2/2 Can you guys see a problem with this? An online company sells CDs, and
they offer to give you a download of the CDs you bought in say 65kbit
mp3, 128kbit mp3, 256kbit mp3 and FLAC. That way you are saved the
trouble of ripping the CD and getting the right ID3 tags, you also get
to listen to the music immediately. As a further extension, you could
have them hold onto your physical CD for a while and only ship you discs
every few months to save on shipping. The 2 caveats I see are they have
to only let the person who ordered download, and they can't sell CDs
they don't physically have. Would this avoid the RIAA/MP3.com fiasco?
\_ Looks like you've been reading Robert X. Cringely's column. -williamc
\_ If you're referring to that "collective ownership" idea, that's
not what I had in mind. I'm looking for a way to have a normal
pay-to-download music scheme with multiple encodings/qualities and
no DRM.
\_ Any scheme that doesn't have DRM will instantly turn into
song-swapping.
\_ Bzzt. Not everyone sucks. Check http://magnatune.com.
\_ Thanks. neat site. -!op
\_ How does http://magnatune.com stop song-swapping?
\_ It doesn't. It accepts it into its business
model. If the riaa companies had done this back
when cassettes were their big issue, they wouldn't
be so far behind.
\_ All downloads would happen from a central server, and only
at the time of purchase, so there should be little risk of
password sharing or the like.
\_ that still doesn't stop me from sharing it on say, kazaa,
or whatever favorite p2p scheme i might have.
\_ There's nothing stopping you from doing it with CDs
you already own. It's also legal for a company to
rip and encode CDs you own. This combines the two.
\_ the law is a tricky thing. is it legal for them
to store copies of mp3s they rip and send them to
you? it would seem there could be a catch if they
didn't rip it from the cd you own. but it wouldn't
be a practical business if they had to hire someone
to open your cd and rip all the tracks off your cd.
then, there's the cost of warehousing a huge backlog
of unsent cd's.
\_ The company would have to retain, store, and be able to prove that
each person's physical CD collection existed in a warehouse some
place. Forever. That alone is going to cost way too much to make
it worth the effort. I recall reading about someone with a similar
idea a few years ago but I guess nothing came of it. Is your
startup prepared to be RIAA audited once a month? Probably not.
\_ If it kept immaculate records, then after the 3rd audit or so it
could either sue or get a harassment reatraining order, or else
refuse the audit, get sued, win because everything is well
documented, then file a SLAPP suit or invoke the Sherman
antitrust act. I do agree it will be harassed and must keep
excellent documentation.
\_ Assuming the RIAA just didn't get a law passed against this,
you still have *huge* storage and IT costs. Music just isn't
that expensive. You have a one time sale but repeat costs on
each one time sale. It is guaranteed to lose money in the
long term. If your plan is to get a million users, own 10%
of your $6b space, IPO and walk away then oh wait, we don't
do that anymore, this isn't 1998. Forget about it. Come up
with a service people would be willing to pay for that you
could actually make a profit running.
\_ Here's a business model that might work: write good,
music, play it in a public concert hall and charge people
money to listen.
\_ that business model works for Dave Matthews, but not
for the vast majority of good bands. -tom
\_ Little guys can't make money that way. How does a big
guy get to be a big guy without a music publishing and
distribution system? No one is going to put me in a
20,000 person stadium because I rock at the kazoo with
out at least 20,000 rabid *local* kazoo fans around.
\_ Your army awaits you, Captain Kazoo. |
http://csua.com/feed/