Bronfman should put up or shut up. If he thinks the market is on his side, then he should test the market. His contract with iTunes is not exclusive. Let his label adopt multi-tier pricing with one or more of iTunes competitors. If the competitor's marketshare goes up or iTunes's goes down, he will have proven his point. If not, then he will have tried. I think that he and I both know how this test will turn out.

That's what the record labels are. The sooner we sprinkle salt on them the less blood we (and the artists) will lose to them. The labels offered artists marketing and distribution, but it was a grotesquely one-sided arrangement. The internet/iTunes Store has rendered that "service" redundant. I'm not sure what they ever offered consumers.

...and it's not about piracy...

...it's because of the quality - AAC as good as it is still isn't lossless, which means consumers are getting less for more as it is...

Speak with your wallets ! - buy non-drm hi fi source (LPs, CD's) & rippem' if you want to send a clear message & keep Big Brother at bay...

I'm guessing the major labels are licking their chops at knowing what, when & where you buy & listen to your music...

It would be interesting to know Apple's licensing & pricing policies for the time when digital downloads are the ONLY source for music buyers...

With 80% market share the labels would cut there own throats if they pulled the music away from iTunes and raised there prices. They must be brain dead if they don't think people would go back to piracy.

I think Artists should perhaps move away from the big music labels and go to Apple or others like them directly. I believe they would get a better deal and perhaps better exposure for their music.

This would then open the way for record shops or some thing similar to burn a CD/DVD for the customers that wanted that service.

What does everyone think?

when distribution in the music industry takes on the main tenets of the open source movement, and record labels and radio as we know it dies the death they both deserve.

Not too sure about the radio dyeing out, its still very good way to get to the masses and the coverage is huge. Plus just think how many times you have heard a track on the radio and then go out and buy it : ))

it's because of the quality - AAC as good as it is still isn't lossless, which means consumers are getting less for more as it is...

Speak with your wallets ! - buy non-drm hi fi source (LPs, CD's) & rippem' if you want to send a clear message & keep Big Brother at bay...

Right, its much better to spend $15 on a CD then $10 on downloads, assuming you wanted all the songs. Isn't it better to put up with less quality but saving money to get those 2 songs on the CD you wanted, rather then spend all that money just to get non-DRM, "loss-less" quality?

Bronfman should put up or shut up. If he thinks the market is on his side, then he should test the market. His contract with iTunes is not exclusive. Let his label adopt multi-tier pricing with one or more of iTunes competitors.

Hey, iTunes has a basic monopoly on downloads. Performing you're test would be inconclusive since it would represent such a small number of users. Plus, people with iPods are still kept from using it, so there's a whole market gone.

But how about this. Maybe Apple should put up or shut up. Why not let the labels raise (and lower - yeah, right!) prices like they want, and see how it affects sales. I mean, its the labels who'll be hurt more, as piracy ramps up again, right?

With 80% market share the labels would cut there own throats if they pulled the music away from iTunes and raised there prices.

They wouldn't be cutting their own throats. h***, one poster here already says you should buy the overpriced CDs, not the overpriced downloads. So the downloads will be more overpriced. Just buy the CDs (which they want you to do anyway, since the labels have really not embraced downloads). Or go illegally download the music for free.

Man, you people act like downloading music from iTunes was a right granted to you by the US Constitution. But it ain't. If the labels want to charge more, they should be allowed to, under rules of capitalism. If Apple doesn't want to sell for that, they have the right not to (they don't have to charge more, they could just suck up the difference). Its the right of any company or organization to shoot themselves in the foot if they want. Its the American way!

Oh, and wouldn't it be an antitrust issue if all the labels pulled out at once? I mean, that seems a little wrong.

when distribution in the music industry takes on the main tenets of the open source movement, and record labels and radio as we know it dies the death they both deserve.

Right. And how does freely distributing music help musicians? I mean, how many people who download and use open-source software actually go "Hey, I like this, and even though its open source and 'free', I'm going to support the developer". Just look at how much shareware authors get paid if they don't put in registration codes on their software...

These record labes ARE greedy. Jobs and iTunes IS the market leader right now. I'm with Jobs on this if they do Variable pricing Piracy WILL increase again. I know that I won't pay more than 99 cents a song for downloads off the iTunes store. People who complain about the 128Kps AAC files should just stop complaining. If you don't like it buy the Damn CD. For me and many others they sound fine and it's convienent. If when I do buy a CD I rip it at 192Kps anyway since if you were to make it Apple Lossless or some uncompressed for your iPod wouldn't last too long.