

Pink Floyd win online downloads court battle with EMI - ilamont
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/pink-floyd-win-court-battle-with-emi-1919801.html

======
ukdm
I am surprised music publishers haven't pushed for exactly what Pink Floyd are
arguing for here. When music was sold on tape and CD you could buy a complete
album, and/or buy the overpriced singles with maybe one additional track, or
several versions of the same track.

Surely that was more profitable than the current focus of selling individual
digital tracks? If publishers decided they would only sell digital albums and
digital singles, and not split them up, wouldn't that work in their favour?

As a consumer I hope that doesn't happen, I just don't fully understand why
EMI would argue against just selling digital albums.

~~~
LargeWu
If it was more profitable, EMI probably wouldn't have fought Pink Floyd's
decision to sell their music as complete albums only.

My guess is selling individual tracks is more profitable, because a) cost per
track is usually higher when purchased separately and b) only allowing
complete album downloads likely results in lost sales from those who are only
willing to pay for a single track.

Pink Floyd apparently has enough money and doesn't really have to worry about
this, and is primarily concerned with the artistic aspect.

------
CWuestefeld
It's funny that the record industry argues that their _rights_ with respect to
digital recordings must exactly mirror those they enjoyed with old technology.
Yet they argue that their contractual _obligations_ for the old media
shouldn't have to apply to the new digital world.

