MySpace Targeted Advertising Spells Opportunity for Bands
MySpace is now planning a targeted advertising initiative that spells opportunity for bands and music companies. The initiative, called SelfServe, allows smaller advertisers to create and target their ads across the network. Bands are an obvious fit for the platform, though MySpace is also pitching the concept to politicians, small businesses, and other groups. "Targeting is for everyone — from the smallest band to the biggest brand — now MySpace provides a solution for anyone looking to advertise on the most trafficked site in the country," said Michael Barrett, chief revenue officer for Fox Interactive Media.
The new concept, slated for release early next year, was recently disclosed at the ad:tech conference in New York.
Story by news analyst Alexandra Osorio.
Source: http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/110607myspace/view
donderdag 8 november 2007
dinsdag 6 november 2007
The piracy debate
The Piracy Debate
The debate over piracy is one that has no end. One one side you have Capgemeni's recent "value gap" study pegged piracy's impact on the U.K. music industry at 18% of its decline from its 2004 level. The majority of the decline, Capgemini estimated, was due to the unbundling of the album, or the substitution of a small number of digital tracks for an album.
But wait. A new Canadian study by academians Birgitte Andersen and Marion Frenz found that online piracy has no impact on CD purchases. (Download a PDF of the report here.) However, in the subset of Canadians who do use P2P services, file-sharing was found to increase CD purchasing (by 0.44 CDs per album download). The study assumes 29% of Canadians are P2P downloaders.
"In the aggregate, we are unable to discover any direct relationship between P2P filesharing and CD purchases in Canada. The analysis of the entire Canadian population does not uncover either a positive or negative relationship between the number of files downloaded from P2P networks and CDs purchased. That is, we find no direct evidence to suggest that the net effect of P2P file-sharing on CD purchasing is either positive or negative for Canada as a whole. ...
However, our analysis of the Canadian P2P file-sharing subpopulation suggests that there is a strong positive relationship between P2P file-sharing and CD purchasing. That is, among Canadians actually engaged in it, P2P file-sharing increases CD purchasing. We estimate that the effect of one additional P2P download per month is to increase music purchasing by 0.44 CDs per year."
Professor Stanley Liebowitz, who has studied the relationship between file-sharing and CD sales, commented on the Canadian study at his website (he refers to the authors as A/F):
"With these seemingly innocuous assumptions, the results of A/F imply that obtaining music illicitly should have increased record sales by 50% (since each illicit album increases sales by half a unit and there are as many illicit albums as legitimate sales). Contrary to the large increase in album sales predicted by A/F, album sales in Canada have fallen considerably since 1999. According to IFPI statistics unit sales were down 30% by 2005 whereas CRIA statistics indicate that unit sales were down by 20%. ...
To believe the results of A/F you must accept that sales have dropped by half in 6 years, due to some factor that no one can identify. Does this seem even remotely plausible? This would be such a steep decline in such a short period of time that it would seem impossible to not have a clearly identified cause. And A/F’s results rule out the possibility of other entertainment activities siphoning off record listeners."
So is online piracy a problem or isn't it? Judging from FCC Commissioner Deborah Tate's speech last week at Vanderbilt University, Washington D.C.'s perception is still that online piracy is a major problem. Commissioner Tate talked almost entirely about piracy -- online and physical -- and laid out numerous examples of piracy's negative impact on the entertainment industry and the economy as a whole. (Of course, Commissioner Tate knows what topic to focus on when in Music City.) Even though most of the figures could be questionable (e.g., sourced from trade groups like the RIAA and the IFPI), it was obvious that Commissioner Tate is dedicated to helping content owners fight online piracy.
Bonus reading: An April 2004 article at the New York Times about the well known Harvard/UNC study that found no link between file-sharing and CD sales.
Posted by glenn on November 5, 2007
Source: http://www.coolfer.com/blog/archives/2007/11/the_piracy_dile.php
The debate over piracy is one that has no end. One one side you have Capgemeni's recent "value gap" study pegged piracy's impact on the U.K. music industry at 18% of its decline from its 2004 level. The majority of the decline, Capgemini estimated, was due to the unbundling of the album, or the substitution of a small number of digital tracks for an album.
But wait. A new Canadian study by academians Birgitte Andersen and Marion Frenz found that online piracy has no impact on CD purchases. (Download a PDF of the report here.) However, in the subset of Canadians who do use P2P services, file-sharing was found to increase CD purchasing (by 0.44 CDs per album download). The study assumes 29% of Canadians are P2P downloaders.
"In the aggregate, we are unable to discover any direct relationship between P2P filesharing and CD purchases in Canada. The analysis of the entire Canadian population does not uncover either a positive or negative relationship between the number of files downloaded from P2P networks and CDs purchased. That is, we find no direct evidence to suggest that the net effect of P2P file-sharing on CD purchasing is either positive or negative for Canada as a whole. ...
However, our analysis of the Canadian P2P file-sharing subpopulation suggests that there is a strong positive relationship between P2P file-sharing and CD purchasing. That is, among Canadians actually engaged in it, P2P file-sharing increases CD purchasing. We estimate that the effect of one additional P2P download per month is to increase music purchasing by 0.44 CDs per year."
Professor Stanley Liebowitz, who has studied the relationship between file-sharing and CD sales, commented on the Canadian study at his website (he refers to the authors as A/F):
"With these seemingly innocuous assumptions, the results of A/F imply that obtaining music illicitly should have increased record sales by 50% (since each illicit album increases sales by half a unit and there are as many illicit albums as legitimate sales). Contrary to the large increase in album sales predicted by A/F, album sales in Canada have fallen considerably since 1999. According to IFPI statistics unit sales were down 30% by 2005 whereas CRIA statistics indicate that unit sales were down by 20%. ...
To believe the results of A/F you must accept that sales have dropped by half in 6 years, due to some factor that no one can identify. Does this seem even remotely plausible? This would be such a steep decline in such a short period of time that it would seem impossible to not have a clearly identified cause. And A/F’s results rule out the possibility of other entertainment activities siphoning off record listeners."
So is online piracy a problem or isn't it? Judging from FCC Commissioner Deborah Tate's speech last week at Vanderbilt University, Washington D.C.'s perception is still that online piracy is a major problem. Commissioner Tate talked almost entirely about piracy -- online and physical -- and laid out numerous examples of piracy's negative impact on the entertainment industry and the economy as a whole. (Of course, Commissioner Tate knows what topic to focus on when in Music City.) Even though most of the figures could be questionable (e.g., sourced from trade groups like the RIAA and the IFPI), it was obvious that Commissioner Tate is dedicated to helping content owners fight online piracy.
Bonus reading: An April 2004 article at the New York Times about the well known Harvard/UNC study that found no link between file-sharing and CD sales.
Posted by glenn on November 5, 2007
Source: http://www.coolfer.com/blog/archives/2007/11/the_piracy_dile.php
maandag 5 november 2007
Laura Marling to release album in 'song box' format
Laura Marling to release album in 'song box' format
Package will contain CD, gig ticket and 'momentos'
4 hours ago
Rising star Laura Marling has announced that her as-yet-untitled debut album, released on February 4, 2008, will be released in a special 'song box' format.
The package will contain the CD album, entry to a gig in the form of a redeemable code, plus 'momentos' relating to each song on the album.
The package will sell for £19.99 and can be pre-ordered from Marling's official website.
The move is similar to that of Radiohead, who have made a deluxe version of their new album 'In Rainbows' available for £40, which features extra songs, artwork and vinyl and CD versions of the album.
Source:http://www.nme.com/news/laura-marling/32288
Package will contain CD, gig ticket and 'momentos'
4 hours ago
Rising star Laura Marling has announced that her as-yet-untitled debut album, released on February 4, 2008, will be released in a special 'song box' format.
The package will contain the CD album, entry to a gig in the form of a redeemable code, plus 'momentos' relating to each song on the album.
The package will sell for £19.99 and can be pre-ordered from Marling's official website.
The move is similar to that of Radiohead, who have made a deluxe version of their new album 'In Rainbows' available for £40, which features extra songs, artwork and vinyl and CD versions of the album.
Source:http://www.nme.com/news/laura-marling/32288
dinsdag 23 oktober 2007
Music Industry looks to new Models to boost Sales
By Yinka Adegoke
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The U.S. music industry is becoming more open-minded about working with online music stores from the tiniest start-up to Amazon.com, hoping to boost digital music sales and erode the dominance of Apple Inc's iTunes.
U.S. music companies, once paranoid about the wide-scale piracy enabled by Web-based companies like Napster and KaZaa, are now embracing new business models such as giving away free song downloads.
Their goal is: to increase digital revenue as CD sales drop more sharply than anticipated; and to create alternatives to iTunes to boost their negotiating power against Apple when licensing contracts are renewed.
"Any viable music discovery option is one we want to see out there," said a major music company executive who asked not to be identified.
"If done the right way, this leads to new revenues as some of them have pretty good built-in mechanisms to lead to direct purchases," he said, reflecting the view of other industry executives contacted by Reuters.
Many Web start-ups have proposed business models to take on iTunes, which has a 70 percent market share of digital music sales. Many have also failed as they get caught up in negotiations with the music companies.
One of the most difficult parts of getting a digital service started is obtaining the licenses to the music itself. In most cases, top music labels will not provide licenses unless the start-ups pay a hefty advance fee.
Amazon is expected to launch its iTunes rival this week, after signing deals with Universal Music Group and EMI.
Two smaller start-ups, Qtrax and Spiralfrog, are promising to offer music downloads for free to consumers supported by advertising sales that will be shared with music companies.
Whether these ad-supported models succeed remains to be seen, but Qtrax Chief Executive Allan Klepfisz said it will be an important way to compete with the free music still illegally available at peer-to-peer networks like Limewire.
"The idea is to make a better version of free," he said in an interview.
Klepfisz said Qtrax is due to launch in December after four years of building the business, during which it has managed to sign all the majors record companies except the biggest Universal Music, owned by French media giant Vivendi.
Spiralfrog said on Monday it launched its service, 13 months after the company signed rights to Universal's catalog. According to an exploratory public offering filing by the company last month, Spiralfrog will pay $4.4 million in nonrefundable fees to Universal by November 15.
"We have controlled content in an advertiser-friendly environment," said Spiralfrog founder and Chairman Joe Mohen, who appointed a new management team earlier this year after losing two senior executives, who are now consultants to Qtrax. "People were discovering music in one place and then downloading it somewhere else. Spiralfrog will change that."
Spiralfrog and Qtrax are not the first to support free and legal downloads with advertising. Ruckus Network Inc of Herndon, Virginia has been offering a similar service for three years and is now officially at 170 U.S. colleges and claims 700,000 members.
A big problem for these free download services is that they are incompatible with the most popular digital music player, Apple's iPod.
