EMI Threatens To Leave IFPI
from the change-your-strategy dept
Last November, we noted that the "under new management" major record label EMI was discussing the possibility of scaling back its support for the RIAA and the IFPI, after realizing that many of the group's actions were counter-productive and had helped lead EMI and the other record labels down the wrong path. The moment of awakening for EMI appears to have been Radiohead's experiment. Apparently, EMI is quite serious about this. Reader Jon notifies us that EMI has told the IFPI that it will leave the group at the end of March, if it doesn't shift its strategies towards helping the recording industry, rather than its current strategy, which has clearly not been working. Part of the proposal is that the IFPI merges with the RIAA, rather than having the two act as separate groups -- though, the two often do seem to work together. Either way, this could represent a huge step forward, as it appears that at least one of the major labels has finally realized what plenty of people have realized for nearly a decade: the strategy of focusing on protecting an obsolete business model while suing your biggest fans is more damaging than helpful. Getting EMI to pressure the industry to realign and rethink its strategies is a huge step forward -- even if it's happening about seven or eight years late.
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
Filed Under: recording industry, trade associations
Companies: emi, ifpi, riaa
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
This EMI seems to be the black sheep
I have no love for iTunes, and have bought more stuff from amazon than iTunes, but it still seems rather stupid to me to let one store sell DRM free and force the more popular store to use drm.
DRM = less sales.
Less popular storefront = less sales.
Really... if the studios want to make money selling stuff, then why are they intentionally holding out?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This EMI seems to be the black sheep
Complicated DRM schemes are difficult for the artists to directly implement by themselves. They usually need infrastructure and third parties, such as record companies, to help them do that.
However, MP3's (and other non-DRM formats) are much easier for artists to distribute directly while potentially bypassing the record companies. Of course, the record companies don't want to be bypassed so they have been promoting DRM formats as being necessary (even if they don't really prevent copying). And that is why they are intentionally holding out on non-DRM formats.
Lately though and despite the record companies best efforts, the kool-aid is starting to wear off and some artists are staring to wake up and smell the coffee. Others, unfortunately, are so far gone that they'll probably go to the grave with an RIAA needle in their arm.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
EMI is scared not smart
EMI could care less about the RIAA or IFPI and their actions. What they do care about is a mass exodus of artists once contracts are up. As the artists realize they can keep all profit from sales instead of the pennies of net profit left after the industry cooks the books then they'll all leave to sell and promote themselves. EMI, and their peers, know how much they've been pocketing illicitly and they know once the artists figure it out the reocrding industry is done.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thom is Right.
Democratization of production, distribution and marketing is here to stay. Social Networking and Media site evolution were the last pieces of the puzzle.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
returning
that is no a bad thing the artist gets heard and they get a fan base. As a Broadcaster I get many such emails most i act on and play the music i have not yet heard a song ive said is total rubbish.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Too late
I've discovered a lot of good indie music, made by people who actually WANT me to listen to the music and enjoy it.
I agree w/ Thom; EMI isn't interested in "doing the right thing". They're running scared. Good.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Um. How do you figure that?
"In terms of digital income, we've made more money out of this record than out of all the other Radiohead albums put together, forever." -- Thom Yorke, Radiohead
It would appear that it was quite a success. On top of that, you have to include the fact that the album itself is selling well and the tours are likely to sellout, with some of those purchases coming from folks who heard the music thanks to the promotion. It's difficult to see how anyone could claim that this was a failure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There's a lot of things going good for Apple's Media distribution system. Time Big Content starts to "Think Different"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RIAA and the ilk move out of the distribution network and stop taking the artists money, the artists decide to distribute digitally (yes, I believe physical media will still exist, just not as the primary market), and now places such as iTunes and the ilk are catapulted into the newly vacant seat of the RIAA.
Yes, the artists could set up their own web server and distribute on their own, but that would be like setting up one record store to sell Metallica and another seperate store to sell Tupac.
I think that as long as the average consumer is lazy (which will be forever) we will have distribution problems.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Artists' websites
Hey, if it's all about the music, with bands making music for people to enjoy, why is this bad? There is far too little interpersonal communication as it is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
honesty
ok people will 'share' them, but make them reasonable and eqasy to obtain (in mp3, i.e. anyone can use it) and enough people will pay to make it worthwhile.
all the group needs to do is make the average profit (after hosting costs etc) to be enough to equal or better what they get from a record company and low enough for people to not bother too much about the cost and it should work.
make it easy to get individual tracks, or albums (maybe as a zip file or other archive of all the files) - not cheaper but maybe to include some art, liner notes etc. just an easy way to get the tracks in one go.
throw up pics, maybe some video from concerts etc.. the site becomes the 'hub' for getting stuff from 'x', along with details of upcomming stuff, interviews etc.
basically make it *easier* to get a legal copy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
re: artists' websites
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]