Music industry caves to free downloading

[The Blue Chibi]

It sounds cool... but I think Qtrax might have jumped the gun a little:

news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080128/en_nm/qtrax_music_dc_2

money.cnn.com/2008/01/28/technology/bc.apfn.downloadingmusic.ap/index.htm?section=money_latest

From the UK Times article: "Allan Klepfisz, president of Qtrax, said: “Customers now expect music to be free but they do not want to use illegal sites. We believe this . . . has the support of the music industry and allows artists to get paid.”

"We believe" is kind of an odd phrase to use in this instance. So, apparently they're in talks with the record companies, but no ink yet. I'm still not sure how the artists are going to get paid ~ will simple ads on the site really do what they claim? And the user comments on that article were funny ~ noting that now superstar artists won't be able to get platinum bathroom fixtures and the latest Lamborghini. True, but there are plenty of starving artists out there, too ~ maybe this will help level the playing field.

from the CNN article:

"The service was among several peer-to-peer file-sharing applications that emerged following the shutdown of Napster, the pioneer service that enabled millions to illegally copy songs stored in other music fans' computers. Qtrax shut down after a few months following its 2002 launch to avoid potential legal trouble.
...
The company also promises that its music downloads will be playable on Apple Inc.'s iPods and Macintosh computers until April 15. That's unusual, as iPods only playback unrestricted MP3s files or tracks with Apple's proprietary version of DRM, dubbed FairPlay. In an earlier interview, Klepfisz declined to give specifics on how Qtrax will make its audio files compatible with Apple devices, but noted that "Apple has nothing to do with it."

Sounds a little funky. At least it will help talks on the issue move forward ~ we can't keep on like this, trying to balance the internet and current copyright law in the West.

[Zen Sarcasm]

This seems a bit strange, given many record companies' previous stance, but it's interesting, nonetheless. However, my "cynic sense" is tingling. It makes me wonder if there isn't some kind of catch to all of this, given that the only revenue the article seems to mention is advertising. Just how much will ads alone bring in, both for the companies and the artists?

And maybe I'm just paranoid, but the "Digital Rights Management" software makes me nervous. Sure, it's only supposed to take statistics of what songs you download, but is that really all it uploads? I don't even let my computer contact the Micro$oft mother ship to upload information, let alone random music download software.

Then again, maybe I'm just over-analyzing things, and this may actually work out in the end, but I'm going with a "buyer beware" attitude on this one.

[spiritmage234]

This seems a little fishy to me...
I agree with Zen.
I can't help but feel in my gut that there is some catch.
My VERY paranoid self is saying that's it's a trap.
I don't want to get into the whole, "The government is watching you" conspiracy (even though it's kinda true),
but these seems like the perfect trap.
Just create another P2P service,
except this time slap a "It's free AND legal" sticker on it,
and watch the suckers download it.
All the while the government searching their hard drives for personal info in order to bring their @$$es to court.

A little far fetched I know.

But to get on topic, I do feel sorry for the artists (Sorry that they don't get another mil[/sarcasm]) but alas, I'm a partial hypocrite when I say this.
Hey, I loooooooove collecting CDs.
But ironically, they haven't dropped in price since iTunes came along.
I think you can see where I'm getting at, and if you don't:
<=CHEAP

So yeah. These P2Ps and copyright laws are a big hassle. But if I remember correctly, people use to share music all the time back in the 80s/early 90s by copying cassettes, and nobody made much of a big deal back then as they do now, but I suppose the reasons for that vary.

In short, they should have thought about the consequences of the music industry before they invented a little something they call "the internet."

[CountessRachel]

It's probably a catch because most websites/programs giving away free downloads are loaded down with spy-ware/ad-ware etc.

For one thing, downloading free music is entirely too difficult to punish. It's to a point where it's impossible to monitor or enforce the rules for. The music industry has finally realized it costs them more to fight it than to just let the people have free music.

Second, CD sales are down a considerable amount. Look at Tower Records which has pretty much closed almost all of its establishments. CD stores get little to no business these days and consequently, neither do the record labels.

At this point record companies and artists are going to have to rely on royalties, concert profits, and product endorsements.

[Rogue-Angel]

All I can say is Fina-f***ing-lly!

They should have done this right from the beginning. Had they not shunned this booming music deposit area, they would not have had so much trouble now.

[spiritmage234]

@jazzie: Actually, I read somewhere that CDs do have better quality than mp3s, you just can't really tell the difference. (Well, near deaf people who blast music in their ears all day can't tell the difference. A normal person can.)

When an mp3 player package says that you can download 5,000 songs at 64/kbps, people think, "Whoa!" but actually, 64/kbps is the lowest bitrate and thus, the least quality, when in actuality, it is 256/kbps that is CD quality, but it takes up much more memory.

That's the deal with that. :shrugs:

[Yakuza]

Regardless, I hope to get ONE song that I have been looking for for nearly 8 months now.

Space Queen - 10 Speed.

God how I want it.

It doesnt seem like a trap, more or less a dream.

[Lt. Dan]

Do not download and use this software. It's been revealed as a scam, all the way from trying to lure/placate investors to loading up client's computers with bloatware.

This thread might as well be locked and trashed.

There is an excellent discussion here (warning, some mature content).

[avatarasabat]

Well dang


I wanted Time's Up's Album and Jalan Jalan but I think I need to gank that from Pacific Moon records <<

[melloyello]

quote]What are everyone else's thoughts? What effect do you think this final transition to free downloads will have on the music industry? Will it even affect society as a whole?[/quote]

Illegal or not, the genie is out of the bottle. Free downloading is rampant, and the music industry is already feeling the effects. There are some positive impacts to this. I for one know that I would not enjoy as many musical genres as I do if I had to pay for each song that I listened to. I am grateful for the technology that has allowed me to enjoy swing, folk, classical, and country music along with the classic rock I was raised on. It has expanded my horizons. Though I worry that people might not continue to value music, and the work that is put into creating it, if it loses it's monetary value.

[mikael]

The way that the artists get paid is simple:

How much advertising do you think this free site is going to have, hm?

[admirality]

I think its about time this downloadin music milarky is legal now..... It reminds me of the epi of south park where the boys get busted for downloading some songs and all the celebs go on protest... It is completely righ ppl will still go and see the artisits in concert and many ppl buy cds anyway coz the like the cover and the feel of having the music on a disk.... I don't think the artists are gonna suffer from this if anything it'll make them more popular ppl who can't afford cds will be able to listen to their music.....

Being a musician shouldn.t be about getting loads of money and having private jets it should be about writing good music that ppl enjoy listening too and brings them happiness that integretty and good image with the fans should be more of a reward than a few million dollars....

sorry bout the rant

[aangstheone]

If they pay 2.7 Million dollars for a Ad like FOX charged the Artist will shurely get paid, but i think this is not going to make it and if it is you will probobbbably need to pay for the App