Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel_
Most phones I've used can take any mp3 and use it as a ringtone (this has been the case with every phone I've had for at least 6 years, and I'm pretty sure is standard across manufacturers).
All of them could plug into a PC to be loaded with content.
There are many free tools ranging from full on editors (like audacity) to websites that let you load, identify and clip the part of a song you want as your ringtone from any mp3 file you have available.
So to contend that ringtones are a closed system is puzzling.
|
I'm basing this on my own limited experience. I understand that the cellular market in Europe is much more open than it is here. Perhaps it's gotten easier in recent years to do such things on North American phones too -- I wouldn't know, as I'm one of those Luddites who expects my phone to actually ring when I get a call.
Even if we take that as granted, the point still stands. Using a song as a ringtone requires some form of selective editing or uploading -- there are hoops to jump through that might make paying the small fee a more attractive alternative.
There is a correlation between extensive CD collections and extensive downloaded libraries. I think the most profound conclusion to draw from this is that people who love music will collect a lot of it. It's an open secret that I have a large collection of music on the very PC I'm using at this moment. Some of it is legally bought and paid for. Some of it was taken from my own CD collection. Some of it was not paid for in any fashion, and a good deal of that is stuff I'd just as soon do without than actually fork over cash to have. Perhaps that makes me a sinner. I prefer pragmatist. Why would I turn my nose up at free?
One of the absurdities of the current campaign being waged by the music industry (although it's winding down now) is the premise that every download is a lost sale. It presupposes that people who take something for free would be willing to pay a nontrivial amount for that same thing. This is exactly the sort of thing I'm talking about, although I suppose I'm maybe not looking at it broadly enough. Perceived value is tricky business in my mind; the price that any given individual attaches to an item may bear no relation to what others think it's worth, or what it cost to produce. Consider those old songs mentioned -- you're not the only one. I have a fair amount of material from the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, AC/DC and so on that's legally bought and paid for. I know for a fact that the other principal participant here to date has quite a bit of Beatles material as well. The investment made on this material was recouped ages ago and the marginal cost on production of the material in a new format is orders of magnitude lower than what's actually being charged. But we pay the amount on the tag because that's the value we attach to it.
Culture as a commodity is on the wane. I'm entirely convinced of this. The new commodity is the experience, I reckon, which is actually a commodity that's as old as time itself.