Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

RE: [cnfractal_music] MP3.Com

Expand Messages
  • Phil Thompson
    If this is correct... my mind boggles as to why MP3.com would think it would be useful to see artists sales and playback. If I have one criticism of the place
    Message 1 of 10 , May 1, 2000
      If this is correct... my mind boggles as to why MP3.com would think it
      would be useful to see artists' sales and playback.

      If I have one criticism of the place it's that the tracks that are #1 are
      likely to stay there, as visitors will start at #1 and work downwards until
      they lose patience.

      I do like MP3.Com... but it seems they've lost the plot a little.

      Phil T.

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Christopher Smith [SMTP:cussmith@...]
      Sent: 30 April 2000 01:13
      To: cnfractal_music@egroups.com
      Subject: Re: [cnfractal_music] MP3.Com

      Do you have a link for this story?

      Chris

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Forrest Fang
      To: cnfractal_music@egroups.com
      Sent: Friday, April 28, 2000 8:36 PM
      Subject: [cnfractal_music] MP3.Com


      The Mp3.Com saga continues. Today, I read that MP3.Com lost their
      lawsuit with the RIAA over copyright infringement. Record companies
      apparently didn't take to kindly to MP3.Com's "Beam-It" software,
      which allowed its users to hear non-Mp3.Com CDs anywhere if they
      already owned them. I've also read that MP3.Com plans (on each
      artists' page) to show how much each artist is being paid for CD
      sales and playback....don't know what you folks think, but I don't
      see how this helps indie artists at all.

      << File: ATT00011.html >>
    • Forrest Fang
      ... intent to make revenue figures for MP3.Com artists public. The reaction to it from Mp3.Com artists has been overwhelming negative, but, as far I know,
      Message 2 of 10 , May 1, 2000
        Hi Phil:

        :Here is the full text of the message from Mp3.Com's CEO, re their
        intent to make revenue figures for MP3.Com artists public. The
        reaction to it from Mp3.Com artists has been overwhelming negative,
        but, as far I know, they're still going forward with it:

        Forrest

        **************************************

        Secrets Are Bad Things

        category: Michael's minute

        submitted by NewsHacks
        Admin: NewsHacks on Apr 23, 2000 at 22:11:26
        I've never liked secrets. Secrets generally mean somebody's getting
        screwed. If you don't know who's getting screwed, then it's likely to
        be you. It doesn't matter if it's the government, religion or
        business, this maxim holds true.

        It sure seems there are lots of secrets in the music business. Try as
        you might, it's darn near impossible to figure out how much artists
        make. There are countless horror stories of questionable accounting,
        unreported sales, and unbalanced contracts.

        MP3.com has contributed to this by keeping data on artists a secret
        from the general public. We didn't reveal sales numbers for artists
        using our zero-cost D.A.M. CD-selling system. Similarly, we didn't
        reveal individual artist earnings from our Payback for Playback
        system. (The Payback system pays artists based on the number of
        listens they get of their tunes.) I think it's time we changed all
        that. Putting out into the open how much an artist is earning removes
        the veil of secrecy. It's no mystery how much movie stars, pro
        athletes or TV personalities make; it shouldn't be a classified
        number what musicians bring home.

        However, this is about more than just financial voyeurism. It's about
        accountability. Yes, it will be fascinating to be able to see exactly
        how many listens and therefore, dollars, any artist makes. It might
        even provide wonderful insights into the trends of music listeners
        and help identify promising talent. More importantly, though, it will
        bring a level of accountability to the music world that I don't
        believe existed before. When any artist can precisely track the
        number of listens from the previous day, week or month--that's a good
        thing.

        When music rights-holders can ask questions and get answers about how
        much money is in their account at 3 a.m. simply by visiting their
        stats area using their web browser, that gives them more power over
        the process. (Eventually, they will be able to see how many times a
        song was played in a retail establishment and even be able to track
        which stores played their music or which radio station spun a track.)

        Starting May 1, this is exactly what happens. We'll bring more
        openness to MP3.com. Our artist contract (see sign up) has always
        been public knowledge. What will be new is that each artist page will
        contain an earnings total displaying a dollar amount. When the dollar
        total is clicked, it will open a new page that will have a more
        complete breakout of how many plays the songs received, how many CDs
        were sold (if they use us to sell CDs), and how much Payback was
        earned.

        There is some minimum legalese the attorney types make us put in, but
        the allocation will be as straightforward as we can make it. Any
        artist who gets 15 plays per day qualifies for the Payback program.
        The monies are distributed daily and are allocated according to the
        number of listens all the songs for that artist achieve. For both May
        and June, the monthly pool will be $1 million.

        We think the Payback methodology of splitting a pool based on
        listenership is a great model for paying artists on the Internet. We
        don't claim credit for it because it's basically the same model that
        ASCAP uses to distribute funds--and they've been in business for a
        long time. What is new is using technology to open the entire process
        to the public and add precise tracking. Here's to the end of secrets.