This is where Palo Alto, California start-up Lala.com comes in. It has been pushing a business model that allows fans to buy digital songs and upload them directly on to their iPods. Songs on an iPod can not be transferred elsewhere.
Yet, as a measure of how difficult it is to gain traction in this market, Lala only has one deal with a major label, Warner Music Group. Lala also offers to send fans free CDs of digital albums they buy from its site, and also plans to give them a chance to "return" downloads they do not like.
"There's a significant amount of trust involved," said Lala founder Bill Nguyen. "But it's unsustainable if we don't do it right," he said.
© Copyright 2007 Reuters.
Source: http://www.i4u.com/article11570.html
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The U.S. music industry is becoming more open-minded about working with online music stores from the tiniest start-up to Amazon.com, hoping to boost digital music sales and erode the dominance of Apple Inc's iTunes.
U.S. music companies, once paranoid about the wide-scale piracy enabled by Web-based companies like Napster and KaZaa, are now embracing new business models such as giving away free song downloads.
Their goal is: to increase digital revenue as CD sales drop more sharply than anticipated; and to create alternatives to iTunes to boost their negotiating power against Apple when licensing contracts are renewed.
"Any viable music discovery option is one we want to see out there," said a major music company executive who asked not to be identified.
"If done the right way, this leads to new revenues as some of them have pretty good built-in mechanisms to lead to direct purchases," he said, reflecting the view of other industry executives contacted by Reuters.
Many Web start-ups have proposed business models to take on iTunes, which has a 70 percent market share of digital music sales. Many have also failed as they get caught up in negotiations with the music companies.
One of the most difficult parts of getting a digital service started is obtaining the licenses to the music itself. In most cases, top music labels will not provide licenses unless the start-ups pay a hefty advance fee.
Amazon is expected to launch its iTunes rival this week, after signing deals with Universal Music Group and EMI.
Two smaller start-ups, Qtrax and Spiralfrog, are promising to offer music downloads for free to consumers supported by advertising sales that will be shared with music companies.
Whether these ad-supported models succeed remains to be seen, but Qtrax Chief Executive Allan Klepfisz said it will be an important way to compete with the free music still illegally available at peer-to-peer networks like Limewire.
"The idea is to make a better version of free," he said in an interview.
Klepfisz said Qtrax is due to launch in December after four years of building the business, during which it has managed to sign all the majors record companies except the biggest Universal Music, owned by French media giant Vivendi.
Spiralfrog said on Monday it launched its service, 13 months after the company signed rights to Universal's catalog. According to an exploratory public offering filing by the company last month, Spiralfrog will pay $4.4 million in nonrefundable fees to Universal by November 15.
"We have controlled content in an advertiser-friendly environment," said Spiralfrog founder and Chairman Joe Mohen, who appointed a new management team earlier this year after losing two senior executives, who are now consultants to Qtrax. "People were discovering music in one place and then downloading it somewhere else. Spiralfrog will change that."
Spiralfrog and Qtrax are not the first to support free and legal downloads with advertising. Ruckus Network Inc of Herndon, Virginia has been offering a similar service for three years and is now officially at 170 U.S. colleges and claims 700,000 members.
A big problem for these free download services is that they are incompatible with the most popular digital music player, Apple's iPod.
This is where Palo Alto, California start-up Lala.com comes in. It has been pushing a business model that allows fans to buy digital songs and upload them directly on to their iPods. Songs on an iPod can not be transferred elsewhere.
Yet, as a measure of how difficult it is to gain traction in this market, Lala only has one deal with a major label, Warner Music Group. Lala also offers to send fans free CDs of digital albums they buy from its site, and also plans to give them a chance to "return" downloads they do not like.
"There's a significant amount of trust involved," said Lala founder Bill Nguyen. "But it's unsustainable if we don't do it right," he said.
© Copyright 2007 Reuters.
Source: http://www.i4u.com/article11570.html
zaterdag 13 oktober 2007
Music business hits jackpot at casinos
(2007-10-13)
By Mitchell Peters
NEW YORK (Billboard) - The music industry is striking it rich at casinos.
As casino venues target concertgoers from all walks of life through creative artist bookings, the effort hasn't gone unnoticed by those in the business.
"If you're an agent, you love casinos," says Greg Oswald, a William Morris agent for such acts as Big & Rich, Hank Williams Jr. and Lynyrd Skynyrd. As new casinos boomed in the past 15 years, "it's found money," he adds.
Most casinos are proactive in booking top-selling rock and pop acts, with the specific intent of drawing younger gamblers. But, as Oswald says, casinos appeal to a broad base of fans, therefore allowing booking opportunities for multiple genres.
For some country acts in particular, casino venues have proved to be a beneficial asset when routing a tour. "Frankly, for a lot of artists in the country business and other genres, it has saved their bacon," Oswald says, adding that many casinos still draw older crowds. In 2007, Kenny Rogers, whom Oswald books, will play 30 casino dates nationwide.
Tom Cantone, VP of sports and entertainment at the Mohegan Sun casino in Uncasville, Conn., says live music is a major component in modern-day casinos.
"You really have to get into the event business to drive traffic and revenue on a consistent basis," he says.
This summer alone, Mohegan Sun hosted 164 events across its three venues -- the 10,000-seat Mohegan Sun Arena, the 400-seat Wolf Den club and the 330-seat Cabaret Theatre. In 2006, 51 shows at the arena grossed $15 million and drew more than 387,000 fans, according to Billboard Boxscore.
Mohegan Sun recently broke ground on a $740 million project set to include a House of Blues, Jimmy Buffett's Margaritaville restaurant and store, and a 1,000-room hotel. Full completion is scheduled for 2010.
Steve Gietka, VP of entertainment for Trump Entertainment Resorts in Atlantic City, N.J., oversees booking at venues in Trump Taj Mahal, Trump Plaza and Trump Marina. He says that while live entertainment certainly helps sell hotel rooms and fill restaurants and nightclubs, there's a price to be paid.
"Because we're casinos, and agents, artists and managers believe that their artists help us drive gaming revenues, we typically pay premiums when compared to regular promoters," Gietka says.
Indeed, William Morris' Oswald says that casinos are in a good position to buy plenty of talent. "They have ancillary income in the form of bar, food and obviously, casinos," Oswald says. "So it's easier than the guy who is only going to make money from the box office."
But there are also challenges with casino venues, No. 1 being overbooking, according to Oswald. In some markets, casinos are bringing in act after act, which can sometimes exhaust the local fan base.
"They've made it real hard to sell tickets," Oswald says. "The fans are spoiled because they can go down to the casino on any Friday night and there will be a big act." As a result, promoters are forced to lower ticket prices to attract concertgoers, he adds.
But hosting too many concerts has never been a problem for Mohegan Sun, which is owned by the Mohegan Tribe. Arena concerts scheduled through October include such diverse acts as Jennifer Lopez and Marc Anthony, Big & Rich featuring Cowboy Troy, Van Halen, Mana, Maroon 5, Phil Lesh and Kelly Clarkson.
And with the 25-and-older demographic expanding, Cantone remains confident that casino bookings will reflect their tastes. "It used to be where an older market went to have their entertainment fix. But now the twentysomethings are going. If you're young, want to go out and play poker or blackjack, then catch a cool concert, where else can you go?"
http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/kuer/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=1165130
By Mitchell Peters
NEW YORK (Billboard) - The music industry is striking it rich at casinos.
As casino venues target concertgoers from all walks of life through creative artist bookings, the effort hasn't gone unnoticed by those in the business.
"If you're an agent, you love casinos," says Greg Oswald, a William Morris agent for such acts as Big & Rich, Hank Williams Jr. and Lynyrd Skynyrd. As new casinos boomed in the past 15 years, "it's found money," he adds.
Most casinos are proactive in booking top-selling rock and pop acts, with the specific intent of drawing younger gamblers. But, as Oswald says, casinos appeal to a broad base of fans, therefore allowing booking opportunities for multiple genres.
For some country acts in particular, casino venues have proved to be a beneficial asset when routing a tour. "Frankly, for a lot of artists in the country business and other genres, it has saved their bacon," Oswald says, adding that many casinos still draw older crowds. In 2007, Kenny Rogers, whom Oswald books, will play 30 casino dates nationwide.
Tom Cantone, VP of sports and entertainment at the Mohegan Sun casino in Uncasville, Conn., says live music is a major component in modern-day casinos.
"You really have to get into the event business to drive traffic and revenue on a consistent basis," he says.
This summer alone, Mohegan Sun hosted 164 events across its three venues -- the 10,000-seat Mohegan Sun Arena, the 400-seat Wolf Den club and the 330-seat Cabaret Theatre. In 2006, 51 shows at the arena grossed $15 million and drew more than 387,000 fans, according to Billboard Boxscore.
Mohegan Sun recently broke ground on a $740 million project set to include a House of Blues, Jimmy Buffett's Margaritaville restaurant and store, and a 1,000-room hotel. Full completion is scheduled for 2010.
Steve Gietka, VP of entertainment for Trump Entertainment Resorts in Atlantic City, N.J., oversees booking at venues in Trump Taj Mahal, Trump Plaza and Trump Marina. He says that while live entertainment certainly helps sell hotel rooms and fill restaurants and nightclubs, there's a price to be paid.
"Because we're casinos, and agents, artists and managers believe that their artists help us drive gaming revenues, we typically pay premiums when compared to regular promoters," Gietka says.
Indeed, William Morris' Oswald says that casinos are in a good position to buy plenty of talent. "They have ancillary income in the form of bar, food and obviously, casinos," Oswald says. "So it's easier than the guy who is only going to make money from the box office."
But there are also challenges with casino venues, No. 1 being overbooking, according to Oswald. In some markets, casinos are bringing in act after act, which can sometimes exhaust the local fan base.
"They've made it real hard to sell tickets," Oswald says. "The fans are spoiled because they can go down to the casino on any Friday night and there will be a big act." As a result, promoters are forced to lower ticket prices to attract concertgoers, he adds.
But hosting too many concerts has never been a problem for Mohegan Sun, which is owned by the Mohegan Tribe. Arena concerts scheduled through October include such diverse acts as Jennifer Lopez and Marc Anthony, Big & Rich featuring Cowboy Troy, Van Halen, Mana, Maroon 5, Phil Lesh and Kelly Clarkson.
And with the 25-and-older demographic expanding, Cantone remains confident that casino bookings will reflect their tastes. "It used to be where an older market went to have their entertainment fix. But now the twentysomethings are going. If you're young, want to go out and play poker or blackjack, then catch a cool concert, where else can you go?"
http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/kuer/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=1165130
Universal Music puts its faith in memory cure for sliding sales
October 13, 2007
Dan Sabbagh, Media Editor
Universal Music, the world’s biggest music company, is to release singles on USB memory sticks this month, in an attempt to arrest the decline in music sales.
