One of my best presentations, still, from Midem 2009 (PDF here).... not much else to say about this, really;)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=1528595f-7ac4-4b55-b4ef-328829f17d88)
Entries categorized "Eoc: Music Industry"
March 05, 2010
March 01, 2010
Why Spotify won't solve the structural problems of the music industry (video interview at Monaco Media Forum)
Fellow Futurist and Keynote Speaker Monty Metzger recorded this video while we were both attending the Monaco Media Forum in November 2009. Some bottom lines:
- Giving fair and reasonable permission is a much better strategy than complaining about so-called digital piracy
- The problems of the music industry are way beyond Spotify, and won't be solved merely by open, free market mechanisms - we need a new, collective digital music license, asap
- Today, music fans want to listen first, and then pay - and the industry insists on the reverse (see WMG's recent 'No' on free streaming in the U.S.). Key question: do they prefer control over compensation??
- To waive a huge stick at the ISPs, and to try make them responsible for solving the music industry's issues, is a very bad idea, and won't put money into anyone's pockets
- The selling of mere 0s and 1s is not really a business anymore - it's no longer about distribution, it's about converting attention into 'new generatives'
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=53bd1bdf-95ce-4671-9d68-09a178b067eb)
February 12, 2010
Google kills some music blog sites - another story from within the dysfunctional music industry
Good coverage of this latest twist in 'change to digital' confusion, via Paid Content, below: Google has killed several blogs - hosted by the Google-owned Blogger platform - that were allegedly infringing on copyright by posting MP3 files. A long-standing tradition of music journalism online is severely endangered. To me, this is yet another example of why we urgently need new legislation in digital music, i.e. the creation of realistic, web-native standards and reliable permissions. Because this is the problem: while the marketing people at the labels love these blogs because they clearly spread the word very efficiently and reach the perfect target groups, the legal people at the labels file DMCA claims and want the sites to remove all MP3 files.
But to me, it also looks like Google is now, increasingly being forced to police blogger-powered sites for unlicensed music postings because executives across many sectors of the traditional media industry are now pointing their fingers at Google for the use of content that is not based on a clear-cut license, i.e. exists in what I call a gray zone - some use of content that is legally uncertain (yes, based on pre-Internet laws, mostly) but has become accepted social-cultural practice. Check out the debate via the Twitter Hashtag. Image: Gorilla vs Bear music blog.
"In what critics are calling “musicblogocide 2010,” Google (NSDQ: GOOG) has deleted at least six popular music blogs that it claims violated copyright law. These sites, hosted by Google’s Blogger and Blogspot services, received notices only after their sites – and years of archives – were wiped from the internet..."
via paidcontent.org
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=ccde0b69-7d34-4a4f-92eb-442a2a850578)
February 11, 2010
Warner Music Group 2.0: my unsolicited advise on how WMG could embrace the Future
Image via Wikipedia
Yesterday, the Net was buzzing with news from Warner Music Group's earnings call, with Edgar Bronfman announcing his intention to not license 'free' streaming services any longer. Rather than rant about this (as tempting as that may be), I thought I would just share some ideas with you, and with Edgar, on what else WMG could do to become.....well, WMG 2.0. Some of these ideas were initially presented to another major music company about 9 months ago, btw. I don't know where this ended up, though - stay tuned.
Download the PDF: Thoughts on WMG 2.0 Gerd Leonhard Futurist
Related posts:
- "Book publishers: please learn from the mistakes of the music industry"
- "Content 2.0: protection is in the business model - not the technology"
- "The price of free: reinventing the online economy"
Gerd Leonhard’s unsolicited thoughts: Creating Warner Music Group 2.0
Dear Edgar, based on what I have learned of my 16 years in digital music, and distilled from the 2 music-specific books I (co)-wrote (“The Future of Music”, and “Music 2.0”) here are a few ideas on how I think WMG could reposition itself and achieve future growth:
1) Create and offer a complete, cutting-edge online platform for your artists, writers, labels etc. Let’s call this the ArtistOS. It should pretty much mirror what Google already does for Internet users, in general, i.e. provide free access to very powerful and inter-connected Web2.0 tools that used to cost 100s of 1000s of $ to build but are now provided free of charge. These tools could include things such as music widgets and embeddable flash players for audio and video, twitter-API based marketing and communication tools, connecting tools based on Facebook- & Google-Buzz/Connect, multi-site upload and updating tools (similar to TubeMogul for videos), text/video/audio RSS feeds and syndication tools, ad-insertion tools and production technologies (for widgets and web pages), mobile phone applications for quick-launching artist and label apps (see MobileRoadie!), general content syndication and CMS tools, Google Buzz, Tumblr- and Friendfeed-like services for artists, Google-analytics-like tools for tracking and analyzing web traffic, and much more. Building (or licensing!) these tools would require some dedicated resources but this would not be a huge undertaking in terms of budget since most of these solutions are based on existing APIs, feeds and various open source offerings. Having the ArtistOS available to anyone that works with WMG would be huge strategic advantage, and would greatly simplify marketing and promotion tasks, as well.
