By Sarah Rotman
MusicNet.com is the record industry's answer to Napster, and if one
wanted to answer back, an appropriate response would be, "Too
little too late." The platform is not available to download yet
(coming Summer 2001), but the site paints a clear picture of what
consumers can expect from MusicNet. Songs by artists signed to three
of the five major record labels (AOL/Time Warner, BMG, and EMI) will
be available to download through the MusicNet platform on a subscription
basis. (The platform will be licensed to sites like AOL that will
set the subscription price.) The advantage of this system is that
they can provide consumers with high-quality music (which is a major
advantage, since there is no quality control for files shared on Napster).
It is also legal. The major disadvantage is that this system does
not allow for alternatives. In the FAQ, the response to "Is there
room for Napster in this new model?" was yes, if Napster licenses
our platform-the subtext being that otherwise we'll sue until it disappears.
Luckily for consumers and artists who are not signed to major labels,
there will always be new and improved unregulated file-sharing networks
when Napster is put to sleep. Which brings up another disadvantage
of the MusicNet system: there is no room for the "folk,"
independent artists who share their MP3s on Napster without the production
and distribution of a major label.
Time will tell if MusicNet's subscription model works. In an ideal
world, MusicNet could exist alongside alternative systems, and it
could serve the audience willing to pay for high-quality recordings
of mainstream music while Napster and Gnutella service the rest of
us for free. Legal and ethical issues aside, a MusicNet monopoly in
the virtual world would be even more upsetting than the Big 6 monopoly
in the rest of the mediated world, because it would mean that the
grassroots potential of the internet had been squashed in favor of
the rich getting richer.