The Vivendi-owned company plans to charge about £4.99 for USB singles starting on October 29 with releases from piano rock band Keane and Nicole, the lead singer of the Pussycat Dolls. That compares with £2.99 for a typical CD single.
However, the hope is that fans will be willing to pay extra because the extra storage capacity on a USB allows the addition of videos and other multimedia.
Brian Rose, the commercial director for Universal UK, said: “This is aimed at the younger, 12 to 24 year olds, who no longer believe that the CD is as cool as it used to be”.
Related Links
Music industry reaction to In Rainbows
Indies accuse Universal of gaining monopoly
Hurt hard by music piracy and legal downloads, sales of CDs are down by 19 per cent in the US and 10 per cent in the UK in the first half of the year.
But with physical music more profitable than downloads, the music business is eager to find formats that will keep consumers coming back to record stores.
Universal’s move is being gradually followed by the other three majors, although by contrast their efforts only amount to dipping their toe in the water, with EMI planning to release Pink Floyd’s studio albums on the format, while Warner Music is aiming squarely at the younger market with a November release of a part-album from electro-punk band Hadouken!
An agreement between the music companies and the Offical Charts Company, which runs the Top 40, means that USB sticks are eligible for inclusion in the chart. That now justifies making them available at the same time as a normal release.
Eric Daugan, vice-president, of digital business in Europe for Warner Music, said: “The CD is an old technology that has not evolved. Fortunately people still want to own a physical product, so with the extra storage, the idea is to offer a better consumer experience”.
Warner Music is hoping that Hadouken!’s USB will retail at £7.99. Promoted as being “halfway between a single and album” by the record company it includes six new songs and five old ones, with links to multimedia content on the internet, and an interface whose job it is to replace the look and feel of the paper album cover.
For Universal, the UK is the test market for the USB format worldwide, partly because it believes the UK is the last important market for singles.
The company hopes to release USB albums before the end of the year from acts such as Kanye West and Amy Winehouse – although rivals privately query its emphasis on the technology when there are alternatives such as MVI, a DVD-based format that combines music and video.
Mr Rose said: “We’re hoping that people will see USB singles as a piece of merchandise. There’s obviously a demand for collectable physical music the kind of format people want to stick up on their wall”.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/media/article2648613.ece
Dan Sabbagh, Media Editor
Universal Music, the world’s biggest music company, is to release singles on USB memory sticks this month, in an attempt to arrest the decline in music sales.
The Vivendi-owned company plans to charge about £4.99 for USB singles starting on October 29 with releases from piano rock band Keane and Nicole, the lead singer of the Pussycat Dolls. That compares with £2.99 for a typical CD single.
However, the hope is that fans will be willing to pay extra because the extra storage capacity on a USB allows the addition of videos and other multimedia.
Brian Rose, the commercial director for Universal UK, said: “This is aimed at the younger, 12 to 24 year olds, who no longer believe that the CD is as cool as it used to be”.
Related Links
Music industry reaction to In Rainbows
Indies accuse Universal of gaining monopoly
Hurt hard by music piracy and legal downloads, sales of CDs are down by 19 per cent in the US and 10 per cent in the UK in the first half of the year.
But with physical music more profitable than downloads, the music business is eager to find formats that will keep consumers coming back to record stores.
Universal’s move is being gradually followed by the other three majors, although by contrast their efforts only amount to dipping their toe in the water, with EMI planning to release Pink Floyd’s studio albums on the format, while Warner Music is aiming squarely at the younger market with a November release of a part-album from electro-punk band Hadouken!
An agreement between the music companies and the Offical Charts Company, which runs the Top 40, means that USB sticks are eligible for inclusion in the chart. That now justifies making them available at the same time as a normal release.
Eric Daugan, vice-president, of digital business in Europe for Warner Music, said: “The CD is an old technology that has not evolved. Fortunately people still want to own a physical product, so with the extra storage, the idea is to offer a better consumer experience”.
Warner Music is hoping that Hadouken!’s USB will retail at £7.99. Promoted as being “halfway between a single and album” by the record company it includes six new songs and five old ones, with links to multimedia content on the internet, and an interface whose job it is to replace the look and feel of the paper album cover.
For Universal, the UK is the test market for the USB format worldwide, partly because it believes the UK is the last important market for singles.
The company hopes to release USB albums before the end of the year from acts such as Kanye West and Amy Winehouse – although rivals privately query its emphasis on the technology when there are alternatives such as MVI, a DVD-based format that combines music and video.
Mr Rose said: “We’re hoping that people will see USB singles as a piece of merchandise. There’s obviously a demand for collectable physical music the kind of format people want to stick up on their wall”.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/media/article2648613.ece
What Does the RIAA File-Sharing Verdict Imply for DRM?
October 11, 2007
By Bill Rosenblatt
RIAA's victory last week in court against Jammie Thomas, a Minnesota woman accused of uploading files to the Kazaa file-sharing network, has given rise to much speculation about the verdict's effect on DRM. The October 4 verdict of US $222,000, or $9250 per incident, was almost two orders of magnitude higher than the typical out-of-court settlements that the RIAA has been proffering to alleged online infringers -- yet far below the maximum statutory damages of $720,000 that the jury could have assigned.
One theory we have heard says that the major record companies are less likely to rely on DRM now that they have an actual verdict in hand to strengthen their legal anti-piracy strategy. We disagree with this theory, because it assumes that the majors run their anti-piracy efforts as if they were investment portfoilios. This has not really been the case. Instead, they tend to operate on the principle of "fight the battle on all fronts." We don't expect this verdict to cause the majors' attitudes about DRM to change. Revenue and file-sharing data from the DRM-free download experiments of EMI and UMG are much more likely to determine the future course of DRM in music.
Yet one aspect of the trial's outcome already has very interesting implications for the future of digital rights technologies for music. In his jury instructions, the trial judge told the jury to consider uploading to a P2P network to be infringement without any evidence that other people actually downloaded the tracks; this is known as the "making-available theory."
Different countries have taken different positions on whether uploading, downloading, or both are illegal. The making-available theory has legal precedent but is not considered settled law in the US. Therefore, Thomas is appealing the verdict in hopes of getting a higher court to disallow the theory, perhaps sending the case back to the original district court for a retrial.
If Thomas's appeal is successful, then the onus would be on the RIAA to provide evidence that someone actually downloaded the exact files that Thomas put up -- not some other copies of the same material. Without technologies for tracking sources of online content, such as certain types of digital watermarking, this would be much more difficult, thus doing serious damage to the RIAA's litigation strategy. Therefore, if the music industry is to think rationally about legal and technological ways to curb piracy, it ought to be thinking (even) more seriously about watermarking.
http://www.drmwatch.com/article.php/3704706
By Bill Rosenblatt
RIAA's victory last week in court against Jammie Thomas, a Minnesota woman accused of uploading files to the Kazaa file-sharing network, has given rise to much speculation about the verdict's effect on DRM. The October 4 verdict of US $222,000, or $9250 per incident, was almost two orders of magnitude higher than the typical out-of-court settlements that the RIAA has been proffering to alleged online infringers -- yet far below the maximum statutory damages of $720,000 that the jury could have assigned.
One theory we have heard says that the major record companies are less likely to rely on DRM now that they have an actual verdict in hand to strengthen their legal anti-piracy strategy. We disagree with this theory, because it assumes that the majors run their anti-piracy efforts as if they were investment portfoilios. This has not really been the case. Instead, they tend to operate on the principle of "fight the battle on all fronts." We don't expect this verdict to cause the majors' attitudes about DRM to change. Revenue and file-sharing data from the DRM-free download experiments of EMI and UMG are much more likely to determine the future course of DRM in music.
Yet one aspect of the trial's outcome already has very interesting implications for the future of digital rights technologies for music. In his jury instructions, the trial judge told the jury to consider uploading to a P2P network to be infringement without any evidence that other people actually downloaded the tracks; this is known as the "making-available theory."
Different countries have taken different positions on whether uploading, downloading, or both are illegal. The making-available theory has legal precedent but is not considered settled law in the US. Therefore, Thomas is appealing the verdict in hopes of getting a higher court to disallow the theory, perhaps sending the case back to the original district court for a retrial.
If Thomas's appeal is successful, then the onus would be on the RIAA to provide evidence that someone actually downloaded the exact files that Thomas put up -- not some other copies of the same material. Without technologies for tracking sources of online content, such as certain types of digital watermarking, this would be much more difficult, thus doing serious damage to the RIAA's litigation strategy. Therefore, if the music industry is to think rationally about legal and technological ways to curb piracy, it ought to be thinking (even) more seriously about watermarking.
http://www.drmwatch.com/article.php/3704706
Universal Music in Tune with Animation Collective
October 08, 2007
Universal Music Publishing Group (UMPG) announced today the signing of Animation Collective to an exclusive worldwide publishing administration agreement.
Through the agreement, UMPG will administer Animation Collective's entire catalogue of original music created for its popular animated and live-action children's programming, including ELLEN'S ACRES and KAPPA MIKEY. The deal encompasses worldwide administration rights, as well as synchronization rights worldwide.
All of Animation Collective's series on-air, in development, or in production feature original pop and rock songs. Certain series episodes have also been produced as musicals. In February 2008, KAPPA MIKEY will premiere its much-anticipated two-part "Karaoke" episode featuring 10 original songs.
http://news.awn.com/index.php?ltype=top&newsitem_no=21100
Universal Music Publishing Group (UMPG) announced today the signing of Animation Collective to an exclusive worldwide publishing administration agreement.
Through the agreement, UMPG will administer Animation Collective's entire catalogue of original music created for its popular animated and live-action children's programming, including ELLEN'S ACRES and KAPPA MIKEY. The deal encompasses worldwide administration rights, as well as synchronization rights worldwide.
All of Animation Collective's series on-air, in development, or in production feature original pop and rock songs. Certain series episodes have also been produced as musicals. In February 2008, KAPPA MIKEY will premiere its much-anticipated two-part "Karaoke" episode featuring 10 original songs.
http://news.awn.com/index.php?ltype=top&newsitem_no=21100
UK download sales 'reach £163m'
Digital downloads are worth just 4% of the total music and video market
More than £160m will be spent on music and video downloads in the UK this year, according to a forecast.
Market analysts Verdict said digital downloads will be worth £163m in 2007 - up 45.5% on last year.
And digital spending will continue to soar, reaching £600m a year by 2012, according to Verdict's UK Music and Video Retailers 2007 report.
But CD and DVD spending has slowed, it said, with the overall UK music and video market down 2.9% to £4bn in 2007.
