latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oew-healey19feb19,0,5551102.story
By Jon Healey
February 19, 2007
| Advertisement |
|
|
At first the shifts were almost too small to notice, as when the
labels started making a handful of downloadable songs available for $2.50 or
more. But as the file-sharing phenomenon grew and CD sales slipped, the changes
became more pronounced. The labels started offering the rights to songs on
terms that didn't cripple their online partners. They embraced Apple's iTunes
Music Store, whose anti-piracy technology doesn't actually limit copying. They
cut deals with file-sharing companies for subscription services that let users
share the songs they rented.
Along the way, though, the major labels adamantly refused to do
the kind of deal necessary to replicate what the original Napster, Kazaa and
eDonkey had provided: they would not accept a flat fee a "blanket" license that lets Internet service providers sell an all-you-can-eat
sonic buffet, enabling customers to download, burn and swap as much as they pleased.
The rights would be included in the cost of a high-speed Internet access line,
so the downloads would seem free while still generating royalties for artists,
songwriters, labels and publishers.
That reticence may be giving way, too, thanks to the
relentless decline in revenue. Just look at what the head of the
major record companies' global trade group, let slip last month at a
music-industry gathering in France. If Internet service providers "want to come
to us and look for a blanket license for an amount per month," IFPI chief John Kennedy said, "let's
engage in that discussion."
His U.S. counterpart, Mitch Bainwol of the Recording Industry
Assn. of America (RIAA), quickly added that the licenses should be negotiated
voluntarily, not compelled by the government. So that part of the labels'
thinking hasn't changed. Nevertheless, Kennedy's remark reflects a potential
sea change in the way the record companies do business. If the labels follow
through, it could trigger the greatest explosion in innovation since engineers
at the Fraunhofer Institute in Germany developed the MP3
format.
That's a big "if," but two of the four majors have already taken
the first step. In England, a venture called PlayLouder MSP is negotiating
deals with record companies and music publishers for a competitively priced
high-speed Internet access service that will include the right to download
millions of songs, transfer them to portable devices and share them with
friends. The main restriction is that subscribers can't send songs to people
who aren't customers of PlayLouder MSP. In other words, it's a private
electronic playground for music lovers.
The company, which expects to launch its service this year, plans to put a chunk of the monthly service charges
into a royalty pool that would be divided according to popularitythe more
often a song is downloaded, the larger the share of the pool that its copyright
holders will receive. To monitor the network and enforce its borders,
PlayLouder MSP relies on technology that can identify songs as they pass
through the networkand, if necessary, block them. So far, several large
independent labels from the U.S. and the U.K. have agreed to let the company
offer MP3s of all their songs, while two of the majors, Sony BMG and EMI, have
agreed to supply songs wrapped in electronic locks. Those locks won't make much
difference, though; as part of the deal, subscribers will be free to share MP3s
from all of PlayLouder MSP's partners, including Sony BMG and EMI.
The shift in thinking is apparent even among labels who haven't
signed on to the PlayLouder approach. In the past, label executives made three
main arguments against the blanket-licensing concept: it turned their companies
into glorified marketing firms; it forced labels to fight over a fixed pool of
dollars, so that one artist's gain was another one's loss; and there wouldn't
be enough money in the pool to replace all the CD sales that would be lost. The
first two complaints get little mention today; instead, the make-or-break issue
for blanket-licensing deals is the amount of royalties the service can
generate.
That's the right focus. Blanket licensing wouldn't transform
labels into advertising companies; the only element of their business they
would lose is the part that distributes plastic discs, and that's going away
anyway. When consumers can choose from a virtually unlimited supply of songs,
the ability of a label to find, sign and promote the most compelling artists
will be even more important than it is today. And the fees that consumers pay
for downloading rights represent only a portion of the money that PlayLouder
could generate for copyright holders. There's also money to be made from
advertisers, mobile phone companies, device makers and premium music services
that want to insert themselves into the network.
Developing a specialty broadband service for music fans is just
one piece of the puzzle. Ultimately, more of the companies that feed and
benefit from the public's hunger for digital music need to generate revenue for
the industry. In England, representatives of Internet companies, computer and
consumer-electronics manufacturers and the music industry are exploring this
issue as part of "value recognition strategy" working group. But it's not clear
the group will come up with new market-based solutions, such as blanket
licenses. Instead, it may bog down in fights over how much Internet providers
should do to help identify and punish customers who share songs illegally.
In fact, some participants in the working group were surprised by
Kennedy's conciliatory remarks because he'd recently stepped up the rhetoric against Internet providers that didn't try to curb
piracy by their users. His organization has already sued more than 30,000
individuals for allegedly engaging in music piracy online, while its U.S.-only
counterpart, the RIAA, has sued more than
18,000. The RIAA, too, has prodded Internet providers recently to do more to
help its lawsuit campaign, although in a less menacing style than Kennedy. But
lawsuits are a holdover from 2003, when the music industry was an $11.8 billion
business in the United States. It was down to $11.2 billion in 2005, and album sales dropped an additional 5% last year. So far this year, the drop is even steeper. You have to wonder how low they have to go
before blanket licenses look like a better approach than blanket lawsuits.
Jon Healey is a Times editorial board member and author of the Bit Player blog.
Copyright © 2013, Los Angeles Times