| |
| |
| |
A
personal background to the music downloads issue
My
involvement with the issue of free music downloads began in
2002 when I was asked by Allan Klepfisz to be Artist Spokesperson
for QTrax
(QTrax is 'peer-to-peer' downloading software that enables consumers
to download shared music and other files at no fee). I had no
idea what that might entail, but after Allan had explained that
he felt that copyright should - and could - be returned to the
composer even in this rather unpromising scenario, I agreed.
The following is a brief resumé of events so far in my
brilliant, but sporadic career as Artist Spokesperson for QTrax..
PS - It's taken a while, but Allan's persistence is starting
to pay off. Read about the deals QTrax - now re-branded Brilliant
Technologies - has pulled off with EMI
Music
and EMI
Publishing (Aug. '06). And, for an even more dazzling
announcement (June '07), read this from the New
York Post
As reported in January's Stop Press, the big QTrax launch
at MIDEM has been and gone, but with, at best, inconclusive
results. Read the LA
Times report.. More recent (June '08) news about
QTrax from Silicon
Alley Insider
NB - Some of the links below are pretty old and may have
passed their use by date. |
|
| |
| My
involvement with QTrax - Mike talks the talk
In June of last year, I flew to Sydney with three
senior executives from the Singwell International / Qtrax
organisation to meet with representatives from APRA (Australasian
Performing Right Association), to discuss a ground-breaking
experimental agreement, which would see revenues generated
from (free) music downloads using Qtrax software returned
as royalties to the composers per APRA.
At the time, the mood for such an agreement seemed positive,
and, with APRA’s blessing, it was decided to take the
message of the impending agreeement and spread it to the Asian
market via interviews with CNBC in Singapore and CNN in Hong
Kong.
Just a few weeks later I found myself on a plane with my manager,
Jenny Klepfisz, her husband, Allan Klepfisz, (CEO of LTD Network),
QTrax publicist Deborah Grey, and Chai Ong, Singwell financial
advisor.
I have to say I was more than slightly trepidatious about
being interviewed on a subject I could only speak lucidly
on for about 15 seconds – and heaven forbid I was asked
a technical question - but Allan and Deb assured me that I
could, and would, be coached thoroughly on the subject so
that I could pass as a competent interviewee. So, whenever
the opportunity arose, I listened attentively to Allan on
the frequent occasions he launched forth in his impassioned
and articulate fashion on the subject, and soon began to pick
up a pattern I thought I could follow.
My first interview was with a Singapore newspaper, the Straits
Times, and thankfully Allan did most of the talking. The article
duly came out the next day with an alluring shot of Kylie
Minogue as the hook, and all of Allan’s quotes
attributed to me, making me sound quite knowledgable.
I was then taken to CNBC for my first solo TV interview. It
seemed to go OK, and I apparently managed to look calm and
collected, even though I was churning inside. It’s so
different talking in front of a TV camera without an audience
or band to bounce off and a guitar to hold on to.
Then, on to Honkers, and a very different atmosphere; for
instance, English is aggressively being replaced with Mandarin
in conversation and signage, and there’s little of the
consideration shown to tourists as in Singapore.
I talked to a local computer magazine journo called 'Maverick'
at some length about the QTrax software, (Allan again filled
in the technical details, much to my relief) but it turned
out that Maverick had lived in Melbourne in his student days
and was very keen to talk about the skiing - one of the few
sports in which I have no interest at all. His dubious sexuality
and softly spoken Hong Kong English made the interview quite
a strain - although Allan later triumphantly produced a copy
of the magazine replete with the interview (in Mandarin of
course!).