Verdict analyst Nick Gladding said: "While piracy will continue and CD volumes will decline further, retailers generally are now better placed to cope with new market challenges."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7040134.stm
More than £160m will be spent on music and video downloads in the UK this year, according to a forecast.
Market analysts Verdict said digital downloads will be worth £163m in 2007 - up 45.5% on last year.
And digital spending will continue to soar, reaching £600m a year by 2012, according to Verdict's UK Music and Video Retailers 2007 report.
But CD and DVD spending has slowed, it said, with the overall UK music and video market down 2.9% to £4bn in 2007.
Verdict analyst Nick Gladding said: "While piracy will continue and CD volumes will decline further, retailers generally are now better placed to cope with new market challenges."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7040134.stm
Universal Music Takes on iTunes
OCTOBER 22, 2007
Universal chief Doug Morris is enlisting other big music players for a service to challenge the Jobs juggernaut
Relationships in the entertainment world can be famously fraught. And few are more so these days than the one between Steve Jobs and Universal Music chief Doug Morris. You may recall that Morris recently refused to re-up a multi-year contract to put his company's music on Apple's iTunes Music Store. That's because Jobs wouldn't ease his stringent terms, which limit how record companies can market their music.
Now, Morris is going on the offensive. The world's most powerful music executive aims to join forces with other record companies to launch an industry-owned subscription service. BusinessWeek has learned that Morris has already enlisted Sony BMG Music Entertainment as a potential partner and is talking to Warner Music Group. Together the three would control about 75% of the music sold in the U.S. Besides competing head-on with Apple Inc.'s (AAPL ) music store, Morris and his allies hope to move digital music beyond the iPod-iTunes universe by nurturing the likes of Microsoft's Zune media player and Sony's PlayStation and by working with the wireless carriers. The service, which is one of several initiatives the music majors are considering to help reverse sliding sales, will be called Total Music. (Morris was unavailable for comment.)
This isn't only about Jobs; Morris badly needs to boost his business, and Apple is the one to beat. The iTunes store has grabbed about 70% of downloads in the U.S. And the iPod--well, what's left to say about that juggernaut? Plus, music companies have been here before. A few years ago they launched services with the aim of defeating Napster-style file-sharing--and failed miserably. And let's not forget that existing subscription services have signed up only a few million people, vs. hundreds of millions of iTunes software downloads.
While the details are in flux, insiders say Morris & Co. have an intriguing business model: get hardware makers or cell carriers to absorb the cost of a roughly $5-per-month subscription fee so consumers get a device with all-you-can-eat music that's essentially free. Music companies would collect the subscription fee, while hardware makers theoretically would move many more players. "Doug is doing the right thing taking on Steve Jobs," says ex-MCA Records Chairman Irving Azoff, whose Azoff Music Management Group represents the Eagles, Journey, Christina Aguilera, and others. "The artists are behind him."
Morris and Jobs were once the best of allies. When Jobs began pushing his idea for a simple-to-use download store in 2003, Morris backed him. Industry insiders say Jobs felt that Morris, unlike many other music executives, understood that they had to adapt or die. And in the years that followed, Apple and Universal moved in near lockstep.
But before long, Morris realized he and his fellow music executives had ceded too much control to Jobs. "We got rolled like a bunch of puppies," he said during a recent meeting, according to people who were there. And though Morris hasn't publicly blasted Jobs, his boss at Universal parent Vivendi is not nearly so hesitant. The split with record labels--Apple takes 29 cents of the 99 cents--"is indecent," Vivendi CEO Jean-Bernard Levy told reporters in September. "Our contracts give too good a share to Apple."
After unilaterally breaking off talks with Apple in July, Morris continued offering Universal's roster--Eminem, 50 Cent, U2, and other artists--to Apple, but on a month-to-month basis. That freed Universal to cut special deals with other vendors, such as cell carriers eager to generate revenues. AT&T (T ) is packaging ringtones and music videos of Universal artists and is expected to start selling downloaded tracks with videos soon.
That's not all: In August, Morris announced a five-month test with Wal-Mart (WMT ), Google (GOOG ), and Best Buy (BBY ). The three companies will sell music downloads that can be played on any device--a freedom not available to buyers of iTunes songs, most of which play only on Apple devices and software. Morris wants to see if the downloads, which won't have copy protection, will help cut into piracy and hike sales. And of course he won't be upset if iPod owners bypass iTunes.
With the Total Music service, Morris and his allies are trying to hit reset on how digital music is consumed. In essence, Morris & Co. are telling consumers that music is a utility to which they are entitled, like water or gas. Buy one of the Total Music devices, and you've got it all. Ironically, the plan takes Jobs' basic strategy-- getting people to pay a few hundred bucks for a music player but a measly 99 cents for the music that gives it value--and pushes it to its extreme. After all, the Total Music subscriber pays only for the device--and never shells out a penny for the music. "You know that it's there, and it costs something," says one tech company executive who has seen Morris' presentation. "But you never write a check for it."
The big question is whether the makers of music players and phones can charge enough to cover the cost of baking in the subscription. Under one scenario industry insiders figure the cost per player would amount to about $90. They arrived at that number by assuming people hang on to a music player or phone for 18 months before upgrading. Eighteen times a $5 subscription fee equals $90. There is precedent here. When Microsoft was looking to launch a subscription service for Zune, Morris played hardball. He got the tech giant to fork over $1 for every player sold, plus royalties. Total Music would take that concept even further. "If the object is to wrest control of the market from Steve Jobs," says Gartner analyst Mike McGuire, "this is a credible way to try it."
Of course, Morris still needs Jobs. It's noteworthy that Universal has not pulled its music from iTunes--Morris simply can't afford to do that. Universal's earnings fell 25% in the first half. Jobs, of course, knows that and can afford to be magnanimous. "Doug's a very special guy," the Apple chief told BusinessWeek. "He's the last of the great music executives who came up through A&R. He's old school. I like him a lot."
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_43/b4055048.htm?chan=search
Universal chief Doug Morris is enlisting other big music players for a service to challenge the Jobs juggernaut
Relationships in the entertainment world can be famously fraught. And few are more so these days than the one between Steve Jobs and Universal Music chief Doug Morris. You may recall that Morris recently refused to re-up a multi-year contract to put his company's music on Apple's iTunes Music Store. That's because Jobs wouldn't ease his stringent terms, which limit how record companies can market their music.
Now, Morris is going on the offensive. The world's most powerful music executive aims to join forces with other record companies to launch an industry-owned subscription service. BusinessWeek has learned that Morris has already enlisted Sony BMG Music Entertainment as a potential partner and is talking to Warner Music Group. Together the three would control about 75% of the music sold in the U.S. Besides competing head-on with Apple Inc.'s (AAPL ) music store, Morris and his allies hope to move digital music beyond the iPod-iTunes universe by nurturing the likes of Microsoft's Zune media player and Sony's PlayStation and by working with the wireless carriers. The service, which is one of several initiatives the music majors are considering to help reverse sliding sales, will be called Total Music. (Morris was unavailable for comment.)
This isn't only about Jobs; Morris badly needs to boost his business, and Apple is the one to beat. The iTunes store has grabbed about 70% of downloads in the U.S. And the iPod--well, what's left to say about that juggernaut? Plus, music companies have been here before. A few years ago they launched services with the aim of defeating Napster-style file-sharing--and failed miserably. And let's not forget that existing subscription services have signed up only a few million people, vs. hundreds of millions of iTunes software downloads.
While the details are in flux, insiders say Morris & Co. have an intriguing business model: get hardware makers or cell carriers to absorb the cost of a roughly $5-per-month subscription fee so consumers get a device with all-you-can-eat music that's essentially free. Music companies would collect the subscription fee, while hardware makers theoretically would move many more players. "Doug is doing the right thing taking on Steve Jobs," says ex-MCA Records Chairman Irving Azoff, whose Azoff Music Management Group represents the Eagles, Journey, Christina Aguilera, and others. "The artists are behind him."
Morris and Jobs were once the best of allies. When Jobs began pushing his idea for a simple-to-use download store in 2003, Morris backed him. Industry insiders say Jobs felt that Morris, unlike many other music executives, understood that they had to adapt or die. And in the years that followed, Apple and Universal moved in near lockstep.
But before long, Morris realized he and his fellow music executives had ceded too much control to Jobs. "We got rolled like a bunch of puppies," he said during a recent meeting, according to people who were there. And though Morris hasn't publicly blasted Jobs, his boss at Universal parent Vivendi is not nearly so hesitant. The split with record labels--Apple takes 29 cents of the 99 cents--"is indecent," Vivendi CEO Jean-Bernard Levy told reporters in September. "Our contracts give too good a share to Apple."
After unilaterally breaking off talks with Apple in July, Morris continued offering Universal's roster--Eminem, 50 Cent, U2, and other artists--to Apple, but on a month-to-month basis. That freed Universal to cut special deals with other vendors, such as cell carriers eager to generate revenues. AT&T (T ) is packaging ringtones and music videos of Universal artists and is expected to start selling downloaded tracks with videos soon.
That's not all: In August, Morris announced a five-month test with Wal-Mart (WMT ), Google (GOOG ), and Best Buy (BBY ). The three companies will sell music downloads that can be played on any device--a freedom not available to buyers of iTunes songs, most of which play only on Apple devices and software. Morris wants to see if the downloads, which won't have copy protection, will help cut into piracy and hike sales. And of course he won't be upset if iPod owners bypass iTunes.
With the Total Music service, Morris and his allies are trying to hit reset on how digital music is consumed. In essence, Morris & Co. are telling consumers that music is a utility to which they are entitled, like water or gas. Buy one of the Total Music devices, and you've got it all. Ironically, the plan takes Jobs' basic strategy-- getting people to pay a few hundred bucks for a music player but a measly 99 cents for the music that gives it value--and pushes it to its extreme. After all, the Total Music subscriber pays only for the device--and never shells out a penny for the music. "You know that it's there, and it costs something," says one tech company executive who has seen Morris' presentation. "But you never write a check for it."
The big question is whether the makers of music players and phones can charge enough to cover the cost of baking in the subscription. Under one scenario industry insiders figure the cost per player would amount to about $90. They arrived at that number by assuming people hang on to a music player or phone for 18 months before upgrading. Eighteen times a $5 subscription fee equals $90. There is precedent here. When Microsoft was looking to launch a subscription service for Zune, Morris played hardball. He got the tech giant to fork over $1 for every player sold, plus royalties. Total Music would take that concept even further. "If the object is to wrest control of the market from Steve Jobs," says Gartner analyst Mike McGuire, "this is a credible way to try it."
Of course, Morris still needs Jobs. It's noteworthy that Universal has not pulled its music from iTunes--Morris simply can't afford to do that. Universal's earnings fell 25% in the first half. Jobs, of course, knows that and can afford to be magnanimous. "Doug's a very special guy," the Apple chief told BusinessWeek. "He's the last of the great music executives who came up through A&R. He's old school. I like him a lot."
