Sympathy for RapGenius

Yes.  You read that correctly.

As I stated before I never wanted to see RapGenius.com go away or get shut down.  I just wanted to see them get licensed.  And I was pleased to see that they decided to sit down with The National Music Publishers Association and work out licenses.

But then I see this story.

http://valleywag.gawker.com/is-rap-genius-fucked-1489917137

RapGenius engaged in some “black hat” spammy SEO (search engine optimization) and they got caught.   And now Google has demoted them. Rather than ranking number #1-5 on lyric searches as they did in many searches I conducted, they are now on page 7!

Not search result #7!  Page 7!  Has anyone ever scrolled 7 pages into search results?

Industry pundits claim this is an effective “death sentence” for the site. And I bet they are right.  According to Vice and Quantcast they’ve lost 80% of their web traffic in days!!

Screen Shot 2014-01-02 at 12.26.07 AM

So think about it.

RapGenius violated the Search Engine Optimization rules arbitrarily set by a private company Google.  A set of rules Google itself  appears to routinely violate to push it’s own property YouTube up in search results.

RapGenius didn’t violate any real law created by an elected legislative body when they did this.  But now they are considered “toast”

So do we really want a monopolistic über politically connected company like Google to be this powerful?  To have life or death power over any and all websites? No trial, no jury, no appeals process, no nothing.

Face it people the web is ruled by an autocratic, unelected and unaccountable search engine.

What happens to freedom of expression when you have a search engine that is this powerful?

Fuck that, what happens to democracy?  If a candidate proposes something that Google doesn’t like will that candidate’s website suddenly sink to page 7?  (And the first 6 pages are filled with links to negative stories about the candidate?)

Surely the internet free speech advocates have something to say about this?

<crickets>

Isn’t it funny that Google won’t noticably demote a site demonstrably and unequivocally involved in a RICO predicate like industrial scale file infringement. But you try to game their SEO and you get demoted to page 7.   Don’t be evil. Yeah right.

On the bright side Google just admitted that they can do more than they say they can about file infringing websites. They can demote them. Same with human trafficking and other exploitative businesses. And see the Internet didn’t break.

No, Streaming is not more profitable than Transactional Sales… Not Today, Maybe Not Ever…

There’s a recent report from the Wall Street Journal that is being grossly misinterpreted from this line,

“Data reviewed by The Wall Street Journal showed that one major record company makes more per year, on average, from paying customers of streaming services like Spotify or Rdio than it does from the average customer who buys downloads, CDs or both.”

This does NOT mean that streaming will be more profitable than transaction sales anytime soon. It seems to suggest that streaming could possibly, possibly become more profitable than transactional sales, but that is seemingly unlikely due to simple math which will review below.

What that sentence says is that a premium paid subscriber spends approximately $120 per year on music purchasing, whereas an average music consumer spends less in total over the course of a year. This does not take into account the non-average music consumer who spends much more than $120 a year, nor does it take into account that the number of “average music consumers” is hundreds if not thousands of times larger than the number of premium paid subscribers.

What would be truly interesting and important to the conversation is to see how much total revenue is being generated by streaming in the aggregate against transactional sales. As we’ve reported before, using a simple spreadsheet, streaming services would need at least 90 million subscribers to be competitive as a viable option to replace transactional sales.

By most estimates there are few people who think Spotify can scale up to and maintain 30 Million paid subscribers in the US. So this begs the question…

If streaming is the future how does $2.5b in revenue from a massively successful Spotify replace the loss of $8.3b in annual earnings?

Complicating discussions around the streaming revenue issues are also the risks of cannibalization. As the early year end numbers come in for 2013 we’re already seeing transactional download numbers starting to flatten and decline.

As Music Downloads Decline, Expect More Anti-Spotify Anxiety | FastCoLabs

It’s official: We’re buying less digital music. Just like vinyl, cassettes, and CDs before it, the digital download may have reached it peak, with total sales dropping 4% from last year. The culprit? It’s complicated, but expect the already-raging debate over Spotify, streaming, and the future of music distribution to heat up.

Here’s a breakdown. In the first half of this year, U.S. music fans paid for 25-30 million digital tracks per week, according to Billboard. In October and November, that number dipped below 20 million. Billboard blames “a web of interrelated stories that show new technologies affecting consumer behavior” for the decline, with the most obvious culprit being that little green and black icon on your home screen.