The highlight of the visit was to be an interview that evening
on Star TV, but we had a radio interview at RTHK 3 in Kowloon
in the afternoon with Natalie Haughton as a warm-up. As it
turned out, Natalie was as smart as she was charming, and
although she knew nothing of the technicalities of the subject,
I felt rather nervous when we ventured into areas I was quite
uncertain about. |
|
|
|
|
| Top
L - R... 1) The mysterious Maverick 2) Hong
Kong Radio 3's Natalie Haughton and me 3)
CNN's Kristie Lu Stout and a beaming DIY Mike |
|
|
|
|
| The much anticipated
interview on Star TV was something else again. Admittedly,
we left a little late to get to the studio. Well, the whole
party had to go, and this meant taking two taxis. Two taxis
in rush hour, and our taxi driver could barely speak English.
And it turned out he didn’t know his way round Kowloon
either, so he took us to the Kowloon taxi rank and dumped
us. The driver in the next taxi we boarded couldn’t
speak English at all, but by now it was so late we couldn’t
turn back. Allan called Chai in the other taxi and got him
to speak Cantonese to our driver, with only the faintest notion
if we were headed in the right direction.
I don’t know how we did it, but we got there, and with
only minutes to spare I was bundled into the studio and interrogated
by a cheerful Indian-Australian expat in front of an audience
of some 24 million!
We had a slap-up meal that night on the mountain ridge overlooking
Hong Kong, but I was so shaken by the evening’s experience
I couldn’t really enjoy the meal.
The next day we went to CNN and I did an interview with the
lankily attractive Kristie Lu Stout on the issues of free
downloading and music piracy, which is somewhat of a bigger
problem in Hong Kong and Asia in general. With any luck,*
you'll be able to check
out the interview - it gives a concise overview of
the situation as it was then, and pretty much still is now.
(*This is an enormous file - if you don't have cable you should
find something else to do for half an hour..)
When we got back to Australia, we discovered that APRA had
decided not to go ahead with the agreement. Allan’s
resolve wasn’t shaken – in fact, he determined
to take his idea to the US, and talk to some movers and shakers
in the music industry, as well as APRA affiliates BMI and
ASCAP.
Over the past six months or so he's done just that, and with
some very interesting results. Watch this website for a pivotal
announcement -coming soon! |
|
| What
happens to copyright when the downloads are free?
Until today, software companies such as Kazaa, Morpheus
etc.that facilitate free music downloads for a generation
of music consumers, have not paid a cent to the originators
of the copyright.
The major record companies have uniformly rejected the concept
of free music downloads and have tried to first ignore it,
then crush it, then buy it out (e.g. BMG and Napster),
and now they’re moving to legislate
against it, with rhetoric achingly reminiscent of the impotent
copyright warnings you see on your rented videos. (Interestingly,
the movie studios have just begun a US-wide campaign against
downloading movies from the Internet).
In the meantime, a large section of the youth market, the
very market the major record companies feel the need to concentrate
on, is turning its back on the industry and gutting sales
of the latest hit songs by downloading and burning them onto
their own personalised CDs.
Music artists themselves are divided over the ethics of free
music downloads. Janis Ian wrote a famous open letter
(and an equally famous follow-up)
to the record industry in favour of the principle of free
downloads a year or so back, and other popular recording artists
have spoken out in its defence, even the befuddled Michael
Jackson. Equally, there are other artists who support the
record industry position (see the Laura
Holson article) and it’s true to say
that the issue of copyright in general is generating much
interest and discussion – and passion.
There is a growing body of opinion within the record industry
that the major record companies might be better advised to
accept the reality of free downloads and to see where they
might learn, and perhaps benefit, from it.
As we all know, failure to adapt leads inevitably to extinction,
but the signs are that the recording industry as a whole,
once inextricably identified with youth and vigour, now seems
unwilling to heed the portents and shift with the times.
In the meantime, the peer-to-peer downloading scene is evolving
daily. Microsoft is now offering P2P tools on its latest versions
of Windows
XP and Amazon offers a free music download service with the
emphasis on sampling new artists. And, perhaps most significantly,
Apple started a service in April (available exclusively to
Mac users and from an initially modest repertoire) with high
audio quality tracks (comparable to CD quality apparently)
available to download for ninety-nine cents each.
