On 3/10/06, Maluvia <terakuma@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hmmmm . . . . . . . . . . . .
>
> Lots of interesting ideas and an abundance of enthusiasm!
>
> Random First Thoughts:
>
> I've got to be honest - the 'Free Music' label makes me cringe.
> Two reasons - one personal, the other practical.
>
> Personal level:
> I *really, really* want my husband to be able to quit his stupid day-job
> flipping omelets and make music full, or nearly full-time.
> (If you're going to try to make a living at that, you've also got to spend
> a lot of time doing "self-sufficiency"-type things to provide for yourself
> what you can't afford to buy.)
> That 'Free Music' term just tells me we'll never be able to accomplish this
> - he can distribute an abundance of beautiful music to the world, freely -
> but forget ever getting anything back for it.
> That's just how it *feels* to me, and that is *really* depressing.
>
> Practical level:
> I have gotten from your posts Carlo, that you also want to encourage a
> culture of tipping/donation to go along with this movement.
> If you're going to address this from a psychological/subliminal/marketing
> standpoint - as you have been doing admirably - you must admit that using
> the term 'Free' so relentlessly in your marketing strategy psychologically
> works against the donation part of it.
> I mean, from the user's standpoint, it creates a cognitive dissonance of:
> "Well is it free or isn't it?"
> "They say it's so great and wonderful because it's free, but I'm morally
> obligated to pay for it too?"
> "Which is it?"
> Confusing your end-user/consumer is not good marketing strategy.
> I think most people will simply take you at your word that it is 'Free' and
> run with it - not feeling in the least obliged to donate - and possibly
> resent that whole aspect of it.
>
> (I know that to Stallman disciples the 'free' word is mandatory, but this
> is entertainment we're talking about here, and besides - as I keep saying,
> to make sense to me, the 'free' has to extend to *everything* or it just
> doesn't work.)
> I agree with Cesare that we could come up with a better term - I don't know
> - Open Music? Global Music? People's Music? Creative Commons Music? Direct
> Music?
>
> Shoot - I'm just not feeling very inspired today, but you know what I mean:
> a term that holds all the positive connotations of being freely accessible
> (at least to those with internet access), disconnected from the industry,
> made with wonderful open-source tools, freedom-of-*choice* about what they
> can listen to, the rich diversity and abundance of this global music, being
> part of a whole new global village where we support and empower one another
> outside the strictures of corporatocracy, etc.
>
> BTW, if we do come up with a good strategy to get people to donate/tip for
> the music, then we definitely need to share the wealth:
> All music made with open-source tools should have nice, big attractive
> sidebar buttons to take people to the project sites' donation page to
> encourage donations for the software tools that make this all possible.
>
> Or better still - how about taking a page from many commercial artists that
> say "10% of the proceeds go to benefit . . . . ('Save the whales', 'Save
> the rainforest', 'Campaign for Peace', 'Earthquake Relief' , etc.)
> We could say that "_% of the proceeds of all donations go to the OSS
> community" as support for the open-source tools that make this music
> possible.
> (I actually had the whacked-out idea at one point that we should pay Paul
> some kind of 'royalty' from our CD sales - but given the likely number of
> such sales, I quickly realized that would be an insult. :) )
>
> Also wanted to mention one other aspect to this that we are going to try:
> Don't limit it just to downloadable music - make the CD/DVD-Audio an option
> as well - perhaps link it to the donation feature such as:
> "You can download these tracks for free - play them on your
> computer/portable player, share them with others, but if you would like to
> listen to this music in the best resolution and have a permanent copy of it
> you can buy it on CD for _$"
> Or alternatively - "$15 donation gets you the full CD with lots of bonus
> features, $20 gets you a DVD-Audio or DVD-Video with performance videos,
> multi-channel, pics, interviews, etc."
> Or for those who don't want to mess with CD production, it could be some
> other 'value-added' content:
> posters, T-shirts, mugs, bumper-stickers, calendars - lots of
> possibilities.
> Just something to give an incentive to donate.
>
> Gotta go drink some tea and do some yoga to get my brain more in gear. ;)
>
> Later,
> Maluvia
A very good, if long ;), post.
If we did make a site like Digg, it should be as close to Digg as
possible, I think, so it's immediately familiar. Digg has a lot of
users, and there are a lot of new sites out there that I just can't be
bothered to figure out, as some of them can be very non-intuitive.
As for the donation thing, the one thing that irks me about all the
independant bands I listen to is that I have to give my credit card
number out to so many different places. It'd be nice to have a central
place for this. OH I KNOW, that Digg-like site! We could have the
infrastructure in place there to allow users to register their PayPal
or CCs, and allow them to tip artists from a central location. The
artists would have to register with the site, but I don't see that as
a problem. The problem would be that we would need someone to pay for
it all and develop it, and I can't do that myself right now,
unfortunately. It's an idea, and it would help the convenience factor
for end-users.
Or we could even make a client, not unlike iTunes.. to take over the world.
Just some outlandish thoughts.
Dana
