The Blinne Blog

More Thoughts on Online Music

I have had some days now to look at the respective technologies for online music. It seems that the labels are doing their best to make the pay versions of online music much more difficult than the "free" versions. Let's look at what made the file swapping programs popular (excluding, of course, getting something for nothing).

• Exploring — This deals with the issue that radio has done a lousy job of exploring new music (even so-called alternative stations). Even in large urban areas, radio is a vast wasteland of bland uniformity. Napster allowed for people to explore new music easily.

  There is a very key difference between copyrights for broadcasting versus actual copies. A copyright holder cannot withhold the broadcast of their material if the broadcaster abides by the statutory license payments. This license is also more artist-friendly and less label-friendly on who receives the royalties.

  With the new Napster many of the really new tracks are buy-only. Thus, only 30-second clips are available for streaming. This restricts the ability of exploring new music. This is not Roxio's fault. Rather, it is the music labels trying to restrict things. Napster also does not give information on music that is not yet available. Apple Music Store has no streaming whatsoever. MusicMatch to the rescue. Here they have their radio-based model for streaming. Brand new stuff is available for streaming. The only restriction is — like radio — you cannot pick the exact music you will be getting. You can specify down to the granularity of an individual artist, however. If the track or album is available for purchase, you can click on the buy-track button or add a song to your wish list. In addition to this, their music guide is far better than the other two. They include music that they don't have yet available. On the negative side, they removed the Buy-CD with Buy-Track button. There is really no need for this either/or approach. Some people would prefer a CD over electronic tracks. Hopefully, they will bring the old button back.

• Availability — People want to play their music on their equipment. For playing on your computer, this is mostly solved (at least for PC owners). It appears that the labels will be providing music at least for purchase in some form. It may get expensive. In one case I noted that to purchase an album through Napster would be twice as expensive as buying the CD. MusicMatch and Apple Music Store both provide more comprehensive album purchasing selections. My guess is the price issue will be a temporary problem on Napster.

  Playing on portables is a different story. As I commented earlier, there are two major formats for protected music. Apple Music Store seems locked into AAC while Napster seems locked into WMA. Again, MusicMatch to the rescue. Their CEO has been publically quoted as saying that they will look at supporting AAC format. Hopefully, this will include transcoding between formats. Their vision is being a universal player. Even without this support, they are coming real close. The only issue right now is they have the smallest library of the three majors. This will undoubtably be fixed in the next couple of months.

As you can see I am a big MusicMatch fan. In a sea of black hats they seem to be the only white hat out their. Add to that their new relationship with Dell for driving Dell's new portable. They may make the online music business work despite the ongoing stupidity of the labels.

Winner Takes All? No, Winner Plays All

Having run both Napster and iTunes for Windows I found the same thing a USA Today reviewer did

More seriously for users of other software, Apple's songs are sold in the AAC format, which I incorrectly said on my Chat last week was an Apple-proprietary format. It's not, but on the other hand it might as well be: I've had a really hard time finding another Windows jukebox application that works with it. Winamp, MusicMatch, RealOne and Windows Media Player won't play them, and if you want to use Roxio's popular Easy CD and DVD Creator to burn AAC songs to a CD, you're also out of luck.

If you buy songs at the iTunes Music Store, you have to play them in iTunes for Windows and use that program to transfer to CDs, whether you like it or not. And if you can get it to "rip" songs from your CDs onto your hard drive (which I did successfully on my laptop, but not desktop, which isn't currently recognizing CDs), the songs are automatically encoded in AAC, although a tab does let you switch your save preference to MP3.

The application nicely adds your hard drives MP3's to the library, as does Napster and MusicMatch, but if you happen to have any Windows Media Audio (WMA) files, they don't exist in iTunes.

However you feel about Microsoft and it's dominance of the computer world, the fact is that MusicMatch, Buymusic.com and Napster all sell songs in the WMA format, and more stores are coming. If you mix and match songs from the services, you'll have to make separate CDs, and listen in separate programs. Apple took the radical step of creating a Windows program. Why not go all the way and make life easier for the PC users?

