What is Digg?112 Comments
- fejimush, on 11/15/2007, -3/+47Let's hope they figure this out and we'll all be a lot happier. The author is correct, the majority of people don't mind paying a reasonable price for music and movies. Music CDs are hardly worth $10+ these days. If music was $0.25 per song and DRM free I would be buying music all day long, and more likely to purchase music I wouldn't normally purchase. At $1.00 per song I will purchase a handful per month. It would be the same for movies.
- inactive, on 11/15/2007, -8/+38yeah, i always pay for music and movies.. also, it's 1997
- weebit, on 11/15/2007, -0/+24"Get rid of the DRM and for goodness sake, get rid of that disgusting Recording Industry Association of America, and start trusting that consumers are willing to do what's right if you don't force them into a corner and make them do what's wrong"
That is music to my ears! Bring it on. - edzilla, on 11/15/2007, -0/+16In France, they just started charging almost double per song for the radio stations...
1-Sue your customers
2-get rid of the people who pay you to advertise your products
3-?????
4-Profit?? - newl, on 11/15/2007, -0/+13Anyone who reads xkcd is always laughing at the music industry. ;)
- branndon, on 11/15/2007, -3/+16"You need to look no further than Apple's iPhone to see how fast brilliantly written software presented on a beautifully designed device with a spectacular user interface will throw all the accepted notions about pricing, billing platforms and brand loyalty right out the window."
Wait... is this about the iPhone? *Dugg* - mrjit, on 11/15/2007, -3/+14$25-35/mo unlimited, DRM-free, bitrate=infinite, or bust.
- rupertmorris, on 11/15/2007, -0/+9I have been buying all my music online (as 320kb Lame-encoded MP3s), exclusively, for years. It's called Beatport, and it rocks if you listen to music that is otherwise only available on vinyl. I'm not a fan of flipping records every 20 minutes.
The only CDs I buy are uber-rare imports from obscure Berlin minimal techno labels. In these cases I buy the CDs because I have no alternative.
In all honesty, I haven't pirated music in years. I get the superb sound quality, and the great songs only, at a cost I agree with.
A side note: I will *never* buy from the iTMS as long as Apple uses a codec other than MP3, and bitrates less than the maximum.
Why? MP3s play on my iPod and MacBook Pro, but also on EVERY DVD PLAYER EVER MADE, as well as my 4 year old Sony Discman and my Linux partition. So I burn CDs of MP3s, and pop them in my 5-disc changer. MP3 FTW!
As an aside, freshtunes.ca is my electronic music site, if you are into that sort of thing. - arbulus, on 11/15/2007, -0/+8your ignorance or confusion is astounding.
There is no "canceling" iTunes because you don't sign up for it. There is no subscription to iTunes and you can delete iTunes, never buy from it again and be perfectly legal.
Rhapsody on the other hand IS a subscription service and will do exactly as you describe, deactive the songs you purchased if you cancel. But not iTunes.
Please get your facts straight before you make comments like that. - inactive, on 11/15/2007, -0/+8I agree with everything else BUT I'm not really down with a monthly pricing plan.. I'd rather go by a charge per song model. (and so would the majority of consumers, don't bother arguing, just look at how much more successful iTunes is) If they could implement both somehow then THAT would probably be the best end solution.
- variant, on 11/15/2007, -0/+7"Change is coming."
Change is already here. Amazon's MP3 Store and iTunes Plus are steps in the right direction, and I think that the rest of the major labels will hop on board soon enough. Has the author not heard of either of the two, or is this some sort of personal vindication against Warner? - astrotrain, on 11/15/2007, -1/+8Most of the music today is not worth the cds its on. To much whiny teenage girls, re-re-re-sampled music from decades gone with a no-name trying to rap some lyrics over it.
- inactive, on 11/15/2007, -2/+9its only a felony because of retarded US laws. in the rest of the world its only a misdemeanor at best.
- wipis, on 11/15/2007, -0/+7Well this article hints at the biggest problem that many others hint at and just straight up scream: The music industry is being run by old men that just don't get it. With napster and cheaper and cheaper MP3 players even I knew digital was the future. By the time Napster was a pay service and itunes had the music store packed with their ridiculously popular iPod it was obvious the music industry would soon need to partially or heavily rely on digital sales and here's this idiot acting like the shift is just now starting. He's about 7 years late.
- TheKrillr, on 11/15/2007, -0/+5Infinite bitrate? That would require a hard drive with an infinite capacity... Besides, anything higher than 320Kbps is pointless.
