A great illustration of what's wrong with DRM

Link: project1ul.jpg (JPEG Image, 594x446 pixels).

Leonhard: Musiikki 2.0 tuntuu ilmaiselta | Tuhat sanaa (Musikki Media Tampere Speaking on "The Future of Music"

Leonhard: Musiikki 2.0 tuntuu ilmaiselta | Tuhat sanaa.

Musiikkifuturisti Gerd Leonhard ravisteli Musiikki & media -yleisöä Tampereella ennustamalla, että Google tulee musiikkibisnekseen vuoden sisällä ja että suuret levy-yhtiöt alkavat siirtyä avoimen jakelun ansaintalogiikkaan jo alle vuoden sisällä.

Musiikin pitäisi tuntua ilmaiselta, musiikkia pitäisi voida käyttää, levittää ja jakaa joutumatta maksamaan joka käänteessä. Tavoittelemalla täydellistä kontrollia levy-yhtiöt menettävät markkinat, Leonhard latasi. Rhapsody ei toimi, koska se käyttää DRM:ia, eivätkä ihmiset istu tietokoneillaan kuuntelemassa, hän totesi.

Media muuttuu, massamedian rinnalle on noussut elämäntapamedia. Valinnan vara kasvaa, hittien varaan ei kannata laskea, muistakaa niche-yleisöt ja valjastakaa blogosfääri sisältöjenne suosittelijaksi. Miehen oma firma, Sonific, tarjoaa työkalun tähän. Songspotin tarjoaa mm. kanadalaispumppu Barenaked ladies.

-- don't know what it says but I hope it's good;)

I was wrong - Blog Maverick (Youtube and the law)

Link: I was wrong - Blog Maverick.

In previous posts, i had said that the minute Youtube got bought, the media companies would sue them because there were now deep pockets to pursue for a big payday.

The more I read and the more I thought about it since the Google/Youtube deal, I realize that is the exact opposite of what should happen and probably will happen.

Rather than suing Gootube, the media companies will first sue several of the imitators and competitors that have no money whatsoever. They wont sue those companies to get money, they will sue a bunch of those companies to build precedent. In particular, they will sue to get clarification on the DMCA Safe Harbor laws. Are these little companies, that do basically what Youtube does, protected by the DMCA safe harbor rules ?

Exactly my thinking!

Huffington Post: The Blog | RJ Eskow: Music's Future: Dylan Vs. Ultragrrrl in the Race For the Sonosphere (Sonific)

Link: The Blog | RJ Eskow: Music's Future: Dylan Vs. Ultragrrrl in the Race For the Sonosphere | The Huffington Post.

Music futurist Gerd Leohard helped create Sonific, a website which allows you to find music that resembles the music you already love. It's a smart idea, one that's also the premise behind Pandora. (Pandora's algorithms have led me to music I love, but have also generated a lot of false starts.)

Platforms like Sonific and Pandora can serve an excellent purpose, but my real question is: What about music I don't know I like yet? For that, you need a guide, a navigator - a "DJ/mogul."

Digital rights in question as business model - Yahoo! News

Link: Digital rights in question as business model - Yahoo! News.
"Goldberg and eMusic CEO David Packman -- are taking labels to task with a more business-oriented argument.

DRM, they say, simply forces consumers to buy hardware with proprietary technology that enriches software companies rather than artists or labels.

The conversation has heated up now that Microsoft is preparing to enter the race with another closed system as part of its Zune strategy. Once Zune is launched, there will be two large, deep-pocketed digital services offering music that is not only incompatible with each other, but also with the many other digital music devices and services already in existence.

"That doesn't sound like a very exciting future to me," Packman said during a recent panel appearance at the Digital Music Forum West conference in Los Angeles. "There's no way you can say with a straight face that that's something consumers want. This has to get solved for the industry to grow."

What's more, opponents insist that DRM, in fact, does nothing to protect music. Virtually every form of DRM has been hacked, including Apple's FairPlay and Microsoft's WMA encryption of tethered subscription files. Not all digital music consumers are aware of these workarounds, but tend to discover them the minute they find they can't play their music on their device of choice...."

yes - amen! Couldn't agree more.

Popkomm: Wie Wasser im Netz flie�en

in German:
Popkomm: Wie Wasser im Netz flie�en.
"Was wäre Pop ohne Propheten? Früher waren es die glutäugigen, langhaarigen Gitarristen, heute sind es die Geschäftsleute. Gerd Leonhard ist beides. Mal ist der Deutschschweizamerikaner unterwegs im Jazz und mal im digitalen Lizenzierungswesen. Mal als Buchautor: „Die Zukunft der Musik“ verheißt ein Dasein, das „Musik wie Wasser“ nutzt. Was so harmonisch, ganzheitlich und esoterisch klingt, stellt sich als liberales Branchenmanifest heraus. Man wird einmal seine Gebühr bezahlen für Musik, ein Leben mit dem Headset führen und Musik genießen wie noch nie. Daran wird auch die Industrie genesen.