2) Define, publish and promote a Collective, Global and Open Licensing Platform. The biggest obstacle for strong growth in the Music 2.0 era is the utter lack of global licensing standards for the legal use of music on the Net, and apart from the admirable Jim Griffin - led Choruss initiative WMG seems to still be following the old-school path of ‘ignore & deny’, here. Not good. The current licensing procedures are causing severe friction in the digital content ecosystem, and represent a significant hurdle to innovation - and thus to creating and nurturing new revenue streams. WMG 2.0 could solve this problem by pioneering a standardized and collective licensing platform that is open to everyone, transparent, flexible, and revenue-share based rather than fixed-fee based, therefore allowing for liquidity in the new digital market place. Providing a public, standardized yet flexible and open license to all streaming-on-demand services would be a very good way to start this process - and the time to do this is now. Yes, I know, advertising revenue splits are not bringing in much money, now - but they are dead-certain to do so within 18-24 months, when up to 25% of all advertising budgets will be shifting to digital, interactive, mobile and social platforms. Have some imagination. Build the Future (don't keep asking for it to be delivered to you).
3) Vigorously pursue flat-rate and bundling scenarios for the licensing of your entire catalog in return for flat fee payments, RAND-based revenue shares and fair splits of advertising and other revenue streams (similar to what Google has done in China, TDC in Denmark etc). Licensing access to music, rather than (just) copies, is the only way forward in a connected, always-on world that already equals listening with owning. Switch from relying on scarcity to monetizing ubiquity and abundance, and invent new models that fit this. Generate new revenues by engaging with ISPs, telecoms, ICT companies. mobile operators and search engines. Drastically reduce friction. Embrace ‘free’ models as long as somebody will pay somewhere.
4) Develop (or license) and deploy your own mobile music applications, on all platforms (iPhone, Android, Symbian, Windows etc); make mobile applications the center piece of all marketing and selling efforts, worldwide - the future of music is mobile, period. Think of mobile applications as the new CD; and therefore of music as....software. Roll out applications for all new releases, and for all your labels and brand. Make the basic apps free, but offer very attractive ways to upgrade, in all territories. It’s all about the packaging!
5) In terms of future sales, think Freemium, and think access not (just) copy. Offer things that used to cost money (such as listening to a song, on demand), for what I like to call feels-like-free (i.e. in return for the users’ attention); just be sure to find ways to convert 20-50% of those users (aka the friends, fans and followers) to all kinds of new premium services, such as high-definition versions, concert recordings and web-casts, special products, digital compilations etc. In addition, dramatically lower the price for physical products while providing all kinds of premium products - again, focus on selling access to music not just products.
6) Investigate the concept of crowd-sourcing new talent. Use the web’s increasingly useful collaborative powers to discover new artists, and draw bloggers and pro-sumers into the A&R process, worldwide. Bloggers, in particular, are the new Radio DJs! Combine some of the ‘wisdom of the crowds’ with your own professional A&R people. Do what P&G has done with Innocentive and their own ‘Connect and Develop’, and what DELL has done with Ideastorm, and what Kodak is doing in Social Media. The benefits seriously outweigh the risks!
7) Drop most if not all of the on-going law-suits, and switch your legal strategy to a 100% solution-oriented process. Compensation not Control is where the money is; all else is just posturing. The IFPI and RIAA-led efforts of enforcing control in an exponentially consumer-empowering media ecosystem have all failed miserably, and will not produce any monetary results in the future (except for enriching the lawyers). Here is a tough one for you: do you still need these lobbyists? Rather than spending most of the time preventing what the ‘people formerly known as consumers’ really want to do, all available energy should be put into exploring, building and co-developing those ‘new generatives’ for digital content, i.e. next generation advertising and branded content, packaging, bundling, flat rates etc.
8) Pursue drastic and large-scale innovation within - and on the fringes of - WMG. Bring the smartest possible people into the company; apart from content and talent (of course), focus on technology, mobile and next generation advertising and marketing. Invest in start-ups that can invigorate WMG 2.0 and provide significant strategic advantages.
