MySpace Teams With Record Companies To Create Music Site 147
The New York Times reports on a deal between MySpace and three of the four major music labels to develop a new music website. Users will be able to stream songs for free, purchase downloadable tracks, and (possibly) pay a flat monthly fee for unlimited access. From the Times:
"Exact terms of the deal and details about the new site, like prices for downloaded music tracks, were not disclosed. But MySpace did say the site would offer songs free of digital rights management software or D.R.M., which is used to prevent illicit copying but can create technical hurdles for buyers. The songs would be playable on any portable music device, including Apple's iPod. For the music industry, the deal is partly born of desperation. In the face of widespread, escalating online piracy, music sales dropped to $11.5 billion in 2006 from a peak in 1999 of nearly $15 billion."
Oh yeah that sounds great (Score:0, Insightful)
More power to them (Score:2, Insightful)
Let me fix that for you ... (Score:5, Insightful)
There, fixed it for you.
Hopefully With The Same Great Quality of Service (Score:2, Insightful)
Piracy's Not to Blame (Score:4, Insightful)
Last.fm Beat Tom To The Punch (Score:4, Insightful)
I think this is too little, too late on the part of MySpace. Their site fell out of fad (in favor for Facebook, but Facebook will eventually be a fad too), and was and still has a terrible site design.
Last.Fm will be a tough competitor to face off against, especially if the same "brilliant" minds behind the MySpace site layout try to crack Last.Fm's bread & butter.
Whoever came up with that idea... (Score:3, Insightful)
3 of the 4 major music labels? Make your own!
And give us some GOOD music, ferchrissake!
I think the falling sales are the industry's fault (Score:5, Insightful)
Quote from the Slashdot story: "In the face of widespread, escalating online piracy, music sales dropped..."
To me, that sounds like the music industry saying, "If something bad happens, it must be someone else's fault."
I think the falling sales are the industry's fault. I was supposed to by a Britney Spears CD to hear her singing something about abusing men? If the music industry wants strong sales, it can be kind to the customer and produce something valuable.
Real figures would be nice (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd love to know how much of the drop in sales is due to "escalating on-line piracy", and how much is due to the fact that people no longer have to accept a bunch of crap being shoved down their throats so they can get the one or two songs on a CD that are worth listening to. If I like even three songs, it's a pretty safe bet that I'll be forking out the cash. One or two songs? Not so much.
Wouldn't it be interesting to have every song on a particular CD available on a site like this, then track how much money each had made after a year, or how many times it had been downloaded. There'd certainly be some tunes that caught on slowly and eventually overtook the initial hit tune. "Ball and a Biscuit" off the same White Stripes CD as "Seven Nation Army" would be an example in my particular case. But those are the exception. Finally, we'd finally get a chance to see objective proof of just how much filler there is on your basic $20 CD.
Re:Because of iTunes? (Score:5, Insightful)
Some Eeerie Similarity With imeem.com (Score:4, Insightful)
So now you have imeem as this monster service where you can essentially listen to any tune ever recorded, and it's all paid for by advertising.
Similarly, myspace has been in litigation with the record labels and has taken a page from the imeem playbook, copying the deal making, the business model and everything else. Only this isn't some tiny startup, this is Fox Interactive with it's massive pockets.
I really hope myspace loses this time.
Re:Because of iTunes? (Score:2, Insightful)
Though personally I'd still take the extra competition, the RIAA is going under no matter what, and I'm willing to put up with a bit more trashing if it means we won't end up with another Microsoft.
Re:Prices of other things (Score:5, Insightful)
From the inception of vinyl until the turn of the century, most people just bought pop music, because that was the only music they could hear at the time. There was nothing to compare contemporary music to, so people bought it out of ignorance. Generation gaps, outdated and worn out audio formats, scarcity due to albums going out of print, and a general lack of interest or time/money to sample, kept the majority of listeners from experiencing music's rich history.
Once Napster came about, people suddenly had instantaneous access to almost the entire back catalog of all prerecorded music (or at least all music that was released on CDs). This allowed for a rebirth of older music and genres that hadn't seen as many fans since their industry-granted 15 minutes of fame expired, as well as the diversification and maturing of musical taste in the majority of listeners. Lots of people I know like older music as well as new music, and have a far more diverse set of musical ascetics than any of the generations past. The success of the Guitar Hero franchise is an excellent example of this. Most of the soundtrack is either indie music or music that's at least 20 years old, yet it sells because people have heard a decent amount of the soundtrack before and found that they liked it much better than what plays on today's top 40 radio or what's in the CD racks at Wal-Mart.
The industry is dying primarily because their business model relied on music being disposable and the audience being fickle and spontaneous. Since P2P emerged, tastes have become more engraved in the general populace, and it's usually difficult to get people to stop liking the really good artists just because something new has come out. Now that they can't get people to throw out their old albums anymore for new ones, the industry has lost its moneymaker. Yes, people are now more used to the idea of music being "free," but the real cause of sales slippage is because the industry has failed to diversify as fast as its populace has. It's still trying to market pop idols as if these were the days of old. Not anymore.
Re:Because of iTunes? (Score:5, Insightful)
The competition between itunes and myspace is not for the consumer dollar, it is for the music industry's product. If myspace gets enough traction with consumers the MAFIAA can tell Jobs to stick that 99 cents up his ass, because they are going to stop supplying music to itunes for sale - instead they will switch over all of their product to myspace and it's $2.99 prices.
Apple is left with no songs to sell, and the music industry gets to start raping and pillaging again with the help of their old buddy, Rupert Murdoch.
Have you no faith? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:No record? (Score:3, Insightful)
I disagree. I know a couple of emerging (and kick ass) bands in the Phoenix area, and I always tell them to have at least one or two free tracks (as in downloadable) so people can put them on their iPods or such. It keeps things fresh between shows (especially if they tour), and reminds them that the band exists as more than an anomalous myspace friend or such. Say you have 5 recorded tracks, that one you give away isn't going to harm you, but will be a nice nod to your fans.
One of the bands I know are releasing a studio CD soon (indie), I told them to release a free track on their page. Free is a good draw, it makes people more willing to buy (social psych 101 there), also it gives the music time to grow on people who are not convinced they want to part with $10-15 bucks for an obscure indie band.
Granted I never say "give it all away for free", I want my friends to succeed, meaning they need profits. And the more albums they sell, the more rounds are on them.
Re:Off topic, but important. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Because of iTunes? (Score:2, Insightful)
The Apple-haters can't seem to fathom that Apple's market power in this particular industry is good for us all even if you hate Apple, iPods, iTunes, MP4AAC, and DRM. The reason being, while Apple may piss you off sometimes, they ARE the only ones selling major-label music today who aren't 100% the RIAA labels' bitch.
As more and more of this DRM-Free-Elsewhere-But-Still-Insisting-on-DRM-in-iTunes shit keeps going down it gets more and more clear what their #1 goal is: "Kill iTunes because they don't play ball with us."
Followed by "switch over to variable pricing" which will mean the 2 good songs on the album will be $4 apiece and the other 10 are 49c.
Followed by re-introduction of DRM on these sites in order to "curb rampant piracy." This is definitely a goal, since you can't seriously believe that these cocksuckers WANT to do away with DRM. Now in order to get DRM back they need to hope to god the Zune or something catches on, though, since an iPod-dominated market of course means you have to work with Apple or go DRM-free.