- inactive, on 11/15/2007, -0/+5There is something about the music industry that just makes my blood boil. The Gene Simmons thing sent me over the edge this morning - because who says that these people deserve millions upon millions of dollars for their music? I've never understood why paying these people all these millions of dollars is so important. It's simple: They're greedy. Bottom line, it's not about the music. It hasn't been about the music for a long time. It's about making sure musicians can afford luxury homes and vehicles, while Joe-Average is busting his ass at a minimum wage job and has to spend $20 of his pay check to purchase one half-decent CD with only ONE half-decent song on it. ***** THE MUSIC INDUSTRY.
- WozNZ, on 11/15/2007, -0/+4They should have made that deal with Napster all those years ago when all 4 majors met with Napster. 40million people using a close system would have given them control over the online world. Now they will end up with nothing.
Sometimes greed is not good lol. - prisoner24601, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3Blanket license FTW.
Seriously, how hard would it be for RIAA to say: "OK, we're done wasting our time with strategies that don't work. Sign up with us and pay us $5 a month and we will put you on a "licensed user" / "do not sue" list that means you are covered for any music in any format. You're completely legal now. Go use Oink, get it from usenet, we don't care. All that matters is that you are signed up and "licensed for all RIAA content." There's some sweet-spot for the fee that is low enough to make *everyone* sign up, then RIAA rakes in the cash, distributes it to the publishers, everyone is happy. - thailand1972, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3I don't want a monthly fee too. I would buy on a per-song basis, and the library of songs had better be absolutely HUGE, including a vast amount of unsigned artists. Give me that and I'll certainly pay for the music on a per-track basis. The biggest problem I have about commercial sites is the lack of depth in their library. Also, give me a 30 second low-fi clip for each track and you've perfected the online music store (I know Amazon do this, but not for every track, and their library is far from vast)
- Fhwqhgads, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3"Who else is laughing at the music industry?"
raises hand - BoneheadFarker, on 11/15/2007, -1/+4And what if I don't want to pay? What if I wanted to stop paying after a while, would I have to give back the music I've already paid for? What if only my girlfriend pays and I listen? Blanket licenses, and licenses in general, are a bad idea....
- huskerdude, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3You were wrong when you posted the comment up above, and guess what? Not much has changed...
- CheeseburgerBro, on 11/15/2007, -1/+4You know, most of the tripe that industry puts out is so steamingly, ***** bad that I can't be bothered to acquire it even when it IS free. The industry's problem is NOT distribution: it's content.
- eatbeefjerky, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3The distribution method is NOT the only problem here -- most of the music these labels are trying to sell us sucks! The people who ARE paying for their music are generally NOT going for the manufactured pop/hiphop "artists", and these guys are what make up most of the music produced by these labels. Get rid of that crap, make some good music, THEN make it available at a reasonable price and DRM-free. THEN we can talk... not before.
These older, conservative businessmen claim to be all about capitalism. Well, this is capitalism at its best folks - people are voting with their dollars, and they're voting for the music industry to change its tactics. Let's see it happen. - cliffski, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3if its too expensive, you cant have it. why cant diggers understand that.
- inactive, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2And these guys...
http://www.publishmymusic.com - Spamcan, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2In another decade audiophiles will be buying records while the other 95 percent of us download our music ether legally or illegally. Compact Disc has far outlasted it's usefulness as a music distribution medium.
- mrjit, on 11/15/2007, -1/+3Well, I'm a hoarder, I don't even listen to 90% of my music, so of course multiple plans would be a good idea. Akin to usenet pricing.
- svenjick, on 11/15/2007, -2/+4I totally agree with this excellent article, to one exception: for me a CD is still worth it. A CD is more than just a collection of audio files, it's a piece of art, with a brochure, in a physical packing, which ages, gets scratches, and I develop a sentimental value towards it... I don't quite see how this could happen with digital files.
- inactive, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2Finally somebody got it right... Piracy won't disappear, but people like me who are already paying for music, would love to see DRM go straight down to hell...
- TheKrillr, on 11/15/2007, -8/+10Some of us prefer not to commit felonies. While yes I think the price of a CD/DVD is ABSURD, I don't agree with stealing music. This is why I purchase all the music I can off of iTunes, and the rest I download of BitTorrent... once its available on iTunes, I buy a legal copy there. I also bought Radiohead's album despite it being available for free. People deserve money for their work... but the record companies pay the artists too little and charge the consumers too much.
iTunes, pay-as-you-like albums, and BT For the Win! - merelyjim, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2I'd like to think we'd all be willing to pay $5-10 for the content, but RadioHead's experiment suggests otherwise.
