> Unless the subscription services are somehow (totally illogically) banning > artists from their catalog, [...]
If this isn't the case now, it soon might be. In a business where exclusive contracts are the norm, why shouldn't one or more big labels base their licenses on exclusive relationships with subscription services? Or maybe they devise some sort of discount, where a subscription provider has to pay less in fees if they sell more of a big label's music? Excluding competing artists / labels from a subscription service's catalog makes perfect sense for a (association of) record labels. There'll be incentives so that it makes sense from a service's point of view as well. On a lightly related notes, dividing the world up into zones (DVDs) is illogical, as is refusing to sell content to anyone outside a designated area in general. Notice how all (Real, Yahoo, Napster) of these new suscription services are US only? From Yahoo's point of view it's illogical to prevent me from spending my money there - they still (have to) do it. C. _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
