iTunes does not rip off artists. The record companies rip off artists. And they're the ones who force terms on Apple that mean iTunes barely breaks even. Apple has put in a lot of work to drag the record companies into the meagre deals they have now. And periodically the record companies try to negotiate prices upwards, so that iTunes is less competitive compared to CDs, though so far Apple has stood firm.

The issue with digital versions of traditionally printed media is not just distribution and delivery though, it's also accessibility. It'll be at least a few years before eBook readers are available on a mass-market basis that are as readable as paper. I can read comics on my computer monitor thanks to the excellent CDisplay application, but I'm really holding out for a portable device with a screen that comes closer to the readability of paper.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Some people claim it's iTunes that rip off artists. Then someone says that it's Apple who rips off artists. Then you say it's the record companies, while Weird Al tells everyone not to buy his music off iTunes. I guess ALL parties are guilty, so I changed the essay title to "Certain Parties Involved with iTunes Rips Off Artists, And Barely Breaks Even".

As for portable eBook readers and technology issues, my previous essay dealt partly with that: http://queeniechan.livejournal.com/27225.html
All we need is a few more years.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Apple has no involvement whatsoever with what artists get paid and how. That's solely down to record companies. Apple doesn't deal with artists, Apple deals with record companies.

When you buy clothes from a manufacturer, you're dealing with the clothing manufacturer, not the underpaid Third World garment workers that make the clothes. Are you ripping off those workers? You're contributing in some small measure to them being ripped-off maybe, but where else are you gonna buy your clothes?

As for barely breaking even, remember that it's iTunes that reportedly breaks even. The record companies, the people who control how much the artists get paid, and how much Apple has to pay for every song it sells, they make out like the bandits that they are.

The ripping off of artists has nothing to do with iTunes breaking even. Except, maybe, in as much as the record companies are out to rip off both artists and Apple as much as possible.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

All true. I agree with you. In fact, Rikki's post (right under yours) has outlined in detail part of what's wrong with the current system. But then it's not really my concern - the more popular iTunes gets, the more likely the system will be amended to become more fair to the artists.

"iTunes breaking even" has nothing to do with ripping off artists, but then it doesn't have anything to do with my essay either (neither does artists getting ripped off). I mentioned the "ripping off artists" and the "breaking even" thing because in my previous essay, some people replied complaining that artists are getting shafted by the system. The first paragraph was replying to these people - I actually am only vaguely bothered on the artists' behalf. Perhaps I should just change the first paragraph to reflect that.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

A few more years? Sony has an awesome new eReader coming out in October with digital ink technology that makes it just as readable as paper. US$350, but that price will come down, hopefully moreso once competitors enter the market.

Here's a great pictorial:
http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/gadgets/sony-reader-gizmodos-hands-all-over-350-in-october-really-203185.php
Note the last picture, showing the very iTunes-like interface.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

The problem isn't iTunes itself -- it's the system. Remove the record companies, give iTunes a monopoly, and iTunes will happily rip-off artists in place of the record companies. That's my problem with the iTunes model -- it depends on being a monopoly. Once you pick iTunes, you have to stay with iTunes thanks to DRM.

Specifically, I believe the problem is that artists negotiate a percentage cut of sales. With online media, the record companies can drop the price because they don't have to pay for the packaging and the medium. But because of the way the contracts are negotiated, this also means they don't have to pay the artist as much.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

iTunes does not depend on being a monopoly. I don't know where you get that from. The restrictive DRM, like all DRM, exists because the content providers (record companies in this case) insist on it. They want to be able to sell rights piecemeal. They want to charge you once for the CD, and again for a digital version.

The thing is, DRM blatantly doesn't work. It inconveniences legitimate users, and is no obstacle to illegitimate users.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

This about summarises it.

"No one but Apple can authorize an iTunes/iPod competitor, and Apple's not exactly enthusiastic about such authorization --the one major effort to date was the stillborn Motorola ROKR phone, which was so crippled by ridiculous Apple-driven restrictions that it barely made a ripple as it sank to the bottom of the cesspool of failed electronics."

