As a Tufts graduate and someone who earns a living in the music business, I find myself asking this question during every conversation I have regarding the widespread use of peer-to-peer (P2P) services and the illegal downloading of music. While many of the technologies used to download music did not exist when I was a Tufts student, I think it is great that Tufts is offering CDigix as a legitimate option because I see what is happening to aspiring artists and others as a direct result of the hit that the music industry has been taking in recent years.
Any student (at Tufts or on any other college campus) will tell you that CDs and digital downloads "just cost too much." You might hear them ask, "Why should I pay for music when it is so easy to download it for free?" or "Why should I buy the entire album when there are only one or two good songs?" or "Why should I care? [insert platinum selling artist] is already too rich."
The sentiment is understandable; indeed, artists such as Eminem are certainly not starving for cash these days, and despite relatively recent CD pricing overhauls in the record industry (yes, the cost of music is now, in fact, less than it was) music is undoubtedly still too pricey in the minds of many fans.
Admittedly, most younger music fans these days are not particularly interested in album artwork or extensive liner notes. To them, such amenities are things of the past. Now that we have all seen glimpses of some of the technologies to come, these tech-savvy fans are looking for music on-demand; whatever they want, when they want it, how they want it, at the right price. Unfortunately, the only model that had previously brought most of these aspects to the table had been the illegitimate/illegal one.
While educational outreach regarding the dangers of piracy and unauthorized downloading of music on P2P networks and the like must (and will) continue, it is simply asking too much to expect students and young people in general to refrain from this type of activity based on some sort of moral consciousness or ethical obligation. Yes, downloading of music without paying for it is illegal, and it is wrong. But if our industry truly hopes to turn people away from illegal downloading while simultaneously expanding the legitimate digital music market, there simply must be better incentives for fans to obtain music legally as long as the illegitimate alternatives continue to thrive.
Fortunately, reasonable alternatives to illegal downloading are beginning to emerge. These alternatives are arriving in the form of "all-you-can-eat" subscription based music services - many of which are now being offered on university campuses for rather minimal monthly fees. Oftentimes, access to the services are bundled with annual student activity fees or, in some cases, provided to students entirely free of charge.
The fundamental difference between these subscription services and the "a-la-carte" pay-per-download model is that subscription services are all about access - they allow users to literally browse and listen to enormous music libraries that contain hundreds of
thousands of songs, with no maximum limits, whenever, for relatively minimal cost. They allow for users to build playlists that they can share with their friends in the same way that fans give each other mixes to listen to. The license to play back the subscription content is, of course, good as long as the user pays the monthly subscription fee.
This subscription model will be the future of digital music consumption, in one form or another, at least for the casual music fan. While a-la-carte offerings such as Apple's iTunes have jumpstarted and taken the early lead in the legitimate digital music space thus far, the $0.99 per track business model does not differ so much from the $12-$18 per album model that the consumer has rejected in recent years.
On the other hand, the subscription services are
currently being offered to consumers for as little as $8 per month, and are costing students on many college campuses even less.
The most important development in digital music this past year was the unveiling of Microsoft's Janus software, which has now given online music services the opportunity to add portability (the ability to transfer tracks to portable, "iPod-like" devices) to digital music subscriptions. A host of music subscription services and hardware makers, including Real's market-leading Rhapsody service, are expected to become Janus compliant sometime in 2005.
Napster, for example, while technically a hybrid subscription and a-la-carte service, was the first to preview the new portability feature in fall of 2004 through their "Napster To Go" service. Now fully implemented, the service costs just $14.95 per month (about the price of one CD in a typical record store). Not a bad deal for unlimited access to about as much music as you could ever listen to.
In time, the public will realize the various advantages to subscription services, particularly as portability becomes the norm. I, for one, am proud to see that Tufts has taken the appropriate steps to make legitimate music services accessible and toward ensuring that Tufts students can enjoy music responsibly and legally.
Ethan Karp (E '99) is coordinator for the Content Protection and Anti-Piracy division of Universal Music Group.