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_43/b4055048.htm?chan=search
Tons of free music ... and other global injustices
RIAA vs P2P
By Andrew Orlowski
Ah, let's hear it for "consensus". These days, consensus is a splendid, many-sided thing that can mean anything you want it to mean - and whatever it is, you'll find the supporting evidence on the internet. Which is great news for hacks, who love to be soothsayers to the nation - and tell us what we're really thinking.
This week saw CNET's Greg Sandoval play the part of Mystic Meg. Looking into his crystal ball, Greg pronounced:
"Almost everybody agrees Jammie Thomas is thumping the recording industry in a battle for hearts and minds."
Ah, but not so fast. The part of the record industry that's represented by the RIAA is hardly more beloved today than it was a fortnight ago. The derisory settlement to its price-fixing case, one correspondent reminded me, is far short of what the lobby group cost consumers.
(And we should point out that the very significant, but always overlooked part of the industry called "songwriters and composers" hasn't filed suit.)
No, the fly in this particular oink-ment is that Jammie Thomas isn't quite the heroic victim she's made out to be. She may even be the World's Dumbest File Sharer.
It just took a bit of plain, blue-collar Mid Western common sense to point out this out.
CNET's Sandoval was doubtless scouring message boards, blogs and even Comments sections like ours, where people whipped themselves into a right old frenzy about the first P2P file sharing trial. But away from the ritual spleen-letting, a few readers beg to differ.
Through bad advice and bad judgement, Jammie Thomas was persuaded to put the matter to a jury trial. Instead of the paying the RIAA tax of a couple of thousand dollars, she was landed with a bill for $220,000.
The jury took five minutes to establish her guilt, and then five hours deciding to punish her for wasting their time. Quite simply: she was insulting her fellow citizens by trying it on.
All of which means its entirely her own fault, say readers.
Writes Kevin Hall:
It really does beggar belief why anyone would try appealing this one. She has almost no chance of winning - I can only assume she is hoping the eye-watering fine might be reduced; on the other hand the appeal court might increase it as she is simply being belligerent in bringing it to them.
The facts of the matter are incontestable and there is really no point of law you can pick a part; I'm no lawyer but this really is a black and white case. The EFF embarrass us all in taking this case on; this isn't about freedom in any sensible way. She broke the law and has to face the consequences of doing that. There is nothing wrong in fighting an unjust law (God knows there's loads of them) but she deliberately lied to the court and was patently dishonest. Freedom comes with a responsibility to be honest and to show integrity which she hasn't.
The problem is the EFF are just making this worse. They're trying to pull this apart in a game of semantics which always make the law an ass. If they're trying to the defence of "no physical objects" then they're into the ridiculous area of the "victim-less crime" which is pretty much indefensible.
The message is simple - as the law stands what she did is illegal and trying to both appeal and to re-categorise it as some kind fight for freedom is totally ridiculous. If you want to make a stand against tyrannical copyright law then by all means, but this kind of action is futile. Freedom has to stand for something more than being able to bootleg CDs with impunity...
He adds:
I think you hit the nail on the head when you said the problem is the sense of entitlement; the arguments being put forward are absolutely feeble and the anger and hostility of the people extremely strange. What facinates and at the same annoys me is that these people aren't even pretentious enough to even be advocating a political point of view; these people aren't old Marxists or left-wingers who have some central dispute with property rights. The downloaders are really just greedy juvenilles who simply just don't want to pay for anything.
They also never let the facts get in the way of a good argument; CD prices have historically never been lower, 15 years ago you would never, ever have paid £7.50 for a top 10 album, it would have been double that. Their argument is fundamentally selective, yes a CD probably costs about 30p to make but this same argument can be applied to any high-margin business which they don't do. Starbucks mark drinks up by 400%; T-shirts sold in supermarkets cost 5p to make and are sold for £3.00 and the staff are paid minimum wage to sell them. Practically every area of feudal capitalism is hallmarked by examples of extreme inequity but none of these downloaders seem at all concerned about it.
They just want the latest U2 CD for free or a download of Revenge of the Sith and they rationalise by saying they're "fighting against the system" whilst never actually taking a stand for anything noble.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CD prices are appalling, and yes, RIAA is a group of morons. But that doesn't justify theft.
What worries me slightly is that my son is now getting ripped DVDs from his friends' parents. Works out well for the industry though - every time he shows up with one I can choose between buying the legit edition or coping with a screaming child who is still too young to understand why this is wrong...
Keep up the good work,
Edwin
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for a sensible article about music filesharing. While I believe that the RIAA are being very heavy handed with people caught with files that they are offering for download, I just can't see how filesharers think that it's an acceptable thing to do. "Oh I just wanted to try it out before I bought it", "it only harms very big companies", "the music they put out is dreadful bublegum pop tat anyway" seem to be a clarion calls, but it's not the people who are downloading and trying it out who are (in general at least) being prosecuted, it's people offering for upload thousands of files.
I wish the music industry would stop dishing out tens of millions of pounds to dreadful artists such as Robbie Williams or Mariah Carey (who inevitably turn out to be expensive, egotistical embarrassments), when the money dished out to them would have developed tens or hundreds of new bands. I long for the days of the early nineties when the indie labels ruled, maybe that's more to do with being thirtysomething though.
Fraser
Was the ultimate fine proportionate? Thomas had made just 24 songs available, which as reader M. pointed out was 10,000 times the retail value of each song.The penalty was designed with industrial-scale bootleggers in mind, and a pirate CD facility can knock out thousands of copies an hour.
But the settlement costs of an RIAA lawsuit are actually one hundreth of that, and the chances of being caught remain far lower than for any other illegal activity.
Small wonder P2P file sharing is carrying on as normal. Not paying for art remains terrific value.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/12/riaa_mailbag/
By Andrew Orlowski
Ah, let's hear it for "consensus". These days, consensus is a splendid, many-sided thing that can mean anything you want it to mean - and whatever it is, you'll find the supporting evidence on the internet. Which is great news for hacks, who love to be soothsayers to the nation - and tell us what we're really thinking.
This week saw CNET's Greg Sandoval play the part of Mystic Meg. Looking into his crystal ball, Greg pronounced:
"Almost everybody agrees Jammie Thomas is thumping the recording industry in a battle for hearts and minds."
Ah, but not so fast. The part of the record industry that's represented by the RIAA is hardly more beloved today than it was a fortnight ago. The derisory settlement to its price-fixing case, one correspondent reminded me, is far short of what the lobby group cost consumers.
(And we should point out that the very significant, but always overlooked part of the industry called "songwriters and composers" hasn't filed suit.)
No, the fly in this particular oink-ment is that Jammie Thomas isn't quite the heroic victim she's made out to be. She may even be the World's Dumbest File Sharer.
It just took a bit of plain, blue-collar Mid Western common sense to point out this out.
CNET's Sandoval was doubtless scouring message boards, blogs and even Comments sections like ours, where people whipped themselves into a right old frenzy about the first P2P file sharing trial. But away from the ritual spleen-letting, a few readers beg to differ.
Through bad advice and bad judgement, Jammie Thomas was persuaded to put the matter to a jury trial. Instead of the paying the RIAA tax of a couple of thousand dollars, she was landed with a bill for $220,000.
The jury took five minutes to establish her guilt, and then five hours deciding to punish her for wasting their time. Quite simply: she was insulting her fellow citizens by trying it on.
All of which means its entirely her own fault, say readers.
Writes Kevin Hall:
It really does beggar belief why anyone would try appealing this one. She has almost no chance of winning - I can only assume she is hoping the eye-watering fine might be reduced; on the other hand the appeal court might increase it as she is simply being belligerent in bringing it to them.
The facts of the matter are incontestable and there is really no point of law you can pick a part; I'm no lawyer but this really is a black and white case. The EFF embarrass us all in taking this case on; this isn't about freedom in any sensible way. She broke the law and has to face the consequences of doing that. There is nothing wrong in fighting an unjust law (God knows there's loads of them) but she deliberately lied to the court and was patently dishonest. Freedom comes with a responsibility to be honest and to show integrity which she hasn't.
The problem is the EFF are just making this worse. They're trying to pull this apart in a game of semantics which always make the law an ass. If they're trying to the defence of "no physical objects" then they're into the ridiculous area of the "victim-less crime" which is pretty much indefensible.
The message is simple - as the law stands what she did is illegal and trying to both appeal and to re-categorise it as some kind fight for freedom is totally ridiculous. If you want to make a stand against tyrannical copyright law then by all means, but this kind of action is futile. Freedom has to stand for something more than being able to bootleg CDs with impunity...
He adds:
I think you hit the nail on the head when you said the problem is the sense of entitlement; the arguments being put forward are absolutely feeble and the anger and hostility of the people extremely strange. What facinates and at the same annoys me is that these people aren't even pretentious enough to even be advocating a political point of view; these people aren't old Marxists or left-wingers who have some central dispute with property rights. The downloaders are really just greedy juvenilles who simply just don't want to pay for anything.
They also never let the facts get in the way of a good argument; CD prices have historically never been lower, 15 years ago you would never, ever have paid £7.50 for a top 10 album, it would have been double that. Their argument is fundamentally selective, yes a CD probably costs about 30p to make but this same argument can be applied to any high-margin business which they don't do. Starbucks mark drinks up by 400%; T-shirts sold in supermarkets cost 5p to make and are sold for £3.00 and the staff are paid minimum wage to sell them. Practically every area of feudal capitalism is hallmarked by examples of extreme inequity but none of these downloaders seem at all concerned about it.
They just want the latest U2 CD for free or a download of Revenge of the Sith and they rationalise by saying they're "fighting against the system" whilst never actually taking a stand for anything noble.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CD prices are appalling, and yes, RIAA is a group of morons. But that doesn't justify theft.
What worries me slightly is that my son is now getting ripped DVDs from his friends' parents. Works out well for the industry though - every time he shows up with one I can choose between buying the legit edition or coping with a screaming child who is still too young to understand why this is wrong...
Keep up the good work,
Edwin
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for a sensible article about music filesharing. While I believe that the RIAA are being very heavy handed with people caught with files that they are offering for download, I just can't see how filesharers think that it's an acceptable thing to do. "Oh I just wanted to try it out before I bought it", "it only harms very big companies", "the music they put out is dreadful bublegum pop tat anyway" seem to be a clarion calls, but it's not the people who are downloading and trying it out who are (in general at least) being prosecuted, it's people offering for upload thousands of files.
I wish the music industry would stop dishing out tens of millions of pounds to dreadful artists such as Robbie Williams or Mariah Carey (who inevitably turn out to be expensive, egotistical embarrassments), when the money dished out to them would have developed tens or hundreds of new bands. I long for the days of the early nineties when the indie labels ruled, maybe that's more to do with being thirtysomething though.
