Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005

THE MOVE TO ARTIST-LED ONLINE MUSIC DISTRIBUTION:

EXPLAINING STRUCTURAL CHANGES IN THE DIGITAL MUSIC MARKET
Jesse Bockstedt, Robert J. Kauffman, and Frederick J. Riggins
Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455
Email: {jbockstedt; rkauffman; [email protected]}

Abstract. We propose a model for understanding the New devices that play digital audio formats, such as
transformation of the market structure in the recorded the Apple iPod and the Dell JukeBox, are increasing in
music industry value chain due to new forms of digital popularity and driving demand for MP3-formatted
distribution. It takes into account the traditional music music. Apple has sold over three million iPods and is
industry’s value chain and distribution network, and the offering multiple versions of the player to gain larger
product characteristics of digital music as they relate to market share. Apple announced in July 2004 that its
consumer value creation. We showcase changes in online digital download service, iTunes, has sold over
market structure from various perspectives of the players 100 million MP3s. It is apparent that the digital music
in the music industry value chain. With this as format is here to stay and, indeed, is quickly becoming
background, we then present propositions that highlight the preferred product choice of music customers.
forces at work in market transformation and how each
1.2. Current Digital Music Pricing
player’s role in the digital music industry value chain is
likely to change. We note the new tensions that arise An empirical regularity of the current digital music
around intellectual property rights for digital music with industry is that pricing structures are similar industry-
market structure changes. We support the propositions wide. There are two basic pricing strategies for digital
with illustrative mini-cases. music: song purchases and subscription services. The de
facto standard price is currently 99¢ per song, or about
Keywords: Digital goods, digital music, intermediation,
$10 per album, versus about $10 per month for streaming
MP3, market structure, music distribution, music
digital audio. The market is in the early stages of
industry, online music, property rights, value chains.
development and prices may be set to encourage growth
______________________________________________
and adoption, to set up for long-run profit maximization.
Table 1 reveals consistent prices for digital music.
1. INTRODUCTION
Table 1. Digital Music Providers
The music industry has experienced dramatic shocks
that will ultimately transform its structure. The PROVIDER PRICE PER PRICE PER SUBSCRIPTION
transformations have been sparked by new technologies SONG ALBUM PRICE
and Internet use distributing music as a digital good. The Napster 2.0 99¢ $9.95 $9.95/month,
MP3 audio format and the wide distribution network that 40 streams
has become available via the Internet are driving changes Apple iTunes 99¢ $9.95 NA
in the recorded music market structure and, thus, are BuyMusic.com 99¢ $9.99 NA
simultaneously having significant impacts on the players Listen.com 79¢ to burn NA $9.95/month,
in the traditional recorded music value chain. We (Rhapsody) to CD unlimited streams
Walmart.com 88¢ $9.49 N/A
examine the factors responsible for shaping this new
eClassical.com 49¢-79¢ $7.99 N/A
marketplace and analyze stakeholder roles in the value
compilations
chain in the move to distribution of digital music, as well
as the intellectual property rights issues that arise. The 99¢ per song pricing is interesting because
providers currently make little or no money on each
1.1. The Growth of Digital Music
digital song purchase. Of the 99¢ per song, the owner of
U.S. retail sales of recorded music dropped from the recording, typically the record label, receives 70¢ to
$13Bn in 1999 to $10.6Bn in 2003 [28], while the 75¢ for royalties or commissions. Credit card companies
popularity of digital music has grown. Meanwhile, receive 27¢ per transaction. For single song transactions
Apple iTunes customers grew from 861,000 in July 2003 the service provider nets a 3¢ loss to a 2¢ profit,
to 4.9 million in March 2004 [7], reflecting digital assuming no costs for providing the music [22]. This
music’s new role as a “strategic necessity” of the music lack of profits suggests that the 99¢ price may be set to
industry. Analysts predict that in five years 20% to 33% grow the market and each service provider’s share. The
of all music sales will shift from CDs to digital sale of 99¢ songs in specific MP3 formats such as Apple’s
distribution [28]. AAC and Microsoft’s WMA may be a lock-in strategy to

Authorized licensed use limited to: Southeast University. Downloaded on October 29,2023 at 14:03:46 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE 1
 Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005

