Summary:

Not necessarily in the way you think: this NYTimes story alludes to the lessons the music industry has learned (or should) from the rather hands-off approach the adult industry has taken to copyright. Free or stealing does not necessarily mean much, though in some cases it […]

Not necessarily in the way you think: this NYTimes story alludes to the lessons the music industry has learned (or should) from the rather hands-off approach the adult industry has taken to copyright. Free or stealing does not necessarily mean much, though in some cases it does. For someone like Playboy.com, free images on other websites means more subscribers for their own site…or so it hopes. For example, Playboy pays Webmasters $25 or more for every subscription they funnel to Playboy.com and provides sales and marketing tools to help make the free Web sites more effective.

“Free is very anarchistic and hard to deal with, and you don’t know what you’re getting,” said a pornography entrepreneur who goes by the online pseudonym T. Lassiter Jones. “Cheap is more convenient.” That notion could be the great hope of the mainstream entertainment industry, where fledgling services like the iTunes store and Rhapsody that offer inexpensive, easy access to legal music are beginning to catch on.

“So, yes, sex sells, but so can music,” concludes this NYT story. Very simplistic…extrapolating from this: does music and sex push the same buttons? Is consumer behavior same when it comes to the two?

Comments have been disabled for this post