Who else is laughing at the music industry?

Wow. Just, wow.

(Credit: Warner Music Group)

Warner Music Group--a company that originally took Apple and its iTunes service to task for not allowing it to sell music at a premium--has changed its entire outlook on the music downloading business and has praised Apple for knowing what is best for everyone involved.

"You need to look no further than Apple's iPhone to see how fast brilliantly written software presented on a beautifully designed device with a spectacular user interface will throw all the accepted notions about pricing, billing platforms and brand loyalty right out the window. And let me remind you, the genesis of the iPhone is the iPod and iTunes--a music device and music service that consumers love," Warner Music Group's CEO Edgar Bronfman gushed, according to a blog post by Simon Aughton on MacUser.

Am I the only one that enjoyed a hearty laugh after reading this clown wax poetic on how wonderful Apple is? If you look closely at what he said, you can almost see him kneeling at Steve Jobs' altar begging for forgiveness. Now that is what I call comedy.

But why has Warner Music seen the light all of a sudden? After months of claiming that his company knew what was best for consumers, Bronfman finally found out the hard way that the music industry knows nothing about consumers.

Interestingly enough, a quick glance at the quarterly financial statements of Warner Music Group points out one alarming statistic: the company has been losing money over the past few quarters.

According to reports filed with the SEC, Warner Music Group witnessed a net loss of $27 million during the quarter ending March 31, and $17 million during the quarter ending June 30. Compare that with a profit over the previous two quarters and it looks like Warner is having some trouble.

Is this the reason why Bronfman decided to make Jobs' head just a little bigger? Has he finally realized that Warner Music Group needs iTunes more than iTunes needs Warner Music Group?

You better believe it.

The future of the music industry has nothing to do with CDs and everything to do with downloading. Hasn't the music industry learned anything over the past decade as its stranglehold on our buying preferences slowly released? Sadly, the answer is no.

As music downloading (and dare I say illegal downloading) continues to rise, these music companies bury their heads in the sand and blow policy out the other end. Instead of understanding customers and realizing that what we want is readily available music without DRM, Warner and its friends have decided to bully us in the hopes we'll stop. We won't.

Believe it or not, most people are honest and they don't mind paying for music. After all, I think most people realize artists create music because it's their job and they deserve to get paid for it.

Simply put, all we want is to be trusted. Get rid of the DRM and for goodness sake, get rid of that disgusting Recording Industry Association of America, and start trusting that consumers are willing to do what's right if you don't force them into a corner and make them do what's wrong. Will there still be piracy? Sure. But believe it or not, a happy consumer won't mind paying $5 to $10 for an album if you let them.

Warner, I appreciate your attempt to try to make amends, but actions speak louder than words. Call me when you strip DRM from songs, denounce the RIAA and lose the greed.

[Frelo]

Voluntary payments for used CDs

Not withstanding the huge download market, there is also a large market for used CDs on the net. None of this revenue can get to the artists. Several years ago, there was a site called FairTunes where people could pay for the music they downloaded. It seemed like a good idea, but has since disappeared.
I recently bought a used copy of a fantastic album. I had the option of buying it new or used. I opted for the used one, not only because it was cheaper, but also for environmental reasons. I would like to contribute to the artists so they can make a decent living too. I am sure there must be like-minded people out there with the same dilemma. Where can we contribute to the artists to make sure it gets to the right place?

[sadchild]

bronfman killing yet another company

first he killed seagrams, wiping them off the map. now he's killing warner music. making all the wrong moves as usual.

PLUS his own kids download music illegally. i don't see them being taken to court.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_Bronfman%2C_Jr.

[digitboy-201514575024412298112]

DRM killed the music industry

I tried DRM. I subscribe to Yahoo Music, Rhaphsody and Emusic.

Emusic is lovely DRM-free music. I can listen to it everywhere, on my PCs at home and at work and in my portable players... all 3 of them! The songs are always there, never expire, and I don't have to concern myself with anything other than enjoying the music.

I have never shared or otherwise duplicated for anyone else a single song I have downloaded from Emusic. Why would I even bother?

Yahoo and Rhaphsody are a scam, plain and simple. My player (only ONE allowed, thanks!) needs to be re-connected on a seemingly random basis to update licenses of the songs I've downloaded, otherwise they DON'T PLAY.

Even then, I have now lost about 20% of the songs on my player because they are "no longer eligible for relicensing". What a crock! I ALREADY PAID FOR THEM!

Or, sometimes the relicensing process doesn't work... and Yahoo Music tries (and fails) to walk me through a process of uninstalling the application and SEVERAL MICROSOFT HOT FIXES to get it to work again... after several days of effort.

THIS is the online convenience these services promised us? They should be prosecuted for selling a fraudulent product. And the RIAA should be sued for extortion.

I have NO SYMPATHY for the fragile economic condition of the record companies. They have wasted my time and my money. They should have offered online selection and convenience when their customers demanded it. They didn't, someone else did, end of story. That's business. Now quit whining and just GO AWAY!

[rdupuy11]

It's radio

The internet didn't teach people music is free, Radio did.
The fact that music has been free for about 80 years, has kind of engrained this notion in people's minds.

How did musician make money during this 80 year period of free music? Well, Radio didn't sound quite as good what you could buy in the store, and making mix tapes from the radio takes effort.

So for a convenience, and to get the best quality you could buy an album.

The same is quite true now...you never know what Kazaa will give you..especially as the record companies can and do seed bad versions of songs.

So you still get the convenience and quality when you go to iTunes and pay .99cents for a song. And that isn't bad, when you consider no inventory, no trucks to haul plastic records around to 'record stores'...its all there for profit.

So great news...except the record industry didn't get it....as you stated they really forced the market into piracy, and they railed against the only company, Apple, that was getting it.

Artists can make money, from these convenience fees...and from live performances, endorsements, commercials, and fan memoriabilia...t-shirts, posters, etc....in other words, the same way that they have been making money all along.

[er3s]

Yes, the music industry doesn't get it. Does that surprise you? It takes a rampid increase in either piracy or the utter failure of physical media for them to take notice. People are tired of being told what to do and when to do it, and they have voted with their money.

I would personally rather have a CD and album artwork for a musician than a download, but that is the price you pay. Only problem, backing up your music, but hey, why do that when you can just download it again.