p2pnet news view | P2P | Music:- I’d laugh, if only my lips weren’t chapped from this cold I have.

Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony Music’s RIAA is run by people who are paid handsome salaries to make other people’s lives unbearable. It’s not all they do, of course, but it’s what they’re best at.

Just before Christmas, the RIAA used to Wall Street Journal to say it’d halted the bizarre sue ‘em all marketing campaign it’s been running for the Big 4 corporate music labels since 2003.

Instead, it’d get ISPs to do its dirty work.

But it’s still pretty much business as usual with innocent men, women and children across America still being called file sharing criminals. Because according to the Big 4, sharing copyrighted music files online is exactly the same as walking into a store and stealing a CD off the shelf.

It is, of course, nothing of the kind, but so pervasive and persuasive has the RIAA indoctrination blitz been that even TechCrunch’s Michael Arrington (right) calls it stealing.

At the end of the day, the RIAA is no more than a blunt instrument – a standard business tool wielded by Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony Music as they strive to gain total control of how, and by whom, music is distributed over the Internet. And Arrington appears to have been selected by at least one of the labels to get its message to all those online file sharing crooks, to wit »»»

RIAA statements of a cessation of hostilities against the people who keep the corporate music industry and business notwithstanding, no real quarter will be given — not, at least, for the next few years.

‘ … no remorse at outright stealing music’

In TechCrunch, Michael says he recently had a, “surprisingly candid lunch conversation” with a big music label executive, “and a good part of our talk focused on the future of music”. And he says he asked the usual question, “Why are you guys so damned clueless?”

Their, “business is disintegrating” before their eyes,” and all they do is, “go for short term cash gains (lawsuits, mafia-style collection rackets from venture backed music startups, etc.)”.

The long term costs, Michael pointed out to this unnamed executive, “are horrendous – an entire generation or two of young music lovers feel no remorse at outright stealing music. Particularly since most online streaming is now free, it’s hard to understand why downloading or sharing songs should be a crime.”

Well, it isn’t stealing, and file sharing isn’t a crime.

And when corporate music executives are being “surprisingly candid,” it usually means they’re lying.

Said the unnamed executive, according to TechCrunch, “The labels fully understand that recorded music, streamed or downloaded, is going to be free in the future.”

Free in the future? It’s free right now. Has been for years. Which is what this is all about.

‘ … recorded music will largely be little more than marketing collateral’

CD sales continue to decline by 20% per year, and the Big 4 understand, “the only thing that’ll stop that trend is when those sales reach zero,” TechCrunch goes on. “Nothing will replace those revenues.”

They, “also understand that recorded music will largely be little more than marketing collateral, meaning that the Internet services being sued today for copyright infringement will be embraced in the future as ways to get the word out on hot new music,” says the post adding »»»

These services pay for the privilege today (either through high streaming rates or in court), but in the future they’ll be the ones getting paid by labels. Think radio payola at a whole new level, and there won’t be any more talk about social networks giving stock to labels and artists. Money will flow the other way, as it should.

By 2013 (maybe as early as 2011) it’ll make sense for the labels to finally reorganize their business models around the reality created by the Internet and person to person file sharing services. No longer will the labels be tied to revenue limited to sales of master recordings – by then most or all artists will be under 360 music contracts that give the labels a cut of virtually every revenue stream artists can tap into – fan sites, concerts, merchandise, endorsement deals, and everything else.

But until then, he says, the spreadsheets and financial models dictate that suing customers and partners just makes too much sense. Venture capitalists have directed hundreds of millions of dollars, via their litigation-mired startups, into the label coffers. To some extent those payments will continue, although the big payment days are likely over. Apple still sends a lot of money to the labels for paid downloads, and sites like MySpace Music, Imeem, Rhapsody and Last.fm pay big streaming dollars. Until CD sales really stagnate, all those revenue streams bring in more money than facing reality.

For most industries, embracing old revenue streams until they are completely petered out is a great way to open the door wide open to competitors with more innovative business models. But the Innovator’s Dilemma problem doesn’t necessarily apply to the music industry. The big labels have a lock on talent, and there’s no reason to believe that new artists won’t continue to strive to lock themselves in to one of them.

“What this means for us music consumers,” Michael adds is, “don’t expect much to change for the next few years. But sometime in the next decade we’ll see a real renaissance in how music is distributed and consumed. And who knows, a decade after that we may have all forgiven the music labels.”

A ‘limitless music outlet’

However, is that really the way things will be? Are we really as powerless as that?

Or is this just reinforcement of a message the Big 4 have been trying to cram down our throats since they first launched their sue ‘em all campaigns — that they rule and we are but mindless cash-cow surfs with no free wills of our own?

Personally, I haven’t been in a record store for almost 20 years. And I’ve never paid a dollar (or more) for an Apple (or other) corporate download worth only a few cents. When it comes to corporate crap, thrift stores, garage sales, and so on, are fine.

For online music, the internet is a limitless music outlet jam-packed with all kinds songs and tunes from everywhere in the world. You can order CDs, or get high quality downloads from people who really need your dollars and who’ll use them to produce even more good music.

And that’s the way it’s been since the first mp3 was uploaded.

Who needs the Big 4?

No one.

Jon Newton – p2pnet

TechCrunch – Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011, March, 2009

---

Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php

---

Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.

This entry was posted on Monday, March 9th, 2009 at 8:24 am and is filed under Music, P2P. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

HOME

Viewed 1861 times