Look at filters this way, from an economics point of view (and the filter system already exists, it's called radio and MTV). What exists right now in music is monopoly (oligopoly actually) on the consumer market and a monopsoney (sp?) on the labor market. What this usually means is that prices are artifically higher, more than normal profits are made, supply is limited, and wages for labor in the TOTAL MARKET are artifically low (high performance fees that acts like the Rolling Stones, etc. get are because they are independently a monopoly in performance, they don't "work" for the record company in that regard). But, the one thing is, control of the filters (radio, MTV, distribution) is what maintains the monopoly. In fact, as I will prove in a moment, the filters ARE what gives music it's economic value.

Now, with the internet, satellite radio, etc. etc., competition is being introduced upon the monopoly. And Mike said this, what's happening in music it reminds him of when cable channels were introduced upon the major TV networks. Except, in the case of music, since technology has also reduced the barriers to good recorded music, there are potentially MILLIONS of competitors entering the market. Everyone can have their own web site. Anyone can get on an MP3.COM type web site. There are just exponetially more and more possible choices.

The effect of several thousands or millions of competitors in the marketplace, with low barriers to entry, according to economic theory, means that music will become a commodity, or even worse, almost worthless in economic terms. And as far as labor, the effect would be to even out wages. The high paid acts would be knocked down closer to the level of the guy on the street. The guy on the street might earn more money. But, there is the very real possiblity that with so much competition, nobody, from Bruce Springsten and David Geffin on down, will be able to make a decent living with music. Profits and wages will normalize to a point that a full time living is not sustainable - FOR ANYBODY. That is a VERY real scenero.

The only thing that saves us from that scenero, the only thing that truly gives economic value to music, is the same thing that keeps the monopoly in place. Filters. Filters are what gives money value to the music, not the music itself. If we throw everything out there that possibly could be created, unorganized, then people would have to spend hours upon hours sifting though it to find anything good. The filters save people time, and time is money, therefore again, the filter is what gives monetary value to music, nothing else. And because the filter does create value, the successful filter builder does deserve a piece of the action.

This whole filter idea (and the TAXI head alluded to this) is nothing more than what you saw on MP3.com. MP3.com had everything imaginable anyone could create musically on it. Yet very few people made any money on it. The ones who did are the ones who made it on the popular filters, either lists created by mp3.com staff reviews, or lists (charts, etc.) that made up the popular "radio" stations. Some of the lists ("radio" stations) that people made it on that made money were just lists that got passed around by word of mouth. So, in the new world of music, I do believe that Bob Young (or Joe Blow for that matter) could create a cool filter, and pass it around and it get to be big. Kinda like the Drudge Report and the internet.

And, nobody is going to be forced into this system. Any digital system except for non-interactive webcasting and a few others that involve statutory licensing is going to require the permission of the SR holder before it can be used. As far as PA rights, for now, those have to be given voluntarily also. If the Copyright Office or Congress decides that PA mech rights fall under compulsay licensing for On Demand Streaming, I'm sure they will set a rate that is just as fair in relation to streaming as 8.5 cents is to a permanant SR copy (after thinking it through, I do believe the Copyright Office has the right to set all these rates in different catagories, even possibly through arbitration, so the mech fee for a compulsary on-demand streaming copy is not gonna be 8.5 cents).

Also, on-demand streaming does not necessarily mean there is no copy resident on the receiving system. There is no permanent copy retained, but there are ephemerial copies to consider, such as buffer copies, etc. The RIAA and HFA have an agreement regarding the mech rights on all these types of copies. They, in concert with the Copyright Office, are supposed to agree to permanent rates, but I can't find that they have done so yet, so there is some type of temporary payment scheme in place. It's a voluntary agreement, meaning individual members (at least as far as HFA/NMPA) don't have to abide by it...

Anyway, enough from me for today...

Later.



[This message has been edited by Liszt Laughing (edited 03-16-2004).]

Boo...my name is Doug