Revolution -not Evolution- needed to win in Online Music

In my last post, I gave a brief overview of why I think that Nokia Music signing with the Warner label does not amount to much in a space that is dominated by a new kind of music offering: Apple's iTunes. I claim that the only way to beat the 800lb. gorilla is by doing something radically different from what people can currently get. Nokia, with their huge base of mobile phones, is in a position to do just that. But my proposal is not for a company to implement, it is for a community to do it. This community is going to need the support and aid of some major players and that is why I think Nokia or someone similar should take the lead, release the bull, and see what happens.

To win this, Nokia will need to be innovative. Don't get me wrong, Nokia is a very innovative company and I love their products, but there are many innovative companies out there and they have all been hampered by the sleeping lion in the room: the major labels and the RIAA (the "Majors"). These guys have what Nokia wants to sell, they are tied to their old business models, and are not looking to rock the boat. They have stifled innovation at every turn and only caved to Apple's iTunes model because it is not really all that different from what they were already doing. The iTunes tracks are hampered by DRM, so they are purchased by the user and then get around the First Sale doctrine by their non-transferability. The only thing bad about this model for the Majors is that people can only buy that one good track on an album, rather than the whole album. Other than that, this model was a complete win for them, although you would never know it by all the complaining they do about online sales.


So, how do you innovate in this music space? That is certainly the multi-billion dollar question, and no matter what the innovation, the Majors are going to fight it all the way. But something needs to happen. Without a cohesive, workable solution, piracy will only become more rampant. No one wants to go to the store at $5/gal of gasoline to buy a $16 CD which they have to then rip, import, and transfer to their preferred listening device(s). Catchy song as a jingle on some commercial? I want the whole thing /right now/, not in a couple hours or so.

But most of all, it needs to be Universally Inclusive. By Universally Inclusive, I do not mean that is has to contain every song recorded. What I mean is that it needs to have the /potential/ to include every song ever recorded. What Nokia Music should do, no, what it should /BE/ is a framework for accessing, sharing, and selling ANY music.

Any Music: The framework should allow artists and labels alike to easily plug-in to the interface/storefront. If you know me or read this site very often, you know that I am a proponent of openness, but even more of interoperability as a way to tie together multiple services. The music industry needs to change. This old model of a few Majors running the show, signing 100s of acts so that a few will actually make it is no longer sustainable. No one other than the studios make any money that way, and I believe the artists are (rightfully) fed up with this. MySpace and the Internet were supposed to change this and there are some success stories, but most of those revolve around a band using the Internet to get noticed by and sign up with the Majors. Not much of a revolution.

What I propose is for the stores to link directly with the artists themselves. The Music Store framework should include an easy way for artists to sort of "plug-in" to the network, offering their music for listening and for sale.

And, what is more, this framework should be not only an open API or similar, but it should be open sourced, allowing for other music storefronts to offer the same type of functionality to the artists. This would increase the availability of music to the store's ability to add an artist's "feed" to its catalog of available music. I use feed here because I envision this to be as easy to use as adding an RSS feed to your feed aggregator (Google Reader or whatever else you choose to use). Feed aggregators make a perfect example because they usually support two different standards: RSS and Atom. And there is no reason this new music framework should not support more than one type of distribution method, so long as that method is transparent to the user. I propose that the music storefront offer the aggregation and search functionality. The better and more seamlessly they can do that, the better their store will do financially. Just like a traditional store. There is no need to lock in the user with proprietary Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) algorithms. Music is a simple commodity. This is like department stores from the 60s. They all carried the same basic items, but some did better than others, based upon service and setup and attractiveness or whatever else the market demanded. I propose the exact same thing here, only instead of freight-liners, this will use a sort of digital syndication and accounting for the music. And instead of a few inefficient and biased distribution channels (i.e. the Majors) this would allow any artist to plug-in and offer their music to any and all of that store's visitors.

1. Accessing: Nokia Music should be a part of the person's personal cloud. This should be a repository (locker, if you will, to borrow the term from mp3tunes) for all the music a person owns. This accessibility would let a person listen to whatever is in their collection at any time, from any device. On your phone? Sure. On your Internet-enabled car? Of course. On your work computer through a web or similar interface? Naturally.

2. Sharing: The framework should include the ability to easily share the music one likes and discovers with others. And what is more, the users should be rewarded for sharing the music with others, perhaps in the form of free downloads, increased access, or exclusive promotions. Last.fm allows you to quickly send a song link to someone else, and this can be played in most places. I am thinking something like this. And if that person also uses this service (remember, this is an open framework, so even if the person is not using the same provider, they should still get the notice) they could go into a "my recommendations" playlist which plays the music that has been recommended to them.

3. Selling: This has to make money to somehow, but people do not all want to own music in the same way. Some will want to buy the tracks, so this should be an option to whatever you are listening. Some want a subscription, and this should be tiered, to grant more access to the network to the most amount of people. The main thing is that it has to be easy and allow for simple and seamless up and downgrades in a person's service. Perhaps playing on certain devices costs more or requesting a certain song will cost a bit where listening to radio-style music would be free. The ability to seamlessly up and downgrade one's account based upon what and how you choose to listen at that moment would approach a micropayments type of system, allowing for the most even distribution of payments possible.

The key is to make it easy and make it interactive. If it is fun to use and communicate the music to others, then people will use it. iTunes is the current market leader in this, but each person's iTunes collection is basically an island of music with no connection to other islands except via a very slow boat. With no motor. The above proposal will allow for instantaneous visitation to anyone else's island, as well as sharing a part of your island with your friends and contacts. ...Read more