toggle

AAPL Stock: 509.46 ( + 6.86 )

MacNN News

Signs point to Google music store

updated 10:10 am EDT, Wed May 24, 2006

Google may take on Apple

Google may be planning to open its own music store that would compete with Apple's iTunes, according to one report. Citing the addition of "/music" to Google.com's robots.txt file, as well new results from the search giant's index on "google.com/music," News.com suspects that Google might be gearing up to take on Apple. Google last month reportedly met with a group of music industry executives, and has been in talks with music execs about new digital music services that may dethrone Apple in the legal download market. The search company will face difficult decisions if it decides to open an online music store, however, as it would have to choose between offering DRM-free music versus some form of copy protection scheme. DRM-free tracks could turn record labels away, while incorporating DRM into song offerings might alienate potential free-software customers.

by MacNN Staff

(20)

TAGS :

industry, digital music/video

Share the Article

Facebook Twitter Delious Slash Dot Digg

toggle

Comments

vasic
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2005

0

05/24, 10:27am | report spam | close Reply |
Which way to go?

If Google decides to go DRM (which they'll have to, if they want to offer competitive catalogue), there are only two players in the field - FairPlay or PlayForSure (AAC WMA). It is unlikely that Apple would license FairPlay to Google. Therefore, they're stuck with WMA and with access to no more than 18% of today's global MP3 player market (i.e. just to the non-iPod users). In other words, Napster, Rhapsody, AOL, Yahoo and all others will now have Google breathing down their necks.

Apple still has nothing to worry about, as long as the Ecosystem is alive and well.

GodsiPod

Joined:

0

05/24, 10:46am | report spam | close Reply | delete
probably just a referral

store for the iTMS. Easier way to make money for Google is get 1cent or 2cents per click to a sing rather than deal with the mess of it all.

Ashari
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2003

0

05/24, 10:46am | report spam | close Reply |
RE: which way to go?

Apple still has nothing to worry about, as long as the Ecosystem is alive and well.

You mean that Apple has nothing to worry about as long as (1) the iPod remains the top selling MP3 player on the market and (2) the government doesn't declare Apple a "monopoly" and force Apple to open FairPlay.

As far as (1) goes, it isn't likely, for the foreseeable future, that Apple will lose their position. I think that they are headed for Sony Walkman like success (meaning that they have to sell another 150 Million iPods to catch up) and I don't see that changing any time soon.

(2) is what we need to worry about. If they get 90+% of the market, then they are by definition a monopoly and therefore should be regulated, in order to prevent price gouging and bad corporate behavior. This isn't going to happen for a while, maybe 3 or 4 years, so we'll be fine for that long at least.

mvitel

Joined:

0

05/24, 11:19am | report spam | close Reply | delete
Monopoly

[quote]"(2) is what we need to worry about. If they get 90+% of the market, then they are by definition a monopoly and therefore should be regulated, in order to prevent price gouging and bad corporate behavior."[/quote]

Uhm, a Monopoly is not defined by market share. It is using your "weight" to prevent fair competition within a given market.

That is a huge far cry from simply "having alot of iPods out there because its really popular"

Go look up the definition of Monopoly again and read a few court cases on declared monopolys.

fletcher
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2005

0

05/24, 11:49am | report spam | close Reply |
Monopoly

Monopoly also depends on the market. Do "MP3 Players" represent a market unto themselves or are they merely part of a larger music player market also including CD players, tape players, portable radios, etc? With cell phones and PDAs playing music as well, and iPods playing video and functioning as pedometers, the question of market gets even more muddy.

jayparry
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2005

0

05/24, 12:11pm | report spam | close Reply |
give up people

these competitors to ipod/itunes are wasting their friggin time. give up and find a new gadget.

Bennyboy
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2005

0

05/24, 12:18pm | report spam | close Reply |
exactly

Jayparry is right. Why is everybody trying to re-invent the wheel. The iPod has the market for music right now, make something else. How about a friggin cell phone that works when you want to use it???

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

05/24, 01:02pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: monopoly

Uhm, a Monopoly is not defined by market share. It is using your "weight" to prevent fair competition within a given market.

Do you mean like how Apple uses their market dominance of the iTMS to basically force the labels to sell music at Apple's price, and not the other way around?

Or do you mean like how Apple uses their market dominance of the iPod by not adding the ability to play music from other online stores, and not licensing Fairplay to allow others to produce content to play on the device, thus leveraging the iPod to drive business to the iTMS?

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

05/24, 01:06pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: exactly

Jayparry is right. Why is everybody trying to re-invent the wheel. The iPod has the market for music right now, make something else.

Yeah, let's see. Someone has dominance, so let's not even bother trying to have competition. Glad nobody follows this theory, as we'd only be driving Fords, using IBM PCs, running Windows, etc, etc, etc.

The reason everyone's trying to re-invent the wheel is because its a freakin' large market, and with lots of room for growth. If you're too stupid to not try to get a piece of that just because someone's already selling something that's popular, you have no practical future as a businessperson.

BTW, the iPod was just re-inventing the wheel as well, as there were already hard-drive based MP3 players out there. They made a better one. If apple can do it, why not someone else?

ZinkDifferent
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2005

0

05/24, 01:19pm | report spam | close Reply |
Oh well...

...I see testudo just can't seem able to ever generate a post that isn't mired by his particular cluelessness...

Anyway, while I find it continuously amusing to see any new entry in the music download field labeled as potential competition to iTunes/iPod, it is amazing how little either the reporters, or the entrants, really 'get it'

Any music download service that goes the WMA really only competes with the existing WMA services - Napster, Real, Urge, etc.. A new entry into this market will only serve to fracture this 18% market segment further.

Though, it is nice to see that Microsoft's contribution with WMA really only has resulted in all those signing up for it to further fracture their own market, and lose more and more money. I guess they must make it up in volume?

As long as no one manages to create a similar start-to-finish ecosystem, and provides a better moustrap, there can't even be a hint of competition in the inept offerings from these other players.

There's a saying, regarding the definition of stupidity: "Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results". At this stage, the WMA players in this market (both definitions) are all losing money, and they all effectively do the exact same thing each of their competitors does - same subscription offers, same pricing, same lame marketing arguments, same tie ins with ineffecive players. That's called 'stupid'

When, in fact, it would be so damn easy to compete with the iPod/iTunes systems by embracing it. If I can figure his out, why can't they?

laz
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2000

0

05/24, 01:22pm | report spam | close Reply |
re: exactly

"BTW, the iPod was just re-inventing the wheel as well, as there were already hard-drive based MP3 players out there. They made a better one. If apple can do it, why not someone else?"

Because there is only one Steve Jobs

porieux
Baninated

Joined: Mar 2001

0

05/24, 01:27pm | report spam | close Reply |
heh

People need to stop worrying about 'dethroning' Apple and start worrying about how to provide a good service. Google is good at search engines but that's about it...their customer facing UI attempts in other areas (such as video) are a joke...

jwdsail
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2000

0

05/24, 01:45pm | report spam | close Reply |
sigh...

Once again.. Apple isn't forcing consumers to do anything. "Monopoly" and preventing competition? Shrug.

My father has an iPod, filled with music, and has never used the iTunes Music Store. All ripped from his CDs.

And there is nothing preventing iTMS users from burning CDs and re-riping the music to mp3 for use with other mp3 players.

This is far more flexible than the recording industry wants things to be as it is. And that's the rub, isn't it?

The main reason there is this DRM fiasco, is the record companies treating their customers as criminals. If it weren't for the draconian DRM BS, users could play what they want on any device they want. The labels set Apple up, they thought, to fail, and only have themselves to blame for Apple dominance in this market. Put the blame on the right target here..

As far as Apple forcing the labels? lol. The labels could've taken their ball and gone home, told Apple to go to h***. They CHOSE to let Apple set the terms as they stand. You don't know what else was involved in these negotiations. Perhaps the poison pill was "Ok, you can set the price, but we'll be selling all songs in Apple Lossless in the future. Oh and those music videos, those will be sold in iPod format and 720p." No one but the people in those meetings really know what was "forced" or not. Perhaps the status quo was the least disruptive of options on the table?

