Steve Jobs versus the RIAA and the future of online music
September 21, 2005 
I don’t own an iPod (pause for collective gasp) or anything from Apple, but that Steve Jobs guy sure seems to know what he’s doing.
With his success with iPod and iTunes, Jobs has shown he really understands the spirit of the Internet and how music consumers think.
Today at some sort of convention called the Apple Expo, he took the RIAA to task for being greedy:
The labels make more money from selling tracks on iTunes than when they sell a CD. There are no marketing costs for them. We are competing with piracy, so it needs to be a fair price: If the price goes up people will go back to piracy.
Let’s compare: Steve Jobs responds to online file sharing by trying to preserve reasonable pricing. The RIAA responds by suing its’ customers. Which reaction do you think will save the music industry and keep music fans happy?
Now if only Apple would make iPod/iTunes tracks a little less restrictive in how you can use them, I might actually buy an iPod.
And yes, I do have an mp3 player, and it also records live radio. So there.
September 22nd, 2005 at 8:18 PM
Word has it that the RIAA has never successfully won a suit but instead has caused many people to settle.
Also, Jobs is great (except for the whole turtleneck thing.)
September 26th, 2005 at 11:58 AM
While I agree with you that his position here is far more reasonable than the RIAA, I’d be reluctant to position Steve Jobs as the good guy when it comes to online music commerce.
It seems to me that Jobs is essentially attempting to achieve the same goal here as the RIAA - convincing people to buy music that they can obtain, illegally pehaps, for free. Jobs uses the carrot while the RIAA uses the stick, but in the end, aren’t they both just trying to make sure that you pay before you play?