Apple and Microsoft are playing this like the old VHS vs. Beta battle. This is the wrong paradigm. Rather, it is the recordable DVD battle. Here the DVD recorders that won play everybody's format. Whichever jukebox plays all formats wins and with it draws buyers to their storefront. Same thing goes for portable players. The other players in the portable game could care less what the format is. If Apple views Microsoft as the competition they will fail to have iPods play WMA files. Then iPods lose. The game is not winner takes all but winner plays all.

Napster 2.0 Launched

TechTV gave the following summary comments concerning the relaunch of Napster.

Summary: Napster 2.0's official launch on Oct. 29 will further broaden the digital-audio field for the PC audience. The combination of a music store, extra premium features, a sweet interface, community features, and its recognizable name should spell success for a grown-up Napster.

Gene Munster, senior research analyst with US Bancorp Piper Jaffray, thinks so too.

"If you look at the brand, the Napster brand dwarfs all others," Munster said. "So I think this is a situation where the dark horse is going to actually win."

I've tried the new Napster and I like it a lot. But I hate the name because of the history of piracy. 12-year-old girls get sued and the Napster dudez make out. Grrrr.

A Good Match

CNet is reporting that

Musicmatch on Monday announced its entry into the digital song-selling business, and sources say PC maker Dell will be one of the first companies to promote the new download service to consumers.

As previously reported, the Internet music software company's service, which will provide a new online rival to Apple Computer's iTunes and to BuyMusic, uses the popular Musicmatch Jukebox software and is distributing music in Microsoft's Windows Media format.

I am a subscriber to PressPlay and I also stream using MusicMatch. So, I tried out the new MusicMatch and even this early it looks like we have a winner. The integration is good with their streaming music service. What is best about this is that you can easily explore artists and genres. PressPlay's interface is a whole lot clunkier. BuyMusic.com? Forget it. This looks like the best (legal) solution for Windows users, so far.

Senator Takes a Swing at RIAA

Finally, a senator who is making sense. Three cheers for Senator Brownback. Senator Brownback introduced legislation that returns some sanity that was lost with the passage of the DCMA. In the following story, note the lame RIAA quotes. Wired News is reporting:

A Kansas senator introduced legislation Tuesday that could deal a blow to the music industry in its ongoing battle with file-sharing fans.

Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) introduced the Consumers, Schools, and Libraries Digital Rights Management Awareness Act of 2003, a bill that addresses two hot topics in the digital realm: privacy and digital rights management.

The legislation would require owners of digital media to file a John Doe lawsuit to obtain the identifying information of an Internet user, rather than simply requesting a subpoena.

Currently, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act permits copyright holders to subpoena an Internet service provider for the name and address of a person they believe is violating a copyright. The one-page subpoena request can be issued by a court clerk and doesn't require a judge's signature.

Brownback said the DMCA subpoena process raises serious privacy and due-process concerns.

"There are no checks, no balances, and the alleged pirate has no opportunity to defend themselves," Brownback said when introducing the bill. "My colleagues, this issue is about privacy, not piracy.

"This will provide immediate privacy protections to Internet subscribers by forcing their accusers to appear publicly in a court of law, where those with illicit intentions will not tread, and provides the accused with due process required to properly defend themselves."

The Recording Industry Association of America, or RIAA, issued a statement in response:

"The DMCA was a carefully crafted compromise. Multibillion-dollar ISPs like Verizon (Communications) fought for and won liability immunity for the rampant piracy on their networks. In exchange, they were obligated to help copyright holders identify individual pirates.

"You can't divorce the benefits of the DMCA from its burdens. If the ability of creators to enforce our rights directly against individual copyright pirates is overturned, so goes the rest of the DMCA and its restrictions on liability immunity. The rules of the road of the past five years will be thrown out the window, and that's not something anyone should wish for."

