Danny ChaiAlso, his model for music distribution is also idiotic. The point is, there are ways now to get music for free, without advertisements. Why then will people use a search engine that gives you music with advertisements? If there’s a choice between that, and other means of obtaining music without it, of course people are going to go with the advertisement-free way. Meaning, no one is going to use Yahoo or whatever if that requires listening to advertisements. Because there’s another way. There is absolutely no reason why people would have to use a search engine that requires you to pay (when others won’t have to) and there’s no reason why links need to go to an artist’s page, with advertisements, when there’s other alternatives.
The only way David’s “model” can work is if the music industry forces it upon people – that only search engines like Yahoo or whatever that link directly to artists’ sites, and that all search engines must go only to artists’ sites. But this is pretty much the same approach that the industry is doing now, trying to force music distribution to be a certain way, and outlawing other ways. If you’re arguing that the current approach won’t work, there’s zero reason why you’re “model” would work, for the exact same reasons.
I always think about Divx in regards to this. You can’t force a system that’s most convenient only for the industry, when there’s an easier system already in place for the consumer. They’ll reject it.