Online Pay For Music Services Will Fail to dent P2p

[FileHoover]

For the online pay-for music industry to succeed there must be a fundamental change in copyright law.

Why? People use p2p programs like Kazaa for several reasons that I can think of.

1) Free!!!

2) Variety. Virtually everything is available, bootlegs, old television shows, virtually everthing!

It is on point number 2 where the online pay-for services will fail because they cannot hope to offer the variety that p2p does. Since staying legal with copyright involves getting the permission of the copyright holder first, there is no way that this type of system can keep up with the demand people have and the variety available on p2p networks.

Copyright law must change to allow anyone to distribute ANY recording without permission, as long as they pay the holder of the copyright some percentage.

Sure, EMI might put its catalog online for downloading, but, what if you want something they don't have? It's too much of a hassle to track down WHO owns a certain song and some things are not owned by any record company such as bootleg concert recordings.

Thus, the lowly p2p program will always be a necessity on everyone's desktop and, since it's there already, why bother buying the music legally when it's all there, in your p2p program already?

Time for the blockheads who manage intellectual property to wake up to the new day dawning if they want to survive.

[PowerMan57two]

When Napster 2.0 comes out and if the interface is good enough, I will purchase monthly through them. Why? Well I am sick of fake music files, 2) It's the right thing to do 3)I have money to do it 4) i want to support my favorite artists that will be using napster. Statistics over the years show that pay-per service has increased dramatically.

[que-em]

I think they would have had a better chance of this succeeding if they weren't so intent in forcing people to their standards. On top of that, I personallly wont pay for something that I wont have entire control over. If they would have started out with a DRM-free version and then maybe worked it in later, they might would have suceeded with the earlier online music sites.

They should be happy because downloading music has probably diversified people's listening preferences. In the past I basically listened to one type of music and there was no chance in hell that I would have paid 18 dollars to experiment with new styles of music. Having the ability to sample new sounds for free has made me purchase albums that I know my podnuhs would have clowned me for if they knew I had them.

But most importantly, I hate when someone forces me to do something no matter how good it is . Microsoft take note.

[Wolfie]

Even though some ppl might go with paid services because free services are sketchy sometimes (Powerman's reference to fake files even though I never really had serious probs with fakes myself), I have to agree with Filehoover point on the public's the attraction to something being free.

MOST ppl will opt for a free option if available. That is the key for success or failure of a business venture ; wither most ppl will opt for it or not.