This week Comcast released the final figures for how many people chose to pay (38%), or not(62%), for Radioheads ground-breaking (OK, not really, but significant for such a large act) release of their new album, In Rainbows, which was released on the internet under a ‘pay what you want’ model.
The internet, and especially the blogosphere, has reported the final paying figure of 38% as being very low; I’m inclined to disagree (as are Radiohead, who claim that ComCasts figures are entirely inaccurate). Given that the release was almost certainly available over P2P networks almost instantly, and that there were no advantages for paying for the record*, the game theorist in me is rather surprised that such a high proportion did decide to pay. If we are to believe the RIAA and BPI, then as we drop the barriers to entry of copying music (and releasing an album as DRM free MP3’s means there are no barriers), then the customers (or, as one entertaining commenter over at El Reg, coined it, the customer-criminals, or custimals) almost feel compelled to start copying that music, spreading it on P2P networks and generally revelling in piracy.
Which is clearly nonsense; in the case of Radiohead we have seem a remarkable proportion of the users actually choosing to pay where they don’t have too; a clear message that customers will pay for access to high quality DRM free music; especially if they can be sure the cash is going to the artist, not through countless bureaucratic layers for a tiny percentage to reach the artist.
Certainly we are being made aware of the ‘real’ market value of this music, and are tired of the day when record companies surfed on the ‘development costs’ of the CD for far longer than was necessary. At £10, let alone £15, a CD starts to look like a poor value choice compared to the high quality, free, recordings available on, say, Oink (the music bittorrent tracker recently shut down), but listeners still want to support their favourite artists (I have gone far out of my way to find and buy obscure music that I already had on MP3, simply to ensure the artist would continue to produce).
When iTunes first launched, Steve Jobs made the point that sometimes P2P users were effectively working for less than minimum wage; taking time to find and download music that was available for a paltry $0.99 on iTunes. Now iTunes is getting cheaper and less restrictive and DRM-free, high quality music is finally becoming available. The associated intangibles of downloading music from P2P; quality, copyability and format choice are being overwhelmed by digital music providers that offer convenience, don’t try to violate their customers rights and expectations and allow us to pay for music and be sure we are supporting the artist.
It should hardly be surprising that it is the concert promoters that artists are now striking deals with. These are people who understand that the music connection is about forging a genuine connection between fans and artists, not obfuscating and elevating the musicians until the listeners stop caring and download their tracks from P2P.
* There was a minumum fee of £0.45 for the credit card processing. Other artists have released albums where a lower quality release is free, and lossless and high quality versions cost. Saul Williams, for example, just released an album under this model.