READ THE FULL STORY AT THE WALL STREET JOURNAL:
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304020704579276123352482930

Fake Iron Maiden Story Raises Questions About MusicMetric and Illustrates Decline in Quality of Music Business Journalism.

By now you’ve heard that Iron Maiden used  torrenting data apparently obtained from a UK company called MusicMetric to find and embrace it’s “worst pirates” and go and play for them!  This story appears to have originated on November 29 with Alexandra Topping in the Guardian in a post that focused more on the benefits to the British economy of “small businesses” like Iron Maiden–ahem.

Ms. Topping was smart enough to avoid the causal trap that MusicMetric fell into.  But the post by ex-Slashdot blogger Andy Patrizio, a freelancer for Citeworld, went straight for that bait, and that post that was picked up by CNET and The Verge almost immediately.  All loudly proclaimed that Iron Maiden embraced piracy and got rich–apparently without ever asking the band what they thought.  Until Citeworld retracted the story, we can’t find any post that repeated the Patrizio story that also had quotes from the band.

http://www.theverge.com/web/2013/12/25/5244204/iron-maiden-responds-to-piracy-by-planning-tours

http://www.citeworld.com/consumerization/22803/iron-maiden-musicmetric

http://crave.cnet.co.uk/software/iron-maiden-makes-millions-by-touring-where-its-pirates-are-50013113/

This story was then widely re-reported and re-blogged in the music press.  In particular the two flagship music business publications Billboard and Rolling Stone ran with the story.

What is interesting about the Alexandra Topping story in the Guardian is in these opening paragraphs (links in the original):

Iron Maiden have never been exactly fashionable: too mainstream for punk, too scruffy for New Wave, too hairy and loud for pop. But it seems the classic British metal act is very good at turning metal into gold.

In a report published on Friday by the London Stock Exchange, the group – formed in Leyton, east London in the 1970s – has been cited as one of the UK’s fastest growing music firms, helping to pull the UK from economic heart failure into recovery.

Iron Maiden LLP, the group’s holding company, is one of six music firms at the vanguard of the new music business, according to the report entitled 1,000 Companies to Inspire Britain.

The Guardian story that Topping linked to was a generic news summary of stories about the London Stock Exchange.  But that summary digest had a link to a post–a post with no by-line, just “Guardian Music”–that included this quote from MusicMetric’s CEO, the quote that launched a 1,000 retractions:

“Iron Maiden’s BitTorrent data suggests Brazil is a huge driver of fans – and given Brazil is one of the biggest file sharing nations on the planet, this is a strong indicator of popularity,” said Greg Mead, CEO and co-founder of Musicmetric.

“With their constant touring, [the] report suggests Maiden have been rather successful in turning free file-sharing into fee-paying fans. This is clear proof that taking a global approach to live touring can pay off, and that having the data to track where your fan bases lie will become ever more vital.”

Still–no one seems to have asked the band what they think about this classic post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy of mistaken causation that is so fashionable.

But sure enough, the penny eventually dropped.  According to Tech Crunch the entire story appears to be fabricated.

In fact–if anything, particularly given the band’s “constant touring” (since 1970s) as quoted by MusicMetric’s CEO, the opposite is the real story: How Pirates Turned Iron Maiden Fans into Advertising Revenue–for Pirates and Ad Exchanges.

Sorry, guys, the BS filter is full.

We suspected this story was bunk right from the start if for no other reason than because every band already has access to very reliable data that shows locations of your assumed fans. You don’t need bittorrent data.  (Unless you’re part of the charm offensive for Bit Torrent, Inc.’s next round of financing.)  And you don’t even have to be tech savvy to get the most important pieces. Facebook anyone?

But suppose you are tech savvy and need more detail? You still don’t need torrent data. Try Google or Quantcast analytics for your website.

Somewhere in the middle?  Use http://www.nextbigsound.com, to track all kinds of social metrics in a precise geographic manner on a single aggregated screen!  Basic accounts are free!

Image

(And actually-at least for the last 7 days-the embedded claim that Brazil, Argentina and Chile are hot markets for Iron Maiden is contradicted by the fact that tiny Luxembourg had more Iron Maiden oriented twitter activity than any of these markets. Hurry Iron Maiden! Go play Luxembourg!) 

