U.S. record labels need to see benefits of digital streaming

The music world’s battle with digital streaming and illegal downloading rages on, but one of the newest computer programs shows the problem to be most prevalent in the United States.

Spotify is a computer program that allows completely legal and ad-supported streaming of a wide variety of music.

It’s somewhat akin to the original Napster, but legal.

Basically, it’s like clicking through music videos on YouTube, but with less hassle and better sound quality. Any music fan can surely see the benefits of free music.

Spotify allows you to share music with friends, build playlists and libraries and even buy music if you really like it.

There’s also the opportunity to pay for Spotify Premium, which offers additional features such as an offline mode or streaming to various devices such as iPhones, computers or TVs.

If you’re in the United States and you click the “Get Spotify” link, however, you’ll be greeted with a very disappointing announcement: “Spotify is not yet available in your country.”

For a country that prides itself on being the land of the free, the United States hasn’t done a great job living up to its mantra.

Rights are being denied to the many Internet users who understand that the Web should be an open place to share and discover new music.

There have been bills proposed to give the government control of the Internet and the ability to censor it, but it’s actually not U.S. officials stopping Spotify from being available.

It’s the music labels.

This is yet another sign the music industry has not learned from its mistakes.

For years, the music industry spent thousands of dollars on lawsuits against people who downloaded a few songs off Napster.

By doing so, the industry failed to embrace the idea of file sharing and using it to its own advantage.

And there are still lawsuits against file sharers going on today.

This is part of the reason Steve Jobs and Apple became so successful.

The CEO of the then-second-tier computer company recognized that the music business was changing and that people would prefer MP3 downloads and players if given the option.

The interesting thing is that the major U.S. record labels all offer their music in the European market.

None of them, however, have allowed Spotify to offer the same service in the United States.

They might be using Europe as a testing ground before bringing it to the larger and more attractive American market, but it’s unclear why they still haven’t opened the program since it’s been so successful overseas.

The Los Angeles Times has reported that EMI, one of the four major labels in the music industry, is close to cutting a deal with Spotify U.S., but is concerned that “only 7.5 percent of European users are paid subscribers while the rest opt for the free service.”

What the label fails to realize is that having even 7.5 percent of users pay for the service might give them the extra money they need to save the otherwise failing business.

If fans have access to digital versions of a label’s songs, they’re more likely to go out and buy a CD.

Jobs was thinking this way when he created iTunes.

Jobs was successful.

Labels need to realize they might be only delaying the inevitable by trying to stop Internet file sharing, as every young person with a computer and the ability to use Google can easily find almost any album ever created with a few keystrokes.

If music labels can’t adapt to new forms of music consumption that are going to exist whether they do or not, the labels are going to become antiquated like the hard copy CDs they’re still pushing.

The Internet is an open place. The music industry needs to be too.

Will Hagle is a sophomore majoring in narrative studies. His column,  “Feedback,” runs Wednesdays.