On Fri, 18 Aug 2000, Arnold G. Reinhold wrote:
>At 8:28 PM -0400 8/17/2000, Jeff Kandt wrote:
>>It won't be long before music will come straight from the artist in
>>a compressed, net-friendly form. If it's the artists creating the
>>file, then they'd might as well stamp their contact info on it
>>before releasing it to the world.
>
>My disagreement here is over the best way to effect change. There is
>significant inertia in the recording industry. New artists still
>dream of signing a record contract. Change is coming and I agree that
>an effective voluntary payment mechanism could speed change, but it
>is a form of circular reasoning to make that change a condition for
>introducing the payment system. The likelihood of a new payment
>model succeeding must be judged on things as they are now, not as
>they will be once the payment system is in place.
Actually, This is an interesting point legally. The artist
certifying a payment server with an unforgeable digital signature
is an act that can be pointed to in court. It's a signature on
a kind of contract, and the extant recording industry can claim
it's a contract that the artist had no right to enter into since
the artist was already under contract to them.
The fact is that most "major" artists are under contracts that
will prevent them from doing this -- and if they aren't, the
recording industry will stick it into the standard contract so
fast it'll make your head spin.
I think you're going to have to start by recruiting unknown or
unsigned artists -- putting *THEIR* stuff up in "tipster" format,
so the RIAA won't have any legal grounds.
Also, please do not mistake "compressed and net-friendly" for
"best sound" -- MP3 is good, for a compressed format, but it is
NOT CD-Quality. I'd download an MP3 to "try" something, but
I'd also like to download in a full-on "audiophile" format if I
really liked something, and I'd cheerfully tip the artist or just
buy a CD in order to get it. Your "tipster" stuff ought to work
with High-Quality audio files.
>>>Second, it would seem you require the artist's cooperation. Some
>>>may not want to cooperate. Maybe that's OK: they don't get paid.
Dude. If the artist doesn't want to cooperate, and their recording
contract doesn't require it, keep their damn songs out of the
system all together. Otherwise you're toast.
>Depending on new artists, as you propose, is a very slow and risky
>way to introduce a new recorded music payment model. Christine Lavin
>once lamented "you can make hundreds of dollars as a folk singer." I
>think new, unknown artists will be lucky to make even that much in
>voluntary payments. The record companies will cite the trickle of tip
>money to induce new artists to sign with them.
The "trickle of tip money" is actually more likely to add up to
serious wealth than anything they could get from a recording industry
contract. I say go with unsigned artists. Or offer popular artists
an alternative to *renewing* their recording industry contracts.
There is a huge fight in the offing here, and it will start in
court. You have to be able to win there against people with more
lawyer money than you, so any "gray area" will go against you.
>>>The recording industry can be expected to try to shut down any
>>>voluntary payment system, so careful legal design is more of an
>>>issue IMHO than cryptographic protocols. A reputable bank as escrow
>>>holder and CPA firm should provide enough trust.
>>
>>The recording industry has no reason to shut down a voluntary
>>payment system, since their music won't be a part of it until they
>>decide they're missing out on revenues.
Bullshit. There are dozens of unknown garage heavy-metal bands
out there that are better than Metallica. You think that the
owners of Metallica's contract are going to stand idly by while
these guys take away their market? Think about Britney Spears and
the Spice Girls -- concieved and executed end to end as marketing
plays. There are scads of artists out there with more talent, and
if the public starts to *hear* unsigned artists with talent, outside
the rules of the current recording industry, then this multi-billion
dollar publicity game is in the toilet.
They will fight you any way they can. They'll start in court, of
course, because that's easiest for them. So careful legal design
is in fact your number one priority if you are to succeed. But if
they lose in court, there will probably be legbreakers and carbombs
in your future. Be ready.
Bear