But you don’t even need the internet to figure this out.  Analog  PRO (BMI/ASCAP) statements or even record company royalty statements provide accurate if slightly stale data on where your fans are!    Eyeballing my catalogue, bittorrent data mirrors this stuff exactly.  My most popular bitTorrent territories are the same territories I get a high volume of airplay and streams. (In my very extensive experience with my own catalog, BitTorrent activity actually follows not leads radio play and other publicity.)

So Iron Maiden collaborating on a major touring project with MusicMetric to do what I teach my first year Music Business students to do in the 1st week of class? Seemed highly suspect to me.

Hence this retraction from Citeworld:

The original version of this article incorrectly stated that Iron Maiden used MusicMetric’s analysis to plan its South American tours. MusicMetric did not work directly with Iron Maiden. The analysis described in this article was carried out without the band’s participation or knowledge, and we have no confirmation that the band ever saw or used it. [Because why would the band ever have done so?] CITEworld deeply regrets this error, and we apologize to our readers [but didn’t change the patently false headline that still reads “How Iron Maiden turned piracy into paying customers”].

Look we’ve gotten things wrong here at the Trichordist a few times. It happens.  But we’ve never f*cked up this bad.  Did anyone ever actually bother to call Iron Maiden’s management?  Agency? Press Officer? Did anyone question why Iron Maiden didn’t go to Southeast Asia or China at the same time? For they have an even greater volume of piratical fans in those territories.

Did anyone question how many times a band that’s been around since the 1970s has toured these same countries in the past and might have a watchamacallit–a fan base?

This is starting to seem  like the Goldblox VS Beatie Boys lawsuit where many news outlets erroneosly reported that  Beastie Boys were suing Goldieblox when in actuality it was the other way around!

The main question music business journalists should now be asking:

“Did MusicMetric have any role in pumping up this purportedly fabricated story?”

I’m not saying they intentionally did this to generate notoriety for themselves or funding for  Bit Torrent, Inc. but like Goldieblox the misreported story certainly provided a lot of free publicity for their company.  And in the world of Journalism 2.0 where “news” outlets print first and fact check later, headline consumers will likely walk around with a head full of garbage in, and we know then there’s going to be garbage out.  It’s just that this particular strain of garbage–piracy is good for you, yummy–bears a striking resemblance to the talking points generated by the Computer & Communications Industry Association and of course Bit Torrent itself.

But there is also a question that the music industry and artists should be asking themselves:

Why should the artists send dollars to MusicMetric, a company that seem to provide propaganda for it’s enemies?  If you look at the many of the company’s statements they seem to tacitly endorse piracy.   As a result I certainly wouldn’t hire this company to work any of my product.

It’s too bad.  MusicMetric generally provides a good product.  They may come out of this looking like they are just another purveyor of digital snake oil aka the Bit Torrrent charm offensive,  more interested in hyping their own product than actually helping their customers.

Makes you wonder where the funding is coming from.

Attention Mr. Almunia: Justice Department Evidence Against Megavideo Confirms Adsense Account

(from Chris Castle)

Music Technology Policy

by Chris Castle

Joaquín Almunia, the Vice President of the European Commission in Charge of Competition currently investigating Google’s unsavory business practices in Europe may wish to consider the dark underbelly of Google’s advertising business when deciding whether to give the company an unprecedented third opportunity to settle the competition questions against the global monopolist.

According to evidence released by the Justice Department in the Megavideo criminal prosecution, Megavideo was a Google Adsense customer until at least May 17, 2007:

On or about May 17, 2007, a representative from Google AdSense, an Internet advertising company, sent an e-mail to DOTCOM entitled “Google AdSense Account Status.” In the e-mail, the representative stated that “[d]uring our most recent review of your site [Megaupload.com,]” Google AdSense specialists found “numerous pages” with links to, among other things, “copyrighted content,” and therefore Google AdSense “will no longer be able to work with you.” The…

View original post 993 more words

Is Rap Genius F*cked? | Gawker

A fascinating twist in the saga of Rap Genius…

“We effed up,” lyrics annotation supersite Rap Genius admitted this week after its SEO cheating was revealed. They sure did. And there’s good reason to believe this isn’t just a gaffe for the cartoonish startup posse: a Google eff up could haunt them forever—but no one search should have all that power.

Rap Genius will never be safe on the internet again, because as far as they’re concerned, Google is the internet. The search engine functions like public infrastructure, a road that takes anyone who wants to look up lyrics to the internet lyrics store, but it thinks like any Walmart of Exxon. It has its own secret rules, its own private penalties, and its own willingness to harm any company that dares make it look stupid. The Rap Genius co-creators must have known what they were getting themselves into: an inordinately complex game of Mouse Trap with the devil that’s finally snapped back.

