Just when you thought they were doing something right...

Sony BMG clarified the earlier rumors about going DRM-Free--they will offer DRM-Free downloads, but just to people who purchase a physical card in a store and visit a Sony BMG online store (www.musicpass.com). Right, so, this is different from purchasing the physical CD and burning it to your computer how? Oh, that's right, the RIAA won't sue you this way. These cards aren't a new idea, either. Check out www.DiscRevolt.com for another example of how bands can self-publish physical cards redeemable for digital downloads (and while you're there, pick up the new Edison Glass EP).

End of an era (good riddance)

Well, looks like Sony finally decided to give up on DRM. Bout damn time. This means pretty much everyone under the sun is free of DRM (though the EU is apparently considering their own DRM...weird). The next question is: why is anyone still using iTunes?

First Discussion: Give the people what they want

So here's the deal: as TechJam goes on throughout today and tomorrow, I'll be posting a quick summary of key notes from each discussion on here. These won't be as in depth as the end summaries that will come in the revised packet of readings, but it's a quick catch-up for folks who are joining the weekend's discussions late in the game.
Our first discussion revolved around determining what are the wants and needs of artists, labels, and fans. Here is a quick overview of some of the stuff we hit on (please comment and keep the discussion going!):

Bands: want to easily and effectively get their music heard by as many people as possible

• Need someone pushing the marketing button all the time—something that labels can offer
• Interaction with media—more mentions spread virally

Labels: want to promote their artists, make money doing so, publishing rights

• New metrics for determining whether a band will be successful—but you can never take the human aspect out
• Healthy number of retention and repeat visits to myspace (etc) page
• Want to have stake in every aspect of bands

Users: want access to music, want access to bands

• MTV people: want “the show”
• Indie shop people: dig for the most obscure
• Majority: like it for what it is and don’t pursue it much beyond that—really the key to distribution
• Want tools to be able to “communicate” with bands—don’t like one-way conduit of information (OMG I LOVE U GUYZ SOOOOOOO MUCH!!! LOL!)
• Love opportunities to generate their own band-approved content related

A little humor for your Friday...

What happens when you download music?

Oh, Canada!

Oh, those crazy canucks. The Songwriters Association of Canada (SAC) has proposed a $5 monthly fee on the internet, collected by ISPs, in order to compensate artists for songs being transferred via P2P sharing. Yikes. Not that many people would really notice that extra charge (considering they probably already pay a good bit in weird taxes and fees above their rate quote), but this just ISN'T a solution. First of all, how does the revenue from this get distributed fairly and evenly? Chances are pretty good that the vast majority (if not all) of the funds will go directly into the pocket of the major labels. Not only that, but since this would be a new thing, the labels wouldn't be contractually obligated to pay ANY of it to the artists. And if the labels needed another way out of paying the artists, there's no way of tracking exactly how many times each artist's music is downloaded. So what it would come down to is essentially the government taxing people because they're not making as much money as they're used to. Great.
But think further--wouldn't the movie industry want in on this, too? I mean, clearly music isn't the only thing getting pushed and pulled through those tubes of the internet. Heck, I don't have the numbers in front of me, but isn't porn likely to have about as many downloads, too?
Let's break down a few numbers:
Canada's Population= 32 million
Multiply by approx 2/3, since presumably not each individual has their own internet account= 20 million
x $5 = $100 mil
x 12 months = $1.2 billion (1/1000th of Canada's GDP--that's a pretty significant tax)
That's no chump change they're throwing around. Especially since not everyone (in fact, percentage-wise, relatively few) downloads music and movies for free. In fact, it's double punnishment for those who choose not to steal--not only are they taxed for things they don't get (taxation without representation!), but they're also still paying for the music they want.
Am I insane, or is exploiting loyal customers a bad strategy? Clearly the labels are not flat broke (by any stretch), so the majority of people still do evidently pay for their music--why make them pay again?
If, somehow, this proposition gets through, don't be surprised if download rates skyrocket and music sales plummet in Canada. The oldest lesson is business is if you piss your customers off, they'll find alternatives. Why can't industry folks put their money and business accumen to use towards a constructive, rather than destructive solution?

No steps forward and two steps back

Apparently, it's Universal's policy that artists can only post 90-second clips of their songs on their MySpace pages, or anywhere other than the company site where songs might be streamed. Just when it seemed like the majors might finally be catching onto this whole DRM-free thing and were starting to get back into the good graces of their listeners they go and create a disaster like this.

Is classical a step ahead of the game?

Not known for innovation, the classical genre has taken a step ahead of its pop/rock/rap counterparts, at least in the major label sector. Deutsche Grammophon now sells high quality (320 kbps), DRM-free tracks and albums on their own site from $1.29 a song to $11.99 an album, available worldwide. Are major labels going to go the way of Radiohead (okay, it's a stretch) and bypass the retailers altogether? Or does classical's relative immunity from BitTorrent and other illegal burning allow them to do things that other genres can't (or won't)?

Perhaps they'll reconsider suing people for more than they're worth...

Looks like EMI is considering cutting its funding to the RIAA and IFPI. Finally, they may have realized that it's not prudent to fund a war against your customers. Will they go through with it? Will anyone follow their lead? Or will the beaurocracy of the industry prevent any drastic measures? Only time will tell.

Universal CEO admits tech cluelessness

As another indicator of how technology has a major opportunity to overtake (and save) the music industry, Universal Music CEO Doug Morris admitted in a forthcoming Wired interview to having no idea what to do about technology.
"There's no one in the record industry that's a technologist," Morris explains. "That's a misconception writers make all the time, that the record industry missed this. They didn't. They just didn't know what to do. It's like if you were suddenly asked to operate on your dog to remove his kidney. What would you do?"
Personally, I would hire a vet. But to Morris, even that wasn't an option. "We didn't know who to hire," he says, becoming more agitated. "I wouldn't be able to recognize a good technology person — anyone with a good bullshit story would have gotten past me."
Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't a major part of the CEOs job to be in tune with market trends and to adapt his or her company to them? He may not personally understand technology, but he does run a major corporation with thousands of employees and a massive budget--surely he could've found a few people around him to explore and learn about what it might take to at least keep up with technology?
Apparently not. But at least that leaves a door open for the rest of us...

Original quote from NYMag.com