Your average American would not think of Nashville as a hotspot for the digital lifestyle, but that may be changing.  In May, the city is hosting a BloggerCon-style BlogNashville and yesterday, the first DigitalSummit music conference was held at Belmont's Curb Center, courtesy LeadershipMusic.  Everything from ringtones to mesh networks was discussed. Highlights from the day:

MTV's Jason Hirschorn announced the group is still working on a digital music service (he even made a joke about the seemingly endless project), as well as a wide-scale plan for very community-focused site, including user-generated content (meaning audio/video and blogs) alongside the usual crop of MTV shows and major music videos.

MSN Music threw out the large, confirming hint that MSN will be launching music features through the MSN messenger (following on a quiet beta application that existed about a year, or two, ago).  This was described as a streaming expedition, across the collections of buddies.

AOL Music confirming that AOL IM will add some type of music sharing feature.  Along with a large-scale marketing launch of the AOL online properties sometime in June.

There were grumbled discussions about somehow unifying the licensing of music around the business model (use, purchase, time out), not the technical process (download, stream, or both).  Universal Music dicussed the label's formation of a group created to market the entire creative brand of an artist, as well as a "digital only" label, looking to build bands initially online.  The general opinion at the event was that subscription services are the big, big thing.  I will try to post transcripts from the event if any of you are interested.

A company called Information Appliance Associates, through their PocketMac.net website, has made availabel an application that enables Mac users to sync iTunes, iPhoto and contact information between OSX and the PSP.  The size of your memory stick RAM will obviously impact the potential here, and we have not been able to confirm whether the group has been able to find a way to play Fairplay encrypted files on a PSP (the encryption used on tracks purchased through iTunes).  They apparently have found a way to bring contacts managment to a piece of hardware lacking such functionality, but as far as music goes, you will probably need to stick with formats the P2P can handle (like MP3).  Via Cnet.

Scott Matthews, developer of the Andromeda digital music service and jukebox, has posted a proposal designed to manage some of the mayhem in the P2P world.  The idea, dubbed DRUMS, suggests:

Essentially, the idea is to create a central database, along with an authority (or a handful of authorities) that can add/update it. The root DRUMS database would likely include data such as author names, work titles, publication dates, types of work, file checksums, flags indicating which rights remain reserved and which rights have been granted, and so on. It would not contain the actual works themselves.

Something to think about.  A means for ascertaining the owners of creative works, knowing what rights the authors would like to pass along and so forth.  (Note: I am one of the people posted on the sidebar of the site supporting the proposal).

If you remember, last year, in response to legal motions by the RIAA, iMesh cut a deal and began work upon a "legal' p2p system.  Supposedly making use of AudibleMagic's audiofingerprinting tech for a filter, iMesh is rumored to be working on a system that filters out those files not approved for sharing.  The remaining files will probably be tracks for sale, or promotional tracks carrying some type of DRM.  The firm has been allowed to continue the functioning of its classic p2p application, with the RIAA's approval, while working on the new version.

At the same time, Mashboxx, in partnership with Snocap and Peppercoin, is working on their pay through P2P platform.  Release dates uncertain.

I wonder how popular these filtered p2p applications will really be.  What will make them diffrerent from downloadable music stores, other than the odd chance you might find a file that has made it through the filter.  Also… the RIAA probably wants this thing to launch prior to the Supreme Court case, as proof of concept on the filtering front.  We shall see.

Funny how those lawsuit announcements are so often timed with positive news from the party being sued.  Napster announced an increase in subscribers by 90,000 in the 4th quarter, raising their total to approximately 270,000 subscribers.  The company claims about 44,000 of these subscribers are the low (or no) margin college folk.  This number is still dwarfed by the sales figures from iTunes, but then again, what online storefront is not dwarfed by iTunes at this point in time.  No comment as to how many of the 270,000 subscribe to the napster-to-go service.

Notice how we made that post without making a comment about the over-priced service that provides the necessary portabilty to actually provide some way of luring non-paying customers from the peer to peer networks were it actually priced like something designed to entice people away from peer networks.  Ooops.

