I'm not even sure how they got me, so I think they can do it again.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
This is part of why I personally advocate more government grants for the arts, not less. When an artist lives or dies by sales alone, you're going to have the brilliant minds of our generation ignored
Ok, but how do you decide who's a "brilliant mind" who needs a grant, and who's a talentless hack who just wants free money for doing nothing but churning out some worthless drivel? I could press some keys on an electronic keyboard and call it "music" too; give me a grant so I don't need to work for a living!
If anything, this is another good case for a Basic Income.
Personally I find it amazing that we still need "labels" and "publishers" for anything nowadays. There's a huge global distribution network out there available for almost no money, there are facebook and twitter addicts that will gladly do massive "word of mouth" advertising for you for free. I think some artists need to realize at some point that in a world where pictures of a blue/black or white/gold dress can take the whole world by storm almost overnight, maybe the reason no one wants their music is actually because it sucks.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
I have a friend who is a musician. He also does music production and recording. The bottom line is that the artist makes less than $.05 per track on a CD, almost nothing from music that is streamed from pay services and royalties. Bands that go on tour generally end up in debt because the labels arrange the tours, and charge the band for everything including the air that they breathe. The labels make the lion's share of the money, and mostly end up owning the rights to the music.
So while this will not harm the artists much more then the very great harm that the labels already do to them, it is true that the labels are shooting themselves in the foot again.
If I hear a track that I like, I will buy it. I will not buy it unheard, nor will I buy a track until I have heard the entire track a few times. If people cannot hear the tracks for free, how will they know it exists, let alone want to buy it? Streaming audio and video are the future. The labels are the past, and becoming more of a hindrance to the artist and the end purchaser of the music every day.