Aflevering van het Nederlands VPRO-programma “Goudzoekers” over de invloed van downloaden op de muziekindustrie:

(Probeer deze link als de player niet werkt)

Een paar interessante commentaren bij de verkoop van Pirate Bay deze week. The Guardian vindt alvast dat het altruïstisch imago van de initiatiefnemers compleet aan diggelen is geslaan:

Pirate Bay’s purchase by a Swedish gaming company proves giving away copyrighted material without compensation isn’t altruistic – it’s a business model  [...]

The Pirate Bay is not the first company (and, yes, whatever image they tried to portray, it was always a business) to have built their entire existence on making copyrighted material available for free, without asking, or compensating, the people who created the material. As far back as 2000, Napster was in the dock for copyright infringement; in 2008, the brand was bought by the American electronics retailer Best Buy for $121m (£74m). As I’ve previously reported, LastFM built their business on unlicensed music only to sell it to CBS for $280m (£171m). And let’s not forget Google’s purchase of YouTube for $1.65bn (£1bn). For supposedly “altruistic” ventures, these companies sure made a lot of money. Some would argue the artists whose music built these businesses should have received some of that money.

De krant stelt zich ook vragen hoe de site “legaal” kan functioneren:

But even if it looks as though GGF got a bargain, many in the music industry struggle to understand how the firm will be able to function – let alone make a profit – if it operates legally. The company says it intends for content providers and copyright owners to get paid for content downloaded via The Pirate Bay. Hans Pandeya, the chief executive, plans to charge ISPs and generate revenue from advertising. I find it hard to believe ISPs will pay, and the problem with ad funding is something to which Google can testify. Pandeya has admitted there are a lot of ifs. He also rather remarkably told the New York Times: “It is possible that they [record labels and other copyright owners] won’t want to get paid.” If Pandeya wants to get paid for the work he does, what makes him think musicians don’t?

The Register vat het cynisch samen:

The Pirate Bay has executed the Web 2.0 business plan to perfection: give someone else’s stuff away for free - then find a bigger idiot to buy the company.

Amanda Palmer, a solo artist and member of the Dresden Dolls with releases on Roadrunner Records, has achieved Internet notoriety for using Twitter to gross $19,000 in 19 hours over three separate events. The first was a T-shirt created during a Twitter conversation with fans and other followers. The second was a Twitter-driven webcast auction. The third was a donation-only gig in which fans got on the guest list via Twitter.

Lees de details op “Lessons learned from Twitter windfalls” (Billboard.Biz)

Interessant Nederlands debat naar aanleiding van het nieuwe boek van Joost Smiers en Marieke van Schijndel: Adieu auteursrecht, vaarwel culturele conglomeraten:

We waren bij Muziekcentrum al iets eerder op de hoogte van het bericht dat de internationale muziekbeurs Popkomm dit jaar is afgelast, blijkt nu dat er maar liefst de helft minder registraties waren dan vorig jaar:

Organizers of the Popkomm music fair and conference in Berlin have admitted that an anticipated 50 per cent fall in attendance meant the 2009 event, due to take place Sept. 16 to 18, was no longer viable this year.

Meer achtergrondinformatie bij Billboard over de toekomst van Popkomm.

Volg de studiedag op de voet op twitter.com/muziekdigitaal!

Je bent te vroeg! Deze website is nog niet helemaal klaar…