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

That is absolute rubbish. Yes, only Apple can authorise non-Apple products to play files with iTunes DRM. Yes, only Apple can allow other companies' DRM to be compatible with the iPod. That's not the same thing at all as only Apple being able to authorise a competitor. That's the most ridiculous strawman argument. I'm mostly a fan of Doctorow's position on copyright and IP issues, but that's just a stupid statement. I suspect you're taking it slightly out of context too.

Only Apple can authorise competitors to sell proprietary music that plays on iPods, or players that play music with iTunes. That's what the quote is actually saying, I think, though it's badly worded if that's the intent.

There are many competitors for iTunes in the market today. Likewise, there are many competitors for the iPod on the market. Neither iTunes nor the iPod has a monopoly, nor do they depend on such.

As for the ROKR... the reason the ROKR failed was that it was a bad phone. It was on old model with iTunes features tacked on.

Apple has next to no influence in the cellphone market. The people who control the cellphone market are the carriers. The article Doctorow links to in support of his claim the restrictions were 'Apple-driven' actually puts most of the blame on carriers. They decide what phones are supported. They also sell downloadable music for phones. Is it any wonder that they're reluctant to allow competitors? Apple themselves have faced resistance from carriers to the iPhone concept they're developing.

Here in Australia, where our mobile phone market is less dominated by carriers that also control the mobile phone music market, we got the RAZR V3i last year, a version of the RAZR with iTunes compatibility. I believe this phone is now out in the US, though the models supported by many carriers lacking iTunes capabilities. This is a decent phone, unlike the ROKR, and has done reasonably well.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

It's not a universal monopoly, no. But anyone who's chosen to buy an iPod has to use iTunes (or a non-DRM seller that has none of the popular content). People can't switch. Anyone who uses iTunes has to use the iPod. There are other devices that can play the content, but Apple says which ones.

It's not just Apple, it's every other DRM-content provider (Microsoft, etc) as well. However, Apple is dominating the market, so it has the most to answer for. As I've said elsewhere, it's not iTunes that's the problem, it's the system. This system means that the only way to sell music online is to create a micro-monopoly. Apple isn't exactly breaking the mould in that respect.

Whether or not iTunes would survive without its monopoly can be argued about, but it would be more difficult for them if people could go to eMusic.com or any other competing music site to download songs (the latest popular Britney Spears song, a classic by the Beatles, or just something random from Rammstein) for their iPod. The broken system isn't their fault but they're cashing in on it.

The current iTunes/iPod strategy only works as long as the system is broken. As long as the system is broken, artists and consumers will continue to get screwed.

I don't think the solution is as simple as abandoning DRMs though.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Nobody is forcing you to buy an iPod. There are many other players available. Apple does not have a monopoly on portable digital audio players.

Even if you do buy an iPod, nobody is forcing you to buy stuff from iTunes. There are many other ways to get content on your iPod. Apple does not have a monopoly on digital audio content.

If you buy stuff from iTunes, you do not need an iPod to play it. It'll play fine from your computer.

You need to get over this concept you seem to have of iTunes and the iPod as intractably bound together. You do not need one to use the other. Yes, there are a number of things that you can only do if you have both. But that number of things is very small, all things considered.

DRM exists because the content providers (the record companies, movie studios, etc.) want it. They insist on it. If they didn't companies like Apple and Microsoft wouldn't bother developing DRM technology, because there wouldn't be a market for it.

The market is the way it is because of the content providers. They control the content. They are the ones who impose terms on consumers and artists that screw them.

iTunes exists within that market. It has to. The degree to which Apple has any control over that market is very, very small. Apple has broken the mould in getting the content providers to agree to better terms than they had before. It's a lot for them to do even to resist the demands of the content providers to raise prices and/or impose more restrictions.

Apple does not have the power to give consumers more rights to content bought from iTunes. That is a right the content providers reserve. If consumers get screwed, it is due to the content providers, and not Apple.

Similarly, Apple does not have any power to change the way content providers treat artists. If the artists get screwed, it is due to the content providers, and not Apple.

