DRM music goldrush is a race for losers - mp3.com founder

Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Nov 21, 2003.

  1. macrumors bot

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2003
  2. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2003
    #2
    Article makes good points about Kazaa. Why pay when its all out there for free :p
     
  3. arn
    macrumors god

    arn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2001
    #3
    Lawsuits maybe? :)

    arn
     
  4. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    #4
    the article points out how ITMS has restrictions but fails to point out the restriction

    who needs More Then Three copies of a song? i haven't meet a person yet who needs more then three

    unlimited ipods
    burn playlists 10x (in practice this can be worked around to unlimited burns)
     
  5. COS
    macrumors member

    COS

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2003
    #5
    Big Baby

    Michael Robertson sounds like a big baby.

    He's just bitter that nobody really ever cared about his MP3.com
     
  6. COS
    macrumors member

    COS

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2003
    #6
    "If one company got a huge market share - say 50 per cent or higher - they could negotiate better royalty rates," notes Robertson. "But they forget something. The music industry is tens of thousands of publishers and just five major record labels. Getting all of them to agree is a real tough thing to accomplish even if you're market leader.""

    So far they've been pretty sucessful Michael. Considering the fact that the music industry regards Apple as their saving grace right now... getting consumers to buy that which they previously acquired for free... getting them to agree shouldn't be a problem.
     
  7. COS
    macrumors member

    COS

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2003
    #7
    i liked this comment,

    "Apple is currently in a position of begging the big five for content, rather than dictating the terms of the deal."

    Switch that around please...
    Its the MUSIC COMPANIES that re begging APPLE to place their music in their extremely sucessful online store.

    Apple is the company responsible for jumpstarting sales... they're at Apple's mercy... not the other way around. What a goon this guy is...
     
  8. COS
    macrumors member

    COS

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2003
    #8
    ""It's the wild card," says Robertson. "KaZaA has been ruled legal, so why pay for restricted music?" he asks."

    Just because the software is legal doesn't mean pirating music is.

    What do you guys think... does Michael have an agenda? Considering the fact that he's no longer involved in MP3.com, why should his opinion even matter?
     
  9. COS
    macrumors member

    COS

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2003
    #9
    "Apple really haven't sold that much music."

    When you factor in the regional restrictions they've been working within thus far... they have indeed sold a LOT of music. Who is this guy kidding?
     
  10. macrumors demi-god

    LethalWolfe

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #10

    I think you are giving Apple way, way, way too much sway in this situation. Apple *needs* the majors to make iTMS work. With out the majors iTMS is dead. And if iTMS fails then Apple is up a creek w/the iPod 'cause iTMS is a huge selling point for the iPod. The majors don't *need* Apple because they have traditional CD sales pluse a growing number of iTMS competitors to cash in on. Right now all the music services are trying to secure exclusive deals to give them a one-up over the other guy and the majors are just kickin' back and enjoying all the bids for attention. Also the jury is still out on if things like the iTMS will continue to be viable options or not. iTMS is less than a year old and just hit the mainstream, i.e. windows, not too long. So the real test has just started. And, IIRC, the majors only signed a 1-year deal w/Apple. Assuming things keep going at the current rate I can't see them not renewing their contract(s) in '04 but you never know.


    Lethal
     
  11. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2003
    Location:
    pittsburgh
    #11
    this article makes some good points (and some bad), but there is an underlying issue that it only touches on.
    The artists...

    What if there were no more "Big Three"?
    Could we ever get to the point where there was ONLY digital music?

    I envision a time when Artists submit their music directly to iTMS (or WinTMS, or whatever). The artist gets 70 cents (not 12) and Apple gets 29 cents.
     
  12. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2003
    Location:
    Fargo, ND
    #12
    It is really weird that so many people have hopped onto this bandwagon when they know they won't make money. In the end everyone knows that Windows music store will win, because they'll make everyone have it on their computer. But it is nice that Apple has the glory for now.
     
  13. macrumors 68030

    medea

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2002
    Location:
    Madison, Wi
    #13
    Um, if I recall correctly the iPod sold pretty damn well long before iTMS was around, and would continue to do so without iTMS. There are plenty of people like me whose iPods are filled with music from cd's.........
    If iTMS were to fail it would not be the end of Apple.
     

Share This Page