While proving there are people out there who want to do the
right thing, the fundamental issue cannot be avoided –
namely, there is a generation of music consumers out there
that has never paid for music on-line, and, despite all the
predictions (i.e. indifferent quality wouild drive
them back to the fold) without some sort of inducement, it
probably never will. (See 'The
Empire strikes back' for accommodating shifts in
recording industry policy).
The issue of copyright is at a very interesting, if not crucial,
stage. That the issue has reached the proportions it has can
be attributed in large part to the initial lack of response
from the industry/industries, and subsequent negative, and
even malevolent, reactions through the American courts.
I suspect that somewhere along the line there’s going
to have to be a concession by all the ‘legtimate’
players that there is another player in the market and it’s
not going to go away. The sooner this enfant terrible
is accommodated, the better it’s going to be for everybody.
The signs are that conspicuous success in the music and movie
business is ultimately going to have to be scaled down. I
don’t think this is necessarily a bad thing; there’s
nothing more embarrassing than a millionaire musician trying
to maintain street cred with one eye on the stock market.
Mike
Rudd |
|
| Artists
Fight Music File-Sharing
- Laura
M. Holson Sept. 2002
WHEN it comes to musical styles, Britney Spears,
Luciano Pavarotti and Sean Combs, lately known as P. Diddy,
do not appear to have much in common. But in a series of advertisements
that begin running today, they are joining with 86 other recording
artists to speak out against unauthorized music file-sharing,
claiming it threatens the livelihood of everyone from recording
artists and writers to sound engineers and record-store clerks.
"Would you go into a CD store and steal a CD?" asks
Ms. Spears in one commercial to be shown in coming weeks.
"It's the exact same thing, so why do it?"
In a print ad, Shakira, the hip-swiveling Latin pop star,
urges the public to just "Say no to piracy." And
Mr. Combs — in a statement released by the Recording
Industry Association of America, which is largely financing
the multimillion-dollar campaign — pleads with consumers
to "Put yourself in our shoes!"
The new campaign, which officially runs under the auspices
of a coalition of music professionals called Music United
for Strong Internet Copyright, was developed by Amster Yard,
a division of the IPG Sports and Entertainment Group, which
also represents the Recording Industry Association of America.
It comes at a difficult time for the recording industry. Sales
of CD's fell nearly 7 percent during the first half of this
year, largely, the industry claims, because of Internet piracy
and file-sharing.
The campaign breaks the same day as the House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property
begins hearings on piracy and the Internet. The recording
industry has long been criticized for failing to assuage disillusioned
consumers who want cheaper and more accessible music over
the Internet. The Department of Justice, meanwhile, is investigating
whether the paid on-line music sites developed by the record
labels violate antitrust provisions by hampering smaller competitors.
The recording industry, too, has been criticized by artist
rights groups, who complain that the industry's accounting
rules favor the labels and that the standard seven-year recording
contract is akin to indentured servitude. On Tuesday, in fact,
representatives of the Recording Artists Coalition, which
include the former Eagles singer Don Henley who is not included
in the new campaign, were at a California State Senate hearing
testifying about the industry's accounting practices. But
mutual interests have brought them together for this campaign
against file-swapping.
What will be interesting to watch, industry executives say,
is whether consumers are alienated by a campaign that speaks
of the travails of wealthy artists like Mr. Combs, who has
some fans who are hard pressed to afford not only his shoes
but also the suits and jackets he sells under his Sean John
clothing line.
"This is not a campaign created to engender sympathy,"
said Hilary Rosen, chief executive of the Recording Industry
Association of America. "We are saying there is a significant
problem and it is affecting us and it is illegal."
David Munns, the vice chairman of EMI Recorded Music, added,
"There is a whole generation of people that don't know
illegally swapping files is stealing."
Not everyone agrees that the most pressing problem facing
the industry is theft. In a study released yesterday by KPMG,
the tax and financial accounting firm, media companies were
chided for spending too much time combating pirates instead
of tackling the more difficult issue of finding new ways to
profit by distributing music and movies online. And other
critics say that the industry's poor performance in finding
new artists that appeal to consumers is more responsible for
the malaise than any threat from the Internet. |
|
| Marketers
try to turn Web pirates Into customers
- Amy Harmon,
NY Times Nov.