To say that they're cashing in on the broken system is like saying your corner store is cashing in on the low wages paid to the migrant workers that pick the oranges that go into your juice. Sure, the store sells more orange juice because it's cheap. But do they have any power to ensure the migrant workers get better pay?

What exactly is it that you think Apple could do that they're not doing?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

I don't think iTunes is a problem for artists. The problem lies with outdated contracts. Just last February Steve Dressler reported on Screen Actors Guild President Alan Rosenberg's message to all us members detailing how the guild needs to move forward in this not so new digital age. And they're about 10 years behind on that front. In fact the last time SAG distributed a technology issue of their quarterly magazine to members was 1980 because of the revolutionary new video cassette technology. SAG members in animation worked under the residuals payment rules for voice over set for video that predated DVD until this very year. That meant that unless you made a special deal above scale you as a SAG actor would only receive residuals from the video sales but not the DVD sales. But the reason for SAG finally sitting down and adding DVD to what was covered in standard contracts was spelled out by this statement in the president's February 2006 message:

"Rapidly changing patterns and methods used in the production and distribution of the products where we use our talents change the cash flow and therefore our traditional compensation levels. For example the iTunes/iPod audience for network television programming often exceeds the estimated audience watching the program on their televisions."

So, iTunes isn't just barely breaking even they're making BANK. It's outdated contracts that are keeping artists from proper compensation.

I think the number one reason why this thing is so successful is because it's easy. It's easy to create an account and upload your credit card ONCE. It's easy to click and download everything you want and it's easy to transfer it to your iPod. Want to listen to it in your car? That's no problem either, just attach it to the auxiliary port. The $2.00 model works very nicely too.

I agree with you that iTunes is probably where comics online will eventually go, but I don't think it will happen until those screens get bigger. There's going to have to be a new iPod unit where the entire surface of the iPod is the screen and the controls are dynamic and part of user interface on the screen.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

I don't think iTunes is a problem for artists. The problem lies with outdated contracts.

Hi Rikki, you could have posted that in the previous essay I wrote! XD I know artists don't make much from iTunes, but am stumped towards why, but then I'm not all that interested in the precise causes. I'm more interested in the potential the iTunes business model has. Thanks for pointing that out, though.

I agree with you that iTunes is probably where comics online will eventually go, but I don't think it will happen until those screens get bigger. There's going to have to be a new iPod unit where the entire surface of the iPod is the screen and the controls are dynamic and part of user interface on the screen.

A few years ago, we had dinky black and white iPod screens. Nowadays we have "I can watch CSI!" iPod screens. Within a few more years, we'll have screens that are huge, and function like a PDA and a PocketPC. The strange thing is, while PDAs and Palmtops have been around for a long time, they're not THAT common, esp. to the average consumer. However, I have the feeling that if the iPod gains the functions of a PDA, it will really start to eat into the hand-held PC market.

It will be marketed as a music player that does PDA stuff and also has 60GB of storage. It will probably fly off the shelves in a way that no previous Palmtop has. It's odd, but I can really envision that happening. The way of the future is a portable music player that also functions as a pocket PC, or even e-book reader. It's bizarre.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

It's not odd at all -- it's a natural progression.

Various companies are indeed working on "convergence devices". The next generation iPod is variously rumoured to be a wide-screen model with touch-screen user interface, with ebook and PDA functions in addition to music and video playback.

Existing devices are pushing the boundaries as well. The PSP has a built-in web browser, and you can purchase the Opera web browser for Nintendo DS. You can also read ebooks, listen to music and playback movies and photos using various software. Considering that these are primarily portable gaming devices, that's pretty versatile! The Nintendo DS Lite is especially notable for its value of money -- its bargain price point makes it as cheap or cheaper than many low-end PDAs.

A truly usable "e-ink" type technology is still some way off though. Current e-ink devices just don't have the ultra high resolution necessary to match the readability of paper-based print. The current generation of e-ink readers is a big improvement over the LCD technology used in PDAs, but we're not quite there yet.

Once e-ink comes in 16.7 million colours, in high resolution (300dpi or better) and at an affordable price point, then the revolution will come. The only question is, what will publishers do, and will they be willing to embrace the technology? Bearing in mind that many ebooks sold nowadays are quite expensive, in some cases cost as much as their printed counterparts!

And as for the pointy question of DRM -- well, there is no question really. There is no way that major publishers would be willing to sell ebooks without some sort of DRM. In the "old days", copying a book took a bit of effort, and in many cases it was just easier to buy the book. The digital age has made it extremely easy to produce 1:1 (or near enough) copies of information.

Publishers and music labels are terrified of piracy. They are also afraid because the digital age may well render them obsolete as middle-men. I think they would be a whole lot more successful if they started embracing the digital age and made songs, videos, ebooks more affordable and with less restrictive DRM.

Oh, and the hate that some people have for Apple is unjustified. They are in this business to sell hardware, namely iPods and Macs. The reason that most artists get little profit from their sales on iTunes is because the middle-man usually takes a huge cut. The only way to avoid this is to eliminate the middle-man altogether.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

The middle-man doesn't have to be eliminated completely, but if they're not eliminated, an environment needs to be created where the small players can compete with the big players. The internet fixes part of this problem by making marketing less vital than content. But the major record companies still control the physical market, and therefore control the content.

None of these possibilities make the record companies happy.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

just a freindly "here, here!" here.

I've got to say, ive reached an age when im pretty much getting tired of alot of the manga these days-since much of it is simply aimed at a younger audience than me. Right now im sturggeling to find titles I'm realy going to enjoy- esp. since I'm not on mom and dads buck anymore. Id realy love a cheap way of sampeling things so I can find a few new titles to fall in love with.

Most months its me, with my $40, and nothing to spend it on, standing in a huge manga section at the local comic store. I'm a big fan, so thats a sign of a big problem!

If I could find an anthology, online or otherwise, that I had reason to belive would carry something of interest to me, the companies publishing the nice versions of the stories I like would have alot more of my money!

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Most months its me, with my $40, and nothing to spend it on, standing in a huge manga section at the local comic store. I'm a big fan, so thats a sign of a big problem!

Actually, I've had exactly the same problem. I've stopped buying alot of manga simply because I'm no longer a teenager, and finding more mature stuff is nigh-impossible. But the reason why I press for anthologies is not only that, but because there's just SO MUCH STUFF out there that I take one look at the shelves and my eyes just roll into the back of my head. Anthologies is a great way to sample new stuff, but it's also a great way to categorise things. I know I don't have the time to sort out monthly releases to figure out what appeals to me. :)

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Brilliant. I really hope most publishers can devise something like this! Seaven Seas kinda-sorta does this with their Global/OLM/OEM/ARRGH books, releasing a few pages each week like a webcomic. I'd be willing to pay a very cheap suscription fee (Either online or buying a card at a bookstore) or be even more happy to get it free-- a digital anthology of all of the any publisher's titles. There's no comic book store in my area, and the bookstores are the size of closets in the local mall. I can't see everything if my bookstores don't carry it. I hope these essays get passed around to all sorts of publishers, not just the manga ones.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Haha, Seven Seas does everything right. They're so cool.

However, I think it's a terrible idea to give away digital anthologies for free. Seven Seas can do it since they're small, but people make a value judgement when it comes to big companies releasing stuff. If a company's releasing an anthology for free, there is the implication that the quality control is lax. It's one thing to do it for promotions once in a while, but another thing altogether to do it on a regular basis.

The weird thing is that when people pay for something, even if it's only a little money, it feels less like they're getting junk mail. Whether the actual content is junk or not is irrelevant - you'll expect better quality when you pay more in anything, including stuff like electronics.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

I don't think they'd make that value judgement about free things being dodgy when in an online context. Webcomics are already expected to be free as a loss leader to "tipping" the creator by buying merch and print editions, etcetera. As far as I know that's the only business model that is a proven success, as opposed to actually charging readers to view the webcomic.