        Michael Robertson
        MP3.com
        Your Music Service Provider
      • Phil Jackson
        Hi Forrest and all In a way I can see their rationale, but it doesn t mean I like it....will people seek out the artists who are making the most, figuring that
        Message 3 of 10 , May 1, 2000
          Hi Forrest and all

          In a way I can see their rationale, but it doesn't mean I like it....will
          people seek out the
          artists who are making the most, figuring that they must be the best? Will
          the dollar
          amounts posted be the decisive factor in "do I want to listen to some
          selections from this
          artist? This info should be the artist's business and no others. How much
          Spirit Oscillator
          made last year on mp3.com is your business, and yours alone (well, maybe the
          IRS also).
          Perhaps this will be good for those really making a lot of money from this,
          but for the
          rest....hmmmm. Any idea what brought this about? Just don't see how this
          is connected
          to the lawsuit thing in any way...maybe we should start up "Generative
          Recordings, Inc."...

          Phil


          Forrest Fang wrote:

          > Hi Phil:
          >
          > :Here is the full text of the message from Mp3.Com's CEO, re their
          > intent to make revenue figures for MP3.Com artists public. The
          > reaction to it from Mp3.Com artists has been overwhelming negative,
          > but, as far I know, they're still going forward with it:
          >
          > Forrest
          >
          > **************************************
          >
          > Secrets Are Bad Things
          >
          > category: Michael's minute
          >
          > submitted by NewsHacks
          > Admin: NewsHacks on Apr 23, 2000 at 22:11:26
          > I've never liked secrets. Secrets generally mean somebody's getting
          > screwed. If you don't know who's getting screwed, then it's likely to
          > be you. It doesn't matter if it's the government, religion or
          > business, this maxim holds true.
          >
          > It sure seems there are lots of secrets in the music business. Try as
          > you might, it's darn near impossible to figure out how much artists
          > make. There are countless horror stories of questionable accounting,
          > unreported sales, and unbalanced contracts.
          >
          > MP3.com has contributed to this by keeping data on artists a secret
          > from the general public. We didn't reveal sales numbers for artists
          > using our zero-cost D.A.M. CD-selling system. Similarly, we didn't
          > reveal individual artist earnings from our Payback for Playback
          > system. (The Payback system pays artists based on the number of
          > listens they get of their tunes.) I think it's time we changed all
          > that. Putting out into the open how much an artist is earning removes
          > the veil of secrecy. It's no mystery how much movie stars, pro
          > athletes or TV personalities make; it shouldn't be a classified
          > number what musicians bring home.
          >
          > However, this is about more than just financial voyeurism. It's about
          > accountability. Yes, it will be fascinating to be able to see exactly
          > how many listens and therefore, dollars, any artist makes. It might
          > even provide wonderful insights into the trends of music listeners
          > and help identify promising talent. More importantly, though, it will
          > bring a level of accountability to the music world that I don't
          > believe existed before. When any artist can precisely track the
          > number of listens from the previous day, week or month--that's a good
          > thing.
          >
          > When music rights-holders can ask questions and get answers about how
          > much money is in their account at 3 a.m. simply by visiting their
          > stats area using their web browser, that gives them more power over
          > the process. (Eventually, they will be able to see how many times a
          > song was played in a retail establishment and even be able to track
          > which stores played their music or which radio station spun a track.)
          >
          > Starting May 1, this is exactly what happens. We'll bring more
          > openness to MP3.com. Our artist contract (see sign up) has always
          > been public knowledge. What will be new is that each artist page will
          > contain an earnings total displaying a dollar amount. When the dollar
          > total is clicked, it will open a new page that will have a more
          > complete breakout of how many plays the songs received, how many CDs
          > were sold (if they use us to sell CDs), and how much Payback was
          > earned.
          >
          > There is some minimum legalese the attorney types make us put in, but
          > the allocation will be as straightforward as we can make it. Any
          > artist who gets 15 plays per day qualifies for the Payback program.
          > The monies are distributed daily and are allocated according to the
          > number of listens all the songs for that artist achieve. For both May
          > and June, the monthly pool will be $1 million.
          >
          > We think the Payback methodology of splitting a pool based on
          > listenership is a great model for paying artists on the Internet. We
          > don't claim credit for it because it's basically the same model that
          > ASCAP uses to distribute funds--and they've been in business for a
          > long time. What is new is using technology to open the entire process
          > to the public and add precise tracking. Here's to the end of secrets.
          >
          > Michael Robertson
          > MP3.com
          > Your Music Service Provider
          >
          >
          > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          > Earn free CDs from Amazon & CDNow? True! New site needs
          > music fans of Rock, Soul, HipHop, Jazz, Country & Dance.
          > Get paid to listen to music you love. JABOOM.com
          > http://click.egroups.com/1/3760/3/_/21722/_/957210884/
          > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        • Phil Jackson
          Hi all, #1 tracks and all - it s that top 40 mentality....wish they would just take the genres and put them in some random ordering each day... You are
          Message 4 of 10 , May 1, 2000
            Hi all,
            #1 tracks and all - it's that "top 40" mentality....wish they would just take
            the genres
            and put them in some random ordering each day...