Fraser
Was the ultimate fine proportionate? Thomas had made just 24 songs available, which as reader M. pointed out was 10,000 times the retail value of each song.The penalty was designed with industrial-scale bootleggers in mind, and a pirate CD facility can knock out thousands of copies an hour.
But the settlement costs of an RIAA lawsuit are actually one hundreth of that, and the chances of being caught remain far lower than for any other illegal activity.
Small wonder P2P file sharing is carrying on as normal. Not paying for art remains terrific value.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/12/riaa_mailbag/
Digital downloads get pop-tastic applause
Musical deathmatch with Queen of Pop as ring master
By Kelly Fiveash
Unless you've been living under a rock recently you'll have noticed that the digital music industry has been flip-flopping all over the place this week.
First up, music licensing company Snocap today confirmed that it had reduced its staff headcount by 60 per cent.
The San Francisco-based firm, which had been the latest e-commerce venture from Napster founder Shawn Fanning alongside biz partners Jordan Mendelson, and Ron Conway, is said to be up for sale according to a blog post on ValleyWag.
It was created in 2002 in a, some might say, ambitious attempt to legally sell copy-protected music files on P2P networks by taking care of licensing and copyright issues on behalf of artists wanting to punt their musical wares online.
As ValleyWag points out, however, the firm's apparent decline could in part be attributed to the fact that there is less call for such a business model in a music industry fast moving towards a DRM-free future.
Elsewhere, Madonna has decided to ditch her long-running relationship with record label Warner Music Group (WMG) in a move that many commentators have, perhaps prematurely, seen as the nail in the coffin for the old way of doing business with record companies.
The pop Queen's latest reinvention will see her leave WMG after a quarter of a decade with the firm. Various reports say Madonna is expected to sign a $120m ten-year deal with concert promotion firm Live Nation.
It's a move that doesn't take much working out. Apparently, Madonna's album sales have continued to decline while her live, pricey shows have proved extremely popular among her fans.
Of course, Radiohead had already declared a touchy-feely attitude of "who needs them anyway?" The label-less band recently asked its army of fans to name the price for digital downloads of its latest CD.
And we've not even got on to talking about everyone's favourite media punchbag Britney Spears, yet. But what the hell, it is a Friday.
The troubled star's music label, in a bid to stop the party getting started, yesterday said it had filed a copyright infringement suit in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles against gossip website Perez Hilton.
According to Reuters, Jive Records, which is a division of Sony BMG Music Entertainment's Zomba Label Group, has accused the popular site, and its owner Mario Lavandeira, of posting illegal recordings during the past three months of our Brit's forthcoming album, the somewhat aptly named Blackout. No pathos intended.
And finally, a new study has revealed that music-buying trends continue to point to a surge in sales online.
Market analysts Verdict said that UK digital downloads will be up more than 45 per cent on last year, worth £163m to the music and video industry in 2007.
Verdict, in its UK Music and Video Retailers 2007 report, also predicted that digital spending will continue to rise and that it could reach £600m a year by 2012.
It said: "While piracy will continue and CD volumes will decline further, most retailers are better placed to cope with market challenges... Digital downloading is starting to pick up pace and has much potential."
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/12/madonna_snocap_britney_downloads/
By Kelly Fiveash
Unless you've been living under a rock recently you'll have noticed that the digital music industry has been flip-flopping all over the place this week.
First up, music licensing company Snocap today confirmed that it had reduced its staff headcount by 60 per cent.
The San Francisco-based firm, which had been the latest e-commerce venture from Napster founder Shawn Fanning alongside biz partners Jordan Mendelson, and Ron Conway, is said to be up for sale according to a blog post on ValleyWag.
It was created in 2002 in a, some might say, ambitious attempt to legally sell copy-protected music files on P2P networks by taking care of licensing and copyright issues on behalf of artists wanting to punt their musical wares online.
As ValleyWag points out, however, the firm's apparent decline could in part be attributed to the fact that there is less call for such a business model in a music industry fast moving towards a DRM-free future.
Elsewhere, Madonna has decided to ditch her long-running relationship with record label Warner Music Group (WMG) in a move that many commentators have, perhaps prematurely, seen as the nail in the coffin for the old way of doing business with record companies.
The pop Queen's latest reinvention will see her leave WMG after a quarter of a decade with the firm. Various reports say Madonna is expected to sign a $120m ten-year deal with concert promotion firm Live Nation.
It's a move that doesn't take much working out. Apparently, Madonna's album sales have continued to decline while her live, pricey shows have proved extremely popular among her fans.
Of course, Radiohead had already declared a touchy-feely attitude of "who needs them anyway?" The label-less band recently asked its army of fans to name the price for digital downloads of its latest CD.
And we've not even got on to talking about everyone's favourite media punchbag Britney Spears, yet. But what the hell, it is a Friday.
The troubled star's music label, in a bid to stop the party getting started, yesterday said it had filed a copyright infringement suit in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles against gossip website Perez Hilton.
According to Reuters, Jive Records, which is a division of Sony BMG Music Entertainment's Zomba Label Group, has accused the popular site, and its owner Mario Lavandeira, of posting illegal recordings during the past three months of our Brit's forthcoming album, the somewhat aptly named Blackout. No pathos intended.
And finally, a new study has revealed that music-buying trends continue to point to a surge in sales online.
Market analysts Verdict said that UK digital downloads will be up more than 45 per cent on last year, worth £163m to the music and video industry in 2007.
Verdict, in its UK Music and Video Retailers 2007 report, also predicted that digital spending will continue to rise and that it could reach £600m a year by 2012.
It said: "While piracy will continue and CD volumes will decline further, most retailers are better placed to cope with market challenges... Digital downloading is starting to pick up pace and has much potential."
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/12/madonna_snocap_britney_downloads/
EMI 'goes indie'
When financiers do A&R
By Andrew Orlowski
A memo from EMI's new owner has got the music digerati very excited. In recent years they've been hoping some of the lovely lolly that's been lubricating the City of London would flow their way. Now their wish is coming true - and it might not be what they wanted after all.
Guy Hands, whose private capital investment company Terra Firma acquired the label earlier this year, says he wants EMI to "act more like venture capitalists", according to a memo "leaked" earlier this week.
In our experience, acting like VCs means throwing money at hopeless dot.com start-ups - pick a card, any card! - while convincing the press that there's a New Economic Paradigm just around the corner. This might be "Pen Computing", or "Web 2.0" - it doesn't really matter. The trick lies in creating the demand - then making a sharp exit. They're really PR companies spending someone else's money.
But this doesn't map onto business models that fulfill a demand for cultural goods - especially not a large 21st century "entertainment" company. Did major record labels invent punk or acid house? Of course not - the best they could do was fulfill demand that already existed - usually with a load of cheesy ripoffs. Culture always remains a few steps ahead of the entrepreneurs who try and monetise it.
So the VC model is a lousy one for music: so long as sound recordings have value, record companies need artists they can milk for decades. Dead or alive, it doesn't really matter.
The most surprising part of Hands' memo is where he indicates that EMI should be prepared to let these prize assets go.
"Why should [established acts] subsidise their label's new talent roster — or for that matter their record company's excessive expenditures and advances?" he asks.
One of EMI's most bankable outfits has already done so. Radiohead released its new album Ten More B-Sides this week, clocking up more than one million downloads. Radiohead's bag of riffs and tropes varies little more than Status Quo's, it's just as dependable - and there's nothing wrong with that - for businesses it's what makes them so attractive. But if Hands is to allay fears that he's not just a quick turnaround merchant, he needs to keep them in the stable for longer. Perhaps giving these acts the kind of deal Madonna won with LiveNation this week - where she bags revenue from concert tickets, merchandise, as well as the sales of sound recordings.
From this memo, Terra Firma doesn't so much look like an asset stripper, as someone shooing the assets out of the window, as if they're flight-fearful pigeons.
A-ha, you're thinking. The money men have been in charge of the major labels for years now, and acting like it. The recent tendancy to cut their losses and ditch promising acts after their first album undermines the boast that major labels have a "nurturing" role.
But we're about to find out what happens when real financiers are in control - at which point major label executives might start to look back nostalgically at the frying pan they've just jumped out of.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/12/emi_hands_memo/
By Andrew Orlowski
A memo from EMI's new owner has got the music digerati very excited. In recent years they've been hoping some of the lovely lolly that's been lubricating the City of London would flow their way. Now their wish is coming true - and it might not be what they wanted after all.
Guy Hands, whose private capital investment company Terra Firma acquired the label earlier this year, says he wants EMI to "act more like venture capitalists", according to a memo "leaked" earlier this week.
In our experience, acting like VCs means throwing money at hopeless dot.com start-ups - pick a card, any card! - while convincing the press that there's a New Economic Paradigm just around the corner. This might be "Pen Computing", or "Web 2.0" - it doesn't really matter. The trick lies in creating the demand - then making a sharp exit. They're really PR companies spending someone else's money.
But this doesn't map onto business models that fulfill a demand for cultural goods - especially not a large 21st century "entertainment" company. Did major record labels invent punk or acid house? Of course not - the best they could do was fulfill demand that already existed - usually with a load of cheesy ripoffs. Culture always remains a few steps ahead of the entrepreneurs who try and monetise it.
So the VC model is a lousy one for music: so long as sound recordings have value, record companies need artists they can milk for decades. Dead or alive, it doesn't really matter.
The most surprising part of Hands' memo is where he indicates that EMI should be prepared to let these prize assets go.
"Why should [established acts] subsidise their label's new talent roster — or for that matter their record company's excessive expenditures and advances?" he asks.
One of EMI's most bankable outfits has already done so. Radiohead released its new album Ten More B-Sides this week, clocking up more than one million downloads. Radiohead's bag of riffs and tropes varies little more than Status Quo's, it's just as dependable - and there's nothing wrong with that - for businesses it's what makes them so attractive. But if Hands is to allay fears that he's not just a quick turnaround merchant, he needs to keep them in the stable for longer. Perhaps giving these acts the kind of deal Madonna won with LiveNation this week - where she bags revenue from concert tickets, merchandise, as well as the sales of sound recordings.
From this memo, Terra Firma doesn't so much look like an asset stripper, as someone shooing the assets out of the window, as if they're flight-fearful pigeons.
A-ha, you're thinking. The money men have been in charge of the major labels for years now, and acting like it. The recent tendancy to cut their losses and ditch promising acts after their first album undermines the boast that major labels have a "nurturing" role.
