RSS
Twitter
Recording Industry Dabbling In File Sharing
from the slowly,-but-surely dept
For years, people have been telling the recording industry that the strategy of yelling at and suing your best customers isn't a particularly intelligent long term strategy - and figuring out a way to embrace file sharing made a lot more sense. Well, now it seems that the industry is trying to have it both ways. While they continue with their lawsuits, a few major labels are starting to explore opportunities that involve using file sharing services to promote their artists. Of course, they're doing this in fairly limited ways, but it's a start. EMI seems to be the most progressive, from what this article says, and they've admitted that it's important for them to figure out a way to embrace file sharing. Of course, this seems to go against recent statements from others in the industry who are saying there can be "zero tolerance" for any kind of file sharing. Eventually, the record labels will realize that embracing file sharing is (and has always been) the only solution to their current "problems" - but the question remains whether or not it will be too late for them to really make a difference when they finally come around.
Reader Comments
(Flattened / Threaded)
Individual Labels != RIAA
However, they do have a pull at the RIAA, which may get the RIAA to rethink things. It is like Sony Music and Sony Entertainment fighting each other over usage of Sony Music in Sony Entertainment titles or over the ability for Sony Playstations or Sony Walkmans to play MP3s on CD-Rs.
What we have is a large organization made up of smaller organizations who each either get it or don't. Unfortunately, those who don't get it far outweigh those who do at the moment, but that may not happen forever. If EMI succeeds, though I doubt they will given their (anti-consumer) attitudes during this dabbling, then they may be able to persuade others to do so too.
Most consumers will not partake in something that is obviously anti-consumer, such as DRM or "strings attached" and expensive downloads. However, if EMI actually used it to give away free demo copies of their artists' work, instead of $50 a year for Whippit for a very small selection of work (which amounts to less than $1 a week, which isn't bad, but still isn't going to attract everyone.) It would be even nicer if there was a P2P service that charged $52 a year, had an unlimited selection to everything, and used DRM-less mp3 files (or ogg) or the like.
Hell, I don't download music (except from a very specific group of band run websites, i.e. Gov't Mule, etc,) but I'd consider paying $104 a year for unlimited selection of everything with DRM-less mp3 or ogg files (and I bet I wouldn't even use the service much.) It is just the ability to go out and grab that song that keeps playing over and over in my head so that I can once and for all move on to the next song that keeps playing over and over in my head.
Of course, the RIAA doesn't listen to the opinions on Techdirt, nor do they care about consumer demand or common sense, so it is a pipe dream...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Individual Labels != RIAA
What do you mean the RIAA doesn't listen to Techdirt! Of course we do. We'll, at least, I do.
No problem with filesharing, just a problem with breaking the law. It's got to fit within the existing licensing contracts, and the existing copyright law. Or these things have to change. All of which takes time.
There might be a difference between media sharing and filesharing. And don't knock DRM. We don't have the power to do lock up media. But we've got to have restrictions, so that people can access the media and not own it. If people need to own the media, don't expect it to cost less than 70 cents a song any time soon, and that is too much for the average college student. They need something closer to a library. Where you can access the media, but you don't get to keep it.
Derek
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment