Let's accept the assumption that iTunes pricing doesn't obey the rule of lower price implying greater volume. For the theory to hold up, iTunes would have to re

Let's accept the assumption that iTunes pricing doesn't obey the rule of lower price implying greater volume. For the theory to hold up, iTunes would have to represent a significant share of an artist's total revenues. Otherwise the artist wouldn't be bothered by a decrease in iTunes sales volumes. But! As the importance of iTunes sales grows, an artist's incentive to keep a record label as distributor diminishes. Any artist can list themselves on iTunes - why would they share revenue with an evil record company if they don't need help with distribution and marketing?