Pay what you want for music downloads?

docfunkenstein · 10-28-2010, 11:49 AM

In 2007, Radiohead announced that they were making their album 'In Rainbows' available for download exclusively from their website. Fans could choose how much to pay for the music, or pay nothing at all.

This idea was thought of as revolutionary and controversial at the time, yet little has been done in attempt to expand on the experiment since.

Could this be a possible solution to rampant music downloading/filesharing?

Insane Guest · 10-28-2010, 11:58 AM

No, there three types of people.

1. People who would pay a bit higher to support the band. 20%
2. People who would pay the least amount. 30%
3. People who still wouldn't want to pay. 50%

Filesharing will never go away.

LoathsomePete · 10-28-2010, 12:37 PM

It was a good idea for a band like Radiohead with such a large profile to do it, but they weren't the first ones to do it. Jonathan Coulton started releasing his music with a "pay if you want to" policy back in 2003 as well as legally making his music public domain, so fans would be encouraged to create their own music videos to advertise for him. His method proved to pretty pretty successful, to the point where he was able to quit his job and focus exclusively on his music. I've donated money to him, bought some of his merchandise for gifts, and have exposed other people to his music, all of whom have loved it, and I think in that regard I've done far more as a fan than someone just going out and buying a CD.

OctaneHugo · 10-28-2010, 02:49 PM

Been done before. I buy music that's self-released or on tiny labels and support bigger artists by going to shows and buying their other merchandise, so the only time I'd actually bother is if a self-supporting artist I liked did it.

Alfred · 10-28-2010, 05:23 PM

I know of other artists that have done this, maudlin of the Well being one and Omar Rodriguez-Lopez/John Frusciante being another.

But yes, it was a good idea.

Insane Guest · 10-28-2010, 05:31 PM

That's really all it is. Do you want to support this arrest by paying what you can. In a way it's a good idea, but you have to realize, that if people like your music, it doesn't mean they'll buy it. It's a donation, and if you want to be nice and give, than give what you can.

But one thing I can guarantee you, not trying to generalize here, but big artists that revolve around the money, no way in hell would they do this.

docfunkenstein · 10-29-2010, 11:54 PM

i realize radiohead werent the first to do this, they were just a good recent example that received a fair amount of mainstream media attention. obviously filesharing will never die, and whose to say thats necessarily a bad thing. most of artists revenue comes from gig and merch sales anyway. pirating is a great way for bands to get exposure, especially up and coming acts

this idea just poses an interesting legal alternative

Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra · 10-30-2010, 10:57 AM

Well, between you and me, I pay exactly what I want for the majority of music I have.

Urban Hat€monger ? · 11-01-2010, 11:54 AM

I'd quite like the option of choosing how much to pay AFTER i've heard the album.

~~someonecompletelyrandom~~ · 11-01-2010, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger

I'd quite like the option of choosing how much to pay AFTER i've heard the album.

This. Which is why donation basis music seems like it should work well. I don't know how well it works, since I don't actually have any experience with being on the other end of the label as the artist. A record label called Marathon of Dope releases all their stuff on donation basis, and to be honest I'm glad they do because there have only been 1 or 2 albums that I felt I needed to pay for.

View Poll Results: Was radioheads 'pay what you want' experiment for In Rainbows a good idea?
Yes	16	84.21%
No	3	15.79%
Voters: 19. You may not vote on this poll

10-28-2010, 11:49 AM	#1 (permalink)
docfunkenstein Music Addict Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: rural new jersey Posts: 60	Pay what you want for music downloads? In 2007, Radiohead announced that they were making their album 'In Rainbows' available for download exclusively from their website. Fans could choose how much to pay for the music, or pay nothing at all. This idea was thought of as revolutionary and controversial at the time, yet little has been done in attempt to expand on the experiment since. Could this be a possible solution to rampant music downloading/filesharing?

10-28-2010, 02:49 PM	#4 (permalink)
OctaneHugo Goes back & does it again Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: philadelphia Posts: 807	Been done before. I buy music that's self-released or on tiny labels and support bigger artists by going to shows and buying their other merchandise, so the only time I'd actually bother is if a self-supporting artist I liked did it. __________________ If Any Major Dude Has Yet To Tell You, Click Here

10-28-2010, 05:23 PM	#5 (permalink)
Alfred one big soul Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Canada Posts: 5,096	I know of other artists that have done this, maudlin of the Well being one and Omar Rodriguez-Lopez/John Frusciante being another. But yes, it was a good idea. __________________ LAST.FM / VINYL COLLECTION / RYM

11-01-2010, 11:54 AM	#9 (permalink)
Urban Hat€monger ? The Sexual Intellectual Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Somewhere cooler than you Posts: 18,605	I'd quite like the option of choosing how much to pay AFTER i've heard the album. __________________ Urb's RYM Stuff Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave.

10-28-2010, 11:58 AM	#2 (permalink)
Insane Guest Music Addict Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: CA Posts: 1,322	No, there three types of people. 1. People who would pay a bit higher to support the band. 20% 2. People who would pay the least amount. 30% 3. People who still wouldn't want to pay. 50% Filesharing will never go away.

10-28-2010, 12:37 PM	#3 (permalink)
LoathsomePete Cardboard Box Realtor Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Hobb's End Posts: 7,648	It was a good idea for a band like Radiohead with such a large profile to do it, but they weren't the first ones to do it. Jonathan Coulton started releasing his music with a "pay if you want to" policy back in 2003 as well as legally making his music public domain, so fans would be encouraged to create their own music videos to advertise for him. His method proved to pretty pretty successful, to the point where he was able to quit his job and focus exclusively on his music. I've donated money to him, bought some of his merchandise for gifts, and have exposed other people to his music, all of whom have loved it, and I think in that regard I've done far more as a fan than someone just going out and buying a CD.

10-28-2010, 05:31 PM	#6 (permalink)
Insane Guest Music Addict Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: CA Posts: 1,322	That's really all it is. Do you want to support this arrest by paying what you can. In a way it's a good idea, but you have to realize, that if people like your music, it doesn't mean they'll buy it. It's a donation, and if you want to be nice and give, than give what you can. But one thing I can guarantee you, not trying to generalize here, but big artists that revolve around the money, no way in hell would they do this.

10-29-2010, 11:54 PM	#7 (permalink)
docfunkenstein Music Addict Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: rural new jersey Posts: 60	i realize radiohead werent the first to do this, they were just a good recent example that received a fair amount of mainstream media attention. obviously filesharing will never die, and whose to say thats necessarily a bad thing. most of artists revenue comes from gig and merch sales anyway. pirating is a great way for bands to get exposure, especially up and coming acts this idea just poses an interesting legal alternative

10-30-2010, 10:57 AM	#8 (permalink)
Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra \/ GOD Join Date: May 2010 Location: Nowhere... Posts: 2,179	Well, between you and me, I pay exactly what I want for the majority of music I have.