promote sales of complementary products such as 2.1. Pricing in the Digital Economy
expensive MP3 players.
Price Dispersion. Price dispersion has received
With low profit margins in digital music, new
considerable attention in IS research. Brynjolfsson and
transaction strategies are being developed to increase
Smith [9] argue that the Internet offers a low-friction
profits for digital music service providers. Peppercoin
channel for commerce, but other dimensions of Internet
(www.peppercoin.com) uses proprietary technology to
competition are important sources of heterogeneity
cut all-in transaction costs to 7¢ to 9¢ per transaction.
among online retailers. Branding, trust and awareness
iTunes waits to charge a customer’s credit card until the
perpetuate price dispersion. Clay, et al. [10] reported
end of the day, bundling purchases into one transaction.
substantial price dispersion online. They suggested that
Subscription services may become more popular due
Amazon.com can demand a premium price for online
to Microsoft’s new copyright protection tool, Janus [6].
books because they differentiate themselves based on
Released in July 2004, Janus uses a hacker-proof clock
service capability and brand recognition. Clemons, et al.
to let consumers rent digital files for a predetermined
[12] found that product differentiation via online travel
amount of time. Bhattacharjee, et al. [4] argue that due
agents’ services was a key driver of price dispersion.
to piracy, a digital music distributor may be able to
The music market appears to be in a “pre-price
maximize profits by offering a mixed-model purchase
dispersion state” that may change as consumers begin to
and subscription service.
show differentiated demand for songs in digital format
1.3. Research Questions and for the service providers. Gallaway and Kinnear [19]
found that older music could be offered at lower prices.
We analyze the changing music industry from the
Higher prices could then be reserved for new music,
perspective of each of the players in the industry value
where demand is more inelastic and copyright protection
chain: artists, record label/producers, intellectual
is more strictly enforced. This suggests that pricing for
property (IP) rights enforcement body, physical retailers,
digital music downloads should account for popularity.
digital music retailers, and consumers. We answer:
Thus, we expect to see formation of market segments,
• What impacts will digital music have on the music price-tiers and increasing price dispersion.
industry market structure? How do property rights Price Rigidity. The current consistent pricing of
issues affect the predicted outcomes? MP3s suggest the existence of some basis for the
• Can current theory explain changes in the roles of the observed price rigidity. Kauffman and Lee [26] suggest
players in the recorded music value chain? Will five bases for price rigidity on the Internet: menu costs of
property rights issues change their behavior? price adjustment, underlying market structure,
asymmetric information in industry business processes,
• What other contextual evidence can we provide for the demand-based drivers (e.g., consumer expectations), and
robustness of our theory for changes in the market contract-based drivers (e.g., subscriptions).
structure of other digital goods industries? Digital music services maintain databases of MP3s
We evaluate the literature on pricing and property and their prices involve low menu costs. Contract-based
rights issues associated with information goods, as well price rigidities are not likely. The market is too young to
as market structure and value chain analysis. Based on have any long-term contracts established between digital
our synthesis, we propose a new conceptual model for music sellers and buyers. Industry price changes are
understanding the value chain. Our model considers the easily viewed by competitors. Some firms maintain rigid
traditional music value chain, key product characteristics prices to avoid signaling quality weaknesses to
of digital music, and related property rights issues. It competitors or customers [38]. Online firms compete on
enables a series of propositions that provide a theoretical price first and then non-price elements, such as customer
interpretation of the ongoing industry transformation, in service, promotions, and advertising [26]. Digital music
terms of the roles of the market participants. We utilize is at an early stage of its development, so service
exploratory research methods, specifically business and providers have not established service capability or brand
organizational mini-cases, to identify leading issues and differentiation.
theoretical relationships in the digital music market [2, Versioning, Bundling and Subscriptions. Shapiro
17]. and Varian [36] describe three strategies for pricing
information goods: versioning, bundling, and fixed-fee
2. BACKGROUND LITERATURE pricing. We have already seen fixed-fee subscription
We present three areas of theory associated with services for digital audio streams. Similarly, bundles of
digital music distribution: pricing of digital goods, digital music tracks can be purchased for $9.99. These
market structure and value chain analysis, and related are either a full album from one artist or some
intellectual property rights theory concerns. compilation of tracks compiled by the service provider.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Southeast University. Downloaded on October 29,2023 at 14:03:46 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE 2
 Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005

Altinkemer and Bandyopadhyay [1] demonstrate flexible free market access to suppliers that are connected via the
bundling strategies for digitized music based on an Internet, which translates into more choices. There also
economic model. Different prices for different versions are lower coordination costs throughout the industry
of digital music have not surfaced yet, although full- value chain. This enables e-links between suppliers (i.e.,
contents “try-before-buying” versions with less audio artists and digital distributors) and consumers, which
quality have appeared. An example is Naxos reduce transaction and coordination costs. Lower
(www.naxos.com), a leading discount classical music physical distribution costs are also possible. Digital
label. Music versioning is also being considered in the music is reproducible at nearly zero cost, reducing
physical CD market. BMG Germany began testing a distribution costs compared to physical formats of
new pricing model by offering three-tier versioned CDs: recorded music. Finally, there is potential for
a €9.99 low-quality, no cover art version; a €12.99 redistribution and reduction in total profits. With the
medium-quality standard version; and a €17.99 high- changes come new opportunities for artists to bypass
quality version with bonus tracks and online extras production of physical CDs and avoid royalty contracts
(www.bertlesmann.com). that depend on recouping production costs. With lower
For audio quality, an MP3 purchased from one costs, consumers may gain from lower prices while
provider is virtually the same as an MP3 purchased from artists gain a share of the profits they have not obtained
another provider. Moorthy and Png [31] suggest that before. Meantime, record labels and production
offering multiple versions of a physical good allows companies lose their shares. Thus, the changing structure
retailers to reach a market segment that may not already of the value chain may have major impacts on the
be served, yielding higher profits. Riggins [35] extends distribution of profits within the industry. Zhu [42]
their model to an information good setting with tiered examined e-distribution for digital videos and found that,
Web sites. However, the same characteristics of in the short term, more use of digital production and
information-based goods that allow for easy versioning distribution technologies may result in significant cost
also allow unscrupulous users to violate copyrights by reductions throughout the value chain. However, in the
engaging in piracy activities. Wu, et al. [41] argue that it long term, digitization of film production and
is even possible to fight the piracy of information goods distribution may cause motion picture industry
with versioning. Still, versioning may become an restructuring.
effective tool in digital music pricing and marketing
Newly-Vulnerable Market Structures. Changes in
because it promotes self-selection.
the value chain can drive changes in the underlying
2.2. Music Market Structure and Virtual Value Chain market structure and vice versa. Mahadevan [30]
discusses the new market structures of Internet-based e-
We next consider virtual value chains and market
commerce and the accompanying business models.
structure vulnerability for digital music.
Digital music providers act as product/service providers
The Virtual Value Chain. A new virtual value by dealing directly with the end customer. The emerging
chain characterizes the digital music market. Rayport digital music market supports dramatically reduced
and Sviokla [33] argue that there is a series of value- production and distribution costs. But technology allows
adding activities connecting a company’s supply side them to disintermediate others players too, by cutting out
with its demand side. The traditional value chain treats unnecessary steps in the value chain. Market structures
information as a “supporting element of the value-adding and value chains are subject to change when the channel
process, not as a source of value (p. 76).” A virtual value of distribution changes to Internet-based selling.
chain exists when value-adding steps are performed Gosain and Lee [20] argue that the music market is
through and with information. For digital music, there is especially subject to changes. Internet demographics of
no longer a physical product to manufacture. Instead the young, educated, and well-off customers are suited to
product itself is information: the digital music recording. music purchases. The Internet allows sampling of
“Companies that create value with digital assets may be products using digital audio files. There are low
able to reharvest them in an infinite number of consumer and seller risks due to relatively low product
transactions [33, p. 82]”. A song is recorded once, but in costs, which may lead to impulse purchases. And the
a digital format it can be replicated and distributed an Internet pro-vides reach and connectivity within the
infinite number of times with low costs for reproduction. music market for buyers and sellers. The Internet also
Also, songs in digital format can be sampled and supports an emergent virtual market in which the music
remixed benefiting record companies, artists, and labels and artists may move to distribute directly to
creative consumers. consumers. The authors also identify five key
Benjamin and Wigand [3] identify four areas of differences between the physical and digital market
opportunities and risks for stakeholders in online channels: a decoupling of the digital content from the
distribution. There are benefits to consumers: they have physical carrier; easy unbundling and rebundling for

