Slashdot Log In
Music Labels Screwed, DRM Is Dead
Posted by
Zonk
on Sun Nov 05, 2006 07:16 AM
from the damn-the-man dept.
from the damn-the-man dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Peter Jenner, former manager of bands like Pink Floyd, T.Rex and the Clash, states in an interview with the Register that music label executives have lost faith in DRM and dollar-per-track online music selling isn't working too well as a model. He predicts that in two to three years time, many countries will have moved to a blanket licensing regime." The article goes on at some length, talking about the value of digital music, patterns in the music industry, and some business at the end about 'the tyranny of the playlist' that I'm not hep enough to follow. I'm not sure this rant has any connection whatsoever with reality, but it is something to think about.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
dream vs reality? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It has no connection to reality... (Score:2)
Worse Than The Disease (Score:2)
Frankly, I'd rather have the DRM.
The "freedom" people are telling us I have to go out and sell more T-shirts - it's an argument I find tremendously insulting.
Nobody cares, Mr Jenner. Nobody cares.
Re: (Score:2)
Most Western governments already fund new art music. Many composers make their living indirectly from taxpayer money. Institutions like IRCAM in Paris or the Sibelius Academy in Helsinki are completely publicly funded. Even in the U.S., which has lesser taxation than much of the EU, you still have the NEA.
Re: (Score:2)
But what they don't do is use this as a means by which to compensate all so-called musicians.
And that is what Jenner is after.
WTF (Score:2)
Paying for music is dead (Score:5, Informative)
What I mean is: before computers became widely available, people had the option of sharing bootleg analog copies of something (which was prone to sound degradation during copy, and media aging) or buying a legit copy of the medium with the best possible song. That is, people who wanted good quality music bought the "officially sanctionned" medium it was imprinted on. Now that everybody can copy a file a million times without any quality loss other than the one possibly introduced during sampling, who's to stop people from copying things for free? only two thing: people's sense of morality ("I don't want to steal from artists") and people's fear of the law ("I don't want to be caught with illegal copies on my hard disk"). That's hardly the basis of a healthy business model.
The one-music==one-media confusion that is the basis of the **AA's business model is dead. In reality, record companies sell plastic disks, not music, and people don't need plastic disks anymore, so record companies are now obsolete. If they want to stay alive with their obsolete business model, they have to:
- appeal to people's morality: not likely to generate revenues long-term
- DRM-protect their music: easily circumvented as shown numerous times
- DRM-protect hardware: easily circumvented regardless of the hardware, simply by playing and re-recording the music
- push for harder copyright laws: circumvented by the sheer mass of file-sharers, which effectively means that an individual file-sharer has a next-to-null chance of getting caught
*or*... they could disappear and music bands could turn back into what they once were: live performers, who were paid to play music on a stage.
So in short: Peter Jenner is wrong. Nobody will turn to X, Y or Z licensing scheme. Eventually, people will share music for free, simply because that is the logical technical and legal way it must be, and they will pay musicians directly to give them what no amount of digital files can give them: live performances.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Jenner is wrong about DRM being dead... because DRM is not about controlling the distribution of music and video.
You can only control data by controlling the applications that run. DRM is about the centralized development of software, and about forcing people to only run that software to access certain pieces of data. That's DRM is a nutshell.
Once you understand that, you understand why DRM is not dead, and will not die just because a bunch of record/movie companies finally get a clue. The technology comp
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You're pretty wrong. It's not losslessness that caused piracy. It's the fact that pirated music has less restrictions, is more convenient, and is (sounds odd but) is cheaper.
Using pirated music costs you: you can be sued, and you gotta use questionable service f
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The previous role of the record company was more than "sell plastic disks". The record companies were the only entities that were capable of recording music, distribute the record and market it. Now, with the development and widespread adoption and use of computers and communication networks the role that the record company once played simply became obsolete. Now
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
First of all, it's wrong if only because this would imply the similar death of the video gaming industry, which is not going to happen.
