Hello Mr. Meckler,

While I agree with you that price will definitely be a diferentiator, I also think that we should not foget the legal issues surrounding copyright in the international scene. If you look at sites such as www.allofmp3.com (out of Russia), you can get a lot of the same content as on iTunes, and certainly more than on subscription sites such as emusic.com. The big difference is that from the Russian site, you can download a whole album for about a dollar. I am actually quite surprised that those that initially went after Napster, are not going after allofmp3.com, since I seriously doubt that the artists are seeing a penny.

Since there is no internationally binding legislation for copyright law, I think that any industry that relies on these laws for protection of their copyrights could be in danger.

The movie industry has made us aware of the copyright issues of downloading movies from the net, but frankly, I do find that the large files sizes can be prohibitive. Music and Stock-Photography, on the other hand, are of much smaller file sizes, and there is a veritable cornucopia of devices on which to transport and enjoy the content. (e.g. iPod, m:Robe, 1GIG mini drives, etc)

In the end, the winner may very well be the one with the most accessible business model. It is not difficult for people to be honest, as long as you make it relatively easy for them to do so. Consider newspaper vending boxes as an example. For fifty cents, I could take all of the newspapers in there, but I choose not to. Why? because they make it relatively painless to be honest.

The biggest hurdle I think we face is – as Negroponte elonquently put it in "Being Digital" - is how to easily transition from a culture of atoms, into a culture of bits. I for one, had a lot of vynil that I "had" to then upgrade to CD. If the music industry wants me pay once again to trade up from perfectly good atoms to more convenient bits, you can bet that I will want to do that as cheaply as possible. If I could take all my CD's in and trade in my copyright license from atoms to bits with a minimal fee, I would gladly do so. But, alas, that business model is not upon us yet. A pity too, since if everyone was into bits instead of atoms, the whole thing would be SO much easier to manage, copyrights and all.

My apologies for being so epic with my comment, but I do believe there is a lot to be said about the matter, and even more yet to discuss.

e.

P.S. The flower entry was another good example of atoms and bits. Perhaps next year, you could simply IM one of these ---> @;-'---. It's the thought that counts.

Mr. Meckler,

After sleeping on it, I thought of something else to add to the mix in regards to the music wars. Always a fan of the analogy, I began to think of what other industries the concept could apply to. Then, I thought of the department store.

A department store will carry a series of brands, all of which will come together and present a "lifestyle", if you will, that the department store is associated with. This representation is an extension of the lifestyles that the brands it carries are associated with. So, in a sense, the department store is defined by the sum of the brands that it carries.

Now, consider the music scene. What most people want is the music that they hear everywhere, music that they identify with (and can relatively easily identify). This is primarily the mainstream music scene; this is the music that napster, and iTunes carries. In a sense, these sites have become known for the sum of the brands... er, bands, that they carry. (even if one of them had some help from their notoriety.)

So, to get back to the point (and yes, there is one), The online music retailers of the future will also be dependent on the brand that is extended unto them by the sum of the brands that they carry.

I would imagine that in the stock photography industry it must be more about the "currency" * of the images that an agency carries, since few photographers are known to the masses in the same way that music artists are. Then again, for photos, the concept may not be that different. In the same way that one thinks of the "Currency" of music - i.e. what's hot right now, top 40 and such - stock photography agencies must also deal with the currency of the visual language - i.e. what best represents where we are at now.

e.

* this refers to that which is current.

Yeah, I was getting a little sick of toting around 1000 bucks worth of songs on my IPod; was getting to the point where I was going to have to take out an insurance policy on the d#$n thing (kidding).
Actually have never owned any kind of solid-state music playback device.

Use satellite radio for my car and listen to it online, too. My gripe is that Satellite Radio providers seem to have adopted Apple Computer's strategy: XM and Sirius are both dealing in "hardware" (satellite and related equipment management) and "software" (music programming), so to speak.

However, neither are facing an IBM/Microsoft competitor, so maybe its no big deal. But, it seems that both XM and Sirius would be in much better financial straights if they just handled the technical matters and then partnered with an established and well-capitalized media outfit to fill in the content blanks. Even better, XM and Sirius should consider leasing half, if not all of their bandwidth to the highest bidder...tah dah, instant profitability.