9) Start to really talk to the music users, and have actual conversations with your customers. Engage on public conversation platforms, switch your PR and corporate communications from push to pull. Launch a WMG executive blog, start using Twitter; turn push into pull across the board. Do a Kodak - and go beyond! Create more transparency which creates trust which creates new business opportunities. Win back the trust of the consumer (better: the users) and the artists.
10) Offer profit-sharing arrangements with your artists: from a fixed pool of profit shares, each artist that is affiliated with WMG could receive a bonus payment that is proportional to their significance, every year. Do something similar with your staff.
11) Decentralize your distribution efforts, syndicate the music as wide as possible. Youtube gets 60% of its traffic from people embedding video players into their own websites - do something similar for your catalog. Instead of (or at least, along with) building or supporting central destinations, allow the users & fans to do the marketing for you, and syndicate your assets around the web. Think RSS, feeds, XML, API, not MTV.
12) Data is the new Gold - mine it! Making money around the music (not just from or with the music) is where the future is going. Investigate new business models that are based on data-mining, next-generation advertising and branded content, and behavioral targeting.
Note: once you’re ready.... there are a few good companies already working in most of these areas, and you could team up with them: just ask me.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=a2e490f3-1f47-4e23-90a3-1a7a7b00eb4f)
January 24, 2010
MidemNet 2010 Presentation: The New Generatives - selling Music in a connected World
This is the PDF from my presentation at MidemNet 2010: Download Gerd MidemNet Academy new generatives for Music Public 25.1 MB PDF
Please note: this is slightly different from what I actually presented this morning - please stay tuned for the audio and video versions of this talk, via the MidemNet blog and Twitter.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=60bb23ec-7af7-416f-8dab-1a967f35bc93)
January 13, 2010
My presentation on "TeleMedia Futures" at BLPLaw in London
Here is the PDF from today's session in London. High-res and Slideshare version below - and stay tuned! 3.5 MB PDF: Telemedia Futures BLPLaw London Gerd Leonhard
TeleMedia Futures: the next 5 years in Media, Content and Telecom
View more documents from Gerd Leonhard.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=ffec4690-edae-457b-9d22-933877e8f3d3)
December 31, 2009
The Corey Smith success story via TechDirt (nice to hear my books are having some effect;)
Techdirt's brilliant Mike Masnick wrote about this a few weeks ago: Corey Smith achieved massive success as an indie artist apparently based on some ideas outlined in my 2005 book "The Future of Music" (co-written with my buddy and BerkleeMusic chief Dave Kusek). Very cool! It feels really good to hear this; and to find that some of our work actually falls on fertile ground. May there be a lot more of this in 2010!
If you have similar stories please feel free to share them. If you want to read my follow-up book, Music 2.0, please go here to order it (dead-tree or PDF), or here to read it on your iPhone or blackberry (for free;).
"One of the things that he discusses in the podcast is that what really got him started down this road was realizing that it could be done. He read Dave Kusek and Gerd Leonhard's excellent The Future of Music, and it made him realize "hey, this is possible." And that, alone, made a huge difference. It's amazing what you can do once you realize that something is possible -- and one of the great things we've seen in writing about Corey and numerous other musicians and their success stories is that they, in turn, inspire many other musicians who realize that it really is possible to do quite well despite the naysayers and the doom and gloom. There are a bunch of people who seem to have a vested interest in tearing down the success stories (in many cases because they profit from having naive musicians sign over their lives), but the obvious success stories shine through and inspire many more who follow. It doesn't mean that every musician is guaranteed success. In fact, Corey's story highlights the amount of hard work and dedication that was needed, combined with some great music and a bit of luck as well, to make all of this work...."
via www.techdirt.com
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=92ecc630-7874-4eb1-bb46-c34667981bf5)
December 21, 2009
My New Year's Message to the Music Industry: 9 points, 3 videos
Merry Christmas and a happy 2010 to everyone in the Music Industry! Below is a short video I made specifically for all you music industry people reading my blog (plus 2 other videos I believe you may enjoy, as well - if you need more, please go to my GerdTube channel on Blip.tv).
In addition, here are my top 9 ideas for what I think needs to happen in 2010, to move this industry forward. I am using mostly links here because, well, I have said it all already way too often in the past 5 years;)
- Stop pushing for more and more and...more legal or technical protection measures and lighten up on the constant quest for control: think (and act) compensation not control!
- Access to music is going to replace ownership, very soon, so start thinking 'Selling 2.0' - if copies are abundant and can no longer be monetized in the same way as before, what else can you sell? This is crucial. You need to groom and build the New Generatives not push harder to pass laws to try and get the old times to magically return.
