RIAA Got It Wrong, Convenience More Important Than Free To Students
from the we-don't-need-no-dumb-restrictions... dept
With Microsoft looking to use free music as an enticement, it's worth looking at how well the various attempts at colleges and universities to offer "free" music downloads are going. As you may recall, a few years ago, Napster made a huge effort to get colleges to sign up for their service, claiming they could then let students get "free music." Of course, it wasn't free at all. It involved many restrictions (it was for streaming rather than downloads, you could only get music from on-campus computers and, most importantly, all your music disappeared upon graduation) and of course, the university was paying for it somehow -- and that cost money that could have gone to other student programs. Despite what the industry seems to think, college students aren't that gullible. Most seemed to see through the bogus offer. Last year, the report from one university suggested not a single student bought a song through the service, even as they kept on buying songs from iTunes (the service allowed free streams with "discount" purchases, which no one took). Now the Wall Street Journal has chimed in and noticed the same thing at many different universities. Students are smart enough to know that, even when "free," these services provide a raw deal for users, and they'd rather do without them entirely.Of course, this goes pretty far towards destroying the recording industry's claims about how kids only want "free stuff." This shows that (once again) it's not about free, but about convenience. Even when something is free, if it's inconvenient, people won't bother. Other services have shown the reverse is true as well: if it's convenient, people will pay for it. So why is it that the recording industry still focuses on the "can't compete with free" story?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
1.) quality
2.) convenience
3.) price
the music industry fails on all three counts
first!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1) Cool stuff
2) Cool stuff that is convenient
3) Cool stuff that is convenient that is free.
If stuff is free, but it's neither cool nor convenient, nobody wants it. It might as well cost way too much, because nobody will buy in anyway.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
but anywho, i appreciate the people who do :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1. Filesharing = quality content (usually)
2. Filesharing = convenient quality content (usually)
3. Filesharing = conveniently free quality content (as long as 'they' don't know)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Profit!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oversimplification
Sometimes I think that the music industry just doesn't get it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Educating the people
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Free
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
free stuff
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
err grammer, anyone?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm not sure what you mean by "Convenience"
Could it not have been that they opted for itunes because they didn’t want to rent songs.
Of course they end up renting ipods but that’s for another subject. (They may rent ipods but not songs.)
Could it not be, then , that people associate Napster with rent and Itunes with own/buy.
If this was in fact the primary consideration leading to your article then I'm not sure that the word "convenience" is applicable here.
It might be, for example, that college students realize that this time and these collections of songs may mean something to them latter in life.
In other words for the same reason people take pictures. To remember a place and time.
Given a choice, the average person, I think, would probably want to own their "Keep-sakes" rater then renting them over time from some company.
(I dont know, Maybe "Rent-Sakes? Or lets see Company+Rent - "Creep-Sakes"?)
As far as I can tell, this example is not so much about convenience as it is about the association, in the human mind, between things that have personal value and the idea of renting vs. owning.
-- Albert
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm not sure what you mean by "Convenience"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
renting, DRM... where did my purchased music go?
DRM music is flawed and may not work in 10 years (try reinstalling your apple OS a few times).
Lots of college kids are broke.
Filesharing networks are both convenient and free.
DRM free netlabels are the future. It's a shame the RIAA doesn't trust it's own best customers. They've lost me for good. Apple too..
Any guesses when the MP3 or AAC format will become obsolete for the next best format.. so you can re-purchase your entire music collection all over again?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here here...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
By the way, filesharing does not offer much guaranteed quality by any means. Especially when what you're looking for doesn't play on MTV.
It's all very immature (as far as the internet music scenes development). So any actions taken towards people for their actions is based on very immature conclusions from an immature market. More time and energy should probably be spent on finding a system that works. iTunes is run on iPod success and convenience. It's successful but still not reasonable.
Pricing should be lowered when distributing digitally. It's not like they have a limited supply of MP3s to send over. The lower the pricing, the larger the customer base, the stronger the sales momentum. $1 a song? That's a bit ridiculous when you add everything up. You're using pennies of their bandwidth.
God I'm being opinionated. But damn am I frustrated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
renting ipods? renting music?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nothing is both FREE and EASY
But, I digress. I got 20 "free" songs when I signed up with Vonage, one of the few perks of that disaster. Anyways, when I finally got the code to get my free music, I went to the website, which was part of the puretracks.com company, and then tried to get my free music. Browsing and adding songs to the cart was easy, although the selection wasn't great, and when I went to check out, Vonage said that I should enter the value of 20 songs times $.99 when I entered me certificate ID. That would leave me having to pay for the taxes. I screwed that nonsense and put the full total of the order including taxes, and it accepted it.
The fun came when I wanted to actually download the music and play it. The download engine didn't seem to work on Firefox, and even using IE was spotty. It took way too long to download the music. The REAL joyous part of the experience was when I tried to play the DRM protected songs in Windows Media Player 10, and the player wouldn't play them, period. I tried to find a utility to remove the windows DRM on the music, ( I mean, I do legitimately own the music at this point), but after browsing many suspicous websites that wanted to set way too many cookies and run way too many scripts and active X controls, and downloading one dubious application which only crashed my system (but wasn't reported as a trojan by Norton Anti-virus) I almost gave up on the songs.
I finally installed Windows MP 11 and tried it one last time, and I actually was able to unlock the songs and listen to them. I promptly made a CD of the music and then ripped it into iTunes to put onto my iPod.
The moral of the story is, be wary of anything Vonage offers you, because it probably sucks in reality.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The real Moral of this story...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Useless file formats and DRM
I want MP3s! A no-nonsense format that's been around for years, sounds good, doesnt take up much space, and wont yell at me when I try to copy it from one device to another.
This is why I have been using all-of-mp3 for a few years (till I just heard they are not paying any royalties at all to the artists, true or not?).
I don't mind paying for music, but once I've paid for it I want to do with it what I please!
I don't giveaway copies to friends or share my collection, I just want something functional.
The price is less important to me, $1 per song is too much IMO, but if they started legally selling MP3s without all the DRM and other BS that comes along with it, I would be willing pay their dollar a song.
The RIAA puts very little trust in us normal people and I think that's hurting them more than anything at this point, they come across as a big bully, kill the little guy, my way or the highway sortta bunch and I want NOTHING to do with it!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think Apple would disagree with you ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why all these huge record comapnies anyway?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RIAA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]