So I heard yet another bonehead argument about “markets” etc. from the other side that went something like this:

The reason why iTunes has been a financial success for the music industry is because they have a great product that is easy to use.

This sounds good when you first hear it, right? However, it is the usual load of bollocks from the Great Innovators.

Peer to peer is a great product that is also easy to use, correct? non-Fairplay DRM solutions may have been sold in “great” products, but aren’t so easy to use in the iPod, but they do produce some income. So what’s the difference? Why is iTunes a financial success for the music industry?

The difference is that iTunes respects private property rights, gets licenses and pays royalties. That’s why it makes money for us. As does Amazon, Liquid.com, eMusic and the others.

Lots of things are innovative and easy to use. It takes another step on the part of the “innovator” to innovate some money by means of an innovative royalty system and playing by the innovative rules of the road.

I don’t mind so much if people are offensive. I do mind when they rely on fallacious reasoning to get there. Or as a wise man once said, I don’t know which is more offensive, that he said it or that he thought I would believe it.