Quote:
Originally Posted by 100th Monkey  True, but you're nitpicking. There's plenty of music available on youtube which is there legally, and it's only one of many avenues a person can use to listen for free without being a pirate.
I think you're also greatly underestimating the difficulty of tracking copyright and banned material based on text searches, especially when you take into account the prevalence of live performances, covers, and interviews/discussions by and about the artists. |
The other factor regarding availability is that there are plenty of free and legal sources. VH1.com, on demand through your cable provider, the record company website, not to mention the ease of using a DVR to capture 12 hours of MTV versus 6 VHS tapes in the past, it's simply a lot easier to hear the song you need to hear for free than it was 20 years ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by initialsBB I don't agree with that. Streaming is the way forward, and it's inevitable. It may not be a one size fits all approach though. Why not try free, ad supported streaming of the vast chunks of slow selling back catalog and obscure little things that never get reissued, to attempt the long tail strategy for that stuff. Then maybe paid subscription services for the middle range of consistently selling back catalog. And finally a premium, pay-for-the-download tier for new releases.
Maybe the music industry needs to do something along the lines of Hollywood's release "windows" for these different segments of the market. Sort of a spotify+emusic+itunes approach. |
Most industry types aren't interested in free streaming due to the revenue it can provide.
Currently, you'd have to charge more than consumers are willing to pay to satisfy the monetary demands of the artists and labels.