- merelyjim, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2I hope you're a good musician, because you're a piss-poor writer. Good luck with the career.
- inactive, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2I don't mind buying music at the iTunes Store. The quality is the best available when downloading iTunes Plus songs. It is worth the money if you ask me. I don't have problems burning CDs. I never burn music DVDs, but I understand your point. Totally. I would love to see Apple add the option to convert it to music MP3 CDs. I don't mind if they use their format on Macs and in iTunes itself. iTunes is unbeatable. It's pretty close to perfection, so I don't bother. But music MP3 DVDs for people like you, that's what they need to implant!
- justAnother9, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2I am a happy user at emusic.com, where I pay $9.99/mo for 40 downloads (I think their price has gone up a little). I am able to find new music and give a little back to the artist without it costing much. Seems like a good model to me.
- amoro99, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2Promote better music and people will buy it. I used to be able to like at least a couple of songs on commercial radio -- no more.
- dbdrum, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2Monthy fees don't work. Ask Napster, Real Audio and Yahoo Music.
- clubby, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2"It's amazing the number of you losers that want to hide behind the complaint about the RIAA but your real intentions are to pay nothing no matter what."
I think it's presumptuous of you to tell people what their real intentions are. You really don't know what Lindsay would do if the RIAA charged reasonable prices, had a reasonable business model, and reasonably compensated their artists.
Also, IMHO, the real loser is the one who quits playing the game, rather than fighting to win, which is what we're doing through civil disobedience. - randysouth, on 11/16/2007, -0/+1We're not laughing at them, we're laughing WITH them...... No, wait, we are laughing at them.
- DanielKongos, on 11/16/2007, -0/+1Right, so why would you download that? I'm saying that surely the music you enjoy is worth ten bucks to you no? What actually is wrong with my statement?
- BurnTees, on 11/16/2007, -0/+1the RIAA isn't a company that's out there distributing music and deciding how to do so...maybe you should read up on the RIAA to see what they actually do. There are plenty of different companies out there and each provides a different model. Subscription models where you get the songs while you pay, Sub models where you retain the rights to the music, all types of stuff. Instead of spending your time stealing music, maybe you should be checking out all of the legal options that are out there.
- PopularNerd123, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1You are very smart, dugg!
- nullx42, on 11/16/2007, -0/+1>anything lower than 320Kbps is pointless
Fixed. - arbulus, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1and http://www.magnatune.com
- BurnTees, on 11/16/2007, -0/+1he's the bitch because he's doing it the legal way? you're a moron.
- mrjit, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1I meant infinite as "whatever you want" 96-320/flac/aac/etc.
- Makaveli604, on 11/20/2007, -0/+1Why would I want to contribute to society? What`s the benefit to me?
You do realize pretty much everyone (or atleast everyone who is rational) thinks this way?
Go pick up a first year economics textbook.
Contributing to society is for idiots. Did you read my name? Just because I spelled it for the rappers interpretation does not mean I have not read Machiavelli. - Capta1nA, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1Gene Simmons doesn't represent the entire industry. As a musician, I am relieved and excited that everything is changing. My band is releasing its first album tonight. We don't have a download solution set up yet, but hopefully we can get on that soon.
- stefan24, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1Since oink went down it really made me think about what I was doing I didn't want to sign up to another tracker as getting sued for copy write would piss me off more than having to stump up a bit of cash for a product I consume.
I know that the labels make stupid amounts of money and they all burn $100 bills to light their cigars with, but stealing music isn't the best way of going about things, nor is paying $15 for a cd for a couple of tracks which are alright.
bit torrent has opened up a way of accessing vast amounts of music and communicating what you like and what you don't like, at the moment the labels are still way behind on offering me something I want in a format that I want which isn't hard.
mp3's encoded at 320kbps, a vast selection of all types of music, a pay as you go or monthly payment model and music at a reasonable prices. itunes is way over priced and the quality of the encodes aren't great, oink had better quality so surely a massive company like apple could do a better job !! - dbdrum, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1$9.99 or Less Per Album - No Label - 50% to Artist - DRM Free - Mp3 256 Bit Rate - PDF Artwork - Released online as soon as or before it leaks.
That's where I see things working for everyone. -
Show 51 - 100 of 111 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is