• Font Size:
  • Print

The big news here in the UK this morning (lead story in the FT and I just saw the minister of culture on the BBC) is the deal between the broadband ISPs in the UK and the music and film companies on downloading.

The ISPs have agreed to send warning letters to thousands of their customers who are the most active downloaders of music and films. The UK government will do their part by discussing legislating regulations on the ISPs if the warning letters don't work.

The most commonly discussed legislation would be a "download fee" applied to every ISP bill which would be paid to the music and film companies.

All of that is well and good, but I read nothing in the FT piece and heard nothing in the BBC interview about regulating the music and film industries to force them to make their content easily and readily available over the Internet.

Of course there are people who don't want to pay for their music and films, but I believe that vast majority of downloaders are people like me who would gladly pay if the content was available to purchase when I wanted it in the format I want it.

Let's take The Dark Night. Let's say that I'd really rather watch it at home on my big screen. I know I can get it on Bit Torrent, so I do that. If it was available to be purchased the same day it went live in the theaters, I'd be happy to pay $20 for the right to watch it at home. But the film companies want to maintain their release windows, so it's not available. So it's to Bit Torrent that I and thousands of others go.

Last month I wanted to purchase a new music album from a band I like. I went to eMusic and Amazon mp3. It wasn't available. It was available exclusively on iTunes in DRM format. Screw that. I can't play DRM'd music on my Sonos or Request systems. It's of little to no use to me in DRM format. So I bought the CD on Amazon but also downloaded it on Limewire so I could listen while I waited for the CD to show up.

The solution to the downloading problem is not simply to plug the hole at the ISP level. First, its not fair to impose a fee on every ISP customer when not everyone downloads. It would be fair to impose a downloading fee for those who want to download, and maybe it will come to that. But we all know that it will be very easy to hack around that technology.

The real solution is to give the customers what they want - which is simple, easy, affordable, instant access to the content they want at a reasonable price. When and if the content owners do that, they will be on their way to solving the download problem. If they don't do it themselves, we should regulate them and force them to do it.

Fred Wilson

About this author: Author's VC firm:
Become a Contributor Submit an Article

This article has 6 comments:

  •  
    Jul 24 10:40 AM
    Quite right.

    This British Government goes off half-cocked at every opportunity. It's quite unbelievable.

    And if they do do this, what comes next, books, film and every other type of digital consumable?

    The mess we in, and it could be far worse without the efforts of Apple's iTunes (5 billion songs and counting) is entirely due to the backwardness and greed of the music labels. Having made the mess they want to resort to legislation, and what government is more willing to issue legislation on anything that moves than this one?
  •  
    Jul 24 12:09 PM
    Interesting that the author admits to behavior that, in some countries (e.g., the US), may be a crime punishable by fine and/or jail, not to mention a civil tort. (When you download via Bit Torrent, you may also be "publishing" copyright files because of the way Bit Torrent works.)

    As for playing iTunes Store music on devices other than iPods, Fred seems to be behind the times, ignorant or deceptive. One can LEGALLY burn CDs from a "playlist" on iTunes, including songs purchased through the iTunes Store, as has been the case since the iTunes Store was opened.
  •  
    Jul 25 04:52 AM
    I would like to pay the artist or his widow for great old hits I still have from Napster's heyday. How would you suggest we dis-intermediate the music industry?
  •  
    Jul 26 07:42 PM
    Don't let iTune's DRM stop you from doing the right thing. You can always burn your songs to CD and rip them back if you really need to.
  •  
    Jul 28 11:10 AM
    I'm with Fred here. Content providers can solve their problems by providing what their customers want, instead of forcing them to buy things they don't. (This applies to supplying singles vs. albums, and single episodes of TV shows vs. paying $50 or more to get a "season".)

    It's unfortunate that it's taking piracy to get media firms to see that truth. Most other industries figure that out on their own via competition (and let's face it, piracy is just a form of competition here.)

    As for the iTune burn/rip two-step, yes it can be done but it's a huge pain. Instead of a choice between restricted transfer and a major hassle, how about just selling the music without either?
  •  
    Jul 30 05:26 PM
    The many forms of this problem and the attempted solutions are, to me, wildly entertaining to watch as a student of business and marketing in mass media. The only certainty I can predict is that the consumer will ultimately win. The content controllers who survive and prosper will be the ones smart enough to pan for gold in the stream rather trying to build dams and levies to fight a losing battle against nature. As a songwriter, musician, and independent label owner, I'll be spreading the net far and wide to be sure my content is available whenever and where ever people look for it. Sometimes the folks looking won't want to pay and I'm sure they'll find a way to partake without doing so. That's part of doing business in a changing digital landscape if you ask me. It's only my problem if the seeker who's willing to pay can't find my work. For the folks intent on theft, I'll leave that up to karma.

ETFs In Focus

  • Long Ideas

  • Short Ideas

  • Cramer's Picks