Comments on: The Paradox of Free http://www.cyberbuzz.com/2009/10/02/why-information-is-free-but-music-isn%e2%80%99t/ Buzz Bishop takes a look at new technology and trends. Thu, 09 Feb 2012 03:26:40 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Film At Eleven | cyberbuzz http://www.cyberbuzz.com/2009/10/02/why-information-is-free-but-music-isn%e2%80%99t/comment-page-1/#comment-9639 Film At Eleven | cyberbuzz Wed, 18 Jan 2012 20:34:55 +0000 http://www.cyberbuzz.com/?p=764#comment-9639 [...] News wants to be free and if you try to lock it up, you lose. [...] [...] News wants to be free and if you try to lock it up, you lose. [...]

]]> By: Is Geoblocking Unethical? | cyberbuzz http://www.cyberbuzz.com/2009/10/02/why-information-is-free-but-music-isn%e2%80%99t/comment-page-1/#comment-5963 Is Geoblocking Unethical? | cyberbuzz Wed, 11 May 2011 12:46:26 +0000 http://www.cyberbuzz.com/?p=764#comment-5963 [...] Information wants to be free. Throw up a paywall or a geoblock and someone will find a way to tunnel under, jump over or blast through the obstruction. [...] [...] Information wants to be free. Throw up a paywall or a geoblock and someone will find a way to tunnel under, jump over or blast through the obstruction. [...]

]]> By: Roger Kingkade http://www.cyberbuzz.com/2009/10/02/why-information-is-free-but-music-isn%e2%80%99t/comment-page-1/#comment-1470 Roger Kingkade Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:47:00 +0000 http://www.cyberbuzz.com/?p=764#comment-1470 Free can work very well for music. It still does in some places like myspace. The internet has brought people together in a marketplace that only the consumer seems to understand. iTunes works because the perceived value and quality are in line in the consumer's eyes. I see this model being the basis for many future content delivery systems. People who see value in the New York Times don't see the value in the paper stock. They see the value in the content. I don't see that changing.nn Free can work very well for music. It still does in some places like myspace. The internet has brought people together in a marketplace that only the consumer seems to understand. iTunes works because the perceived value and quality are in line in the consumer’s eyes. I see this model being the basis for many future content delivery systems. People who see value in the New York Times don’t see the value in the paper stock. They see the value in the content. I don’t see that changing.nn

]]> By: Roger Kingkade http://www.cyberbuzz.com/2009/10/02/why-information-is-free-but-music-isn%e2%80%99t/comment-page-1/#comment-1691 Roger Kingkade Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:47:00 +0000 http://www.cyberbuzz.com/?p=764#comment-1691 Free can work very well for music. It still does in some places like myspace. The internet has brought people together in a marketplace that only the consumer seems to understand. iTunes works because the perceived value and quality are in line in the consumer's eyes. I see this model being the basis for many future content delivery systems. People who see value in the New York Times don't see the value in the paper stock. They see the value in the content. I don't see that changing.nn Free can work very well for music. It still does in some places like myspace. The internet has brought people together in a marketplace that only the consumer seems to understand. iTunes works because the perceived value and quality are in line in the consumer’s eyes. I see this model being the basis for many future content delivery systems. People who see value in the New York Times don’t see the value in the paper stock. They see the value in the content. I don’t see that changing.nn

]]> By: Roger Kingkade http://www.cyberbuzz.com/2009/10/02/why-information-is-free-but-music-isn%e2%80%99t/comment-page-1/#comment-1315 Roger Kingkade Wed, 20 Jan 2010 14:47:13 +0000 http://www.cyberbuzz.com/?p=764#comment-1315 Free can work very well for music. It still does in some places like myspace. The internet has brought people together in a marketplace that only the consumer seems to understand. iTunes works because the perceived value and quality are in line in the consumer's eyes. I see this model being the basis for many future content delivery systems. People who see value in the New York Times don't see the value in the paper stock. They see the value in the content. I don't see that changing. Free can work very well for music. It still does in some places like myspace. The internet has brought people together in a marketplace that only the consumer seems to understand. iTunes works because the perceived value and quality are in line in the consumer's eyes. I see this model being the basis for many future content delivery systems. People who see value in the New York Times don't see the value in the paper stock. They see the value in the content. I don't see that changing.

