A Different Kind of DRM

[Anderton]

http://www.business2.com/b2/web/articles/0,17863,1130183,00.html?cnn=yes

Sounds sort of like the Weedshare.com model in a way, but it's interesting how Apple has now become the company to beat for online sales...how soon before people start accusing it of "monopolisitic practices"?

[spokenward]

EDITED Post to remove boring quote
I was pointed to the very irritating Mark Cuban's Blog over the weekend. He raises a point that I raised before with new download models.

The point is this. There are some organizations that dispute the fundamental notion of a single permanent license.
Time to allow hard drives pre loaded with Music….and change Harry Fox
Posted Nov 26, 2005, 8:26 PM ET (http://www.blogmaverick.com/entry/1234000273069815/) and more about statutory mechanical royalties.

[Brittanylips]

EDITED post to include additional boring point

interesting article.

good conclusion too: the power of simplicity. While the idea of selling digital rights is a good one, implementing and explaining it to the public may not be so easy.

Two thoughts:

One, I think if you view traditional record companies as largely distribution systems (the most valuable service they provide artists, IMO), iTunes is simply the evolution - rather than replacement - of the traditional model.

Two, the value of bundling songs on a CD, which traditional labels prefer over lower-margin digital singles, has another dimension and a dirty little secret: artists often add filler songs to complete a CD after having recorded a few good ones. If digital distribution supplants physical distribution (and it will, right?) then maybe that's the end of throwaway songs produced simply to fill up a CD.

Or [and here comes the additional point, OK, two additional points]

the arbitrary size of the typical CD bundle is history. Who said songs must come in bundles of tens anyway (aside from the physical limitations of formats that are becoming obsolete)? Thus, musicians will have more freedom to release one song, or bundles of 3, 30 or 300 songs, the legacy of the 10-song CD - and the comfy margins it provides record companies - fading into the piano-rolls of history.

Ultimately, the new digital distribution systems will have to decide whether they are going to give away the razors to sell the razor blades or vice versa: are they going to give away the software to sell the hardware (.99 songs, $300 iPods), or give away the hardware to sell the software ($100 laptop, $5 for "digital rights")?

-Peace, Love, and Blips

[MorePaul]

Originally posted by Anderton
...how soon before people start accusing it of "monopolisitic practices"?

As far as DRM - how soon before?

I'd say it's happened a couple of years ago - remember the Apple v Real DMCA RE sabre rattling?


also take a look at how they (Apple) implement Audible's DRM

[amplayer]

Originally posted by Brittanylips
[i]If digital distribution supplants physical distribution (and it will, right?) then maybe that's the end of throwaway songs produced simply to fill up a CD.

It is clear to me that consumers have tasted the unbundled buying method, and they like it. Whatever the record industry does, it can't force the consumer back into buying stuff they don't want (through bundling).
I think the end of throwaway songs is one of the best things to happen to the music industry.

[Will Chen]

Originally posted by amplayer

It is clear to me that consumers have tasted the unbundled buying method, and they like it. Whatever the record industry does, it can't force the consumer back into buying stuff they don't want (through bundling).
I think the end of throwaway songs is one of the best things to happen to the music industry.

Disagree. Now instead of a comercial artist who still likes to experiment and write things outside the norm (like Seal) releasing an album with a couple hits to make the suits happy and a few songs to satisfy his creative side, you will only get the "hits" because the label will not put up the money to record the "filler". In my opinion, more often than not the filler is better than the singles...

[BLAblablah]

Originally posted by wbcsound

In my opinion, more often than not the filler is better than the singles...

That has certainly been my experience too on many albums. Still, I like having the option of purchasing just the actual song I want sometimes. And I usually listen to samples of the songs I haven't heard while I'm at it...just in case. If they sound promising, I'll often just go ahead and buy the album.
Barry

[Brittanylips]

Originally posted by wbcsound


Disagree. Now instead of a comercial artist who still likes to experiment and write things outside the norm (like Seal) releasing an album with a couple hits to make the suits happy and a few songs to satisfy his creative side, you will only get the "hits" because the label will not put up the money to record the "filler".

Yeah, but you don't need a label to make the type of filler you're talking about (artistic experiments with potentially limited commercial appeal) -

That's the whole point of technology emancipating musicians from the clutches of the record industry - you don't have to wait for a green light from the exec producer to go into a fancy shmancy studio and record - you can do it yourself with all the little trinkets we all talk about all the time.

A friend of mine was recording a "living legend" at the hit studio (RIP) in NYC. At the same time he was recording the living legend's wife, a minor legend, in their living room, using virtually the same equipment and no label telling them what to do.

New set of gates, new set of gatekeepers.

And as for the other type of filler (throwaway songs speedily produced to fill up empty slots on a CD): good bye to bad rubbish!

-Peace, Love, and Brittanylips

[Will Chen]

Originally posted by Brittanylips

That's the whole point of technology emancipating musicians from the clutches of the record industry - you don't have to wait for a green light from the exec producer to go into a fancy shmancy studio and record - you can do it yourself with all the little trinkets we all talk about all the time.


Double edged sword. Would we even know who the Beach Boys, Beatles, or James Brown are today if not for the marketing machine that is the record industry.

[Brittanylips]

Originally posted by wbcsound


Double edged sword. Would we even know who the Beach Boys, Beatles, or James Brown are today if not for the marketing machine that is the record industry.
Well, I don't think the marketing muscle of popular culture will go away just because the technology becomes more democratic. The proliferation of niche, less marketable, more artistic, or even just plain bad musicians doesn't threaten the juggernaut: The Beach Boys, Beatles, and james Browns among us will always have the marketing machine to bring them to us.

microbreweries don't supplant Budweiser anymore than Edie Brickell supplants Paul Simon. ;)

-PL&B