Why Rhapsody Is Lame

A long time ago (but in this galaxy, not one far-far-away) … I signed on with Rhapsody for a test. (Yes, I have a PC as well as a Mac.) Didn’t use it- didn’t like it – wanted to cancel. But … I couldn’t. At least, I could not easily cancel.

You can sign up for Rhapsody without human intervention — the auto-magic of databased websites. But you have to talk to a person to cancel. And of course, they close at 6 pm Pacific.

Today, I got an e-mail telling me that the service was about to increase in price. That got me off my duff … and I dashed over to the website to try to cancel.

You still have to call.

What’s even more lame? The “excuse” that they give for having you call, instead of being able to cancel 24×7 via the website. (Hint: it’s so they can try to talk you out of it. But you knew that.) Continue reading

Apple/EMI Deal – What Does This Mean for DRM?

It’s a little hard for me to reconcile the disconnect between RIAA lawsuits and the proposed jacked-up online radio licensing fees with EMI’s recent deal with Apple to sell DRM-less music for a premium (130%) price.

Is it as simple as the Brits being more in tune (no pun intended) with online media? This is not a facetious question: it’s the Recording Industry Association of America that is persecuting college students, streaming “radio” and, reportedly, a signed-off-by-the label virual campaign for the forthcoming Nine Inch Nails album.

IFPI (an international trade group) says that only 10% of global music sales are made online. Of course, given how young the online music market is, that 10% could (should?) be considered quite a coup. And it’s a growing segment.

Continue reading

Proposed Internet Radio Licensing Fees Dwarf Terrestrial Radio

SaveTheStreams banner

Something seems amiss here. According to BetaNews, the Copyright Licensing Board (an arm of the Library of Congress) ruled in March that online radio (streamed music) must pay royalties to the RIAA (via the SoundExchange, an industry group) that greatly exceed the amount paid by “real” (AM/FM) radio stations.

The retroactive fee change (how can they make it retroactive?) will probably doom Pandora. And the San Jose Mercury News calls it a “huge gift” to the record industry (13 March Op-Ed, pay-to-view).

BetaNews estimates that online webcasting leader AOL Radio may receive a bill for copyright holders’ royalties retroactive to 2006 amounting to $23.7 million, payable to a collective representing the US recording industry… This while the world’s three major copyright holders’ groups – ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC – collectively charge terrestrial broadcast radio stations $972 per year per station, for the rights to broadcast exactly the same music to an equivalent or larger audience.

Continue reading