- Friction truly is Fiction i.e. utterly wishful thinking, now, so you have a choice: get out of the way... or lend a hand (you have heard that song before). Reinvent your relationship with the artists and the 'people formerly known as consumers'. Stop hiding behind technological tricks and artificial hurdles: protection is in the business model not in the technology (need more? Check out my new book "Friction is Fiction").
- Stop hanging on to that good old, comfortable EGOsystem paradigm - start building the new ECOsystem. The future is not in Google paying for all music online, or the ISPs paying for all music on their networks - it's in constantly moving, interconnected, fluid and tri-brid (that is hybrid+1) systems of 'I pay, you Pay, 3rd party pays'.
- Collaborate - engage don't enrage, have real conversations not monologues, drop the big sticks and start growing more carrots. The time for Music 2.0 is now.
- Offer a public digital music license that legalizes - and monetizes - all use of music online.
- Music consumption via computers is getting less and less important - it's all moving to Mobile Devices (read my mobile Music 2.0 book and see the video below;)
- The new money is in connecting the cloud (where the music is) with the crowd (where the money is) - access comes first now, ownership is second. And this is good news!
- Question your assumptions: what do you still believe that is no longer really true...? (see the video below).
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=aefcae61-1057-4e6b-a74e-cc81574d7920)
December 04, 2009
Announcing my presentations and workshops at MIDEM 2010
Once again, the global music industry will come down to Cannes / France, January 22-27, 2010, to debate the future of the business at MIDEM. I have been involved with MIDEM / MIDEMNet and their conference programs for quite some time now (see last year's talk here), and will be contributing again, this year, see below. If you are in the music industry I do hope to see you there, and to connect. In the meantime, check out the MidemNet blog (I am a guest blogger there, too), and take a look at the 2010 conference program.
Sunday, January 24th, 2010
Monday, January 25th, 2010
Tuesday, January 26th
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=2c1a08e3-7e4c-447c-a168-de0cc917ddd1)
November 26, 2009
The Future of music and digital content: mobile, social and... PAID? (FAM09 presentation in Madrid)
I had the great pleasure to speak at the Future As Music (FAM) conference in Madrid / Spain, today. This event was organized by AIE (the Artists and Performers Society of Spain) and I was delighted to present alongside one of my favorite colleagues, famed mobilist and mobile content guru Tomi Ahonen.
My talk and presentation was on the juicy topic of "The Future of Music & Digital Content: Mobile, Connected, Social, Open... and Paid?" and included comments on: 1) why it makes no sense to disconnect fans from the Internet and expect them to then buy more 'legal' music 2) why the music industry must adapt to the new behaviors of 'the people formerly known as consumers' asap 3) why we have a 'digital toll-booth challenge' (see my column on Spotify) and how we need to structure 'music sales' going forward 4) why music is first an experience and a service, and only then a product (and how the industry can monetize this shift) 5) where the New Generatives will come from 6) why a collective digital music license makes sense - and much more. Here is the slideshow, below (you can download the PDF via slideshare, as well). Enjoy and spread the word!
Download LOW RES 5MB PDF Future Music Media Open and Paid Public
The Future of Music and Digital Content: Mobile, Social and... PAID?
View more documents from Gerd Leonhard.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=dc3e2155-683b-4c35-8979-3118cca0c123)
November 24, 2009
Video of my presentation at A2N Berlin: Music Like Water - the time is now!
This was one of my best presentations on the topic of the music flat rate - the PDF and more details are here.
From the intro on the A2N Berlin
site:
"Digital music is in a serious gridlock: everyone is using it, very few
are paying for it, and nobody except for Apple has yet succeeded in
making a business of it. At the same time, broadband penetration in Europe is exploding, mobile
devices are getting ever more powerful, and almost a Billion people
will be always-online at high speeds, within 2 years, sharing music on
social networks and via all kinds of digital networks. Attempts at making ISPs and telecoms reponsible for solving the
business model problems of the industry have failed, 95% of the Digital
Natives in Europe are guilty of copyright infringement, and this logjam
is becoming a major cultural, political and economic issue. Meanwhile, flat-rated, collective music licenses for the digital music
are being trialled in Denmark, the Isle of Man, Turkey and China. For
the past 6 years, Gerd Leonhard has been suggesting that Music on the
Internet needs to be licensed like Radio: collectively, publicly and
compulsory, and a revenue-sharing basis, so that a new, web-native
music ecosystem can unfold..."