]]> By: buzz http://www.cyberbuzz.com/2009/10/02/why-information-is-free-but-music-isn%e2%80%99t/comment-page-1/#comment-1189 buzz Mon, 05 Oct 2009 17:27:49 +0000 http://www.cyberbuzz.com/?p=764#comment-1189 Vanity Fair gets in on the discussion of Murdoch's plans: http://www.vanityfair.com/business/features/2009/11/michael-wolff-200911?printable=true Vanity Fair gets in on the discussion of Murdoch’s plans:

http://www.vanityfair.com/business/features/2009/11/michael-wolff-200911?printable=true

]]> By: buzz http://www.cyberbuzz.com/2009/10/02/why-information-is-free-but-music-isn%e2%80%99t/comment-page-1/#comment-1178 buzz Sat, 03 Oct 2009 02:25:19 +0000 http://www.cyberbuzz.com/?p=764#comment-1178 Perhaps. But with more reliable distribution channels for free information vs free music, it's a much taller mountain for the paid model to climb. The model is being broken in terms of iPhone apps. ESPN is charging for theirs, the WSJ is charging $2 a week for theirs. Since the pay model is the starting point on the mobile front, perhaps there's a way for it to evolve into the web. But it's going to be a much longer, slower shift than what we saw with music. Perhaps. But with more reliable distribution channels for free information vs free music, it’s a much taller mountain for the paid model to climb.

The model is being broken in terms of iPhone apps. ESPN is charging for theirs, the WSJ is charging $2 a week for theirs. Since the pay model is the starting point on the mobile front, perhaps there’s a way for it to evolve into the web. But it’s going to be a much longer, slower shift than what we saw with music.

]]> By: Raize http://www.cyberbuzz.com/2009/10/02/why-information-is-free-but-music-isn%e2%80%99t/comment-page-1/#comment-1177 Raize Fri, 02 Oct 2009 22:51:30 +0000 http://www.cyberbuzz.com/?p=764#comment-1177 The same will happen with newspapers. Someone (like Apple) has to lead the charge. It looks like it will be Murdoch. In the short term, his newspapers will lose readers which, like you say, will go to other sources. But in the long run, even the CBC and WSJ will trend towards a paid model. At that point their will be segregation...bloggers vs. real journalists. The latter being free (and of lower quality) and the former being paid (more thorough, and of higher quality). People are always willing to pay for a premium product. This case is no exception. The same will happen with newspapers. Someone (like Apple) has to lead the charge. It looks like it will be Murdoch. In the short term, his newspapers will lose readers which, like you say, will go to other sources. But in the long run, even the CBC and WSJ will trend towards a paid model. At that point their will be segregation…bloggers vs. real journalists. The latter being free (and of lower quality) and the former being paid (more thorough, and of higher quality). People are always willing to pay for a premium product. This case is no exception.

]]> By: Raize http://www.cyberbuzz.com/2009/10/02/why-information-is-free-but-music-isn%e2%80%99t/comment-page-1/#comment-1176 Raize Fri, 02 Oct 2009 22:48:38 +0000 http://www.cyberbuzz.com/?p=764#comment-1176 I disagree with your theory because it is an oversimplified analogy. When iTunes first launched, artists and record labels didn't really know what platform would best suit their needs. iTunes was simply another option and music was still freely available on underground networks. What I'm trying to say is that it took time for iTunes has become the "norm" and as more and more artists started putting there music on their, more and more of their fans followed. I disagree with your theory because it is an oversimplified analogy.

When iTunes first launched, artists and record labels didn’t really know what platform would best suit their needs. iTunes was simply another option and music was still freely available on underground networks. What I’m trying to say is that it took time for iTunes has become the “norm” and as more and more artists started putting there music on their, more and more of their fans followed.

]]>