Authorized licensed use limited to: Southeast University. Downloaded on October 29,2023 at 14:03:46 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE 3
 Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005

digital goods; finer-grained control over the customer online information-based goods markets. Conner and
experience and dynamic pricing; less importance placed Rumelt [14] have shown that in the software industry,
on physical logistics and brick-and-mortar infrastructure; under certain circumstances, piracy can be beneficial to
and an increased role for value-added information and both firms and consumers by raising profit levels and
the support of information processing tasks. Each is lowering selling costs. Jiang and Sarkar [25] expand this
apparent in digital music distribution. idea for digital music and show that some piracy may be
Clemons, et al. [11] interpret the emerging useful in certain circumstances to encourage usage.
competition between music companies and their star Shapiro and Varian [36] point out that a key managerial
artists as a result of online distribution. They note that tradeoff in these markets is to balance the value created
music is increasingly produced using digital technology by allowing some liberality in terms of distribution while
and distributed on digital media (CDs) or in pure digital maintaining a viable revenue model.
formats (MP3s). Some music is created, distributed and
3. THEORETICAL DEVELOPMENT
enjoyed without ever requiring physical production.
Using the theories of resource-based value retention and We next explain the changes that are occurring in
newly-vulnerable markets, the authors argue that music the music industry value chain.
labels are vulnerable to falling profits due to the potential
increase in power of the artists because of digital 3.1. Conventional Recorded Music Value Chain
technology. The digital music market is a newly- Figure 1 shows that the main drivers for value in the
vulnerable market: newly easy to enter, attractive to traditional recorded music value chain include copyright
attack, and difficult to defend [11, 13]. Dramatic and licensing (airplay), production, distribution and
technology change has reduced the necessary cost of inventory, and promotion and marketing costs.
resources. The market is attractive to attack due to the
presence of cross-subsidies (star artists subsidizing Figure 1. Traditional Music Distribution Value Chain
unprofitable artists). It is difficult to defend because
artists have opportunities to easily break away from Traditional Music Industry Market Structure
record labels. Economic analysis using the Grossman- Retailer Consumer
Hart-Moore theory of incomplete contracts [23, 34] also Record Manufacturer/
Artist Distributor
has confirmed that in the new music virtual value chain, Label
star artists’ increased bargaining power should lead to Retailer Consumer
profit-sharing arrangements that are more favorable to Producer
star acts. The vulnerability of record labels and
production facilities is forcing these players to adopt new
strategies to maintain profit levels. The record labels can
provide promotional and production management Traditional Music Industry Value Chain
services, offer piracy prevention and copyright protection
services, or they can attack online channels to lock out Compose, Copyright and
Produce, Licensing Manufacturing Inventory
independent distribution. Consumer
and Marketing and and Distribution and Sales
2.3. Intellectual Property Rights Record Promotion

With information-based goods such as digital music,

software, news and e-books, most of the costs are in the
Record labels make the most profit and have the
development of the first copy of the good. Once
most control over the value chain. According to
developed, information-based goods can be reproduced
Clemons, et al. [11], record labels retain 35% or more of
and distributed at essentially zero cost. This unique
the revenues received from retailers. However, with the
aspect of information goods allows the producer to
advent of digital music formats, there are many
version the good to create free samples for potential
opportunities for changes in the recorded music
buyers. However, information-based goods also allow
distribution value chain. Kauffman and Walden [27]
pirates and file sharers to illegally copy and use the good
argue that technology enables products, business
without the producer’s knowledge. Peer-to-peer (P2P)
processes and markets. In addition, markets are defined
file sharing networks such as Napster, Gnutella, and by the business process that permits transactions of
KaZaA threaten the very business model of information-
specific products. With digital music, the new MP3
based goods producers by potentially eliminating all
audio format standards and the Internet have enabled
sales revenues. The popularity of these networks has
new music products and distribution processes. These,
been evident. Napster went from zero users in June 1999
in turn, have reshaped the existing market structure.
to 20 million in July 2000. Enforcement of intellectual
property (IP) rights, thus, is crucial to the viability of

Authorized licensed use limited to: Southeast University. Downloaded on October 29,2023 at 14:03:46 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE 4
 Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005