Gerd Leonhard - Music Like Water: why, what, when and how? from all2gethernow on Vimeo.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=6eb9545c-d326-474e-bab2-51e25c098c12)
November 19, 2009
Free mobile version of my Music 2.0 book for iPhone, Android and Blackberry
Many of you may have already downloaded my free Music 2.0 book as a PDF, or read it on the iPhone using Instapaper via my very basic mobile page, or even purchased the dead-tree version (note that Amazon is sold out now, all future orders should be done only via Lulu.com)
Today, I am delighted to announce that a much better mobile-optimized version of the book is finally available here - and yes, it's still free. However, I really don't mind if you make a payment for the free PDF via Lulu.com;)
As you can see, below, this includes all of the chapters in an easy-to-read, mobile-native format, and all kinds of ways to share it via eMail, Twitter and Facebook. The best thing is, however, that you can now add all of the chapters of the book to your Instapaper app (iPhone only, I think) with just one click, and then read the whole thing offline, as well. Way cool! We are also working on a 'real' iPhone app.
Note: Instapaper was covered on the new Indicatr site, yesterday, as well). Please spread the word - and don't forget: if you are entirely and utterly mobile-only you can track most of my tweets and shared items here.
November 10, 2009
Making money with music when the copy is 'free' (Kristiansand Music Industry Conference)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=b8b8a2f5-cdb1-46c4-b4dc-5060df305d15)
October 16, 2009
2 new videos on The Future of Music
"How can music be like water? Providers will be offering music as a small portion of payments you already make. It may be your hosting provider fee, your e-mail account, or even part of your telephone subscription, but you will have access to an unlimited quantity of music without even noticing.
"There should be a provision for me to pay along with the DSL or the mobile phone subscription. [...] In most contexts, this would be paid for by advertising so [music] would be subsidized [...] like we have now for BlackBerry."
Allowing people to have an "unfettered, unrestricted and unlimited" access to music on the web, may also lead music piracy slow down. Copying and sharing music illegally no longer makes sense when you listen to as much music as you like, without paying for any single song. Basically it is a model that says that music should be included in the network access, just like music is now included in radio. We do not pay for music when we listen to radio and, of course, television. Similar to that, music should be included when I go on the web. There should be a provision for me to pay along with the DSL or the mobile phone subscription. I would say in most cases, in most contexts, this would be paid for by advertising, so it would be subsidized or by bundled subscriptions, like we have now for BlackBerry. We can see the first couple of models about online music evolving already in:
- Canada: the Canadian songwriters are making proposals for flat rate for ISPs to essentially pay for the music, both by advertising as well as by making my own payments.
- It is already happening with Google in China: Google is paying for the music, and all Chinese that use the Google search engine get free music downloads and streams for free.
These models make a lot of sense, because the future of music, in my view, is basically an unfettered, unlimited, unrestricted access on a revenue-sharing basis, so that we go away from the climate of having a certain file format or a certain price or a certain way of delivery and we can open up the ecosystem. I think that is true, in general for all future of media: we are moving to an open platform, a connective platform, a revenue-sharing platform. Basically an ecosystem of how the money flows rather than monopolies of how the money flows, which is what we had so far..."
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=0baf4e50-942d-424d-9def-c97ea59359c3)
October 12, 2009
Open letter to Lord Mandelson: here is how to solve the Internet Music Problem - Legalize It!
Basel, Switzerland, October 12 2009 Gerd Leonhard, Media Futurist
Open Letter to Lord Mandelson, First Secretary of State, Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills (UK)
The Digital Music License (DML) – why and how a new public license for the legal consumption of music on the Internet would provide a solid alternative to the proposed '3 strikes' legislation
Update: Greek Translation here
Dear Lord Mandelson,
The proposed "3 Strikes" legislation is flawed in many more ways than I could hope to outline in this letter, and many of these issues have already been addressed in many other places. Therefore I shall provide only a quick summary of some of the key issues, and then move on to describe what a fruitful, realistic and decidedly more pragmatic alternative could look like.
Unauthorized use of music on the Internet is not a technical problem but a business issue. The reasons why the global ‘free’ sharing of music via the Internet (whether streamed or downloaded) is growing exponentially cannot be nullified by technological means. Rather, the digital music (r)evolution clearly poses a myriad of business and socio-cultural problems that require us to devise a new social contract that legalizes what people actually do, and then build new business models around it.
Anyone that has attempted to innovate within the music industry (including me) will attest to the fact that the largest hurdle for the monetization of music on the Internet during the past 15 years has been the astounding absence of new licensing schemes that actually fit the 'Internet Generation' i.e. the digital natives, and the new ways of consumption that connected consumers are rapidly adopting. Bottom line: the problem is not what consumers are doing - the problem is that the music industry has not blessed it with a license yet!
