Yeah, we get ruckus and I know how to strip the DRM. Maybe I didn't phrase the question right. I was hopping to see if what Itunes and Zoon are charging is much higher than what people want to pay. And if you are like me, you realize that they are charging about the same per album (assuming 12-17 songs per album) as they charge in record stores which is ridiculous because records in record stores have so many more fixed costs at downloads don't.
RIAA says the reason it is going after college students is because they want us to develop buying habits that involve us never paying for music. However at a $1.30 a song, my DRM free music collection is worth that of a (f-ing nice) car and many college students are in the same boat. They have become use to having access to a plethora of information, including music, at little or no cost and we're not willing to give that up. Ruckus tries to cater to this however, even someone like me who has unimpressive tastes in music is perturbed by their minuscule song selection. I know the record companies are loosing money on me and a huge number of people who don't pay for their music, however, I am not willing to pay what they are asking me to pay for music. I am trying to figure out the proper price/#user compromise.
oh I mean, absolutely. And there are other issues here. Consider the fact that, most of the DRM-free services feature music from independent labels. Major labels won't touch it, because they're convinced it's just an invitation for piracy. The problem with major labels is the ridiculous level of overhead they have. When they want to promote a new artist, they take out ads, have stories planted about them being the "next big thing", produce expensive, lavish videos, etc., etc. All of this happens before any of the music is really out there, and as a result they can be in the hole millions of dollars with an artist before the album even drops. So basically, a major-label artist's debut album has to create a firestorm, or they get dropped. Which is ironic, given that some of the best-selling artists of all time started out selling relatively small.
And the funny thing is, that kind of bought publicity doesn't seem to matter anymore. A high score from pitchfork media can catapult an artist from obscurity to the top of the charts (Arcade Fire, anyone?), without a single cent spent on pricey PR campaigns.
So, what's left is a problem that is hard to fix. Due to their practices, the major labels are deep in the hole. Piracy has certainly contributed to this, but, at the same time, it has also exposed people to far more music than they normally would have known about, and thus spurred purchases. The big issue with DRM, as I'm sure you know, is that it's treating the customer like a criminal before anything happens. I don't want to shell out for music that I can only play in one location and then have to pay additional fees everytime I want to do something with it. If I buy something, I should own it. The end user license agreement on music has just gone insane.
In the meantime, there are a ton of interesting free net labels that I recommend you check out.
RIAA says the reason it is going after college students is because they want us to develop buying habits that involve us never paying for music. However at a $1.30 a song, my DRM free music collection is worth that of a (f-ing nice) car and many college students are in the same boat. They have become use to having access to a plethora of information, including music, at little or no cost and we're not willing to give that up. Ruckus tries to cater to this however, even someone like me who has unimpressive tastes in music is perturbed by their minuscule song selection. I know the record companies are loosing money on me and a huge number of people who don't pay for their music, however, I am not willing to pay what they are asking me to pay for music. I am trying to figure out the proper price/#user compromise.
Does that make sense?
Reply
Reply
And the funny thing is, that kind of bought publicity doesn't seem to matter anymore. A high score from pitchfork media can catapult an artist from obscurity to the top of the charts (Arcade Fire, anyone?), without a single cent spent on pricey PR campaigns.
So, what's left is a problem that is hard to fix. Due to their practices, the major labels are deep in the hole. Piracy has certainly contributed to this, but, at the same time, it has also exposed people to far more music than they normally would have known about, and thus spurred purchases. The big issue with DRM, as I'm sure you know, is that it's treating the customer like a criminal before anything happens. I don't want to shell out for music that I can only play in one location and then have to pay additional fees everytime I want to do something with it. If I buy something, I should own it. The end user license agreement on music has just gone insane.
In the meantime, there are a ton of interesting free net labels that I recommend you check out.
Reply
Leave a comment