Should we pay for music in the same way that we pay for water? This is a question which is being debated by the music industry at the moment. The idea is that everyone should pay a kind of flat tax to music providers which will enable listeners to stream as much music as they please from their library. No longer a product, music will be sold as a service. There seem to be many merits with such an approach: all the music we can listen to for a flat fee, a proportionate distribution of revenue between artists, a way to overcome the DRM controversy, and a solid revenue base for the music industry. To see points in favour of such a system, this article by Gerd Leonhard is recommended, as is David Kusek´s article in Forbes.

However, there are still a few points to consider before being too enthusiastic about such a structure. Firstly, one could wonder where independent music would feature in such an environment. Andrew Dubber of New Music Strategies makes the observation in a very informative interview with MyMusic.dk, that this kind of broadcasting structure could result in a “globalised music administrative bureaucracy”. In this view, “the purpose of the flat fee ‘music-like-water’ system would be to reinforce, rather than eradicate, the current power structures of existing labels and media outlets” (ibid). Rather than going beyond the decentralised distribution environment which has dampened the controlling influence of centralised distribution conglomerates, this view has the potential of reinstating their power over the market. It would make the market harder for independent and unsigned artists to enter.

A major factor which will affect the outcome of this debate is no doubt consumer behaviour. Because the traditional supply chain between the producer and consumer has essentially been broken, how we consume music is still a very open question. At the moment, enforcing DRM encoding seems increasingly futile, and many people have got used to not paying for the music they listen to. The “music like water” system would compliment this, as music would in many ways feel free. Then again, some like  the feeling of purchasing a single track or album; it is in some ways a more personalised contact between listener and artist. The listener pays the artist because their music has a positive effect on them. And now that there is less distance between artist and fan (one does not need a Record Label to sell music), one can be sure that this money reaches the artist more or less directly. In addition, purchasing a track or album is more versatile.   “Music like water” services will presumably allow you to stream your music from a program as opposed to having the music file yourself; so until there is a single streaming platform on all music devices, audio files will be more versatile. These factors will surely play some role in the final outcome of this debate.

The debate, as you can imagine, is far more complicated than is presented here, but as a musician or fan it is worth having an opinion on this matter, for how the future of music will look will be directly influenced its outcome.