Therefore, any attempt to solve these business issues with technological measures – such as the proposed 3-strikes legislation – would, with utter certainty, be very expensive, have serious social and political consequences and yet fail miserably to deliver tangible monetary results for the content industries or indeed the creators; just like Digital Rights Management (DRM) which was pushed very hard by the music industry for over a decade and has now finally been acknowledged as the snake-oil it really always was. The only outcome of the proposed 3 Strikes legislation would be to further criminalize every single consumer that is interested in music, every fan and every potential customer.
So, again, let me be pragmatic: this idea means no money for the creators, no new revenues for the industry (but even more rejection by the consumer), and still no satisfaction for the music consumers. In my view, the most pressing objective must be to solve the very real problem of how music (and then, other digital content) can indeed generate new revenues via the Internet - for the old revenue streams are the past, beyond a shadow of a doubt - just look at what is happening to newspapers and print publishing! Technology will not and cannot solve problems posed by seriously outmoded business practices.
The bottom line: controlling the flow of digital files is ‘Mission Impossible’. The challenging but nevertheless indisputable reality is that the very idea of reliably and consistently controlling the distribution of music files on the Internet is basically a technical impossibility as well as a social, political and cultural minefield. Today, the simple act of listening or streaming, watching or reading anything on a connected computer or a mobile Internet device is indeed the same as copying the content; one cannot be done without the other. The Internet is a giant copy machine, by definition, by design, and now… by culture. We may not like it, and we not appreciate it, but just like the railway was hated by the people that made horseshoes and horse carriages we have no choice but to shift what we do, adapt, and reinvent ourselves. As your own kids or any so-called digital native will tell you, access is now the same as a copy i.e. ownership - in technical terms and in terms of user behavior and mindset. Crucially, of course, not yet in terms of the existing laws and prevailing licensing practices. And therein lies the rub.
I would argue that we are in fact trying to build a new business on top of the decidedly pre-Internet principle of total and exclusive copyright – a stark dilemma that has proven to create endless friction but produce very few new revenues. The very idea of being able to control the flow of files in order to extract earlier or possibly higher payments from the users is fundamentally flawed, and we must therefore look for ways to monetize it rather than to prevent it.
The value of music is no longer (just) in the copied file. We urgently need to understand and accept that the value of music is no longer (just) in the mere copies of the digital files. Our attention needs to shift from the old - and dying - business of ‘selling the copy’ to selling everything else i.e. the many other values around that copy (some people call that 'service' ;) but starting with providing very low-cost or flat-rated and bundled access, and then creating many new revenue generators on-top of the bundled, legalized access to music. Once legal and unlimited music distribution is build-into Internet access - when Access is Content - a revitalized music industry can focus on talent, curation and marketing, i.e. the attention-getting and the conversion of that attention into actual income. And yes, there is serious commercial value in the music industry once we regulate distribution (I call this Music 2.0 - if you care to read my free book on this... here it is)
The DML: the alternative to the proposed '3 Strikes' legislation. 80 years ago, the answer to the challenge of a then-new and vastly popular technology called 'Radio' was to legalize it and provide new licensing schemes to remunerate the content creators. The same thing happened with CableTV and with the copy-machine, and the very same logic needs to be applied to music on the Internet. A public, collective, standardized and open license for music on the Internet needs to be either voluntarily created by the music industry, or mandated i.e. enforced by the government - and the sooner the better for everyone. The DML would - similar to the existing radio & broadcasting licenses that are already in effect around the world - make music available on public, standardized terms and conditions, and therefore allow any and all businesses that want to use music to do so without the utterly crippling uncertainties that exist in the current marketplace.
Revenue shares and flat rates - not fixed license fees per song. The objective of the DML is to create a new, vast, and constantly replenishing ‘pool of money’ for music, i.e. to grow the revenue potential along with the growing number of users, as well as via the many new kinds of usages that will be spawned by the DML.
In my opinion, the most crucial component of the DML is this: the license fee needs to be calculated on a revenue-sharing basis rather than on a per-unit i.e. per song fee, whether streamed or downloaded. The current practice of a fixed per-track fee (usually amounting to about 1 cent U.S. per song, for the use of the master recording) for a stream and around 70 cents (U.S.) for a download has proven to be economically detrimental and utterly unrealistic for the market participants (such as Omnifone, Spotify, Rhapsody, Napster, We7 and Yahoo). Why is this? Because of the still-very-nascent stage of the digital music ecosystem, the fact that large-scale advertising revenues for new forms of media are always 2-3-5 years behind, and given that a very large number of users - potentially all UK consumers - are likely to listen to quite a bit of music in this way.
