5 ms·

I can actually see their point, curation is very valuable in world with this much accessible content. But I'm getting tired of "old school" media companies tr

by gizzlon 13y ago

I can actually see their point, curation is very valuable in world with this much accessible content. But I'm getting tired of "old school" media companies trying to solve all their business problems by suing those who actually innovate the slightest. Why not, for a change, try to embrace technology and see new opportunities? The music industry have been collaborating on their own grave since napster, and very much deserve to fall in it.

gizzlon 13y ago
Here's an idea: Mix the tracks together, re-release it to spotify and pay the artists x% of what you earn on the stream. Good for me as a user since I can get curated & mixed content from a "trusted" source. Good for MoS since they get something for their effort. Good for the artist that can get exposure they otherwise would not get. (that might not be perfect, but it took me 1 minute.. Old media, are you listening? You should hire me as a consultant since you obviously can't do this on your own ;)
- justincormack 13y ago
  Its funny that the Ministry of Sound is old media already...
  - cyphax 13y ago
    If I'd start a business like theirs and behaved the same way, it'd probably be considered old media as well. What bothers me about their attitude is that this is not something Spotify wants, it obviously is something the _listeners_ want, and it seems like they don't give a damn about that. If they fail as a business, they well deserve it for refusing to adapt to their listeners' wishes. Instead, they want to force their listeners to adapt to _them_.
ollysb 13y ago
A big part of the problem seems to be that these organisations are filled with employees that, while probably very good at what they do, don't have the skills to find a product that will fit the current market.
rayiner 13y ago
I think this suit is a bit silly (since the suit is about users replicating the playlists, not Spotify), but I feel the need to harp on your comment about "innovation" a bit. At the end of the day, whatever "innovation" happens with companies like Youtube or Spotify, they make their money selling someone else's creative works. Spotify could have the most innovative, awesome platform ever, and nobody would use it without the library of content provided by the "old school media companies." Indeed, in a way the Viacom lawsuit was a great thing for Youtube, because it helped pave the way for companies using it as a platform to deliver quality content instead of just being a host for cat videos. So while I think it's true that the old school media companies need to embrace new technology, at the same time I think new school media technology companies need to accept that their sole revenue source is derived not from their "innovation" but other peoples' hard work. Those people that are creating the actual product will be justifiably protective of how media technology companies use their work.
- gizzlon 13y ago
  "At the end of the day, whatever "innovation" happens with companies like Youtube or Spotify, they make their money selling someone else's creative works" Not that I necessarily disagree, but the exact same thing could be said about the media companies. "I think new school media technology companies need to accept that their sole revenue source is derived not from their "innovation" but other peoples' hard work" Again, it's the same with all media companies. Also, even if Spotify would be value-less without music it does not mean that they don't add any value.
  - rayiner 13y ago
    Sure, but the media companies don't wax philosophical about how actors and directors are holding back innovation when they insist on getting paid lots of money for their hard work. It's not the basic transaction that's the problem. Aggregating and distributing other peoples' products is a valuable function. But Amazon doesn't go around complaining that its vendors don't give it all their products for free (so they can turn around and make piles of money reselling them).
warfangle 13y ago
If this goes through, watch Pitchfork start suing top 40 stations for stealing their curation.
dreamfactory 13y ago
I'm surprised this is going as far as court since music compilations have long been protected as IP in law (whether or not you agree with the principle). It's covered in the music business bible (http://www.amazon.com/This-Business-Music-10th-Edition/dp/0823077233 http://www.amazon.com/This-Business-Music-10th-Edition/dp/08...).

by gizzlon 13y ago

gizzlon 13y ago

Here's an idea: Mix the tracks together, re-release it to spotify and pay the artists x% of what you earn on the stream. Good for me as a user since I can get curated & mixed content from a "trusted" source. Good for MoS since they get something for their effort. Good for the artist that can get exposure they otherwise would not get. (that might not be perfect, but it took me 1 minute.. Old media, are you listening? You should hire me as a consultant since you obviously can't do this on your own ;)

justincormack 13y ago
Its funny that the Ministry of Sound is old media already...
- cyphax 13y ago
  If I'd start a business like theirs and behaved the same way, it'd probably be considered old media as well. What bothers me about their attitude is that this is not something Spotify wants, it obviously is something the _listeners_ want, and it seems like they don't give a damn about that. If they fail as a business, they well deserve it for refusing to adapt to their listeners' wishes. Instead, they want to force their listeners to adapt to _them_.

ollysb 13y ago

A big part of the problem seems to be that these organisations are filled with employees that, while probably very good at what they do, don't have the skills to find a product that will fit the current market.

rayiner 13y ago

I think this suit is a bit silly (since the suit is about users replicating the playlists, not Spotify), but I feel the need to harp on your comment about "innovation" a bit. At the end of the day, whatever "innovation" happens with companies like Youtube or Spotify, they make their money selling someone else's creative works. Spotify could have the most innovative, awesome platform ever, and nobody would use it without the library of content provided by the "old school media companies." Indeed, in a way the Viacom lawsuit was a great thing for Youtube, because it helped pave the way for companies using it as a platform to deliver quality content instead of just being a host for cat videos. So while I think it's true that the old school media companies need to embrace new technology, at the same time I think new school media technology companies need to accept that their sole revenue source is derived not from their "innovation" but other peoples' hard work. Those people that are creating the actual product will be justifiably protective of how media technology companies use their work.

gizzlon 13y ago
"At the end of the day, whatever "innovation" happens with companies like Youtube or Spotify, they make their money selling someone else's creative works" Not that I necessarily disagree, but the exact same thing could be said about the media companies. "I think new school media technology companies need to accept that their sole revenue source is derived not from their "innovation" but other peoples' hard work" Again, it's the same with all media companies. Also, even if Spotify would be value-less without music it does not mean that they don't add any value.
- rayiner 13y ago
  Sure, but the media companies don't wax philosophical about how actors and directors are holding back innovation when they insist on getting paid lots of money for their hard work. It's not the basic transaction that's the problem. Aggregating and distributing other peoples' products is a valuable function. But Amazon doesn't go around complaining that its vendors don't give it all their products for free (so they can turn around and make piles of money reselling them).

warfangle 13y ago

If this goes through, watch Pitchfork start suing top 40 stations for stealing their curation.

dreamfactory 13y ago

I'm surprised this is going as far as court since music compilations have long been protected as IP in law (whether or not you agree with the principle). It's covered in the music business bible (http://www.amazon.com/This-Business-Music-10th-Edition/dp/0823077233 http://www.amazon.com/This-Business-Music-10th-Edition/dp/08...).