How much will you pay for open-source Radiohead?
(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. 
I would pay them to keep their music to themselves. ;-)
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.
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.
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. :)
- 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
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(5 Comments)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