The question of whether p2p allications violate copyright laws will be dealt with by the US Supreme Court.  The side of the issue, as quoted by News.com, say it all:

"There are seminal issues before the court—the future of the creative industries and legitimate Internet commerce," Mitch Bainwol, chief executive officer of the Recording Industry Association of America, said in a statement. "These are questions not about a particular technology, but the abuse of that technology by practitioners of a parasitical business model."

"There's a lot more at stake here for the technology industry than for the copyright industry," said Fred von Lohmann, an Electronic Frontier Foundation attorney who has represented StreamCast Networks on the issue. "This case will not be determinant of the future of peer to peer around the world, but it will be determinant of the future of a whole host of future digital products."

Where do the rest of ye stand on this issue?  via Pho.

I am old enough to remember the first BandAid album.  All the big UK 80's stars, with all thei their hair and stretched t-shirts singing "Do they know it's Christmas time at all", with a video of the song to boot that got played what seemed like every hour on MTV.  Well, UK popsters still release a BandAid album every year and the effort raises piles of cash for needy folks each year.  There's just one little thing- they want to sell the singles for more than 79pence through online, digital music stores.  The desired price is about 1.49 pounds, and Apple UK won't budge their standard pricing to release the single.  So no BandAid for iTunes in the UK, while every other download store carries the track.  Guess someone at Apple decided that 79pence was te future price for music, even if that music is raising money for charity.

Museekster.com has interviewed one of the people behind MP3Search.ru, a controversial website selling music for $0.10a track, without DRM.  The company is based in Russia, and this article spells out their opinion of Russian law as it applies to online music stores and services.  There is mention of the Russian collective agencies RAO and ROMS, who apparently can collect fees without obtaining such rights from the copyright holders.  So how does the cost of doing business stack up, according to Sergei Arsentiev, director of MP3Search.ru:

We pay 10 % of our full income (not of the net income only). ROMS's tariffs will increase beginning from the 1st of January 2005. We do not know yet how far they will increase.

Many Russian and foreign copyright holders were displeased with such low prices ($0.03 - $0.05 USD) per song, and the price of $0.10 USD satisfies them. Also this change is to make calculations with our clients much more clear and transparent. In fact, bitrate and size of a file are unimportant both to our clients and copyright holders. That is why it is not reasonable to take money for megabytes. Besides that, there are a lot of beginners in the Internet, and they do not understand units of quantity of the information at all.

Crazy stuff.

In response to a complaint file by a group of french retailers, the legal corner of the french government in charge of anti-competitive issues has decided that Fairplay - the DRM used by Apple, but not license to any third parties- is not anti-competitive behavior.

The retailers complaint was ruled to be short on convincing evidence, the watchdog ruled. In any case, it said, Apple's refusal to license FairPlay was on no way hampering the expansion of the digital music download market - growth indicated by the huge number of rivals popping up to compete with the iTunes Music Store.

The committee did content that consumers might be put at a disadvantage by this implementation, but consumer issues were beyond the terms of the court.  So seems like the Fairplay issue will only truly hit hi velocity when consumers begin collectively voice some frustration, rather than buying up iPods in hi volume.

We ran into this little ditty in a story about a new service offering sharable ring tones from mobile phone to mobile phone:

When it became possible five years ago to freely swap copyrighted material over the internet, the entertainment industry began a battle that still rages today. But, as file-sharing now finds its way from PCs to cell phones, there is very little resistance; in fact, those same fierce opponents of file-swapping are among the technology's biggest cheerleaders.

Ok.  Let's clarify something.  Perhaps this was a typo, or just a little slip by the writer.  But it seems like once a week there is an article claiming people share files "over websites" and such.  People were sharing files long before 1999 with Napster, Gnutella and the whole mess.  Basic FTP made it possible to share files.  IRC channels were and are flowing with files.  Hotline was letting the unsophisticated browse other computers (ok the article in the link is from 1999).  Some of us who are old, and were plugged in the 80's, remember swapping a few, albeit small, files over our little 14.4  modems.

P2P is how the internet works.  That's why the issue of file sharing is such a problem… cause the basic nature of the internet is a bunch of computers offering up sections of their hard drives for all to browse and enjoy.