There is competition out there, depending on how you define the "market". Even if you limit the "market" to online sales, there's plenty of competition. Only issue is that they all suck. It isn't even not playing on the iPod that's a deal breaker. Lack of consistent DRM song to song on these competing services make them useless to the average consumer that just wants to pay and play the music on what they want when they want w/o having to think about what DRM restrictions are on song 1 vs song 2. The iTMS would remain the dominate online music store even if Apple licensed FairPlay for this reason alone.

My $0.02US

jwd

porieux
Baninated

Joined: Mar 2001

0

05/24, 01:47pm | report spam | close Reply |
except..

eMusic doesn't suck though.

jwdsail
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2000

0

05/24, 01:52pm | report spam | close Reply |
re: except..

Honestly not familiar with that one, so will take your word for it.

(There is competition out there, depending on how you define the "market". Even if you limit the "market" to online sales, there's plenty of competition. Only issue is that *most all suck. It isn't even not playing on the iPod that's a deal breaker. Lack of consistent DRM song to song on these competing services make them useless to the average consumer that just wants to pay and play the music on what they want when they want w/o having to think about what DRM restrictions are on song 1 vs song 2. The iTMS would remain the dominate online music store even if Apple licensed FairPlay for this reason alone. )

benhur
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2001

0

05/24, 04:16pm | report spam | close Reply |
it seems

as though most people here think iTunes is perfect. I certainely don't think it is. By far it is the best model out there but if Apple rests and thinks it's as good as the worshipers here think they are then they will lose.

MS - Urge, google, etc. don't have to reinvent the wheel and as we know with MS, they aren't even shy about copying ideas. They are two gorillas and they're efforts shouldn't be taken likely.

There are quite a few mp3 players out there that I wish my iPod had. Honestly, as soon as the Sony Ericsson W810 comes out that will be my next music player. I love my two iPods but they are evolving too slowly.

It's interesting that some will shoot down a product because it doesn't work with iTunes yet also defend the idea that it isn't a monopoly because you can put music on there without purchasing on iTunes.

I wish google luck. If they have a good product it will only (hopefully) force Apple to make more innovations, some of them pretty darn obvious. Competition is a good thing.

It seems to me that many of the posters here think Apple should just sit on their pedastal and yawn and the competition.

I hope Apple has a different attitude. One that looks at the competition and says, "Bring it, b$%@"

bigpoppa206
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2003

0

05/24, 04:26pm | report spam | close Reply |
On the other hand...

If people didn't give away (or openly share) music so freely we wouldn't need a DRM. It's not like the public didn't give the music industry a reason to come up with this extra layer of protection in the first place.

jwdsail
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2000

0

05/24, 06:51pm | report spam | close Reply |
fileshare myth

Sorry bigpoppa.. I have to disagree with you.

At the height of the "1st Napster age" music sales were higher than they'd been before.

I knew many people that downloaded music back then. You know what? If they liked it, they bought it. The best example of this was my best friend at the U.. Used file sharing more than anyone I'd ever met in my life. Know what? Had an entire wall with shelving FILLED - STUFFED - PACKED to the gills with the largest collection of (legal yes legal) CDs, DVDs, VHS tapes, and video games I've ever seen before or since. If they liked it, they bought it.

The RIAA cried foul, but they killed a golden goose. The best advertising there is.. Free advertising. The only people that didn't buy the music they downloaded, probably never would have anyway. So where do they figure "lost" sales? In the meantime, sales had gone up! They killed the free advertising goose and have been hurting for it ever since. Now it's the worst.. all they dish out and promote is what a majority thinks of as c*** (Spears, backyard boys, etc.) and smaller acts don't get the free advertising. The c*** doesn't sell (cause it's c***), and the smaller acts, good acts, don't get the traction they could (RIAA incompetency + lack of fileshareing/free advertising).

Sales of music are still low, and they still want to blame fileshareing ... It can't be all the people boycotting the RIAA for their behavior. Sony Rootkit? Trying to kill the first MP3 players? Claiming that 152 40x CD-R drives was equal to 421 CD burners? (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/12/14/riaa_in_a_spin_over/) It can't be that most of the music out these days is c***. Nope. The RIAA would rather treat all their customers like criminals, than take accountability for dishing out c*** no-one wants to buy, and for creating a hostile environment where people would rather do anything than buy from the RIAA (it's members) and send them a dime.