3.2. Digital Music Product Characteristics information occurs over the Internet when consumers
purchase digital music files from a distributor and
Digital music characteristics influence market
download or stream content.
structure. The digital music format is cheap to reproduce
Intermediaries are economic agents that facilitate
and transfer, and is portable and easy to store. For these
transactions between suppliers and buyers. They set
reasons, it is subject to significant IP rights concerns.
market-clearing prices, make purchase and sales
The quality of experience with using the digital music
decisions, manage inventories, supply information and
product is virtually the same as with the physical
coordinate transactions to provide the underlying market
medium. And, the digital format allows music to be
microstructure [37]. Their role in the music market is
separated into individual songs and rebundled in unique
changing as a result of the digital music format. Physical
ways to form new products. These characteristics enable
retailers are being replaced by digital music retailers.
new business processes and products in the music
Manufactures and distributors are becoming obsolete as
industry. Table 2 outlines how these characteristics
record labels, producers and artists can go directly to
impact the players in the music industry value chain.
digital music retailers without producing a physical
3.3. The Digital Music Virtual Value Chain product, reducing the “distance” between the music
supplier and the consumer.
Digital technologies in the music market will drive Figure 2 sketches our model of the music industry
changes in the underlying market structure and value
value chain and market structure with digital music.
chain. The adoption and diffusion of digital music,
reduction in “distance” between artists and consumers, Figure 2. Digital Music Distribution Value Chain
wide distribution networks through the online channel,
reduced costs of replication and production, and Digital Music Industry Market Structure
copyright protection and piracy issues will affect the
music market structure. Moreover, the nature of the new Record Manufacturer/
Artist Retailer Consumer
Label Distributor
digital music format will be a key driver of the new
virtual value chain in the industry.
Table 2. Digital Music Product Characteristics Producer
Digital
Music Consumer
CHARAC- PLAYERS HOW THEY ARE AFFECTED
TERISTIC AFFECTED Artist Retailer
Easily Record label Low manufacturing costs IP Rights
New Supply Link
reproduced Artist, record High cost to make “master” Protection Body
label Low break-even
Easily Record label Low distribution costs Digital Music Industry Value Chain
transferred Consumer Cheap, high quality product
Effective Digital music Low inventory costs
electronic retailer Low menu costs
Manufacturing Inventory
format Consumer Easy pre-purchase sampling
and Distribution and Sales
Likes high portability
Values high compatibility Compose, Copyright and
Demands additional product Produce, Licensing
features: artwork, lyrics, etc. and Marketing and Consumer
Equivalent Consumer More product options Record Promotion
quality Physical New entrants can compete IP Rights
Enforcement Digital
retailer Increased Value
Distribution
Contribution and Piracy
Separability Artist, label Song “single” is the product and Sales
Protection
Decreased Value
Contribution
Five activities occur in the virtual value chain:
gathering, organizing, selecting, synthesizing, and
distributing information [33]. Clemons and Lang [13] The added value to the music product from
provide a detailed analysis of the impact of changing manufacturing and distribution is decreasing, but digital
digital technologies on the five value added activities music retailers add new value. With Internet distribution
identified above. For digital music, the creation and and music piracy, they can now add value through
recording of music and the signing and promotion of marketing, promotions, copyrighting and licensing.
artists represent the gathering and organizing steps. There is also value added through enforcement of IP
Selection and synthesis occur when the artists and/or rights and piracy prevention. As a result, the channel
record labels produce digital recordings. Distribution of power dynamics change. Plus, there will be new

Authorized licensed use limited to: Southeast University. Downloaded on October 29,2023 at 14:03:46 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE 5
 Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005

