Proposel for the MP3 Industry
Proposel for the MP3 IndustryAs our technological generation advances into the new millennium, we are using our personal computers to expand our daily lives. One method of expansion recently developed on our World Wide Web is the abundant MP3 sites and programs. These sites gained instant popularity with our pop culture obsessed society. These sites and programs allow anyone to download music from almost any artist, any song at any time of leisure. Making a trip to the CD store is quickly becoming something of the past. Controversy arose however when the music industry realized the potential of these MP3’s. If these songs are accessible for practically no price at all, then conversely the demand for purchasing CD’s will considerably drop. This drop in sales creates lost revenue for these artists and in order to survives in our capitalistic society, money talks. Now more than ever both the computer and music industry are realizing that the MP3 sites and programs are an untapped capitalist resource that needs to be focused on.
This focus has recently been brought to the forefront by certain artists such as rap star Dr. Dre and the heavy metal band Metallica. Media has allowed these artists to vocalize their concern with the loss of credibility and copywriting of their creativity. They argue that MP3’s it is too accessible to download and own their music without ever financially supporting their efforts. Inversely the public has already tasted possibilities and the ease that MP3’s allows them. This taste will urge them to continue the use of these sites and programs and only adds to Napster, Scour Exchange, and MP3.com’s popularity. What needs to happen is something of a convergence on both parties. While lawsuits over copywriting are being battled in a courtroom behind a desk, the younger generation is maneuvering around their blocks and downloading more than ever. If there could be some convergence of these industries they would tap into a gold mine larger than any CD or record store could ever produce. Imagine being able to have unlimited downloading, better quality, less traffic, and a larger selection of MP3’s. This could be achieved through the implementation of service charges for these sites.
Taking into consideration the millions of people that download everyday simply require a flat service charge for utilizing the sites. Even if fifty to seventy-five percent of the current number of users signed on to this service the revenue gained would be staggering. With this method all parties involved would be accommodated. The consumer would be charged for a service that they currently use for free, in the long run they would save money. Economically a flat monthly fee would be hundreds of dollars cheaper than having to purchase every CD they want to download. In conjunction with that, CD prices will be so inflated because of their supply and demand consumers would be overcharged for each purchase. The consumer would also be benefiting from the perks received through joining the service. Perks such as unlimited downloading, less traffic, speedier downloading, keeping MP3 quality, and accessing a larger selection of music. The web sites would financially profit due to these charges and create a partnership with artists instead of enemies. The constant and frequent usage of these sites would also benefit this industry for marketing’s sake.
Other possible solutions would simply correct or treat the symptom, but not fully heal the problem. One possibility would be to charge a small fee per download to the consumer. However with this it would be possible for more frequent users to be charged considerably more than less frequent users. This imbalance between the customer would cause possible favoritism or special treatment for those who do pay more. It could also potentially be an outrageous fee for the customer for a simple service. Another possibility is to charge the user based on an artist’s popularity. For example, downloading Christina Aquillera would cost more than downloading Britney Spears. This sort of competition would be unfavorable for both the music industry and the consumer. There should not be a financial penalty for wanting to download a more popular artist over a less popular one. The popularity should not be decided on either the frequency of downloading or how many times they can show their faces on MTV. The web sites would also be putting themselves in a position to try and judge financially how much one artist is worth compared to the next. Is Christina worth an extra two dollars over Britney or fifty cents? This is not something the consumer or the computer industry would want to take on.
Therefore the only solution that could bridge the gap between all three parties would be the monthly service charge. With this there is equality on all levels. No one artist is more expensive than the other is. No one customer is charged a higher fee, and no web site has to financially unscramble an artist’s popularity.
It is illogical and naïve to think that the music industry can do battle much longer with the surge of technology. Everyday more people become accustomed to their Internet and MP3 collection. There must be a partnership made in order for both industries to profit as well as the consumer. Making these fees a necessity may seem to hurt the user at first. However when the bigger picture comes into focus it is obvious that this would only benefit them from all sides: economically, better accessibility, and better quality. With this solution implemented the controversy that is boiling right now would eventually simmer and then cool off completely.