Replies

Back when napster was big, I used to share out my own rather massive collection of CD/ripped albums on the days when news articles would come out with Rosen or one of those other bozos making stupid comments about how it was destroying their business.

The RIAA is destroying themselves.

I have more than 19GB of now of my CDs and albums that I've ripped. I really enjoy starting XMMS, and putting it on random play. It is a heck of a lot more convienient for me than it would be to try to do something similar with my collection. I even bought an FM transmitter so I can tune it in on my home stereo.

The recording industry is today's version of the buggy whip manufacturers of the early 1900s. They need to look at what the public wants and provide it, or tehy will get completely run over.

One of the things I thought was interesting about napster was watching what people would download. I have very little 'pop' music, because I don't really like that kind of stuff. Most of it is 'classic rock', big band, classical, blues, bluegrass and early country (pre-60s). I'd see people hit my box when searching for something obscure, then start looking really closely at what I had, and download stuff that was even more obscure, or even just random picks. It didn't seem to fit the profile of what the media was reporting as being the typical napster user.

I've looked into itunes, and think it is closer to the model that will ultimately win out, but at $1/tune, they are still buying into the RIAA arguments too much IMO. 25¢ is probably a better long-term price point, but the problem with that is, the RIAA members won't be making $17/album at that price.

but the problem with that is, the RIAA members won't be making $17/album at that price

They wouldn't need to.
What has a better cost/profit ratio- producing hard CD's that need to be manufactutred, packaged and distributed (andfactor in retail markup), or making the same songs available on innumerable websites for download?
The RIAA would be making money hand over fist already if they had jumped on Napster et al as a distrbution medium and charged membership fees or pennies per song. Let people try before they buy and compile their own CDs.
One of the most useful aspects of file sharing networks is the opportunity to be exposed to new material and new artists and genres. That equals a bigger audience and more profits.

I agree that the iTunes store is a good model, but I, too, think the price is too much. Anyone remember when CDs started and the record companies justified their outlandish prices (more than double the price of vinyl) because it was a new medium, and promised the price would come down when CDs caught on? Well, it's 20 years later, and we're still waiting.

I really enjoy starting XMMS, and putting it on random play. It is a heck of a lot more convienient for me than it would be to try to do something similar with my collection. I even bought an FM transmitter so I can tune it in on my home stereo.

I thought about that but haven't yet. I do use MusicMatch's 'radio station' at home and it is nice to put it on random. I do have a 20GB Archos MP3 player but to tell the truth it's not something that's easy to use going down the road. May have to look into XM, but I just want to make sure which of the two competitors is going to make it before I choose