 |
|
John Schwartz/NYTimes are reporting that the music industry has decided to warn the next 204 lawsuit targets:
Cary Sherman, president of the RIAA, said "we want to go the extra mile and offer illegal file sharers an additional chance to work this out short of legal action." This new policy was announced at last month's Senate hearing. Senator Norm Coleman (MN) said he wished it hadn't taken hearings to bring this sort of consideration about. Now how about considering judicial review for all subpoena's for user information for those they intend to sue?
In the meantime, Epeus Epigone talks about Steve Jobs' comment about iTunes "editing tactics": At the iTunes Music launch, Jobs said something very wrong - that record labels should be the arbiters of taste - that they edit for our own good, and that unsigned bands need not apply.
The key point of digital media is that we can all edit, so I edited him: video file.
It's interesting, because we all know, time and again, that attempts to control or limit the network result in loss of business. And then you leave yourself wide open for disruption. Biz 101. It's not like the Internet offers huge barriers to entry for offering interesting music over a website. And considering Microsoft's Q&A (and other media offerings) on iTunes (I'm shocked to hear MS is down on iTunes - kinda snarky, even) after they've added Windows support, (link from Ernie Miller), Apple could remain more competitive by embracing the rip, mix, burn philosophy once again, allowing any music into iTunes, regardless of whether it was produced by an RIAA affiliate. What would it cost them? Very little. It seems anticompetitive as well. Is this the result of some exclusionary agreement between Apple and record companies in exchange for industry music? It would be interesting to find out if Steve's spin on "editing" out the smaller music is actually about appeasing the music industry. Hey Steve, innovation is cool and it leads to more cool stuff, like the Motorola C350, where you can mix your own dance tracks anywhere for Groov'n On The Move.
Ernie also points to an open source audio media player/ripper. Good stuff.
Posted by Mary Hodder at October 18, 2003 08:04 AMMary,
For the most part I agree that the iTMS should include as many independent artists as possible. As for why Job's said what he did, we can only speculate. I would add a few more possible scenarios based on economics.
First, I assume it is not costless to contract with a new artist/publisher (for Apple). Even if the contract is cookie-cutter, they still have to set up a payment scheme. The setup costs also includes ripping and encoding the files with the Fairplay DRM information. Second, while bandwidth and storage space is cheap, it isn't free.
I think it is possible that Apple's main concern is with efficiency in their own operation.
That said, I agree that we can't rule out that he (Jobs) has an "understanding" with the major labels or, for that manner, that he has a different view of music than you and me.
Posted by: Fredrik Wallenberg on October 19, 2003 08:59 AM"As for why Job's said what he did, we can only speculate. I would add a few more possible scenarios based on economics."
I'm hoping his comment was purely based on economics and not on musical snobbery.
Digital distribution services like apple iTunes are the future, and could be the lifeblood of independent artists, though I think the revolution is longer-off than the media hype would have us believe. It's at such an early stage that it will be years before most of the world uses it as the MAIN way to get music.
Posted by: Tom on December 10, 2003 05:02 AM