"This policy is line with many other clothing, shoe and electronic stores who are also facing the same issue."
I'm wondering just how common this practice is. It has to be one of the worst business idea I have ever heard, it seems unlikely that many businesses would be that stupid to do it.
In a world where publicity and word of mouth advertising dominate, it seems baffling to ban people from giving your "product" free publicity.
The worst was the Olympics. It is an event that is supposed to evoke an image of being shared by the world, when in fact it's own by a couple of media companies.
What is interesting about stories like this is that it turns the talking points used by publishers on their heads. They argue that music piracy is primarily hurting the artists who are actually creating value. However we keep seeing artists who want to take advantage of a new model and the publishers prevent them from making decisions about their own music.
Right now the band is getting nothing from the downloaded music. What Mike is saying is that by offering an official free download they can get emails and contact information from their fans in order to get them to shows, purchase merch, or even offer limited content to those who downloaded through the site.
Wishing file sharing away isn't going to work, and publishers like Sony are preventing artists from adapting to a 21st century digital economy.
Dumbest Business Decision of 2013
"This policy is line with many other clothing, shoe and electronic stores who are also facing the same issue."
I'm wondering just how common this practice is. It has to be one of the worst business idea I have ever heard, it seems unlikely that many businesses would be that stupid to do it.
So Much for Publicity
In a world where publicity and word of mouth advertising dominate, it seems baffling to ban people from giving your "product" free publicity.
The worst was the Olympics. It is an event that is supposed to evoke an image of being shared by the world, when in fact it's own by a couple of media companies.
Artists vs. Publishers
What is interesting about stories like this is that it turns the talking points used by publishers on their heads. They argue that music piracy is primarily hurting the artists who are actually creating value. However we keep seeing artists who want to take advantage of a new model and the publishers prevent them from making decisions about their own music.
Right now the band is getting nothing from the downloaded music. What Mike is saying is that by offering an official free download they can get emails and contact information from their fans in order to get them to shows, purchase merch, or even offer limited content to those who downloaded through the site.
Wishing file sharing away isn't going to work, and publishers like Sony are preventing artists from adapting to a 21st century digital economy.
This drives me nuts so much...
I had to write a post about it and the Boston censorship on my own blog. Thanks for posting this story.