The Dream Is Over: Music Labels Have Killed Their Digital Future • Hacker News Board

Re: The Dream Is Over: Music Labels Have Killed Their Digital Future

#31

Post by jfornear » Tue, Oct 05, 2010, 7:30 PM UTC

DevX101 wrote: post #13

Disparity wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, we do have Grooveshark. But it probably won't last. :(

If it's lasted this long it will probably keep going for some time yet. They have a pretty clear song takedown policy, so any music being shared on grooveshark is likely being done so with the full consent of the label. Grooveshark is also paying the music owners royalty from a share of their ad revenue.

The clock has already been ticking... [1]

[1] Universal Music Group Now "Declaring Legal Jihad" Against Grooveshark... http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/090310groovesharkumg

Re: The Dream Is Over: Music Labels Have Killed Their Digital Future

#32

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Oct 05, 2010, 7:34 PM UTC

DevX101 wrote: post #13

Disparity wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, we do have Grooveshark. But it probably won't last. :(

If it's lasted this long it will probably keep going for some time yet. They have a pretty clear song takedown policy, so any music being shared on grooveshark is likely being done so with the full consent of the label. Grooveshark is also paying the music owners royalty from a share of their ad revenue.

[deleted]

Re: The Dream Is Over: Music Labels Have Killed Their Digital Future

#33

Post by lukev » Tue, Oct 05, 2010, 7:37 PM UTC

endlessvoid94 wrote: post #30

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.

Re: The Dream Is Over: Music Labels Have Killed Their Digital Future

#34

Post by DevX101 » Tue, Oct 05, 2010, 7:40 PM UTC

jfornear wrote: post #31

DevX101 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's lasted this long it will probably keep going for some time yet. They have a pretty clear song takedown policy, so any music being shared on grooveshark is likely being done so with the full consent of the label. Grooveshark is also paying the music owners royalty from a share of their ad revenue.

The clock has already been ticking... [1] [1] Universal Music Group Now "Declaring Legal Jihad" Against Grooveshark... http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/090310groovesharkumg

Thanks for the link. I stand corrected.

Re: The Dream Is Over: Music Labels Have Killed Their Digital Future

#35

Post by pavel_lishin » Tue, Oct 05, 2010, 7:42 PM UTC

endlessvoid94 wrote: post #30

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.

Re: The Dream Is Over: Music Labels Have Killed Their Digital Future

#36

Post by il » Tue, Oct 05, 2010, 7:51 PM UTC

lukev wrote: post #33

endlessvoid94 wrote: post #30

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 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?

Re: The Dream Is Over: Music Labels Have Killed Their Digital Future

#37

Post by lukev » Tue, Oct 05, 2010, 7:55 PM UTC

il wrote: post #36

lukev wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 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.

Re: The Dream Is Over: Music Labels Have Killed Their Digital Future

#38

Post by njharman » Tue, Oct 05, 2010, 7:58 PM UTC

The Dream was over a while back when digital music and Internet got popular. Apple iTunes store kind of brought it back except Apple as the dreamer not Record Labels.

The Dream being control over distribution. Selling over and over the same product. Selling lots crap (most songs on album) on the backs of 1 or 2 hits. Being the gatekeeper between artists and their fans. Near monopolistic control over supply and demand. All of it, a cash fucking cow.

Over, for the Record Labels. Although they're doing a damn good job at legislating their dream into law. Their government mandated welfare will live on similar to but more insidious than farm/corn lobbies subsidy program. And just like corn subsidy it(warping of copyright) will fuck the rest of us for decades.

Re: The Dream Is Over: Music Labels Have Killed Their Digital Future

#39

Post by lukifer » Tue, Oct 05, 2010, 8:03 PM UTC

thought_alarm wrote: post #29

digitallogic wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then allow me to make your day: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_iPod_managers

Yes, trying out other music managers is a very good way to come to appreciate iTunes and how it works. I encourage everyone who thinks they're unhappy with iTunes to check out these other applications.

iTunes is a great personal media database, and a terrible everything else. The former is enough to make me willing to put up with the latter.

Re: The Dream Is Over: Music Labels Have Killed Their Digital Future

#40

Post by bincat » Tue, Oct 05, 2010, 8:05 PM UTC

endlessvoid94 wrote: post #30

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 also would not pay anybody to store the music. It's just cheaper to buy two external hard drives and keep them in sync.

As time goes by I have noticed that most of what I have downloaded is becoming extra baggage to log a round. I keep going back to the same set of things to listen as nothing really good seems to coming out in the genre I like (ambient, electronica).

In short, I perceive digital music as the money pit not that's not worth it.