- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
How the "value" of media is determined is so loopey that I just can't trust them to give me a fair price on their own -- so outside entity (in this case Apple) needs to be there to force them to be fair to consumers.
In theory, with efficient markets and informed rational consumers, it is the consumers (wielding the proverbial invisible hand) who determine the "fair value" of media. However, just as you don't trust the record companies to be fair to the consumer, I don't think you should trust Apple either.
For what it's worth, at least until this past Supreme Court session there was a blanket prohibition on companies requiring retail price floors for their product meaning it would be brazenly illegal for a record company to dictate retail prices to Apple or Amazon (or Rhapsody which has the same DRM-free mp3 options as Amazon). Apple has no such restrictrions on retail pricing unless they are determined to hold a monopoly.
As far as subscription services go, I think they are fantastic and way better than iTunes! You're not paying $X/month to rent a Fergie song. You're paying $X/month for access to their ENTIRE catalog. There are songs I've downloaded and put on my phone that I would never in a million years pay $0.99 to purchase. If I get tired of a song - I just start playing a different one without having to pay anything extra.
With Rhapsody I also have the option of purchasing the song ($0.89 ea.), some with WMDRM similar to FairPlay (3 computers instead of 5 - but can burn to a CD), some DRM free (as part of the deal that Amazon got in on). I've got 2GB of music on my phone and half of it is in the form of subscription tracks from Rhapsody. Their software is pretty buggy, though.