READ THE FULL STORY AT GAWKER:
http://valleywag.gawker.com/is-rap-genius-fucked-1489917137

RELATED:

Rap Genius Says It Will Seek Licenses for Lyrics

Google Renders Rap Genius Unsearchable As Punishment for Spamming

The case against Kim Dotcom, finally revealed | Ars Technica

Feds lay it all out: Megaupload made $150+ million, and Dotcom must stand trial.

The government’s 191-page “Summary of Evidence” also details the stunning sums that Dotcom and his colleagues made running their site. Dotcom, who owned 68 percent of Megaupload and all of sister site Megavideo, made more than $42 million in calendar year 2010. CTO Mathias Ortmann, who owned 25 percent share of Megaupload, made more than $9 million that same year; designer Julius Bencko (2.5 percent) made more than $1 million, and programmer Bram Van Der Kolk (also 2.5 percent) made more than $2 million. Chief Marketing Officer Finn Batato, who was not a shareholder, made $400,000. And no perk was too excessive: the company spent $616,000 renting Mediterranean yachts.

READ THE FULL STORY AT ARS TECHNICA:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/12/us-unveils-the-case-against-kim-dotcom-revealing-e-mails-and-financial-data/

The Failure of the DMCA Notice and Takedown System | CPIP

Section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act will be turning 15 years old soon, and it’s showing its age. Its design belongs to a different era. Like a 15-year-old automobile, it no longer runs as well as it used to. It can’t keep up with the newer, faster vehicles on the road. Its users are beginning to look for alternative forms of transportation. Pieces of it have been wearing down over time, and ultimately something is going to break that outweighs the cost of replacement.

That time may be now: the notice-and-takedown provision of Section 512 is straining under the weight of a blizzard of notices, as copyright owners struggle to abate the availability of infringing copies of their most highly valued works. The tool is no longer up to the task. Mainstream copyright owners now send takedown notices for more than 6.5 million infringing files, on over 30,000 sites, each month. Printing out the list of sites for which Google receives takedown requests in just one week runs to 393 pages. And that just counts the notices sent to Google; duplicates of many of those notices are sent to the site hosts and to other search engines. For example, over a six-month period ending in August, the member companies of the Motion Picture Association of America sent takedown notices for 11,996,291 files to search engines, but sent even more notices—for 13,238,860 files—directly to site operators. (See chart below.)

…

The problem is that notice-and-takedown has been pressed into service in a role for which it was never intended. Section 512 was originally designed as an emergency stopgap measure, to be used in isolated instances to remove infringing files from the Internet just long enough to allow a copyright owner to get into court. That design reflected the concerns of its time. In 1998, the dawn of widespread public use of the Internet, there was considerable anxiety about how the law would react to the growing problem of online infringement. Online services worried that they might be held directly liable as publishers for infringing copies of works uploaded by users, despite lacking any knowledge of those copies. Section 512 addressed these concerns by giving service providers a safe harbor to protect them from liability for unknowingly hosting or linking to infringing material.

READ THE FULL STORY AT CPIP:
http://cpip.gmu.edu/2013/12/05/the-failure-of-the-dmca-notice-and-takedown-system-2/

David Byrne: “Do you really think people are going to keep putting time and effort into this, if no one is making any money?” | Salon

Start the stopwatch for the synchronized swimming rapid response team… David Byrne in Salon:

The musical genius shares his songwriting secrets, opens up his finances and ponders the future of art and the Web

Lots of us believe that musicians, along with other artists, are struck by inspiration and have this emotion which they must express and share. But you argue in your book that it is actually the opposite — that the idea of the songwriter pouring heart, soul and autobiography into his or her music is wrong-headed. “The accepted narrative,” you write, “that the rock and roll singer is driven by desire and demons, and out bursts this amazing, perfectly shaped song that had to be three minutes and 12 seconds. This is the romantic notion of how creative work comes to be, but I think the path of creation is almost 180 degrees from this model.”

READ THE FULL STORY AT SALON:
http://www.salon.com/2013/12/21/david_byrne_do_you_really_think_people_are_going_to_keep_putting_time_and_effort_into_this_if_no_one_is_making_any_money/