Also, they have to be a bit more honest about it. Just about every attempt by a big company at digital comics or previews have been a joke. You have to use their special player to view their lo-res pages that have been DRMed to pieces, to ensure that you don't save these lo-res pages and collect them and torrent them. As if anyone would, because you can guarantee that there's already torrents of the same title which involve hi-res pages viewable however you like with no DRM. I think they have to honestly acknowledge that they have competition and not expect people to pay for something far worse than they could get for free. It's a cruel economic reality but it's not one they can avoid.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Indeed. For myself, I actually feel like the opposite is true. Dodgy content is anything I have to pay for. I need a fair amount of free content in order for me to feel safe about spending money on anything. Especially when there's no resale value.

A free site worth paying for is a good paid site.

And I won't pay for DRM. Or, I will only if it's subscription-based and not item-based, so I don't have to worry about being trapped with content I can't use.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

NetComics has an interesting online distribution system, where you only pay 25 cents a chapter, and there are different subscription based webcomics sites..... though it seems like it'll be slow move towards things. Scanlations and free webcomics show people will read comics online, but it's not clear if they'll pay for them.
Still, NetComics looks to be accepting submissions to some degree. And the growing popularity of comics in bookstores overall is a good sign for online publishers looking to move into print.

My main beef with scanlators is those like Narutofan who charge subscription fees [or ask for "donations"] for licensed works... it's too bad things can't stay in some kind of grey honour system thing, but it is good to see people are actually buying the books in the end.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Oh, and free online webcomics of some kind are an excellent way to pimp your books. Tangently, I kind of wish TokyoPop would make an easier way to read their online previews [like say, a non-PopUp version of the Manga Reader, that can adjust to different screen sizes].

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

If NetComics require my credit card details to buy anything, I'm not using it. The problem I highlighted in my previous essay is that there is no good way for people to pay for online digital media. And people will read ANYTHING if it's free and easy - which is what alot of things on the internet are. The challenge is to offer them digital media that you can charge money for, while weaning them off the multitude of free things you can find on the Internet.

The strange thing is that if there was an easier way to do it, people WILL pay a little money for something. It's because they're under the impression that if they're paying money, there HAS to be some kind of quality control involved.

People will read free fluff entertainment because it's free, but I tell you, they also think it's all junk (because it's free). The exception is Japanese manga scanslations, because when folks read these, they know the original product is a PUBLISHED BOOK. Somehow there is more prestige that comes with published books, because the implication is that someone is paid to produce it. Your stuff hasn't been published, people may look at it, but at the same time they won't rate it as highly in their mind as a published book. Why? Because you're doing it for free, and even if you're the next Osamu Tezuka, if you couldn't get someone to publish you, your work must be a few notches down from anything that's published.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

I'm not sure that's true. Maybe it's a generational shift thing, or maybe I'm just imagining it...

But I have a massive amount of respect for free "fluff", as I believe a lot of people do.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

i love the dreaming.I just finished reading it a hour ago.i am so exsided to read the next one.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Thanks. :D The next one's coming out in November, so your wait won't have to be very long!!

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Anthologies, and indeed the whole OEL manga movement is never going to be taken seriously until decent artists stop going to ridiculous publishers who publish books six months apart. If any OEL artist wants my patronage, and indeed the patronage of many people out on the internet, they have to start releasing 30 pages of their (good quality) work a *month*. That's what Japanese artists, and their hidden cohorts of scanlators can do. Heck, why not everyone get together and come up with a day they all decide to release their work on the internet? That's kind of an anthology, isn't it?

Hope to see you at Animania. I'll be sure to pop into your panel on Saturday, even though I'm not really into yaoi (Do Greek epics count?). I actually haven't bought the first volume of your book yet - I'd hate to read it, love it, and then have to wait so long for the next one. It doesn't make good horror/thriller reading. Maybe when volume 2 comes out?

Ave!
Insectice

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Actually, 20-30 pages a month is doable (20 is the standard weekly in Japan). I'll be happy to put my work in an anthology, however, I should point out that writing for a serial and writing for a series of single books that come out can be quite different. It's in how you structure the story. I know "The Dreaming" will be structured completely differently if it was serialised.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Thanks for information.
many interesting things
Celpjefscylc

(Reply to this) (Thread)