Friday, March 28, 2008
P2P Tax to Be Followed by Boston P2P Party?
Back in 2000-2001, when the Recording Industry Association of America was still trying to recover from its CD price-fixing scheme with poorly reasoned justifications for CD price inflation (”Listen, if CD prices were governed by the Consumer Price Index, you’d be paying $33.86 for them instead of $12.75!”), a little company called Napster came calling. Napster had pioneered a new Internet distribution model for digital media that was revolutionizing the music industry, and it hoped to partner with RIAA member labels to create a subscription-based service.
At the time, Napster had some 20 million users worldwide and was essentially the de-facto file-sharing standard. Had the RIAA labels agreed to the alliance, they might have turned peer-to-peer distribution into a new and powerful business model, one with low distribution and marketing costs and a fast developing user base. But they didn’t. They chose another route.
Big mistake. Along came Gnutella. And increased broadband penetration and cheaper storage. Along came Kazaa. And then came BitTorrent. And, well, look at the industry now.
Given such history, it’s difficult to look at the recording industry’s plan to have a monthly fee added to consumers’ internet-service bills and not shake your head in wonderment.
Portfolio.com reports that Edgar Bronfman Jr.’s Warner Music Group (TWX) has indeed hired veteran industry consultant Jim Griffin (no relation to Peter, right?) to quarterback a plan under which consumers pay an Internet-access surcharge of $5 a month for the collective right to freely share music. Those fees would be pooled and divvied up among artists and their labels.
“Ideally, music will feel free,” says Griffin. “Even if you pay a flat fee for it, at the moment you use it there are no financial considerations. It’s already been paid for.”
Ah- charge everyone for all music. So it is Monetization Without Representation. OK. But what gives the music industry the right to tax all broadband users because it suspects some of them might illegally share its content? And if the music industry deserves that right, then doesn’t the film industry deserve it as well? And the publishing industry? And any other industry that might benefit from such a tax?
As David Barrett, engineering manager for peer-to-peer networks at Web content-delivery giant Akamai (AKAM), notes Griffin’s plan is problematic. And desperate.
Said Barrett:, “It’s too late to charge people for what they’re already getting for free. This is just taxation of a basic, universal service that already exists, for the benefit a distant power that actively harasses the people being taxed without offering them any meaningful representation.”
Yahoo took some time off from fretting over its uncertain future today to ditch its also-ran subscription music service.
This morning the company said it’s exiting the subscription-music market and throwing its support behind Rhapsody America, a joint venture company owned by RealNetworks and Viacom. In the coming months, Yahoo Music Unlimited subscribers will be transitioned over to Rhapsody and Yahoo will begin promoting the new service on its properties.
The deal leaves us with a subscription services market of three: Rhapsody, Napster and Microsoft’s Zune Marketplace. And among those, Rhapsody–with just under 1 million subscribers–will be the leader. “This takes away a competitor, and gives Rhapsody potentially some marketing muscle,” Jupiter analyst David Card told USA Today. “This is good for Rhapsody.”
Indeed. But only if the deal lasts. And there’s good reason to believe it won’t, given Microsoft’s hostile bid for Yahoo. The software giant and Real aren’t exactly old friends.
According to last year’s safely-looking-ahead-to-the-year-to-come lists, 2007 was to be “a year of hyperdisruption for the technology industry”; it was to be “a year of significant developments” and “a year of evolution”; it was to be “a year of invention and innovation,” “a year of experimentation” and “a year of slow, but significant, change”; it was to be “a year of carnage,” but it was also to be “a year of great happiness and multiple blessings.” Above all, 2007 was to be “a busy year for technology.”
Which, as you’ll see below (and in our companion video), is pretty much how it turned out. What follows is Digital Daily’s abridged guide to the year in tech news–a fond reminiscence of what was, and our First Annual Year-End List For Year-End List Haters.
Many, many years ago, when the digital-music business consisted of little else besides Napster and the Recording Industry Association of America’s lawsuits against it, Apple proved that there was indeed a decent business to be had in selling music online for $1 per song. With iTunes, it quickly established a market for paid downloads as the music industry wrung its hands in utter incomprehension at this new age of digital distribution that was dawning.
So it is ironic, enormously ironic, to hear NBC Universal Chief Executive Jeff Zucker accuse Apple of ruining the music business (like that second Lindsay Lohan album didn’t do any damage at all). Speaking at a breakfast organized by Syracuse University’s Newhouse School, Zucker said Apple “destroyed the music business in terms of pricing” and will invariably do the same to the online video business.