But we're about to find out what happens when real financiers are in control - at which point major label executives might start to look back nostalgically at the frying pan they've just jumped out of.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/12/emi_hands_memo/
Electronic Frontier Foundation To Support Thomas In RIAA Appeal
October 12th, 2007
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has publicly sided with Jammie Thomas, the single mother from Minnesota who lost a jury verdict against the RIAA for copyright infringement. Thomas, who received almost a quarter of a million dollars in fines for making a few dozen songs available for download on a Peer-To-Peer (P2P) file sharing service, has stated that she will appeal the verdict. The EFF’s involvement is certainly good news to Thomas, who was obviously guilty according to jurors interviewed after the trial. Now her financial future may rest on a technicality.
The EFF has a new strategy that hinges on challenging a jury instruction that associates making tracks available on P2P networks with active distribution. Here’s what the Jury was told:
Jury Instruction #15: The act of making copyrighted sound recordings available for electronic distribution on a peer-to-peer network, without license from the copyright owners, violates the copyright owners’ exclusive right of distribution, regardless of whether actual distribution has been shown.
According to the EFF, there are two distinct things wrong with this instruction…
First, the “distribution right” set out in Section 106(3) of the Copyright Act simply does not extend to Internet transmissions. It may sound odd, but “distribution” as defined in the Copyright Act requires that a physical object change hands (remember, this is a law that was written in 1976). EFF laid out this argument in its amicus brief in the Elektra v. Barker case, building on a 2001 article by University of Texas copyright law professor R. Anthony Reese.
Second, even if the “distribution right” reached Internet transmissions, a copyright owner must prove that a distribution actually took place (i.e., that someone actually downloaded from Ms. Thomas’ computer). As a result, Jury Instruction #15 is wrong when it asserts that the record companies can prevail “regardless of whether actual distribution has been shown.” For more on this issue, read the amicus brief filed by CCIA in Elektra v. Barker, as well as the 2005 ruling by Judge Patel in the Napster case.
If 8th US Circuit Court of Appeals rejects that jury instruction, the verdict against Jammie Thomas will have to be tossed and the case re-tried, if the RIAA is willing to get back into the ring.
http://www.futuremusic.com/blog/
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has publicly sided with Jammie Thomas, the single mother from Minnesota who lost a jury verdict against the RIAA for copyright infringement. Thomas, who received almost a quarter of a million dollars in fines for making a few dozen songs available for download on a Peer-To-Peer (P2P) file sharing service, has stated that she will appeal the verdict. The EFF’s involvement is certainly good news to Thomas, who was obviously guilty according to jurors interviewed after the trial. Now her financial future may rest on a technicality.
The EFF has a new strategy that hinges on challenging a jury instruction that associates making tracks available on P2P networks with active distribution. Here’s what the Jury was told:
Jury Instruction #15: The act of making copyrighted sound recordings available for electronic distribution on a peer-to-peer network, without license from the copyright owners, violates the copyright owners’ exclusive right of distribution, regardless of whether actual distribution has been shown.
According to the EFF, there are two distinct things wrong with this instruction…
First, the “distribution right” set out in Section 106(3) of the Copyright Act simply does not extend to Internet transmissions. It may sound odd, but “distribution” as defined in the Copyright Act requires that a physical object change hands (remember, this is a law that was written in 1976). EFF laid out this argument in its amicus brief in the Elektra v. Barker case, building on a 2001 article by University of Texas copyright law professor R. Anthony Reese.
Second, even if the “distribution right” reached Internet transmissions, a copyright owner must prove that a distribution actually took place (i.e., that someone actually downloaded from Ms. Thomas’ computer). As a result, Jury Instruction #15 is wrong when it asserts that the record companies can prevail “regardless of whether actual distribution has been shown.” For more on this issue, read the amicus brief filed by CCIA in Elektra v. Barker, as well as the 2005 ruling by Judge Patel in the Napster case.
If 8th US Circuit Court of Appeals rejects that jury instruction, the verdict against Jammie Thomas will have to be tossed and the case re-tried, if the RIAA is willing to get back into the ring.
http://www.futuremusic.com/blog/
Defecting from Music1.0 - what Radiohead, Madonna, Prince, The Charlatans, Korn, Jane Sibbery, Ani De Franco and The Eagles have in common
I don't buy a lot of printed newspapers (why... well, you should see the inbox of my google reader ;) but something made me pick up a copy of the International Herald Tribune (IHT) today. The IHT is indeed my favorite international newspaper; with consistently great writing and sharp opinions.
I was delighted to find at least 2 major stories on the music industry in this edition: one on Radiohead and one on Madonna (this was the only cached IHT link I could find, but here are other details). I was happy to see that at least one of them is already available in their entirety (maybe they know a little but something about The End of Control...?) - but where is the Madonna feature I have in my print version?
So what is happening here?
Basically, faster, nimbler, less-control-obsessed and less-conflicted players are doing what the major record labels should have done five years ago: offering partnerships to artists and their managers, real profit (and responsibility) sharing, engaging with artists on all levels, not just on selling copies of plastic (or zeros and ones, for that matter). As the IHT puts it when talking about the Madonna-Live Nation deal: this is a "wide-ranging partnership", not a mid-term 'plantation agreement' (the latter expression is mine, not theirs).
And by and large, major record labels will not be welcome in this game, because:
they have little expertise in it
they have none or few people that could run something like this
by and large, they have a monopolist's mindset (which is not going to work here)
they have aptly and with great dedication eradicated trust across the board: with the artists, the managers, the producers AND the users
they don't like deals that create a level playing field
Here are some quotes from the IHT features which I like a lot:
"Radiohead couldn't be in a better position to market itself online, without middlemen. It has a huge and loyal, if contentious, fan base that has sold out arena concerts for more than a decade. Unlike Prince, who chose to go independent at a much earlier, slower stage of the Internet, Radiohead can count on broadband access from much of the world."
My comment: indeed. If Todd Rundgren and Prince would have had broadband-enabled fans instead of a dial-up crowd it would been all over for the major labels a few years ago.
"...Radiohead records and tours on its own budget and timetable, plays new songs before they're recorded, lets listeners hear its music with a click or two and sustains itself primarily through performing and direct sales"
My comment: I like that thought, too, yet I think they will indeed need very strong managers, smart advisers, hot branding teams, and cutting-edge service providers to make this work because large financial success is still a question of SCALE. That is, of course, what the major labels have indeed provided and maybe that is what they can provide in the future? But now, guess what, there are hundreds of companies gearing up to provide just that: scale, and access to very large audiences. Another tough reality check for the majors - as far access to large numbers of people goes, they will be competing with the likes of myspace, youtube, google, facebook, AOL, Yahoo etc, and a gazillion of startups such as Kyte, Blip.tv, iLike, Jamendo, Reverbnation, Sonific (woho knows;) etc.
"Historically, middlemen are expensive. Under typical major-label contracts, musicians have paid handsomely for market access. The luckiest ones receive perhaps 15 percent of what their albums earn after a label's expenses are recouped - as opposed to the 100 percent of revenues that Radiohead is getting from "In Rainbows" online...."
I think these, below are the driving factors behind all of this:
http://www.mediafuturist.com/
I was delighted to find at least 2 major stories on the music industry in this edition: one on Radiohead and one on Madonna (this was the only cached IHT link I could find, but here are other details). I was happy to see that at least one of them is already available in their entirety (maybe they know a little but something about The End of Control...?) - but where is the Madonna feature I have in my print version?
So what is happening here?
Basically, faster, nimbler, less-control-obsessed and less-conflicted players are doing what the major record labels should have done five years ago: offering partnerships to artists and their managers, real profit (and responsibility) sharing, engaging with artists on all levels, not just on selling copies of plastic (or zeros and ones, for that matter). As the IHT puts it when talking about the Madonna-Live Nation deal: this is a "wide-ranging partnership", not a mid-term 'plantation agreement' (the latter expression is mine, not theirs).
And by and large, major record labels will not be welcome in this game, because:
they have little expertise in it
they have none or few people that could run something like this
by and large, they have a monopolist's mindset (which is not going to work here)
they have aptly and with great dedication eradicated trust across the board: with the artists, the managers, the producers AND the users
they don't like deals that create a level playing field
Here are some quotes from the IHT features which I like a lot:
"Radiohead couldn't be in a better position to market itself online, without middlemen. It has a huge and loyal, if contentious, fan base that has sold out arena concerts for more than a decade. Unlike Prince, who chose to go independent at a much earlier, slower stage of the Internet, Radiohead can count on broadband access from much of the world."
My comment: indeed. If Todd Rundgren and Prince would have had broadband-enabled fans instead of a dial-up crowd it would been all over for the major labels a few years ago.
"...Radiohead records and tours on its own budget and timetable, plays new songs before they're recorded, lets listeners hear its music with a click or two and sustains itself primarily through performing and direct sales"
My comment: I like that thought, too, yet I think they will indeed need very strong managers, smart advisers, hot branding teams, and cutting-edge service providers to make this work because large financial success is still a question of SCALE. That is, of course, what the major labels have indeed provided and maybe that is what they can provide in the future? But now, guess what, there are hundreds of companies gearing up to provide just that: scale, and access to very large audiences. Another tough reality check for the majors - as far access to large numbers of people goes, they will be competing with the likes of myspace, youtube, google, facebook, AOL, Yahoo etc, and a gazillion of startups such as Kyte, Blip.tv, iLike, Jamendo, Reverbnation, Sonific (woho knows;) etc.
"Historically, middlemen are expensive. Under typical major-label contracts, musicians have paid handsomely for market access. The luckiest ones receive perhaps 15 percent of what their albums earn after a label's expenses are recouped - as opposed to the 100 percent of revenues that Radiohead is getting from "In Rainbows" online...."
I think these, below are the driving factors behind all of this:
http://www.mediafuturist.com/
vrijdag 12 oktober 2007
Beyonce-Phone Among New Devices Hitting The Market
A host of new multimedia mobile phones are poised to hit retail shelves, just in time for the holiday sales season.
Just a week after Verizon unveiled a touch-screen iPhone competitor as part of its fall device lineup, Sprint pulled the curtain back on a pair of new devices as well. The biggest splash in the music department is a Beyonce-branded version of the UpStage music phone, originally introduced earlier this year.
The B'Phone, as it is called, features gold-and-burgundy colors designed by Beyonce, a Beyonce-themed startup screen, and the ability to download exclusive Beyonce photos, videos and a childhood song she recorded when she was 10.
"When I was 10, I recorded a song called '632-5792' - a phone number. It's a little embarrassing but it's cute. There's a recording of that song on the phone exclusively for my fans," said Beyonce.
The company also introduced the Rumor from LG, pitched as a "social networking" device based on various text messaging and IM functions. A "text tones" feature allows users to assign specific alerts for incoming text messages from different people, much like is done with ringtones today.
