From Chad Mossholder Sent Thu, Jul 15th 1999, 19:26
From Chad Mossholder Sent Thu, Jul 15th 1999, 19:26
Over the next two weeks, the music industry establishment will be announcing its first steps towards an SDMI format. They are loading their hooks with "anti-piracy" bait, which many in the mainstream press will swallow enthusiastically. Rather than identifying this as the last-ditch effort of an industry grasping to retain distribution control and halt the inevitable march of technology and competition, these media outlets are likely to focus on illegal copying of music. This is not a SDMI Vs. MP3 war. Rather, it's a struggle of artists and consumer rights vs. record labels. Until recently, artists were universally treated shabbily by a system with no alternatives, while consumers were faced with a music scene void of innovation and artificial price supports propped up by the "minimum advertised price" (MAP) policy retailers are required to adhere to even today. It took an open standard (MP3) and the Internet to ignite the competitive landscape. Using MP3.com, artists now have a new channel into the music marketplace that doesn't require them to sign away their rights or lock themselves into lengthy contracts. Music fans are enjoying benefits as well. CDs on MP3.com are about 1/2 the price of traditional retail products, innovative new music playback devices are being announced regularly, and music lovers have unprecedented access to nearly 100,000 songs from tens of thousands of worldwide artists on MP3.com. The advent of the MP3 revolution is a beneficial development for artists and consumers, but not for those riding the status quo. SDMI is the industry's effort to halt these developments and keep control of distribution. One need look no further than the make-up of the SDMI panel to uncover its true motivations. Or try accessing a list of SDMI members from their site <http://www.sdmi.org/>. Artist representation amounts to an appointed board of advisors that, similar to the British Royal Family, has a title, but no authority. Similarly, consumers are left out of the decision-making process. The fact is that the record labels have full veto power over all issues arising out of SDMI. With no input from other interested parties, the eventual outcome will surely favor those currently in power. While the RIAA touts the "openness" of the process, it is anything but open to the public. MP3.com has been forced to post leaks from SDMI meetings as an attempt to keep the music community informed about issues such as the "millenium trigger <http://www.mp3.com/news/249.html>" and "revocation <http://www.mp3.com/news/279.html>." It's for good reason that outsiders--that large group of us that stands to be significantly impacted by SDMI decisions--are alarmed by SDMI's secretive meetings. Music consumers and artists should be especially wary of SDMI developments. Besides being saddled with a complicated proprietary architecture complete with nonsensical "PC-Like" periodic driver updates to insure compatibility, they stand to lose something much more significant than a say in how software and hardware devices function. At risk is the degree to which artists and music fans will shape the future of music and, ultimately, share in the benefits of the MP3 revolution. [This message has been edited by michael (edited 07-08-99).]