Vidal Considers the Value of Art in an Age of Streaming
In his recent article for InsideCounsel, Intellectual Property and Technology Partner Thomas Vidal pondered the value of music and the audiovisual arts in an age dominated by streaming. As the influence of platforms like Snapchat and Spotify continues to grow, Vidal questioned whether media and tech companies will begin to transact differently – and how this may change the way we appreciate art.
“The statistical trend today reveals that people prefer to stream music and pay monthly subscription fees rather than own music outright,” he wrote. “Nielsen Music's year-end report highlighted that 2016 saw streaming services overtake digital sales of music in the United States for the first time ever.”
Streaming vs. Ownership: The Permanence Problem and Content Constraints
There has been much debate over a streaming vs. ownership model in music. Steve Jobs found the idea of music streaming services abhorrent. Why should you pay thousands of times to hear your favorite songs, he wondered? Others, like Harry Guinness writing for MakeUseOf.com, have taken the view that since media is available seemingly everywhere and accessible nearly 24/7, why bother owning it?
To understand whether streaming adds to or detracts from the value of the music, one must consider its inherent limitations. For instance, impermanence.
“A streaming subscriber owns nothing. Once the subscription expires or the streaming service goes out of business (not hard to fathom in today’s climate of continual disruption), the library is gone,” Vidal explained. “How will [the consumer] feel once they start losing their collections? Or perhaps the entire library does not go away, but instead the streaming service's licenses to certain compositions expire and that subset is no longer available.”
This is a profound problem where people want to be able to listen to their favorite songs over and over again throughout the course of their lives.
Another constraint with streaming is that a subscriber only has access to the music in the particular streaming service's library. “If exclusive content relationships become more prevalent, consumers will need to maintain – and pay for – multiple subscriptions,” Vidal said.
A third consideration that arises in the context of streaming is what happens to the music in a world where permanence has seemingly become irrelevant?
“Entire political and social movements have been launched and carried out through albums. In contrast, today it can feel as though music has become background filler. It is in danger of losing its power as art,” Vidal wrote.
This shift has broad ramifications for the industry. Can the value of music be preserved in an era of streaming? If not, will the result be a spike in revenues for the music business, followed by a sustained plunge when people abandon streaming, having lost their connection to the music?
To read Vidal’s predictions for the future of streaming services, view the full InsideCounsel article.
More About Vidal’s Practice
Thomas Vidal is recognized as an authority on the interplay between media, technology and litigation, and is ranked among Southern California’s leading intellectual property litigators.
A partner in Pryor Cashman’s Technology, Litigation and Intellectual Property Groups, he represents a diverse roster of clients including media companies, software developers, entrepreneurs, film distributors, VOD platforms, recording artists, and motion picture production companies, among many others.
