October 1, 2007 9:53 AM PDT

How much will you pay for open-source Radiohead?

by Matt Asay
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 5 comments
(Credit: Kate Geraghty)

I just pre-paid $20 for the newest Radiohead album (available on October 10). Radiohead, now without a label/ball and chain, has decided to let its fans choose how much to pay the company. I'm actually feeling cheap right now, even though I'd pay $10.00 or less on iTunes (if Radiohead sold through iTunes, which it doesn't, because of a somewhat silly "artistic integrity" argument).

How much will you pay? It's nice to think of all the money going to Thom and crew, rather than to a Larry in a lounge suit somewhere in Los Angeles. Just as I'd prefer to pay Marten Mickos for my database than Larry Ellison. :-) But that's not the only open-source analog here.

This model arguably works much better for an established brand like Radiohead. It's not too dissimilar from how open source has fared in software: traditional markets are much more susceptible to open source than new markets because it becomes much cheaper to market an open-source application, for example, when everyone already knows what the product does.

At any rate, download and/or pay here. Just as if it were open-source software. Except that this will sound a lot better.

Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to The Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure. You can follow Matt on Twitter @mjasay.
Recent posts from The Open Road
An application war is brewing in the cloud
2010 the year of cloud-computing...M&A
Canonical shines its Ubuntu light on consumers
Open source became big business in 2009
Will we see an open-source IPO in 2010?
Could Apache keep Google's regulators at bay?
Red Hat's Q3 earnings defy gravity
Canonical's opportunity to simplify Ubuntu
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (5 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
How much will you pay for open-source Radiohead?
by royrusso October 1, 2007 12:40 PM PDT
[How much will you pay for open-source Radiohead?]

I would pay them to keep their music to themselves. ;-)
Reply to this comment
I'm sure Radiohead appreciates your support....
by benhascoolhair October 1, 2007 6:01 PM PDT
but you're missing the point about not selling on iTunes. What you called "a somewhat silly "artistic integrity" argument" is nothing of the sort. Radiohead is taking a stand against record labels, who feel the need to control who listens to their music, how you listen to it, and where you listen to it. The iTunes store is just another lemming on the DRM bandwagon.

By releasing their music for download at whatever price you want, Radiohead is focusing on treating their fans like human beings, not iClones with 99 cents to lose.
Reply to this comment
I would agree...
by Matt Asay October 1, 2007 10:25 PM PDT
...but Radiohead's stated intent behind not releasing their songs on iTunes is that they want fans to buy the entire album or nothing. Like Moby, they believe their songs make sense as a coherent whole, not as hit singles.

Fine. But guess what? I got into Radiohead based on "Fake Plastic Trees." I listened to that for a month before I ever got another song (through a friend who kept burning songs for me). I finally hit critical mass and then bought one album after another.

By taking a hard line that appeals to its ego but not to its fans, Radiohead is locking out many would-be fans.
Reply to this comment
Open source?
by Bryan Cheung October 2, 2007 1:45 AM PDT
I didn't know you were a fan. :) Although I think it's not really open source what they're doing - just a different payment and distribution model. What they're doing is like shareware: try it out and pay what you want. But shareward can and is often closed source.

It would be closer to open source if Radiohead released the original WAV / AIFF files, EQ settings, filters, ProTools or Logic settings, etc., for the album.

Going further, they could even release info about what instruments they used (including mods, pickup swaps), info about environment (recorded at an old abandoned warehouse), and so forth (though this info would be secondary).

Then they would allow people to take those original tracks and change the songs, add new layers, extend sections, take stuff out that they don't like.

I suppose they would need commit rights to make sure the thing wasn't a debacle.

Ryuichi Sakamoto did something like this, check out http://www.sitesakamoto.com/chainmusic/

Anyway, this may be one case where I would prefer the proprietary approach to the creative process. :)
Reply to this comment
by johngraham9 February 23, 2008 5:35 PM PST
Our band has just finished its latest CD and instead of pressing it on a CD we released it on a flash drive direct

We were really stoked with the results and wondered if anyone else had anything to say about this. It seems we cannot find enough fans at the gigs to buy a CD but were willing to shell out $15 bucks for a 1 GB...has anyone else found this to work for them?

Also, they seem to be a great eco idea....nobody throws away a flash drive while tons of CD's get in the trash......just a thought

I read this Billboard.com release http://billboardpublicitywire.com/releases/flash/drive/prweb530039.htm
and it convinced me if the labels are dropping the CD perhaps this was the next thing...?

anyways........drop me a line....
JT
Reply to this comment
(5 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

15 sites that went kaput in 2009

Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.

Top 10 news stories of the decade

Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.

About The Open Road

Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to the Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is general manager of the Americas division and vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.

Add this feed to your online news reader

The Open Road topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right