Legit music downloads may jump in price...

vi edit

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 28, 1999
62,484
8,345
126
http://www.theregister.com/2004/04/09/pigopolist_price_hike/

Remember how online music stores were going to route around the music industry? The pigopolists have barely got their feet under the table and already demanding more. The Wall Street Journal reports that the major five labels think that 99 cents per song is too cheap, and are discussing a price hike that would increase the tariff to $1.25 up to $2.99 per song.

The current tariff is too much for most people, as saggy sales indicate. "99 cents a song is a pricing model designed to protect CD sales, and not one designed to move people into a new digital music marketplace," senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation Fred Lohmann told us recently. "If an iPod has room for 4,000, does Apple think people are getting to spend $4,000 filling it with music?"

As it is, online music stores are a loss leader, or barely cover operating expenses. Apple alone can consider its online store a success: it has driven demand for its iPod and given itself a toe-hold in a valuable new consumer market. Some analysts reckon Apple's cut is as high as 33 cents, but once the bandwidth, manpower and marketing are counted - and let's not forget that Apple pays Thomson an MP3 licensing fee on the iTunes software it gives away - there's very little to the bottom line. What it does do is indirectly help the iPod.

The iPod's success wasn't always assured. Almost exactly two years ago, we reported that Apple had seen a 50 per cent drop in demand for the iPod, launched to great fanfare, and an apologetic CFO Fred Anderson "defended the figures, and said other MP3 manufacturers had seen steeper declines". In the last quarter Apple generated $256 million worth of income from iPod sales and admitted it could have been higher if it had made more.

It's not a pretty picture for the other download services, all of which take the distribution costs onboard. What does the customer get for this? A very low bit rate file encumbered with DRM. Now the major labels want to make online music downloads even more expensive than conventional CDs, so customers are invited to pay more for less.

The major labels want us to view the DRM-encumbered download services as the carrot to the legal stick. But paying more for less is a business proposition that has only worked for the record industry when it has been able to make the previous generation of technology, such as vinyl, obsolete. It doesn't have that option anymore. CD sales and "pirate" downloads dwarf DRM online downloads.

Von Lohmann thinks the online services may yet be a success, although they need to offer much more for less. "Maybe. With no DRM, and by bringing the price way down and by having much more music - at 25 cents a song or with a flat rate pricing. That could be compelling." ®

-------------------------------------------------------------

What a joke.
 

Warthog912

Golden Member
Jun 17, 2001
1,653
0
76
increase the tariff to $1.25 up to $2.99 per song

They keep pushing... and all good people whom actually buy cd's will eventually stop. And they will all be outta jobs.

the RIAA sucks.
 

edro

Lifer
Apr 5, 2002
24,326
68
91
They will never stop me from borrowing people's CDs and burning them.

They need to get over it and spend all that money on a new format or better content, instead of on lawyers.
 

flxnimprtmscl

Diamond Member
Jan 30, 2003
7,962
2
0
Hahaaha, smart thinking. I'm sure everyone will be fine with $2.99 a song pricing. Hell, back in the day I could go buy singles for that much. At least with that I'd get two songs, have something physical to show for it, and not have to worry about the annoyances of DRM. Oh yeah, this should work real well.
 

FeathersMcGraw

Diamond Member
Oct 17, 2001
4,041
1
0
So, let me get this new business model straight: increase prices to the point where legitimate customers turn to illegal means to obtain products, then sue them. That's so crazy, it just might work.
 

Mookow

Lifer
Apr 24, 2001
10,162
0
0
Originally posted by: FeathersMcGraw
So, let me get this new business model straight: increase prices to the point where legitimate customers turn to illegal means to obtain products, then sue them. That's so crazy, it just might work.

Funny, I just enabled a student's port that I'm 95% was disabled for file sharing over Kazaa. If the RIAA wasnt being such @ssholes about it, my university might be helping them. But, as it is, we no longer log IPs precisely because of the notices the RIAA has been sending us.
 

DannyBoy

Diamond Member
Nov 27, 2002
8,820
2
81
www.danj.me
Originally posted by: Mookow
Originally posted by: FeathersMcGraw
So, let me get this new business model straight: increase prices to the point where legitimate customers turn to illegal means to obtain products, then sue them. That's so crazy, it just might work.

Funny, I just enabled a student's port that I'm 95% was disabled for file sharing over Kazaa. If the RIAA wasnt being such @ssholes about it, my university might be helping them. But, as it is, we no longer log IPs precisely because of the notices the RIAA has been sending us.

Have a :cookie;
 

Triumph

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
15,031
14
81
Originally posted by: Mookow
Originally posted by: FeathersMcGraw
So, let me get this new business model straight: increase prices to the point where legitimate customers turn to illegal means to obtain products, then sue them. That's so crazy, it just might work.

Funny, I just enabled a student's port that I'm 95% was disabled for file sharing over Kazaa. If the RIAA wasnt being such @ssholes about it, my university might be helping them. But, as it is, we no longer log IPs precisely because of the notices the RIAA has been sending us.

Wow, that's awesome. What school is this?
 

JackBurton

Lifer
Jul 18, 2000
15,993
14
81
Von Lohmann thinks the online services may yet be a success, although they need to offer much more for less. "Maybe. With no DRM, and by bringing the price way down and by having much more music - at 25 cents a song or with a flat rate pricing. That could be compelling." ®
Haha...Itunes' DRM in their AAC files has already been circumvented. Download your music and strip the DRM. Sounds good to me. ;) However, if they plan on charging more than $.99, people will start downloading natively DRM free music again at a cost of $.00. :)
 

Mookow

Lifer
Apr 24, 2001
10,162
0
0
Originally posted by: Triumph
Originally posted by: Mookow
Originally posted by: FeathersMcGraw
So, let me get this new business model straight: increase prices to the point where legitimate customers turn to illegal means to obtain products, then sue them. That's so crazy, it just might work.

Funny, I just enabled a student's port that I'm 95% was disabled for file sharing over Kazaa. If the RIAA wasnt being such @ssholes about it, my university might be helping them. But, as it is, we no longer log IPs precisely because of the notices the RIAA has been sending us.

Wow, that's awesome. What school is this?

If you really want to know the school, PM me. The basics of the story, as I have been told it, is that the RIAA was sending us notices* saying such and such IP was sharing music, and we are required to stop this. Oh, BTW, we might still sue you, the school, for not proactively stopping this. Then they contacted us wanting our activity logs for the dorms, or alluded to future requests for them (I wasnt here at the time, so I'm fuzzy on exactly what how the logs were mentioned, but I could try asking our network admin later). So the university decided that those logs were "taking up too much room on the server", so we deleted them and stopped logging activity by ports (we still do log bandwidth usage).

*They still send us those notices, and we reply with "The University is acting as an Internet Service Provider (ISP) for our students and is not itself hosting the alleged infringing content. The DMCA, as interpreted by the courts, applies only to hosted content. You will need to persue other remedies afforded you under the law".


Cliff Notes: Someone needs to talk to the RIAA about catching flies with honey vs vinegar.