incentives as the roles of the players in the value chain Mini-Case 1a (Artists): “Beastie Boys Link to iTunes from
shift. The changed value chain is likely to be affected by Web Site.” Prior to their full-length album release in June
issues that relate to IP rights. 2004, the Beastie Boys made use of their Web site to promote
the music it contained. The group’s site linked to Apple
4. PROPOSITIONS AND RELATED EVIDENCE iTunes, where it was possible for a consumer to immediately
purchase their music in digital format. The Beastie Boys
We next specify propositions for how each player is
continue to leverage their Web site to sell digital copies of their
affected based on exploratory mini-case evidence. They music, cutting out the distribution and manufacturing
aid theory development and pre-empirical analysis of middlemen. Source: www.beastieboys.com.
issues and relationships in the digital music market.
4.1. Artists Mini-Case 1b (Artists): “Freezepop—A Do-It-Yourself
Approach.” Freezepop, a Boston group, recorded an album
New digital recording and distribution technologies using a $300 sequencer, made two animated videos using
present opportunities for artists to adopt a do-it-yourself inexpensive Shockwave Flash, and developed a fan base by
approach. Before, artists depended on labels for access posting news, photos, and tour dates and offering merchandise
to production and distribution capabilities. With digital on their Web site. The group brokered download-only
technologies and the Internet, artists can produce, record, distribution deals with online music stores, such as iTunes and
and distribute music without help from record labels. A Napster, avoiding the production costs. This extreme example
demonstrates the opportunities artists have in the music
leading example is ArtistLed, Inc. (www.artistled.com),
industry through digital technologies. Source: [8].
which focuses on the Internet. The company calls itself
“classical music’s first Internet recording company.”
A survey [32] reveals that 83% of musicians and Mini-Case 1c (Artists): “ArtistLed, Inc., the Living Room
Record Label.” “[T]he Internet …favors cottage industries
songwriters provide music samples online. Free
such as ArtistLed, the living-room record label belonging to the
downloads sell more music and increase concert husband-and-wife duo of cellist David Finckel, and pianist Wu
attendance. Artists have incentives to compete directly Han. Finckel and Wu produce their own CDs of cello sonatas
with record labels and producers [11]. The digital music … [sell] exclusively through their own Web site. Their costs
format has had a positive impact on the artist, who can are minimal and they pocket 100% of the sale price, so they do
leverage the technology for further gains. Gosain and not need to sell many copies to break even. … ‘Where do you
Lee [20] anticipate a decoupling of digital content from think the clerk in an ordinary store would file our CDs?’ asks
the physical carrier. Artists can distribute music directly Wu. “Under ‘Miscellaneous Cello.’ But the Web site is like
to consumers through the Internet, bypassing having our own store.” Source: [16].
intermediaries involved in the production and 4.2. Record Labels / Production Companies
distribution of physical music media. They determine
whether they need help with distribution or can go it Record labels and production companies may lose in
alone, and will benefit from choosing between periodic this new environment of digital music distribution. As
song-by-song releases or whole-album releases. The artists gain control, traditional producers and
separability of the digital music format allows intermediaries will lose profits—unless they develop
consumers the option of buying individual songs through ways to retain profits, emphasizing value that artists
digital music retailers. This gives artists incentives to cannot provide themselves. These services include
unbundle full-length albums and focus on producing promotion and marketing management, production
singles for sale. consulting services, and copyright enforcement services
[11]. Since digital music is virtually costless to
Consider these propositions related to the artists: reproduce and transfer, as manufacturing and distribution
• Proposition 1a (Artist-Led Direct Distribution). costs are removed, artists will require less upfront
Due to new incentives more artists will form their own investment to produce their music and record labels will
online direct distribution capabilities. lose power over the value chain. The labels, thus, have
an incentive to claim a new stake, as we point out with
• Proposition 1b (Digitally-Intermediated Distribu- the following propositions for the record labels.
tion). Due to new incentives more artists will contract
with digital music retailers for online distribution of • Proposition 2a (Service Alliances). Record labels
their music. will invest in digital distribution services by either (i)
forming alliances with existing digital music retailers
• Proposition 1c (Music Singles Production). Due to or (ii) by launching their own services.
new incentives more artists will focus on producing
singles, not bundled music, for online distribution. • Proposition 2b (Copyright and Promotion). Record
labels will add value by focusing more on copyright,
The following mini-cases illustrate these propositions. licensing, marketing, and promotion services.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Southeast University. Downloaded on October 29,2023 at 14:03:46 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE 6
 Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005

Mini-Case 2a (Record Labels/Production Companies): • Proposition 4 (Brick-and-Mortar Customer Ex-

“Bertlesmann Forms Alliance with Napster.” Bertlesmann, perience): Brick-and-mortar music retailers will
owner of BMG Entertainment (a major record labels), formed diversify their product offerings and enhance their
an alliance with the P2P file-share service. Napster 2.0 is a customers’ experience to retain them.
(now) legal pay per download and subscription service.
BMG’s alliance signaled the power of the digital music format Mini-Case 4 (Physical Retailers): “FYE Stores Use
in the eyes of the record labels. Source: [5]. Technology to Attract Customers.” Trans World
Entertainment Corp. installed 1,250 viewing stations at its 600
Mini-Case 2b (Record Labels/Production Companies): mall stores. The viewing stations let consumers preview
“Sony Launches Download Service.” Sony launched its games, movies, and music prior to purchase. FYE sees the
online music service, Connect, on May 4, 2004 to compete with stations as a marketing tool that allows sales staff to provide
leader, Apple iTunes. Sony produces music through its record personalized assistance to customers. The music retailer is
label, Sony Music, and manufactures electronic devices that also diversifying, by stocking more video games and DVD
play digital music formats. Connect will provide digital music titles. Source: [40].
downloads that are only compatible with Sony devices using
4.5. Digital Music Retailers
flash media technology. Source: [21].
Digital music retailers are building installed bases of
4.3. IP Rights Protection Body customers. As the number of consumers increases,
Since digital music is easy to reproduce, there is a need digital music providers’ control over the costs associated
for IP rights enforcement to prevent piracy. Several with selling music will increase. Unbundling and
technical advances, such as encryption, watermarking, rebundling will be easy for digital goods, enabling more
traffic volume monitors, and time-triggered decay fine-grained control over the customer experience and
mechanisms, can help prevent illegal copying of digital dynamic pricing [20]. Online retailers differentiate
files. Even so, Clemons, et al. [11] note that the music themselves through brand, services and trust, as in the
industry can add value to the digital music value chain online book, CD, and travel industries [9, 12].
by developing a contracting and legal mechanism to Versioning and bundling are ways for online retailers to
stamp out digital music piracy. This will include new offer unique products to meet demands with varying
and tougher enforcement of existing copyright laws and levels of willingness-to-pay across customer types.
perhaps the creation of new copyright laws for the digital Thus, digital music providers have profit incentives
age. The new IP needs of the music industry will be met for differentiating themselves with product versioning,
by legal, government, and corporate players. In our services, and brand. Digital music retailers can offer
conceptual model we incorporate a new entity called the services such as recommender systems, versions based
“IP Rights Protection Body.” on audio quality or copyright restrictions, and product
extensions such as downloadable lyrics. “Separability”
• Proposition 3 (IP Rights Enforcement). Legal of digital music products provides an opportunity for the
bodies will contribute to the value chain by enforcing sellers to offer unique bundles to consumers.
IP rights and fighting piracy of digital music.
• Proposition 5a (Digital Music Retailer Differen-
Mini-Case 3 (IP Rights Protection Body): “RIAA Sues tiation). Digital music retailers will differentiate them-
Napster.” In November of 1999, the RIAA filed a lawsuit selves by offering new services, product versions and
against then upstart Napster for the illegal distribution of
extensions, and unique bundles of music.
copyrighted music. This case against the P2P pioneer marks
the beginning of legal efforts to protect intellectual property • Proposition 5b (Digital Music Price Dispersion).
rights in the digital music industry. Source: [39]. Digital music retailer differentiation will result in price
4.4. Physical Retailers dispersion in the online digital music market.

