Post #3447 by hanford_lemoore on Mon, Jul 8, 2002 2:53 PM

On 2002-07-08 08:58, Swanky wrote:
No one will pay to join to swap, because the point is to tap into a large base to find the stuff you want. But to have the base, you need to be free.

A similar argument goes for record companies selling their complete music archive online. Why should they sell MP3s online when the preferred, number one, cost-free and guilt-free method is by using a free file-swapping service? They’d no doubt be selling their music to a small percentage of people who would then turn around and file-share it, so the theory goes. For legit online sales of MP3s to go into full swing, file sharing needs to first be pushed to the fringe.

I have no doubt that eventually we’ll see record labels offering on-demand versions of every song/album in their archives available for sale through their website. Why? Because to a lesser degree they do that today. They release and re-release as much of their old catalog as is financially viable. But with online on-demand creation/delivery of the product, the financial risks of selling music goes waaaaaay down, because you’re not having to produce CDs, you’re not stocking warehouses, and you’re not trying to predict demand.

But, for that to happen, file-sharing, not just in practice, but in concept, has to become more taboo. If users don’t think there’s anything wrong with it (and seeing people protest Metallica when they sued Napster proves that there are plenty who feel that way).

(all in theory, anyway)

~Hanford