Robert Fripp, member of the infamous band King Crimson, has posted to his weblog some "discussions" he had with the EMI group regarding the release of Crimson tracks as digital downloads.  Put it all in the category of Unauthorized file sharing of a corporate kind.

the reason for the foundering of our re-licensing negotiation with EMI, last year, was on the subject of accounting for digital downloads. we were told - face to face - that digital downloads "were not important" and therefore should not concern ourselves with a royalty of 6 cents when EMI received c. 69 cents per download (the artist royalty subject to packing deduction, of course). we proposed a third party licensing arrangement, to receive 75% of receipts. and if downloading was not important, then why not? the reply, to support the investment in downloading technology EMI need a high royalty, is spurious. the investment in that technology came from IT, not record companies. a small part of that investment (a mere $4 million) was the result of an initiative by david singleton here at DGM (BootlegTV in seattle).

As a result, Crimson tracks are slowly being removed from most download stores.  At the of this posting, none could be found wthin iTunes.

The RIAA and the MPAA, along with many of their member labels and studios, have requested the Supreme Court of the United States take on the issue of what is legal and what is not in the world of P2P software and networks.  Text of the petition can be found at the EFF website.  Should the court take the case, this would be the most prominent test of the 1984 Betamax ruling, whereby new technologies were excused of certain copyright complaints should the technology hold sufficient non-infringing uses.  In the words of Sanford - "this is the big one."  In the words of those invovled, thanks to News.com:

"These companies have expressly designed their businesses to avoid all legal liability, with the full knowledge that over 90 percent of the material traversing their applications belongs to someone else," MPAA Chief Executive Dan Glickman said in a statement. "Now is the time for the courts to review these businesses that depend upon violation of copyright."

"There is no reason the Supreme Court should review the (lower court's) decision," Gigi Sohn, president of Public Knowledge, said in a statement. "That case was based on the principles established in the 1984 Betamax case, which has led to the largest and most profitable period of technological innovation in this country's history. Consumers, industry and our country have all benefited as a result."

Everytime you fire up your iPod, or any other Mp3 player, do you think to yourself, "Thanks Karlheinz?"  Karlheinz Brandenburg is one of the developers of the all-to-popular MP3 format.  He now is the director of electronic media technologies at the Fraunhofer Institute in Ilemenau, Germany.  Recently, he spoke to Reuters about the format wars- the mish mash of audio formats now challenging the music industry- and the industry's choice to battle over formats rather than just accept what listeners had chosen.

Brandenburg said he twice warned manufacturers and music labels that they risk alienating fans and driving them to unsanctioned file-sharing networks, where the songs are free and encoded in the unprotected MP3 format.

"They didn't listen. Maybe they thought it made commercial sense not to have a standard. It's very strange," he said. "Blank MP3s is the only standard. It is supported by all," he said. "This has been good news for Fraunhofer. And, I consider myself a wealthy man as well."

For those of you who think MP3 is free.  Think again.  Karlheinz says thanks.

Following up on Brad's post earlier, the eBay download "store" appears to be live in the form of a PassAlong branded storefront.  The first promotion to have gone live is a 15-minute phone conversation with Avril Lavigne to the high bidder on the digital download of the album Under My Skin- Net proceeds of the auction will goto WarChild.org

You can find the store here http://stores.ebay.com/Pass-Along

Apparently a group of record executives are bonding to suggest MSFT include the means for the Longhorn operating system to respect certain restrictions upon copying that labels might place on CDs in the future.  Not an MS-only platform is in the request, apparently, but:

"We're asking Microsoft to put in a framework—not to say what the rules are," said EMI Music Chairman David Munns, who has helped coordinate discussions among the music labels. "This would solve consumer confusion and help make the whole thing a much more friendly and easier consumer experience."

Have to wonder whether a popup stating "you have reached your last copy attempt of this CD" would result in a friendlier, easier consumer experience.  I get in trouble for this, but what might happen if we let these rules go full force.  Would two markets for music evolve- one for artists on major corporations with copy-restrictions and rules and one for artists who release their work without restriction.  What might happen to competition in the music industry if the terms of the product were not only the music on shiny disc, but what you might do with this music?