Verizon, involved in ongoing litigation with the RIAA, said it was pleased with the legislation.

"Verizon is very appreciative of Sen. Brownback introducing this bill," said Sarah Deutsch, vice president and associate general counsel for Verizon. "We believe it's a necessary first step toward better protecting Internet users' privacy, due process and safety rights."

Brownback said he created the legislation in response to the legal fights between ISPs and the music industry. Sen. Norm Coleman (R-Minn.) also has expressed concern with the RIAA's tactics in the file-sharing battle, and will hold hearings on the subject Sept. 30.

The RIAA has issued more than 1,500 subpoenas to ISPs seeking the personal information of subscribers it suspects of sharing music illegally. The music trade group has said it will use the information gathered from the subpoenas to sue thousands of people for copyright infringement. Last week the organization announced the first batch of these lawsuits, targeting 261 people, including a 12-year-old girl and a 71-year-old grandfather.

The music group is also involved in legal fights with Verizon and SBC Communications because the two ISPs refused to surrender the names of subscribers who, the trade group alleges, shared copyright music files on the Internet.

Verizon was forced to surrender the names of its subscribers, but also appealed the decision. A Washington, D.C., district court heard oral arguments on the appeal Tuesday.

Another part of the bill calls for a labeling system for all digital media protected by digital rights management, "so consumers will know what they are buying when they buy it," Brownback said.

Digital rights management, also called DRM, refers to technology measures that control how digital content is used and accessed.

The music industry has started selling copy-protected CDs without labeling the products as such, and some customers have had trouble playing these CDs on their computers. Plus, music lovers have been unable to convert these music files to MP3s, a legal action, Brownback said.

On Wednesday, the Senate commerce committee will hold a hearing on the DMCA subpoena process and DRM. Panelists will include RIAA President Cary Sherman and representatives of Verizon and SBC, among others.

Digital rights groups applauded Brownback's legislation.

"We like lots of things here," said Wendy Seltzer, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "It reaffirms Internet users' rights to privacy and anonymity and it reaffirms that we preserve traditional fair-use rights as we move to the online environment."

"The bill helps to ensure that the public is informed about capabilities and restrictions of media they purchase," Seltzer said, adding that the bill is "asserting that public rights of access to media and rights to innovate with technology persist in the digital age."

Someone Who Gets It

Michael Booth of the Denver Post gets it on why people are not buying CDs when he makes the following contrast between the movie industry and the music industry.

The best-selling "Chicago" movie soundtrack is available on CD starting at $13.86.

The actual movie, with the soundtrack songs included, of course, plus additional goodies ranging from deleted musical numbers to the director's interview and a "making-of" feature, can be had for precisely $2.12 more.

Therein lies the problem for a critically wounded music recording industry: The "Chicago" CD looks like a rip-off, and the DVD looks like a steal.

Nearly everything the record companies have done wrong in the age of downloading has been done right by the movie studios.

America's love for movies is stronger than ever, while the nation listens to music with smoldering resentment.

While movie companies escort happy customers to newly-installed recliner stadium seats, the music companies escort their biggest fans straight to the courthouse. There is only so much time for entertainment in a busy day, and people will spend their leisure where they meet the path of least resistance.

For every slight by the music world, there's a smarter parallel move by the cinema promoters:

Not until 20 years after the introduction of the CD in the United States did a record label announce across-the-board price cuts that acknowledged consumer anger at paying $19 for one decent Justin Timberlake song. Universal will now drop prices on many CDs to below $10, a breaking point many buyers seem to accept.

In contrast, the movie studios saw the threat from pay-per-view cable and satellite in 1997, when DVDs first arrived here, and slashed prices immediately. DVDs started between $19 and $24; today hundreds of great titles are available in the $10 range. With "Pirates of the Caribbean" still taking in great business in theaters, a two-disc DVD version will arrive before Christmas for $18.