Noting that NBCU booked just $15 million in revenue during the last year of its iTunes deal, Zucker described the company’s deal with Apple’s digital media store as one that was corrosive to its media business. “We don’t want to replace the dollars we were making in the analog world with pennies on the digital side,” he said. What Zucker does want is a piece of Apple’s iPod business. “Apple sold millions of dollars worth of hardware off the back of our content and made a lot of money,” Zucker said. “They did not want to share in what they were making off the hardware or allow us to adjust pricing.”
Can’t imagine that’s going to change anytime soon, either–no matter how loudly Zucker whines. Apple CEO Steve Jobs would probably rather swallow a Zune whole than be pressured into handing over a percentage of iPod sales to record labels, as Microsoft has done with Zune.
Does AT&T know how to craft a competitive value proposition or does AT&T know how to craft a competitive value proposition?
This morning, the company said it will soon offer wireless customers the ability to download music over the air from Napster–at a 50% to 100% markup over iTunes and Amazon MP3. AT&T is charging $1.99 a track, or $7.49 for five songs from Napster’s 4 million song library–prices that, while on par with those offered by Verizon Wireless, are double the 99 cents currently charged by not only Amazon and iTunes, but also Sprint, which reduced the price of its music downloads to 99 cents from $2.49 in March to spur demand.
Rob Hyatt, AT&T’s director of premium content, acknowledged the steep price point might be off-putting to some, but insisted it wouldn’t pose a problem for the impulse-control challenged. “They’re very price insensitive,” he told Reuters.

–Toronto Globe and Mail writer Mathew Ingram explains the formula used to calculate damages in Virgin Records America et al. v. Thomas.
We’re never going to hear the end of it now …
The recording industry won its first ever file-sharing suit to go to trial yesterday, when a federal jury found 30-year-old Jammie Thomas liable for copyright infringement. The jury awarded the six record labels involved in the case a total of $220,000, or $9,250 for each of the 24 songs they claimed Thomas uploaded.
Seems it was far easier for the labels to sell the jury on their investigative methods than you might think–especially after the presiding judge ruled that no proof was needed that anyone actually downloaded the songs at issue in the case–simply making them available constituted distribution.
Emboldened by the ruling, the Recording Industry Association of America took a break from sending prelitigation settlement letters to college students to issue this gloating statement: “The law here is clear, as are the consequences for breaking it. When the evidence is clear, we will continue to bring legal actions against those individuals who have broken the law. This program is important to securing a level playing field for legal online music services.”
Reading that you’d never think it’s been eight years since Napster, would you? Eight years. Anyway …
Attorney Ray Beckerman, writing in the Recording Industry Vs. the People blog, called the verdict “one of the most irrational things” he’s ever seen in law. “A verdict of $222,000, for infringement of 24 song files worth a total of $23.76?” he asked. “In a case where there was zero evidence of the defendant having transferred any of those files? It is an outrage, and I hope it is a wakeup call to the world that we all need to start supporting the defendants in these cases, and the attorneys who are sacrificing so much to represent them. And the support cannot be with words, it must be with checkbooks. And it cannot be next year, it must be now.
“All the businesspeople who make a living from the vibrancy, democracy and freedom of expression which is the Internet need to get behind the RIAA’s victims; if they do not, the world in which they hope to thrive and prosper will disappear rapidly.
“The RIAA ghouls smelled blood in Duluth, and I guess they were right.”
John Paczkowski has been poking fun at the tech industry and the personalities that drive it since 1997. From 1999 to 2007, he wrote the award-winning tech news Web log Good Morning Silicon Valley for the San Jose Mercury News, Silicon Valley's daily newspaper.
Here is a statement of my ethics and coverage policies. It is more than most of you want to know, but, in the age of suspicion of the media, I am laying it all out.
Fill the fun bar all the way to the top and keep it there for a few seconds to have a successful date.
… in 2 Minutes
3. Among those earning 10-figure incomes, Mr. Soros’s total annual compensation is greater than Mr. Falcone’s. Mr. Falcone’s is greater than Mr. Griffin’s. Mr. Griffin’s is smaller than Mr. Soros’s, and Mr. Paulson’s is greater than Mr. Soros’s. In descending order, list the men by the respective hotness of their trophy wives.
Dear Mr. Prince: It’s been three days since you delivered your keynote address, “When Doves Cry,” to our organization, the American Ornithological Society.
I’ll have the “J&J fresh intestine pot,” a side of “cowboy leg” and the “carbon burns black bowel” to go, please.
Starring Stephen Colbert and Steve Carell
… in CSS
Lenovo has its way with Apple’s MacBook Air ads
If you really want to hear about it, the first thing you’ll probably want to know is where my cemetery plot is, and what my lousy adulthood was like …
googletimewarner.com? googlepoo.com?