In its formative stage, this new market does not and will not bear license fees that are fixed in this manner and that are totally unrelated to actual incoming revenue streams. Instead, the DML would need to be calculated on a flat-rate or percentage-of-revenue basis, possibly combined with a minimum 'floor' that could prevent unfair and unintended use of 'free' music as a loss-leader (if needed).
Initial DML's reserved for ISPs, telecoms and operators. Since there are many different kinds of businesses that would benefit from having legalized music available (e.g. telecoms, operators, search engines, social networks and communities, blogs, web portals, online magazines etc) but their business objectives and parameters are so vastly different, I would propose to initially make the DML only available to ISPs, mobile network operators and telecommunications providers. This would have several important advantages: 1) once ISPs and operators are able i.e. licensed to offer music bundles and flat rates, they will have every incentive and reason to monitor (i.e. count not control!) which songs are used on their network, 2) they have very large user bases which will provide for a critical scale of payments to be obtained immediately (thus significantly lessening the perceived threat of revenue loss in the physical music market), 3) they have strong potential for the integration of next-generation, user-friendly advertising integration 4) and they already have build-in billing and payment mechanisms.
A flat fee license per user, generated in a multitude of ways. When licensing ISPs, mobile operators and other telecommunications companies it will be crucial to offer flat-rate licenses rather than to pursue revenue shares which are not going to be an acceptable way of generating music revenues from this process, at least initially. Rather, I believe that a fixed, flat-rate license fee per user, per week or month, would be the most suitable way provided that suitable 3rd parties (see below) will also engage to contribute to the funding of each user’s license fee. We must not simply declare the license fee payments to be the ISP’s problem - because it isn't, and because the solution is in the creation of a new Ecosystem, a new business logic, and not in creating tax-like burdens for individual industries.
Economic experts have already done a lot of work on the flat rate model. Far from being an economist myself, I would add that a payment of 1 GBP (in the UK) or 1 Euro (in Germany, France etc) per week per user seems to be economically feasible; however the exact price point will of course need to be negotiated with all involved parties, and possibly be adapted on a yearly basis until the market is more fully developed and each party’s ultimate value position can be determined. In any case -and this is crucial - the DML must clearly be so utterly affordable that every single ISP, operator and telecommunications company would immediately apply for a license.
In terms of the actual use of the music and the subsequent accounting for remuneration purposes, I propose that it should not make a difference if a song is downloaded or streamed (i.e. played on-demand while online), and - similar to CableTV - it should not make a difference if a user would use music 24 hours a day, every single day, or just download 3 songs every now and then. All music usage would need be counted, anonymized and reported, and artists would get paid fully proportional to the actual use of music i.e. according to their popularity (see below for details).
A calculation example: a pool of 2.6 Billion GBP per year for music, in the UK. As an example, a DSL provider and mobile network operator with 20 Million UK users would need to generate funds to pay for a DML of GBP 80 Million per month, i.e. 960 Million GBP per year.
Assuming, for mere calculation purposes, an average of 50 Million eligible UK residents i.e. a large percentage of the entire UK population (~ 61 Million) generating 1 GBP per week, the revenues for the music industry would amount to a very substantial 50 Million GBP per week i.e. 2.6 Billion GBP per year, which represents almost twice the UK's recorded music revenues in 2008 (1.36 Billion GBP). Any argument of ‘cannibalization’ of existing revenue streams such as CDs or iTunes would pale against this figure. And yes, iTunes would do just fine with and on-top of the flat-rate: remember they don't sell music, they sell iPods and iPhones!
How to fund a DML of 1 GBP per week per user. The key question is, of course, how exactly the ISPs and telecoms would raise the money to pay for the quite significant cost of the DML, every week, per user. This is a crucial issue since,a gain, under no circumstances should the ISPs, operators or telecoms be made solely responsible for the financial solution of this problem; it is absolutely crucial to position the DML as a business solution that will unlock strong new revenue opportunities and will be more than cost-neutral in a fairly short time. In my view, the job of building the financial support mechanisms i.e. the ecosystem that the DML will require should be handled by a mutually respected, knowledgeable and neutral advisory board whose mission would be to 'collate' this new ecosystem and to get device makers, advertisers, premium-service providers and other interested parties aboard as quickly as possible.
Advertising is only one of the many ways to fund the DML. Of course, as in television and radio, advertising is one of the key factors that will subsidize the DML fees. The concept of advertising-supported content is not new but what will be drastically different, going forward, is the type of advertising that we will see on digital networks in the very near future. Concepts such as advertising becoming content, itself (such as in mobile phone applications) and social advertising will blossom once permission for the legal use of music is given, creating much higher advertising revenues than we are currently seeing online.