A growing group of online marketers have a new name
for the millions of people who use Internet file-trading software
to steal music: "customers."
The ranks of these marketers include independent bands with
little to lose and established companies like Microsoft. What
they have in common is that they are starting to view the
masses of Internet pirates as a possible source of revenue.
They have begun to experiment with promoting their wares on
file-trading services, which are typically used to obtain
unauthorized copies of music, movies or software.
Some entertainment industry officials condemn those marketing
efforts as giving support to services that encourage the theft
of other people's intellectual property. But the organizations
promoting file-traders see it as a way to lure people away
from piracy by providing them with authorized material to
download — and, in some cases, asking them to pay for
it.
"We're going to find that people labeled as hackers,
thieves and pirates will convert and change patterns to pay
for content," said Kevin Bermeister, chief executive
of Altnet, which acts as an intermediary for KaZaA, the most
popular file-trading software, and organizations that want
to distribute legitimate materials.
Under the deal with Sharman
Networks, KaZaA's distributor, Altnet's Software
is automatically installed whenever someone installs KaZaA
on a PC. Companies and artists seeking to market music, software
or other material to KaZaA users pay Altnet to place their
material at the top of the results of searches. AltNet shares
the revenue with Sharman.
Users who type in "Dave Matthews Band," for instance,
will get a list of the artist's tracks on the screen. By clicking
on a blue icon, they can download the music free. But now,
Dave Matthews fans are also likely to see, at the top of the
list, gold icons offering alternative acoustic rock from the
Jay Quinn Band of Dallas. That is because Mr. Quinn's manager,
Cornerband, is paying Altnet to have his music appear in KaZaA
listings when someone searches for music by Dave Matthews,
Moby, Beck and David Gray, among others.
Cornerband, in turn, charges artists to distribute songs in
a technology wrapper, supplied by Microsoft, that can prompt
users to pay for a track or buy a CD when they try to play
the music after a preset time period. Since about three million
people are typically using KaZaA at any time, the audience
that has been exposed to Mr. Quinn's music since the promotion
began in September surpasses the number who have ever seen
him play in local Dallas clubs.
For Cornerband, the KaZaA technology is attractive not just
because of the large, interested audience using it, but because
Cornerband does not incur the transmission expense of distributing
music from its own Web site. With KaZaA's peer-to-peer system,
users download music or other material from each other, rather
than from a central site.
The 29 entertainment companies that are suing KaZaA's distributor,
Sharman, and other file-sharing companies, are more focused
on what the mass audience is generally looking for: unauthorized
copies of popular music and movies that they can get without
paying. The mainstream entertainment companies take a dim
view of those who are supporting the use of the technology,
albeit for a legitimate use.
"At a time when the public is especially hungry for good
corporate citizens," said Carey Sherman, a lawyer for
the Recording Industry
Association of America, "it's surprising that any legitimate
interest would consider giving financial support to a pirate
service like KaZaA that illegally traffics in the copyrighted
works of others."
One executive at a major record company said that he and many
colleagues would like to use a service like Altnet to distribute
their material but that their lawyers would not allow it.
Some entertainment industry lawyers fear that if Sharman can
prove that KaZaA has legitimate uses, it will be harder to
shut it down. Others, however, say that by displaying some
material more prominently than others, Altnet's service helps
to prove their point that KaZaA could block all copyright
material from appearing in its search results. Sharman has
maintained that it has no way to control what files users
chose to use the KaZaA software.
Robert Schwartz, a lawyer for some of the studios and record
companies,
compared Altnet's role to that of people who hand out fliers
at swap meets organized to trade bootlegged copies of movies
and music. "It may or may not be illegal," Mr. Schwartz
said, "but it seems like a crummy way to make a buck."