Wenn sie nicht den eingeschlagenen, falschen Weg fortsetzt, den Leonhard im Plauderton beschreibt: Sie muss die Preise überdenken, darf das Tauschen nicht verbieten („Maus-zu-Maus-Propaganda“), soll den Kunden nicht verklagen („McCarthyismus“), Daten nicht verschlüsseln („digitale Keuschheitsgürtel“) - und sich dabei eilen. In neun Monaten, mahnt Leonhard am Stehtisch, werden Internetportale den Musikvertrieb beherrschen. Sollten sich die großen Plattenfirmen uneinsichtig zeigen und darauf beharren, dass Musik ja keine Dienstleistung darstelle, sondern ein Produkt.

Im Buch erzählt er ausführlich davon wie es den Notendruckern in der Gründerzeit des Radios erging sowie dem Fernsehen durch die ersten kriminellen Kabelleger. Doch am allerliebsten schreibt er von der Pornobranche: aus dem Videotheken-Separee also zum digitalen Dienst - vom Porno lernen, heiße siegen lernen. Das ist ungefähr der Kern der nun sogar im analogen Buch bezeugten Botschaft (Musikmarkt Verlag, 180 S., 24,90 ?). Im Jahr 50 nach Elvis. ..."

ahem... and this is what Babelfish offers as translation:
16,02 o'clock which would be Pop without prophets? In former times there was the fiery-eyed, langhaarigen guitarists, today is it the businessmen. Gerd Leonhard is both. Times the German Switzerland American is on the way in the jazz and times in the digital Lizenzierungswesen. Times as a book author: "the future of the music" promises an existence, which uses "music such as water". Which sounds esoterisch so harmoniously, to holistic and, turns out as liberal industry communist manifesto. One will pay once its fee for music, a life with the Headset will lead and music enjoys like never. To it becomes also the industry genesen.                                                                 

                                                                               

                               If it does not continue the hit, wrong way, which Leonhard in the chatting clay/tone describes: It must consider the prices, may exchanging not forbid ("mouse to out propaganda"), is the customer not to sue ("McCarthyismus"), data does not code ("digital Keuschheitsguertel") - and thereby to hurry. In nine months, Leonhard reminds the music selling at the standing table, InterNet portals will control. The large disk companies should show up uneinsichtig and in it persist that music represents no service, but a product.                            

                                                                               

                               As well as in the book it tells of it like it the note printers in the period of promoterism of the radio was issued in detail the television by the first criminal cable-casually. But all-dearest it writes of the Pornobranche: from the Videotheken Separee thus to the digital service - from the Porno learn, is called to triumph to learn. That is approximately the core now even of the message testified in the similar book (music market publishing house, 180 S., 24.90?). In the year 50 after Elvis...."

google buys youtube: the founders' video

Congrats guys. Well done.

Gerd Leonhard's feeds

I have published a few of my feeds here - seems like a good way to transmit news etc.  Check it out.

eMarketer.com on Music Marketing -- Read this - great comment on how music is marketed online TODAY

eMarketer.com - Jonathan Coulton Is a Better Marketer Than You.

"I woke up this morning and checked my personal blog. Overnight, my blogging partner had posted a fan-made video he found for a clever song ("Code Monkey") by an independent musician whose name and work I had never heard of. After viewing it, I went to Jonathan Coulton's site, thanks to the Web address on the screen at the end of the video. The site had a ton of content, including a blog. Moreover, I could listen to all of his songs for free there. If I had wanted to download any, they were a buck apiece, with "albums" available for a discount. I subscribed to Mr. Coulton's podcast, which includes a new song every week, reminiscent of They Might Be Giants' longstanding "Dial-A-Song" service. Many of Mr. Coulton's songs were downloadable at no charge at all; one of these was titled "Podsafe Christmas Song."..."

This is a great insight into how music is being marketed today. All PULL not push. From the EDGES of the network. User driven.

Google Watch : Five Reasons Google Will Acquire YouTube (and 5 Reasons Google Won't)

Link: Google Watch : Five Reasons Google Will Acquire YouTube (and 5 Reasons Google Won't).

Five Reasons Google Will Acquire YouTube

1. YouTube has more traffic than Google Video and, what's more, represents the cultural zeitgeist in a way that Google does not. By acquiring YouTube, Google would be investing in the future of interactivity on the Web, and ensuring that the company has the inside track on video search trends.

2. Google can afford the bandwidth. YouTube's biggest expense is the bandwidth required to serve 100M videos per day. Ostensibly, Google could cover those costs while actually making the site browsing faster through Google's distributed architecture.

3. The advertising potential is enormous. Direct visits to YouTube are just one angle. If searches done through Google automatically lead to YouTube videos, that's another. What's more, YouTube, despite its immense cultural position, is still a small company with a small amount of revenue. The upside on the deal would be big for Google.

4. Google has experience dealing with copyright holder concerns. It is one of the few companies that could buy YouTube and manage the copyright concerns that large studios and networks have.

5. Google could integrate its social networking products and/or get the inside track on how a social network operates in a video-based site. Google is also heavily invested in mobile technologies -- I would expect to see YouTube functions integrated into handsets.