41–50 of 158 posts
I would absolutely pay google $25 to store my music in the cloud. I have 150GB of the stuff and keeping it on my laptop has become impossible.
You can do this already. Write a music player client that can stuff your music into an encrypted blob and push it out on Amazon S3 or something. $22.50/month for storage. The problem is that that monthly price is a bit high for most people.
I came to this conclusion myself about 6 months ago, after Dalton Caldwell spoke at a YC dinner. I realized it was basically hopeless to start startups that touch label music, because even the ones that seem to be succeeding (in the sense of not being sued out of existence) are only allowed to live so the labels can suck investors' money through them. But by creating a startup-free zone around themselves, all the lab…
only allowed to live so the labels can suck investors' money through them That's true, but not as true as you might suspect. Pandora is profitable. Yes, they are certainly pumping a large amount of money to the record labels, but they're able to exist without driving their users away with over-advertising. I wouldn't do a (label) music-based startup today, though. Sad.
I came to this conclusion myself about 6 months ago, after Dalton Caldwell spoke at a YC dinner. I realized it was basically hopeless to start startups that touch label music, because even the ones that seem to be succeeding (in the sense of not being sued out of existence) are only allowed to live so the labels can suck investors' money through them. But by creating a startup-free zone around themselves, all the lab…
It seems that if the labels have positioned themselves as unfavorable toward startups to the point of making an anti-platform, that there would be demand for an independent, label-free music buying/selling experience for startups to work with. Yet the only thing I think of that comes close was the old version of thesixtyone's marketplace.
Are the startups that apply to ycombinator in this area trying to build something outside of the current music ecosystem and failing (and why)? Or is everyone just trying to work with the current system and finding that it isn't feasible/profitable?
I came to this conclusion myself about 6 months ago, after Dalton Caldwell spoke at a YC dinner. I realized it was basically hopeless to start startups that touch label music, because even the ones that seem to be succeeding (in the sense of not being sued out of existence) are only allowed to live so the labels can suck investors' money through them. But by creating a startup-free zone around themselves, all the lab…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think "Write a music player client that can stuff your music into an encrypted blob" is a bigger hurdle for most people than paying $25/month. Besides, doesn't Grooveshark already do this for free?
Well, as a startup, I mean. There shouldn't be any legal hurdles, anyway - it's really just a backup system specialized for music. And I'll be honest, I have no clue what Grooveshark's business model is. I like it, but I don't see how the RIAA doesn't come down on them like a ton of bricks, and I really doubt the ads they show can cover what they ought to be paying in royalties.
I would not assume that.
I would absolutely pay google $25 to store my music in the cloud. I have 150GB of the stuff and keeping it on my laptop has become impossible.
I would absolutely not. What if they decide that the music branch of their business is expendable? "We're shutting down our servers in a month, gl;dd". Remember Microsoft.
And Lala, and Walmart.
I came to this conclusion myself about 6 months ago, after Dalton Caldwell spoke at a YC dinner. I realized it was basically hopeless to start startups that touch label music, because even the ones that seem to be succeeding (in the sense of not being sued out of existence) are only allowed to live so the labels can suck investors' money through them. But by creating a startup-free zone around themselves, all the lab…
I will be revisiting these themes at my Startup School talk this year.
I came to this conclusion myself about 6 months ago, after Dalton Caldwell spoke at a YC dinner. I realized it was basically hopeless to start startups that touch label music, because even the ones that seem to be succeeding (in the sense of not being sued out of existence) are only allowed to live so the labels can suck investors' money through them. But by creating a startup-free zone around themselves, all the lab…
The point about the labels doing it to themselves is probably only half the story. The other half is the culturally ingrained phenomena of "the dream." Many artists jamming in their basements dream of "signing," and expect a big advance, tours, radio play, and all of that old-world stuff. Many today of course realize that there's the Internet and they can afford to distribute their work for pennies and market to thei…
The big labels don't feel like changing, not that they cannot change. They are a bunch of human beings at all. Aren't human beings flexible enough to thrive anywhere on earth? Yet, some humans choose to die rather than adapt. The labels don't want to deal with the changing business. So they rather die.
I'm serious. :)
I came to this conclusion myself about 6 months ago, after Dalton Caldwell spoke at a YC dinner. I realized it was basically hopeless to start startups that touch label music, because even the ones that seem to be succeeding (in the sense of not being sued out of existence) are only allowed to live so the labels can suck investors' money through them. But by creating a startup-free zone around themselves, all the lab…
Just curious: Do you think popular music as a whole is a hopeless area or specifically companies that are looking to stream music? I agree in regards toward streaming music services, but there are a lot of startups focusing on other areas of music that seem to be successful: - http://bandcamp.com/ - http://limitedpressing.com - http://songkick.com/