Broadbandreports.com recently noted how ISPs are seriously considering bundling subscription music services like Spotify (or creating their own) for a small additional, optional fee. Spotify, which offers users streaming access to music free with ads or for a monthly fee, is one way the recording industry can shake off the impacts of piracy without resorting to suing children and grandmothers. But Warner Music apparently is having none of it, and according to the BBC, no longer wants to offer its music catalog up for use by free streaming services:
Warner chief executive Edgar Bronfman Jr said: “Free streaming services are clearly not net positive for the industry and as far as Warner Music is concerned will not be licensed. “The ‘get all your music you want for free, and then maybe with a few bells and whistles we can move you to a premium price’ strategy is not the kind of approach to business that we will be supporting in the future.”
One, Bronfman is pretending that he actually has a choice in the matter, when the labels can either adapt to what their audience wants, or go out of business. Two, Bronfman has ingeniously decided to kill off one of the major user alternatives to music piracy – simply because the avenue doesn’t allow Warner to charge the kind of high music prices they’ve grown to love. Mike Masnick over at Techdirt puts it this way:
You don’t compete with “free” by taking your ball and going home. You don’t compete with “free” by pretending that old artificial scarcities are coming back after the wall has been broken down. You don’t compete with “free” by suing customers. You don’t compete with “free” by shunning those who have business models that work. You compete with free by offering a better product and a better business model. WMG is choosing to go in the other direction. Best of luck to them…
Bingo. Couldn’t have been said better. Warner, RIAA… they all need a wakeup call and see that the “old way” doesn’t work well in these new times.