            You are right, that which floats to the top tends to stay there...but the same
            might
            be said of cesspools ;-) I've had a few tunes make it up there, but soon
            loose
            their "bouyancy" and plummet down - Chaos Theory at work....

            Phil


            Phil Thompson wrote:

            > If this is correct... my mind boggles as to why MP3.com would think it
            > would be useful to see artists' sales and playback.
            >
            > If I have one criticism of the place it's that the tracks that are #1 are
            > likely to stay there, as visitors will start at #1 and work downwards until
            > they lose patience.
            >
            > I do like MP3.Com... but it seems they've lost the plot a little.
            >
            > Phil T.
            >
            > -----Original Message-----
            > From: Christopher Smith [SMTP:cussmith@...]
            > Sent: 30 April 2000 01:13
            > To: cnfractal_music@egroups.com
            > Subject: Re: [cnfractal_music] MP3.Com
            >
            > Do you have a link for this story?
            >
            > Chris
            >
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: Forrest Fang
            > To: cnfractal_music@egroups.com
            > Sent: Friday, April 28, 2000 8:36 PM
            > Subject: [cnfractal_music] MP3.Com
            >
            > The Mp3.Com saga continues. Today, I read that MP3.Com lost their
            > lawsuit with the RIAA over copyright infringement. Record companies
            > apparently didn't take to kindly to MP3.Com's "Beam-It" software,
            > which allowed its users to hear non-Mp3.Com CDs anywhere if they
            > already owned them. I've also read that MP3.Com plans (on each
            > artists' page) to show how much each artist is being paid for CD
            > sales and playback....don't know what you folks think, but I don't
            > see how this helps indie artists at all.
            >
            > << File: ATT00011.html >>
            >
            > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
            > Get your money connected @ OnMoney.com - the first Web site that lets
            > you see and manage all of your finances all in one place.
            > http://click.egroups.com/1/3012/3/_/21722/_/957204194/
            > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          • cynique
            As of today, for an indefinite period of time, I will no longer be uploading music to mp3.com. This gentlemen seems to have common knowledge mixed up with
            Message 5 of 10 , May 1, 2000
              As of today, for an indefinite period of time, I will no longer be uploading music to mp3.com. This gentlemen seems to have common knowledge mixed up with secrets. The amount of money I make at work is hardly a secret but it is _not_ common knowledge. Because I don't pin my paystub to my forehead, is the sum of my weekly paycheck a secret? Nope! Again, it's just not common knowledge... AND it's no one else's business either.

              I realize the mp3 service is free, as free as my choice to upload or not. I chose not to be a part of this commercial venture. I will delete all my DAM CD's. I will make all my .mp3 files available for download. I will look elsewhere to share my music.

              >>> Secrets Are Bad Things
              >>>
              >>> category: Michael's minute
              >>>
              >>> submitted by NewsHacks
              >>> Admin: NewsHacks on Apr 23, 2000 at 22:11:26
              >>> I've never liked secrets. Secrets generally mean somebody's getting
              >>> screwed. If you don't know who's getting screwed, then it's likely to
              >>> be you. It doesn't matter if it's the government, religion or
              >>> business, this maxim holds true.


              -7om
            • cynique
              ... Not a bad idea at all; would it need funding ie; own web server, large HD space, good bandwidth. Or perhaps just another sight similar to mp3.com? I assume
              Message 6 of 10 , May 1, 2000
                >>to the lawsuit thing in any way...maybe we should start up "Generative
                >>Recordings, Inc."...

                Not a bad idea at all; would it need funding ie; own web server, large HD space, good bandwidth. Or perhaps just another sight similar to mp3.com? I assume mp3.com (and prolly not the only major mp3 repostory out here) get's more page hits but with a good selection of keywords and a decent _web page search engine submission program_ we'd have just as good a chance of being seen. I like the idea of branching out on our own a bit. Wouldn't matter to me if the site was 'ad laden', long as it's fast, reliable, good storage medium and left the artists alone. ;)

                -7om
              • Forrest Fang
                Hi Tom-- Sorry to hear you re pulling out of Mp3.Com, though I can certainly understand it. That s to the arrogance of their CEO, they re quickly losing
                Message 7 of 10 , May 2, 2000
                  Hi Tom--

                  Sorry to hear you're pulling out of Mp3.Com, though I can certainly
                  understand it. That's to the arrogance of their CEO, they're quickly
                  losing whatever goodwill they've generated for the past year or so,
                  and may have even written their own swan song with the RIAA fiasco.
                  I'm taking a wait-and-see approach for now. Does anyone know if
                  there's a way to opt out of the "hello world, here's my revenue"
                  option without deleting whole DAM CDs and files? Like a roach motel,
                  they make it easy to join their "payback for playback" scheme, but as
                  for opting out...

                  Forrest
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.