Additionally, Sony/Ericsson announced its new Walkman branded phone will be on store shelves this month. The W910 lets users shake the device to skip between music tracks and has a SensMe music recommendation feature. The company also introduced a line of portable Bluetooth speakers that can be used to stream music from a Walkman phone.
SOURCE
Just a week after Verizon unveiled a touch-screen iPhone competitor as part of its fall device lineup, Sprint pulled the curtain back on a pair of new devices as well. The biggest splash in the music department is a Beyonce-branded version of the UpStage music phone, originally introduced earlier this year.
The B'Phone, as it is called, features gold-and-burgundy colors designed by Beyonce, a Beyonce-themed startup screen, and the ability to download exclusive Beyonce photos, videos and a childhood song she recorded when she was 10.
"When I was 10, I recorded a song called '632-5792' - a phone number. It's a little embarrassing but it's cute. There's a recording of that song on the phone exclusively for my fans," said Beyonce.
The company also introduced the Rumor from LG, pitched as a "social networking" device based on various text messaging and IM functions. A "text tones" feature allows users to assign specific alerts for incoming text messages from different people, much like is done with ringtones today.
Additionally, Sony/Ericsson announced its new Walkman branded phone will be on store shelves this month. The W910 lets users shake the device to skip between music tracks and has a SensMe music recommendation feature. The company also introduced a line of portable Bluetooth speakers that can be used to stream music from a Walkman phone.
SOURCE
Report: Teens Moving From P2P To Paid Services
The results of a teen survey, conducted by financial analyst firm Piper Jaffray, revealed young music fans are slowly accepting paid online music sources over P2P filetrading. P2P is still the primary way they acquire music, but its market share fell to 64% from 72% last fall. Meanwhile, 36% of teens said they now buy music from online services, up from 28% last year.
Of the paid services used, iTunes remains the primary resource, but it's market share is slipping at 79% from 91% last year. However it's not Rhapsody or Napster making up the difference, which each hold a 2% share of attention. Instead, the "other" category is now 16% of combines usage -- which includes sources like eMusic, Amazon.com and mobile music stores.
Exactly which of these service is making up the lag in iTunes' share is not clear, as the company did not ask the teen users to identify their alternative sources.
SOURCE
Of the paid services used, iTunes remains the primary resource, but it's market share is slipping at 79% from 91% last year. However it's not Rhapsody or Napster making up the difference, which each hold a 2% share of attention. Instead, the "other" category is now 16% of combines usage -- which includes sources like eMusic, Amazon.com and mobile music stores.
Exactly which of these service is making up the lag in iTunes' share is not clear, as the company did not ask the teen users to identify their alternative sources.
SOURCE
Ad-Supported Service Deezer Signs With Sony BMG
Sony BMG France has signed an agreement which will provide users of French ad-supported on-demand streaming service Deezer with unlimited free access to 165,000 titles.
In a press release issued by Deezer, Sony BMG France chairman and CEO Christophe Lameignère said the agreement was "a first step towards a new form of music usage, respectful of copyright in the digital environment." Sony BMG was unavailable for comments at press time.
"Deezer is a digital jukebox," explains co-founder Jonathan Benassaya. End-users, he says, upload their own music, which is then scanned via U.S. fingerprinting solution Music IP.
While the business model is currently based on advertising, Benassaya says Deezer is considering launching an unlimited download service, which would be based on paid subscriptions.
While he would not unveil the details of the deal, Benassaya says Sony BMG's remuneration is mainly based on a percentage of Deezer's advertising revenue.
In August, French authors, composers and publishers collecting society Sacem signed an agreement with Deezer, which was also based on an undisclosed share of its advertising revenues, with a minimum set per streaming packages.
"Deezer is a practical answer to piracy," says Benassaya, who adds that the firm is currently in talks with several European ISPs to integrate the music service in their offer. In August, France's third ISP Free added a permanent link to Deezer on its homepage. Benassaya says a new version of the service will arrive by the end of October, which will include a social network and music news features.
Named Blogmusik until last August, the service had actually closed in March 2007 after an action taken by Sacem and by independent record labels collecting society SPPF. The service vowed to go legal and re-launched in April. However, Universal Music France issued a press release in August protesting against the use of its catalog without their agreement.
Sony BMG is the first record company to grant their rights. Deezer's offering to date has included 250,000 titles from the four major companies and from many independent labels, many of which are uncleared. While acknowledging this, Benassaya says negotiations are ongoing with the remaining major companies. An agreement with SPPF is close, he says.
Deezer claims a million registered members to date, up from 300,000 a month ago.
SOURCE
In a press release issued by Deezer, Sony BMG France chairman and CEO Christophe Lameignère said the agreement was "a first step towards a new form of music usage, respectful of copyright in the digital environment." Sony BMG was unavailable for comments at press time.
"Deezer is a digital jukebox," explains co-founder Jonathan Benassaya. End-users, he says, upload their own music, which is then scanned via U.S. fingerprinting solution Music IP.
While the business model is currently based on advertising, Benassaya says Deezer is considering launching an unlimited download service, which would be based on paid subscriptions.
While he would not unveil the details of the deal, Benassaya says Sony BMG's remuneration is mainly based on a percentage of Deezer's advertising revenue.
In August, French authors, composers and publishers collecting society Sacem signed an agreement with Deezer, which was also based on an undisclosed share of its advertising revenues, with a minimum set per streaming packages.
"Deezer is a practical answer to piracy," says Benassaya, who adds that the firm is currently in talks with several European ISPs to integrate the music service in their offer. In August, France's third ISP Free added a permanent link to Deezer on its homepage. Benassaya says a new version of the service will arrive by the end of October, which will include a social network and music news features.
Named Blogmusik until last August, the service had actually closed in March 2007 after an action taken by Sacem and by independent record labels collecting society SPPF. The service vowed to go legal and re-launched in April. However, Universal Music France issued a press release in August protesting against the use of its catalog without their agreement.
Sony BMG is the first record company to grant their rights. Deezer's offering to date has included 250,000 titles from the four major companies and from many independent labels, many of which are uncleared. While acknowledging this, Benassaya says negotiations are ongoing with the remaining major companies. An agreement with SPPF is close, he says.
Deezer claims a million registered members to date, up from 300,000 a month ago.
SOURCE
ZUNE'S NEW TUNE
Microsoft's introduction of three new Zune devices, combined with an updated version of the Zune digital music service, suggests that the relatively lackluster response to the initial Zune offering has not fazed the computing giant from advancing its digital music agenda.
The key to what Microsoft is calling "Zune round two" is not so much the features of the new devices—such as the touch pad and flash memory—but rather the added social networking elements the company is integrating into the broader service, especially via a development that Microsoft is calling Zune Social.
The service will automatically list songs that Zune users have most recently played, allow members to customize their own list of favorite artists and let visitors stream full versions of each song. Additionally, each Zune Social profile (called a Zune Card) can be added, much like a widget, to other social network sites, blogs and Web sites.
Together with the elimination of the three-day limit on songs shared from one Zune to another and the new ability for users to forward shared songs to others, Microsoft's latest Zune effort attempts to combine pieces of other existing digital music initiatives into one offering.
"We've got the hardware, the software, and now we have community," Zune GM of global marketing Chris Stephenson says. "We think we can pull all three exciting areas together and create one improved consumer experience."
That's easier said than done. Such music communities as Last.fm and MOG have already attracted millions of users, and such initiatives as Imeem are embracing ad-supported models that allow users to stream full songs discovered on other users' profiles. Combined with the move toward digital rights management-free tracks and widget-based sales, an interoperable community of music discovery and distribution is already in development while Microsoft works to build a self-contained version.
Microsoft has sold 1.2 million units of the original Zune, snagging the No. 2 market-share position for hard-drive-based MP3 players. It wants to achieve the same with its new flash-based devices on the back of its social sharing and networking strategy, but faces strong incumbents and equally innovative newcomers. Sandisk is second in flash-based-device market share at about 10%, behind Apple's 74%, and is integrated with such services as Yahoo Music Unlimited and Rhapsody. Additionally, new Wi-Fi-enabled devices are expected to hit the market this holiday season, particularly the Slacker model—which comes integrated with an online personal radio service.
SOURCE
The key to what Microsoft is calling "Zune round two" is not so much the features of the new devices—such as the touch pad and flash memory—but rather the added social networking elements the company is integrating into the broader service, especially via a development that Microsoft is calling Zune Social.
The service will automatically list songs that Zune users have most recently played, allow members to customize their own list of favorite artists and let visitors stream full versions of each song. Additionally, each Zune Social profile (called a Zune Card) can be added, much like a widget, to other social network sites, blogs and Web sites.
Together with the elimination of the three-day limit on songs shared from one Zune to another and the new ability for users to forward shared songs to others, Microsoft's latest Zune effort attempts to combine pieces of other existing digital music initiatives into one offering.
"We've got the hardware, the software, and now we have community," Zune GM of global marketing Chris Stephenson says. "We think we can pull all three exciting areas together and create one improved consumer experience."
That's easier said than done. Such music communities as Last.fm and MOG have already attracted millions of users, and such initiatives as Imeem are embracing ad-supported models that allow users to stream full songs discovered on other users' profiles. Combined with the move toward digital rights management-free tracks and widget-based sales, an interoperable community of music discovery and distribution is already in development while Microsoft works to build a self-contained version.
Microsoft has sold 1.2 million units of the original Zune, snagging the No. 2 market-share position for hard-drive-based MP3 players. It wants to achieve the same with its new flash-based devices on the back of its social sharing and networking strategy, but faces strong incumbents and equally innovative newcomers. Sandisk is second in flash-based-device market share at about 10%, behind Apple's 74%, and is integrated with such services as Yahoo Music Unlimited and Rhapsody. Additionally, new Wi-Fi-enabled devices are expected to hit the market this holiday season, particularly the Slacker model—which comes integrated with an online personal radio service.
SOURCE
Mexico's Somexfon Shuts Down Digital Jukeboxes
As part of a continued push to combat piracy at different levels, Mexico's Society of Video, Multimedia and Phonogram Producers (Somexfon), has seized 15 digital jukeboxes in Mexico City and Jalisco.
Over the past few months, Somexfon has asked jukeboxes owners across the country to monitor their content and ensure that all tracks, whether in CDR or digital format, are legally obtained.
Those who don't comply have been told their jukeboxes will be seized by authorities. Acting together with local authorities, Somexfon seized 12 jukeboxes in Mexico City and 3 in Jalisco.
SOURCE
Over the past few months, Somexfon has asked jukeboxes owners across the country to monitor their content and ensure that all tracks, whether in CDR or digital format, are legally obtained.
Those who don't comply have been told their jukeboxes will be seized by authorities. Acting together with local authorities, Somexfon seized 12 jukeboxes in Mexico City and 3 in Jalisco.
SOURCE
Abonneren op:
Posts (Atom)