Brick-and-mortar retailers stand to lose more Two mini-cases on the innovations of Apple iTunes for
customers unless they offer new products and services. pricing and customized playlists illustrate.
Physical logistics and infrastructure will be less Mini-Case 5a (Digital Music Retailers): “Apple iTunes’
important as the digital goods grow in popularity [20]. Custom Playlists for Download.” Apple iTunes offers
In order to avoid becoming obsolete, brick-and-mortar playlists designed by celebrities and staff for download.
music stores will need to sell an “experience” to the Playlists have individual tracks from various artists based on a
customer, not a specific digital music product. theme. For example, a consumer can download a Barry
Combining nightclubs, tattoo parlors, workstations, and Manilow Playlist. Or, a consumer can download the Totally
live performances with the traditional music store are 80s Playlist, which includes 1980s pop songs. The separability
of digital music into individual songs gives retailers the
possible ways to add value to the customer experience.
opportunity to create unique product bundles. Source: Apple
iTunes, www.apple.com/itunes.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Southeast University. Downloaded on October 29,2023 at 14:03:46 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE 7
 Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005

• Proposition 6 (Consumer Adoption): Due to the

Mini-Case 5b (Digital Music Retailers): “Apple iTunes new incentives consumers will continue to adopt and
Tries New Pricing Strategies.” Apple iTunes has priced purchase digital music as more services and products
single songs at 99¢ and albums at $9.99. Newer albums have are introduced. As a result, digital music will become
been priced higher. For example, Aerosmith’s newest album the dominant format for recorded music products.
was priced at $11.99, while Joe Satriani’s newest release was
$14.99. Some record executives are eager to test tiered-price Mini-Case 6a (Consumers): “The 40G iPod.” Apple sells the
models in the digital music market. Source: [7]. most popular digital music player on the market, the iPod. It
comes in capacities from 4 to 40 GB. A 40GB iPod can hold
4.6. Consumers 10,000 songs, equivalent to 670 music albums. iPod owners
Download services have changed physical CD sales. can carry a library of music in their pocket. The portability of
the digital music format makes this possible. But at current
The consumer now has the option of buying one song for
prices—99¢ per song—it would cost about $10,000 to legally
99¢, rather than buying a whole CD for $15.99. There is fill an iPod. Source: Apple Computer, www.apple.com/ipod.
no loss of utility: the consumer purchases only the songs
that she wants, creating her own bundles. Rather than
relying on a record company or artists to assemble a set Mini-Case 6b (Consumers): “iTunes Popularity Grows
Exponentially.” Apple iTunes increased its downloader base
of songs into an album, the consumer can now pick
from 861,000 in July 2003 to 4.9 million in March 2004.
songs from various artists and assemble a bundle of $15 Because of this success, Sony, Microsoft, Virgin, Yahoo—and
worth of music to her own tastes. even AOL—are all making plans to enter the market. Source:
Current MP3 players hold very large amounts of [7].
music, making music collections more portable and
transferable than ever before. Also, the MP3 format 5. DISCUSSION
allows the consumer to turn multiple devices into music The digital music market structure has implications
players. Consumers also can listen to digital music on for strategy and management in the music industry.
PDAs, laptop computers, desktop computers, and mobile From our propositions and mini-cases, it should be
phones, and MP3s can be converted and burned to CDs apparent to the reader that power is shifting. Artists,
for play on standard CD players. The MP3 may be consumers, and digital music retailers are gaining more
music’s first universal format. Downloading and control. Table 3 summarizes the shifts in power that are
purchasing digital music is easy, only requiring a PC in the works. This leads to several strategic
connected to the Internet. The format gives a consumer opportunities for the players in the music industry.
instant access to thousands of music tracks. Digital music sellers make little profit with song
Audiophiles claim there is loss of quality, but most sales. Easy transfer and reproduction leave songs
people hear no difference in quality with digital music vulnerable to piracy, and P2P file sharing has hurt artists
vs. a physical CD. Unlike other digitized goods, the and record labels. It is crucial (as with Recording
interface for digital music is the same as for its physical Industry Assoc. of America lawsuits in 2003) for the key
counterpart. Digital music is experienced through players to enforce IP rights restrictions, and promulgate
speakers and is listened to, the same as a physical CD. effective copyrights and licensing for digital music
Recording or “ripping” digital music at 96 kbs or higher distribution. Similarly, technology firms can impact the
provides similar audio quality as a physical CD. This music industry through innovation. Microsoft’s Janus
suggests why digital music has been a success, while technology is a technology company’s effort to enter the
digitized text products have not. Digital text products music industry and provide tech support for digital
have changed the reading interface, such that a reader no property rights protection [18].
longer reads from a paper copy, but from a luminous Though digital music has advantages over physical
screen. Finally, like any successful new technology, formats, the product is incomplete. Digital music does
there is “hype” associated with digital music downloads. not include some of the important attributes of the
Digital technologies have increased consumers’ physical CD. These include artwork, lyrics, liner notes,
bargaining power. Lee [29] shows how the popular P2P and additional content found in enhanced CDs (video
systems increased consumer power and Hughes and games, desktop wallpaper, video clips). But these can be
Lang [24] argue that the Internet has allowed consumers made available in a digital form for distribution. The
to organize into powerful networks to build their Beastie Boys represent a good example. They offer
bargaining power. Digital music users are setting trends downloadable lyrics on their Web site to accompany new
in technology and music that analysts believe will singles. The value chain players should differentiate the
continue, with many new users attracted whose adoption definitions of digital music products, which will affect
will persist. the contents and prices of digital music, and how the