Microsoft, for instance, paid Altnet $5,000 to list the trailer
for a Lions Gate film, "The Rules of Attraction,"
at the top of certain searches for 30 days when the film was
released last month.
Lions Gate, an independent studio, wanted to reach KaZaA's
large audience of college students because it thought that
many would be interested in the film. Microsoft wanted to
showcase its Windows Media software, which lets entertainment
companies distribute material securely over the Internet with
high-quality sound and video. When users download the trailer
video, they are prompted to upgrade to the new version of
the Microsoft software.
"We'll never spend as much as Sony, but this is one way
we can compete with the big boys," said Tom Deluca, vice
president for new media at Lions Gate, who added that after
his trailer promotion, he had received several expressions
of support, tinged with envy, from counterparts at Hollywood
studios.
Microsoft also paid Altnet $12,500 last month for a 60-day
promotion of a video for Tony Hawk's "Boom Boom HuckJam,"
a multimedia punk-rock tour. By Hollywood standards, the promotions
were small, and Microsoft executives maintained that there
was nothing inherently wrong with peer-to-peer technology
like KaZaA's.
"Microsoft clearly does not promote or support piracy
of any kind," said Erin Cullen, product manager for Microsoft's
digital media division. "But in terms of looking at new
ways to reach an audience in a secure way, this may be an
avenue that will become useful."
It is far from clear whether people who come to a site intending
to get free stuff can be induced to pay with a gold icon that
promises a high-quality file, and the numbers so far are probably
too small to draw a firm conclusion.
But AtomShockwave, an independent film and software distributor,
said that 400 people had bought its PhotoJam software in the
last month as a direct result of its promotion on KaZaA. The
firm distributes a free version on the network; people can
buy it for $35 to get more features.
Trymedia Systems distributes the first few levels of some
video games over KaZaA and Gnutella, another peer-to-peer
system, and prompts users to buy the software if they want
to finish the game. The company says that with some products,
like Beach Head 2002, a shooting game, as many as 10 percent
of those who download the hobbled version from peer-to-peer
networks go on to buy the software.
Of the three independent artists — Barrington Levy,
Brooke Allison and
Johnny Virgil — promoted by Altnet in search results
in the last threeweeks, about 20 people a day are paying 49
cents for a song when they are prompted to after a week of
listening to it free. Soon, Altnet said, it will allow people
to pay via their phone bills or with prepaid telephone cards.
Unless Hollywood companies begin paying to distribute mainstream
material, analysts say it is difficult to imagine people turning
to KaZaA primarily to buy digital media, rather than getting
copyright works for free. And if a court orders that the software
begin blocking copyright works, the market for legitimate
material may quickly evaporate.
For now, however, the two continue to coexist. A recent search
on KaZaA for Lions Gate's "Rules of Attraction"
found several copies of the trailer available for downloading
— as well as the full movie, which is still playing
in theaters. |
|
| Universal
to permit downloading
-
July 2002
The Universal Music Group said yesterday that it
planned to permit Internet users to download songs and make
homemade compact discs from music contained in roughly 1,000
albums in its catalog.
This is one of the first instances of a record company's making
a large
catalog of music available in the MP3 format, a popular file
type that has become controversial because files can easily
be shared via e-mail. Under the deal announced yesterday,
the music will be available through emusic.com, a start-up
company acquired last year by Vivendi Universal, which owns
Universal; unlimited access will cost $120 a year. The music
available will be drawn from the company's back catalog.
Matt
Richtel (NYT) |
|
| Earthlink
to run music service
- Andrew Zipern (NYT)
EarthLink, the third-largest Internet service
provider, released an Internet music service yesterday that
is intended to provide an alternative to illegal file-swapping
services. The new service, EarthLink Digital Music —
unveiled with the privately held subscription service FullAudio
— will let users download up to 50 songs a month for
$9.95, or 100 a month for $17.95. FullAudio offers music from
BMG, EMI Recorded Music, the Warner Music Group and the Universal
Music Group. The service may face an uphill battle, however,
as few pay services for digital music delivery have done well. |
|
|