Peter Kafka

Recent Posts by Peter Kafka

Amazon Tells the Music Labels to Quit Crying About the Cloud, Start Cashing Royalty Checks

It’s been two weeks since Amazon launched its cloud-based music service. And Amazon says it’s been a big success–for the music labels.

In a letter sent to the big labels, Amazon says it has been selling more MP3s since it launched the service. In other words: Stop whining about licensing deals and start thanking us for making you more money.

It’s easy enough to imagine sales jumping in the last two weeks, as lots of people dropped by to try the service out. And Amazon gave users a real incentive to buy more songs while they were there by offering increased storage to anyone who bought an album at the online store.

But Billboard’s Ed Christman, who’s seen the letter, says Amazon doesn’t have anything else to say about its recent sales spike–like, say, numbers.

Instead, the letter is dedicated to:

  • Reminding the labels that Amazon has no interest in seeking licenses for the service it has already launched “as no licenses are required.”
  • Letting the labels know that, actually, it does plan to come to them for other licensing deals soon, as it contemplates “potential enhancements” to the service.

Why does Amazon feel that it didn’t need licenses for its initial launch but will need them down the road?

Part of the answer is a technical one that deals with the way the cloud service works, and whether users are actually uploading a copy of their own property to the service or if Amazon is keeping a single master file for multiple user’s songs.

But the real world answer is that this is a clever/ballsy strategy on Amazon’s part: It’s signaling to the labels that they’re going to get at least some of what they want–eventually. It’s just that Amazon is in a hurry and didn’t want to start negotiations from scratch–not when Google and Apple are looking at similar ideas.

So far it seems to have worked. Not only have the labels stayed mum, more or less, about their displeasure with the service, they haven’t done anything more forceful either–like taking their songs out of Amazon’s store or suing the company.

And if Amazon’s right, the labels may have no real choice but to keep their mouths shut and cash some checks.


comments so far. Add yours.

  • Anonymous

    Somehow I’d prefer to believe the music labels, rather than Amazon, on what is good for the music labels.

    I don’t understand why this sort of junk gets published.

    It’s like Facebook issuing a press release saying users don’t need security or confidentiality so join now!

  • Anonymous

    “I don’t understand why this sort of junk gets published.”

    Well Henry, its like this,

    It is a slow morning for Apple rumors, just some ole retreads, so to get hits you need something to appear with the name “Apple” in it.

    This is this mornings lure.

    Worked for you & me. Bet it will work for others.

    Ayuh

  • http://twitter.com/cordial david carter

    Much as I dislike music labels, well at least the majors, I don’t really understand why or how they can let this slide although I imagine they will or will do something as equally stupid as that seems to have been their mission statement for the last 10 years. Assuming they didn’t though, they should consider making an example of Amazon, as they’re not the dominant player in the field (iTunes), pull all their music from the amazon mp3 service and perhaps even pull their music from Amazon.com. The alternative is the continued and increasing slide in power from the content ‘owners’ to the content digital providers like Apple, Google and Amazon et al, which most bloggers would like to think is inevitable but really doesn’t seem to me to necessarily be so. To witness what could happen if they don’t do something drastic very soon you only need to look at the book to ebook transition in the last 5 years in which the digital content delivery companies have pretty much destroyed the publishers.

    Another play for the labels would be to buy a company like Spotify (at whatever cost) and bypass the online gorillas completely, although they really should have done this 5 years ago.

  • Anonymous

    “Somehow I’d prefer to believe the music labels, rather than Amazon, on what is good for the music labels.”

    Funny. Very Funny.

  • Anonymous

    Oh what a dilemma for the music labels – sell more content via the Amazon “cloud” service or lose a scintilla of control. A rational business would applaud a retailer selling more of their product. But, we are talking about music/video producers where sanity seems to be at a minimum.

  • Anonymous

    The major labels have been unusually quiet for the past couple of months. I’m surprised they haven’t sued a number of things (including GrooveShark) out of existence, along with suing Amazon over its cloud service. The film industry is showing much more litigious vigor.

Latest Video

View all videos »

Search »

Arguing online is like wearing a sharkskin vest. You look like a jerk.

— Anil Dash, in Businessweek’s How To issue