Authorized licensed use limited to: Southeast University. Downloaded on October 29,2023 at 14:03:46 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE 8
 Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005

Table 3. Power Shifts Among Recorded Music Market Players

PLAYER CONVENTIONAL VALUE FLOWS DIGITAL MUSIC VALUE FLOWS POWER CHANGE
Artist Music composition (creativity) Composition, performance (creativity) More control of production, distr.
Recording of music Recordings, performances, appearances Potential increase in profits
Performances and appearances Production and distribution arrangements Decreased copyright protection
Label and Copyright enforcement Copyright enforcement Loss of control over production
Production Produce, mfg. of recorded music Marketing, promotion, advertising and distribution
Company Distribution, mktg., promotion Potential decrease in profits
IP Rights Limited intellectual property Intellectual property rights enforcement Increase control over the legal
Enforcement rights enforcement Piracy prevention distribution of digital music
Body Prosecution of music piracy cases
Traditional Distribution to customer None Loss of customers/sales
Retailer Advertising Decrease in profits
Digital Music None Distribution to customer Growth of digital music market
Retailer Advertising Potential increase in profits
Services (recommendations, search, etc.) Increased competition
Consumer Purchase music in physical format Choice: purchase physical format or New supply channel
digital format, or pirate digital format More product choices
More power over prices

market is segmented. Bundling is a key strategy for compilations of various performances. Prices for singles
offering unique products to customers. The digital are slightly lower than our pop music examples—only
single-song product also allows retailers and consumers 49¢, instead of 79¢ per song. Pop music titles are like
to define their own bundles of music. bestseller books, while some classical music titles are
There are unique new ways to do online marketing more like steadysellers (e.g., Jane Austen’s classics).
with digital music. Digital music’s only distribution Hence, price differences occur, as we see in bookstores.
channel is the Internet. Players in the music industry Future research may consider the two main pricing
should consider opportunities to advertise and attract strategies for digital music: pay per song download and
customers online to this channel, and explore the creation subscription services. There are many opportunities to
of strategic alliances. Online digital music retailers can explore consumers’ willingness to pay in the context of
form exclusive alliances with artists or record labels to illegal file sharing and piracy.
attract a fan base to their store. Dai and Kauffman [15] Though the conceptual model presented in this paper
showed this approach worked for B2B procurement e- is intended for the music industry, it is applicable to
markets to acquire installed bases of buyers and sellers. other industries. In particular, the quickly-growing
downloadable movie market has similarities. Digital
6. CONCLUSION
movie downloads provide the same interface and user
We offered a high-level assessment of the changing experience as traditional DVD and videocassettes. Like
market structure in the online digital music industry. digital music, digital movies are easily reproducible and
Our contribution is unique. Our theoretical interpretation transferable. Movielink.com (www.movielink.com) is
is based on value chain analysis, market structure one example. It offers downloadable movies via
characteristics, and the different stakeholder perspectives broadband connections. We expect that trends in the
of each player in the recorded music market. This led us movie industry will mimic those in the music industry.
to state a series of propositions that characterize some
further changes that are likely to occur. We also REFERENCES
identified change drivers and provided real world mini-
[1] Altinkemer, K, Bandyopadhyay, S. “Bundling and
cases that lend support to our theoretical interpretations. Distribution of Digitized Music Over the Internet,” J. Org.
We also suggested strategies the players may use to deal Comp. and Elec. Comm., 10, 3, 2000, 209-224.
with the changing market as a result of digital music
distribution. This work is relevant to IS and Marketing [2] Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D.K., Mead, M. “The Case
Research Strategy in Studies of Information Systems,”
researchers and managerial audiences. It provides
MIS Quarterly, 11, 3, 1987, 369-386.
perspectives on the emergence of a new market and
identifies potential drivers for value creation. [3] Benjamin, R., Wigand, R. “Electronic Markets and Virtual
We mostly focused on popular music in this Value Chains on the Information Superhighway,” Sloan
analysis, but this story could well have been told for Mgmt. Rev., 36, 2, 1995, 62-72.
classical music. eClassical.com (www.eclassical.com) [4] Bhattacharjee, S., Gopal, R., Lertwachara, K., Marsden, J.
offers single downloads of classical performances and “Economics of Online Music,” in Proc. 5th Intl. Conf.
Elec. Comm., Pittsburgh, PA, Sept. 2003.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Southeast University. Downloaded on October 29,2023 at 14:03:46 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE 9
 Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005