But to address what you say: there are a lot more things out there that are held in check merely by "morality and fear of the law" but you don't see society crumbling because of it.
Secondly, people DO want plastic disks. It might be easy for YOU to go online and get the music you want, but even in the absence of worrying about getting caught, much of the popu
Watermarking could work (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, I think there is a scheme which can leverage basic human psychology to get a workable system. It would go as follows:
Watermark the digital content, with information specific to the person who purchased it. i.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is what the music industry is thinking, and I disagree completely.
The filesharing we see today is not lossless copies, it is lossy MP3 files. Of course people will copy the music they buy and use the copies in their MP3 players, in the car and give some cop
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And who will pay for recording in a studio? I *do* want my music recorded in a studio, as opposed to a live recording. The artists? Why? They're not getting paid for it, they only get paid for live performances.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Even with "real" piracy in Asia (that was going on long before digital tech), the major US media producers don't seem to be having financial woes. Eisner's lack of vision (resulting is shitty movies and stagnation or creativity) at Disney
DRM Is Dead - Was it EVER alive ? (Score:3, Insightful)
It was stupid right from the start - digital environment, internet is a free medium. freedom is its nature and its result. monopoly, impending 100-year old control schemes for distribution of intellectual property was a 'clueless' idea at best, if not stupid.
Given the big label company ceos, execs are now of a generation that is in their 60-70s, it is no surprise that they have misjudged that we were still in 1950s.
Gramps, you are of a dying generation. you are passing away.
then, instead of trying to screw your label and your shareholders with dinosaur-worthy 'measures', embrace the new digital/internet revolution and leave a good name behind.
or, leave your chairs to younger ones, who are actually able to understand the contemporary times and participate in it.
Labels' Attitude and Understanding (Score:5, Interesting)
I have a great deal of interest in the copyfight, and earlier that year had attended one of RMS's talks, was reading Laurence Lessig, et. al. Naturally, I wanted to know what he thought of all that stuff. As head of one of the most powerful A&R operations on earth, I assumed he would definitely have an opinion.
But he seemed either completely ignorant of the issues, or completely unconcerned. He said something about how their lawyers are "doing something about it" but other than that had no interest. What about copying music? "Oh, we'll sort that out I'm sure." What about the role of the publisher as gatekeeper to new talent? "Er, what about it? We put a lot of investment into choosing acts that will do well. And they do do well."
Something about rabbits and headlights came to mind, so I asked him about where he went on holiday that year (France, it was really nice, you really *must* visit the Dordogne...)
No, I Won't Pay $3 a Month (Score:3, Insightful)
I can't think of too many "kids" who don't like iTunes. My kids and their friends eat up iTunes gift cards downloading the exact music they want without having to pay $15 for a CD that has one or maybe two songs they enjoy. Which heralds back to what I remember as a kid where I could run up to the local drug store, fork over a dollar and get a 45 with the exact music I wanted (yeah, I'm that old). That's what the music industry was built upon before it was turned into a cash machine that ate customer good-will. And that was before the advent of downloadable music; now the music industry is vilified to the point of no return in the eyes of its customers.
Music taxes no good solution either (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The thing I don't understand is why doesn't a big name artist say fuck you to their studio and go out on their own. U2, Madonna, Britney, etc could all do it. Start your own site selling non DRM lossless songs, do individual deals for CD distribution, run a few commercials.
Artists that big basically ARE the recording industry. Many of them are either producing albums for others, managing newer acts, or own their own studios. So while new acts may well benefit from a change in the status quo, these are
Just where do you get your ideas about artists? (Score:3, Insightful)
One of these days, I want to find the person who started this entire myth about what the life of an artist is like and shoot them. Several times.
I've got news for you - the creative artists who get really rich off their work are the tiny min
Re: (Score:3)
No particular reason, at least until they wake up and fix it [slashdot.org].
At that point, you might want to participate so that comments that you deem more worthy than average were more easily seen by others. Just a thought. :)