RESPONSES TO LENNYBEERBLOG

With the introduction of the 160GB iPod, this issue now needs to be addressed.

Apple Inc and Microsoft Corporation are guilty of three very serious crimes. They are just hoping that the content industry will never wake up. Anyone in the technology industry can tell you they can clearly see this also:

Crime 1: Criminal Copyright Infringement and Aiding and Abetting, in violation of 17 U.S.C. ' 506(a)(1)(A), and 18 U.S.C. '' 2319(b)(1) and 2

Crime 2: Trafficking in Counterfeit Goods and Aiding and Abetting, in violation of 18 U.S.C. '' 2320(a) and 2; and

Crime 3: Antitrust and Unfair Competition

About Crime 1:
Both parties are aiding and abetting criminal copyright infringement by supplying a "operating system" and hardware devices capable of facilitating user's request and acquirement of counterfeit recorded digital media. If you remove the operating system out of the hosting computer hardware then the user is no longer capable to rip CDs and download illegal music. Through the aid of said "operating systems" are users able to copy and duplicate federally protected intellectual property as defined in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 (DMCA)

About Crime 2:
Both parties are aiding and abetting trafficking of counterfeit goods by supplying an "operating system" capable of downloading and internally producing copies of federal copyrighted content without measures of protection defined by law in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998. Through said "operating systems" users can obtain legal digital content from easily accessible locations on the Internet. Apple Inc and Microsoft Corporation allows unchallenged access to known "points of access" to obtain illegal content on the Internet through first party web browsers. Both companies can block access on their network managers embedded in the "operating systems" to restrict access to known IP addresses used in digital counterfeiting. Both companies can employ a dedicated staff to manage this requirement of the DMCA in a similar manner that security updates are managed through remote system updates.

About Crime 3:
Both parties are conducting serious antitrust and unfair completion business practices with content owners with whom content is licensed for company owned "music stores". Both parties sell and distribute a trio of products which are A) operating systems B) hardware devices sold in retail locations, and C) embedded music stores to support the hardware device. Both companies’ operating systems deliver and assist in the creation of counterfeit goods which directly competes with their embedded music store solutions, in which legal content can be obtained. Profits for both companies are generated from sales of the hardware devices which are used with the "operating systems" to transfer counterfeit versions of content which is also available legally through both parties’ embedded music stores.

The RIAA needs to wake up before it is too late. This is a multi trillion dollar lawsuit waiting for a group of content owners to collect.

This e-mail is granted under the named alias of Mr. D. Agnus

______________________________________________

As a producer/songwriter and label owner, I would love a subscription model!!! Let the people rule.

All the below questions can be answered with one solution: solidarity within the music industry to control piracy. Face the fact that over 90% of music on iPods/MP3 players was acquired illegally. Kids WILL NOT pay for anything if they don't have to. We have our own focus groups and they all laugh at subscription models.

Majors are clueless now. Perhaps the film industry (or the porn industry) should be running the music business?

Robert John
President
Megaforce Records
Transdreamer Records

______________________________________________

First off, I think a subscription service is exactly where the music industry is headed. In its ideal form, the music industry will become a rental service. Let me explain. The portable music player is invading every dimension of human life. It goes in your car, your home, your waist, your work, etc. As we're already seeing, cars now have 20gb hard drives built in, and soon enough, you can just plug a flash drive right in and play every file from your home computer. 10-15 years ago consumers bought albums even if it was just for that one hit song.

Now, with the creation of online music stores, we have seen the rebirth of the single. Consumers like one song today, and another song tomorrow. As attention spans grow shorter and popular music becomes more mainstreamed, the consumer will not choose to invest money into something they will not care about in a short period of time. They want the option to buy something but turn right around and say, "I don't like this anymore, let me exchange it for something else."

That's where a subscription service comes into play. An unlimited download scenario based around the Yahoo! model is ideal. Allow the user to pay a monthly/yearly fee to download what they want, but only to a portable player. This way the consumer can listen to all the music they want and not have to be vested in albums that are already outdated 6 months later. It should help the indie labels who get shut out by radio and MTV, and bring back what music is truly about: taking chances on what's lesser known.

Second, with the addition of new online music stores carrying major label catalogs, economic forces of competition should set in and consumers may finally see reduced prices for mp3 singles. Consumers can finally begin to bargain shop for their favorite music. Itunes has been a monopoly for too long. Wal-Mart and Amazon should be able to steal some thunder and bring in extra business to their sites with cheaper music.

Willard Beamen
Pepperdine MBA student, music industry financial analyst, aspiring musician
______________________________________________

The subscription model doesn't fit the current mind state of music consumers. Kids are not going to buy into it and very few savvy grown-ups will either. Why pay a monthly fee for music when on any given month or week none of the music or albums labels put out are worth buying in the first place?

DIMINISHING VALUE, that's the dialog among consumers of music. The attitude is pervasive. Why buy bad product when you can just cherry pick what you like? Companies are looking out instead of within for the demise of the business. It's a consumer-driven musical society where the purchaser is not forced to buy things that they don't want at high prices. The new Democracy...

However, technology companies and content creators must embrace each other, with the former having the upper hand. Music companies are loss leaders and their hegemony is over. It's about choices, it's about getting what you want, when you want it and how you want it...

I think a music fee could come in the form of bundled cost for Internet service. The business model should be more like venture capitalism... participate in the success of building a brand (artist), not themselves.

Terry Loyd
Rizen Entertainment