M6.2

Each experience of listening to music online though many of these streaming option was very similar. Each offered some method to share the experience with other via Facebook, Twitter, etc. And, they all either forced you to explore the genre, like Pandora, or they at least gave you an option to automatically browse the genre by adding similar artists to your stream's playlist. I checked out each one but, the semi-randomness of Pandora providing the chance to discover a new band was most appealing. Many other had this option but Pandora was essentially built for this purpose so it was the obvious choice for me. I use services like Pandora often, however, it is more of a personal usage. I'm never one to use the additional social tools to advertise my tastes. And, lets not for get that fact that it is free.

The linked article makes a good point on the sales figures, it is clear that streaming services are steadily over taking online purchases, the rationale being the appeal to radio like discovery similar to my point about this ease of access to new music above. Many of the large social media hubs are another place one can discover music, although it seems to be much less natural than the radio style offered by streams. However, these are the end game for musician and producers who offer up their media on many streaming venues. Another great point in the linked article is the use of social data. Interaction on social media sites like Twitter and Facebook can help producers and artists track their online success as part of website such as Spotify, Grooveshark, etc.

Slideshare presentation featuring: The New Bomb Turks

M6.1

When I purchase music, as opposed to sharing it, my rationalizations are usually come from a strong connection to the music and/or the artist. Not just your everyday CD for the car or mix for the gym. Its something more and its also something rare. With the evolution of music sharing I am much more reluctant in my music purchases and much more likely to share some before any cash purchases.

My practises probably conflict with many of the IP protections of a lot of mainstream music, however, as the readings indicate many artists and groups are moving to different business models to best capitalize on the shifting attitudes about music purchases and attitudes about music sharing. So as time moves forward practises like music sharing are being more and more accommodated to. Popular online venues for music sales such as Bandcamp.com allow visitors to fully preview songs artists have made available and even give artists the ability to use a 'pay what you can' model for any of their songs.

I do agree that copyright legislation in the music industry and the practices of consumers are shifting considerably and seem to be here to stay, largely due to availability of the internet and other relevant technologies. Many outlets for music sharing like Grooveshark.com, Last.fm, etc are filling this gap between technology and demand. So considering the music industry itself, it must find a way to monetize in this new realm, and I think this can be done a few days. Firstly, suing everyone is no longer an option. At its outset, the online music sharing revolution started small and with programs like Napster. Small factions that the music industry could collectively target and eliminate. Now, we know that Napster's downfall was similar to a hydra's head and several more similar outlets for music sharing were already in the works and becoming available to the public. From this point there are two similar options that allow the music industry to maintain power at the top of the food chain in music production and sales. Either buy up all of the aforementioned companies such as Grooveshark, Last.fm, etc and slowly begin to monetize their distribution once again with a focus on ease of access. If its just as easy and with no cost to get music else where, you can be sure people will seek it out. The other option is to strike a deal with these existing companies for the rights to distribution for a premium or royalty fee. Lately, this second option is what seems to be winning out as it is likely less overhead to just charge for the licences and allow these online stream services to exists than facilitate them yourself while essentially owning a monopoly on the right to the music being consumed.

One final point is the effect this online stream/download system has on the artist. So far, it has been acting as a second middle man to the artist, further detaching them from the fruits of their own labour. I'll let this article further make my case. http://www.aux.tv/2014/02/x-royalty-cheques-thatll-make-lose-faith-music-industry/