The global advertising spend currently amounts to roughly $ 670 Billion USD, per year. The UK advertising & marketing spend is forecast at approx 25 Billion GBP in 2010 (eMarketer), with - by 2012 - an estimated 25% i.e. 6.25 Billion GBP going to digital and mobile advertising. Yet, digital and mobile advertising would only be one piece of this new puzzle: handset makers could pay subsidies to get preferred i.e. 'presented by' access to users (basically a network-centric variation of the existing ‘Nokia comes with Music’ concept), social networks could contribute subsidies to legally integrate ISP-hosted music into their own networks via the DMLs that operators and ISPs would already have; search engines and portals could do the same. Imagine if Google could sit on-top of this new system of fully legalized, feels-like-free music - this is similar to how Google has already made legal music (streaming and downloading) 'feels like free' in China.
After an initial set-up period, it would be crucial that an ISP or operator that makes use of the DML would be able to fully recover the DML costs through a multitude of new revenue streams, such as next-generation advertising, the sale of mobile applications based on the unlimited availability of music (such as social music and play list applications), subsidies by CE companies i.e. handset and device makers, data-mining and cross-selling (with careful consideration to consumers’ data protection and privacy, of course) and various forms of up-selling of other product and services (including music-related premiums) such as the games industry has been offering for the past decade, already, or even by re-packaging some of the license costs to their users.
The DML is NOT a tax. Any indication that the DML essentially amounts to a tax or is yet another compulsory payment scheme levied onto the consumer (such as the existing TV & Radio licenses) or a particular industry needs to be avoided, at least in the UK market where such a proposal would probably be politically unwise. The DML is simply a new license that is made available to businesses that want to use digital music, with the funding being generated from the market participants, themselves.
Monitoring of usage and fair payment to content owners. Every song that is performed i.e. streamed or downloaded on the Internet would need to be tracked and accounted for, using already available software solutions such as Gracenote or Shazam. This data would need to be made anonymous using a mathematical formula that would protect each user’s private data while still providing actuarial tracking of which song has been used how many times, on any given day, week or month.
Each artist and rights-holder would then receive a monthly payment that is proportional to the actuarial use of their music during each tracking period, e.g. if a given artist’s music was used 1.3% of the time (e.g. in any given month), he or she or their representatives (record labels and publishers) would receive 1.3% of the total pool of money collected. All participating creators (e.g. writers, lyricists, composers, producers etc) would get their proportional payment from the same pool. I am advocating a 50-50 split between the composer and the performer (i.e. recording and publishing), at this time. Overlaps with existing rights schemes (such as public performance on the Internet, and so-called web-casting and Internet-radio) would need to be investigated and addressed, as well.
Existing examples: similar models to the proposed DML are already in place, or are being investigated in: 1) China, where Google is providing free and fully legal streams and downloads of music via their Top100.cn property, in return for a share of advertising revenues (and in full collaboration with all major labels) 2) Denmark, where the ISP and mobile network operator TDC has already made music ‘free’ to all of their subscribers, in return for paying a flat fee per year to the music rights organizations 3) The U.S., where Warner Music Group, via Jim Griffin and the his Choruss project, is rolling out a flat ra
te music license for universities and colleges 4) Korea, where SK Telecom’s MelOn service has been providing flat rate music access to most the population (11 Million subscribers at ~$ 5 USD per month) for a few years, already 5) Canada, where the Canadian songwriters are lobbying the government for a new flat for digital music 6) The Isle of Man Music Flat Rate project, headed by Ron Berry.
I look forward to discussing this with you.
Best regards
Please note: this short letter cannot possibly answer every question that may arise if this proposal is further investigated or realized. Rather, I intend to make the case for why the DML would solve the pressing problem of legalizing and at the same time monetizing the many new ways that consumers use music on the Internet. Please keep in mind that most of the suggestions outlined above are still quite basic; prior to making any precise recommendations in regards to possible implementations a lot more research and input from all involved parties is required. Also, while my suggestions should be applied to digital music only, at this time, I do foresee similar developments within other digital content sectors such as motion pictures, TV and books - albeit within a wider timeframe (i.e. 3-5 years).
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=47ea11eb-dee8-46eb-aff7-9c0e7fc15059)
Gerd Leonhard
Keynote Speaker, Think-Tank Leader, Futurist, Author & Strategist, Idea Curator, some say Iconoclast | Heretic, CEO TheFuturesAgency, Visiting Prof FDC Brazil, Green Futurist
Recent Comments