[5] Borland, J. “Napster Launches, Minus the Revolution” of Digital Community Networks and Its Impact on the
CNET News, October 9, 2003. Music Industry,” J. Media Mgmt., 5, 3, 2003, 180-189.
[6] Borland, J. “Microsoft’s iPod Killer?” CNET News, April [25] Jiang, Z., Sarkar, S. “Free Software Offer and Software
2, 2004. Diffusion: The Monopolist Case,” in Proc. 24th Intl. Conf.
Info. Sys., Seattle, WA, December 2003.
[7] Borland, J., and Fried, I. “iTunes Ushers in a Year of
Change,” CNET News, April 26, 2004. [26] Kauffman, R., Lee, D. “Should We Expect Less Price
Rigidity in the Digital Economy?” in Proc. 37th Hawaii
[8] Boutin, P. “We’d Like to Thank Our PC,” Wired 12, 3, Intl. Conf. Sys. Sci., Los Alamitos, CA, IEEE Comp. Soc.,
March 2004, 74. 2004.
[9] Brynjolfsson, E. Smith, M. “Frictionless Commerce? A [27] Kauffman, R. J., Walden, E. A. “Economics and
Comparison of Internet and Conventional Retailers,” Electronic Commerce: Survey and Directions for
Mgmt. Sci., 46, 4, 2000, 563-585. Research,” Intl. J. Elec. Comm., 5, 4, 2001, 5-116.
[10] Clay, K., Krishnan, R., Wolff, E., Fernandes, D., “Retail [28] Keegan, P. “Is the Music Store Over?” Business 2.0
Strategies on the Web: Price and Non-Price Competition Online, March 2004.
in the Online Book Industry,” J. Ind. Econ., 50, 3, 2003,
351-367. [29] Lee, J. “An End-User Perspective on File-Sharing
Systems,” Comm. ACM, 46, 2, 2003, 49-53.
[11] Clemons, E.K., Gu, B., Lang, K.R. “Newly Vulnerable
Markets in an Age of Pure Information Products: An [30] Mahadevan, B. “Business Models for Internet-Based E-
Analysis of Online Music and News,” J. Mgmt. Info. Sys., Commerce: An Anatomy,” Cal. Mgmt. Rev., 42, 4, 2000,
19, 3, 2002, 17-41. 55-69.
[12] Clemons, E.K., Hann, I., Hitt, L. “Price Dispersion and [31] Moorthy, K.S., Png, I.P.L. “Market Segmentation,
Differentiation in On-Line Travel: An Empirical Cannibalization, and the Timing of Product
Investigation,” Mgmt. Sci., 48, 4, 2002, 543-549. Introductions,” Mgmt. Sci., 38, 3, 1992, 345-359.
[13] Clemons, E.K. and Lang, K.R. “The Decoupling of Value [32] Rainie, L., Madden, M. “Preliminary Findings from a Web
Creation from Revenue: A Strategic Analysis of the Survey of Musicians and Songwriters,” Pew Internet and
Markets for Pure Information Goods,” Info. Tech. and American Life Project, Washington, DC, May 2004.
Mgmt., 4, 2003, 259-287.
[33] Rayport, J., Sviokla J. “Exploiting the Virtual Value
[14] Conner, K. and Rumelt, R. “Software Piracy: An Analysis Chain,” Harvard Bus. Rev., Nov.-Dec. 1995, 75-85.
of Protection Strategies,” Mgt. Sci., 37, 2, 1991, 125-139.
[34] Regner, T. “Innovation of Music” in R. Watt and W. J.
[15] Dai, Q. and Kauffman, R.J. “To Be or Not to B2B: (Eds.), Ch. 6, The Economics of Copyright: Developments
Evaluating Managerial Choices for E-Procurement and Research, Edward Elgar Publ., UK, 2003, 104-117.
Channel Adoption,” Info. Tech. Mgmt., 2005, in press..
[35] Riggins, F.J. “Market Segmentation and Information
[16] Davidson, J. “Saved By the Net? Classical Musicians— Development Costs in a Two-Tiered Fee-Based and
Long Facing Declining Audience—Hope to Find New Sponsorship-Based Web Site,” J. Mgmt. Info. Sys., 19, 3,
Life,” Newsday, February 1, 1998. 2002, 69-87.
[17] Eisenhardt, K. “Building Theories from Case Study [36] Shapiro, C. and Varian, H. R. Information Rules: A
Research,” Acad. Mgmt. Rev., 14, 4, 1989, 532-550. Strategic Guide to the Network Economy, Harvard
Business School Press, Boston, Ma, 1999.
[18] Foley, M. J. “Microsoft Opens Door on ‘Janus,’”
Microsoft Watch, May 3, 2004. [37] Spulber, D. F. “Market Microstructure and Inter-
mediation” J. Econ. Persp., 10, 3, 1996, 135-152.
[19] Gallaway, T., Kinnear, D. “Unchained Melody: A Price
Discrimination–Based Policy Proposal for Addressing the [38] Stiglitz, J E. “Toward a General Theory of Wage and
MP3 Revolution,” J. Econ. Iss., 35, 2, 2001, 279-287. Price Rigidities and Economic Fluctuations,” Amer. Econ.
Rev., 89, 2, 1999, 75-80.
[20] Gosain, S., Lee, Z. “The Internet and the Reshaping of the
Music CD Market,” Elec. Mkts., 11, 2, 2001, 140-145. [39] Sullivan, J “RIAA Suing Upstart Startup,” Wired News,
November 15, 1999.
[21] Graham, J. “Sony Hopes to Strike Chord in Online
Music,” USAToday, May 4, 2004. [40] Wood, R. “Music Retailers Seek New and Old Ways to
Bring in Customers,” Bus. Rev., March 14, 2003.
[22] Guterman, J. “Digital Downloads: Profitless Prosperity?”
Business 2.0 Online, Dec. 10, 2003. [41] Wu, S.-Y., Chen, P.-Y., and Anandalingam, G. “Fighting
Information Goods Piracy with Versioning,” in Proc. 24th
[23] Halonen-Akatwijuka, M., Regner, T. “Digital Technology Intl. Conf. Info. Sys., Seattle, WA, December 2003.
and the Allocation of Ownership in the Music Industry,”
in Proc.Conf. Royal Econ. Soc., Swansea, UK, April 2004. [42] Zhu, K. “Internet-Based Distribution of Digital Videos:
The Economic Impacts of Digitization on the Motion
[24] Hughes, J. and Lang, K.R. “If I Had a Song: The Culture Picture Industry,” Elec. Mkts., 11, 4, 2001, 273-280.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Southeast University. Downloaded on October 29,2023 at 14:03:46 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
0-7695-2268-8/05/$20.00 (C) 2005 IEEE 10