Sad really. Pathetic even. Watching the RIAA stumble and grind itself into obsolescence. Don't make excuses for their incompetency.

jwd

mvitel

Joined:

0

05/25, 12:43pm | report spam | close Reply | delete
heh Testudo

[i]Do you mean like how Apple uses their market dominance of the iTMS to basically force the labels to sell music at Apple's price, and not the other way around? [/i]

How the Labels decided that the option Apple gave them was apparently worthwhile, since they signed the contract? It is not like there are not other options out there, there are plenty of other online music stores, the labels decided to go with Apple. Their choice.

[i]Or do you mean like how Apple uses their market dominance of the iPod by not adding the ability to play music from other online stores, and not licensing Fairplay to allow others to produce content to play on the device, thus leveraging the iPod to drive business to the iTMS?[/i]

Refusing the license a technology is not illegal as far as I know. iTMS and iPod are Apples products, they are under no obligation to give those products or access to them, to other people.

Why can't I use Ford parts to repair my GM car? What about when V-Tech came out, it was a copyrighted technology so what happened... people went out and invented something they could put in their cars that did the same thing, they didn't whine that the V-Tech patent owners have a monopoly no fair!

Get a grip Testudo, I realize that in general Mac users don't "like" to admit something is wrong with Apple, but you on the other hand, just always take a position against any Mac News, regardless of how stupid it makes you look.

zzarg
Forum Regular

Joined: Sep 2004

0

05/29, 10:20pm | report spam | close Reply |
my next ipod won't be...

I've got no ITMS licenced music so I'm not stuck to Fairplay (obviously not if they won't licence it to 3rd parties). I'm over the whole iPod worship thing. My next portable player will probably be a SE Walkman phone or a WM5 based device. If Google is just an ITMS referal it's irrelevant, and Google don't do irrelevant. The halo effect is great but Apple need to keep the Mac/OSX dream alive to fall back on

Show More Comments

Login Here

toggle

Network Headlines

02/15	AMD Radeon HD 7750, 7770 GHz Edition...
02/14	Cook hints at Apple TV set during Goldman...
02/14	Apple CEO: Kindle Fire will sell, but...
02/14	Cook talks labor, pre-paid iPhones...
02/14	Apple 'aggressively' pursuing new production...

Show All

02/15	AMD Radeon HD 7750, 7770 GHz Edition...
02/14	Apple CEO: Kindle Fire will sell, but...
02/14	Time Capsule stock sees delays, sell...
02/14	Readability iOS app delayed, Android...
02/14	Fresh rumors surface of Apple testing...

Show All

02/14	Apple attempting to disrupt Siri hacks...
02/14	Readability iOS app delayed, Android...
02/13	Apple launches 2012 back-to-school...
02/13	Sony Music caught inflating price for...
02/09	Apple explores environment-sensitive...

Show All

02/14	Refurb. 16GB iPhone 4, now only $259...
02/13	Refurb. Flip UltraHD Pocket Digital...
02/10	$380 off refurbished 2.8GHz Mac Pro...
02/09	iHome Dual Alarm Clock for Apple iPod...
02/08	Save 69% on SanDisk Cruzer 32GB USB...

Show All

toggle

Signs point to Google music store

updated 10:10 am EDT, Wed May 24, 2006

Google may take on Apple

Which way to go?

probably just a referral

RE: which way to go?

Monopoly

Monopoly

give up people

exactly

Re: monopoly

Re: exactly

Oh well...

re: exactly

heh

sigh...

except..

re: except..

it seems

On the other hand...

fileshare myth

heh Testudo

my next ipod won't be...

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools:

Subscribe

to our RSS

Follow us

on Twitter

10 Most Read

10 Most Discussed

MacNN Marketplace

Signs point to Google music store

updated 10:10 am EDT, Wed May 24, 2006

Google may take on Apple

Related Articles

Recent Articles

Which way to go?

probably just a referral

RE: which way to go?

Monopoly

Monopoly

give up people

exactly

Re: monopoly

Re: exactly

Oh well...

re: exactly

heh

sigh...

except..

re: except..

it seems

On the other hand...

fileshare myth

heh Testudo

my next ipod won't be...

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools:

Subscribe

to our RSS

Follow us

on Twitter

10 Most Read

10 Most Discussed

MacNN Marketplace