eMusic and AT&T to partner for mobile music downloads

The nation's second largest online music retailer, eMusic, is apparently announcing plans today to partner with AT&T to sell tracks by independent artists directly to mobile phones, without the need for the computer middleman. The music-seller will make nearly all of its 2.7 million songs available for direct download to the carrier's devices, although eMusic's rates will jump from $9.99 for 30 songs using their traditional service, to $7.49 for just five songs with the new mobile service. You would think AT&T would be hot-to-trot with Apple when it comes to selling music for phones, but the telco already has agreements with services like Napster, and since the iPhone-maker somehow failed to include iTunes direct downloads to its device, and doesn't offer them to other devices, AT&T clearly sees a window. Granted, eMusic's catalogue is somewhat more eclectic than iTunes, but with artists like Paul McCartney and The Pixies, the cash registers could start ringing.

[SteveJ @ Jul 31st 2007 10:38AM]

That's a pretty high premium for the convenience of downloading direct to your phone. And one wonders just how convenient it will be to browse emusic on your phone anyway, as opposed to on a real computer.

[Ross @ Jul 31st 2007 10:56AM]

"Granted, eMusic's catalogue is somewhat more eclectic than iTunes"

I don't think eMusic catalogue could be considered broader than iTunes considering Universal, Warner and Sony/BMG don't have contracts with the site for their artist. And they are the 3 largest labels in the US.

[Josef F @ Jul 31st 2007 2:08PM]

"eclectic" does not mean "broader".

[Silver @ Jul 31st 2007 10:56AM]

YES!!!! A 500% premium for the convenience of buying music on a tiny cell phone screen!!! Truly the cell carriers know what we consumers really want!

P.S. what a joke. When Apple puts the iTunes store on my iPhone, at normal iTunes prices, *that* will be mobile music buying the way it *should* be.

[Bruno @ Jul 31st 2007 11:07AM]

Ross, eclectic doesn't mean "more" or "greater" - look it up. :)

So let me get this straight... Buying music on your ATT phone will cost MORE than buying a CD. Wow.

Personally, I think the prices at iTunes for normal tracks (99 cents each) is a huge rip-off, let alone nearly $8 for 5 tracks.

Buy music on CDs, rip them and then put the discs in a box/storage as backup. Of course this isn't suitable for the people who only want to buy one track from a disc, which probably accounts for the majority of teens, preteens and people who aren't really devoted music listeners.

[ross @ Jul 31st 2007 11:17AM]

@Bruno

I didn't say "more or greater", I said broader. Saying eMusic catalogue is more eclectic implies it covers a broader range of musical genre. I don't think this is correct.

[Jamie @ Jul 31st 2007 12:00PM]

I've stopped using iTunes, purely emusic had a better selection of the music I like. Cheaper too, and DRM free. And a better bit rate.

[Ross @ Jul 31st 2007 12:52PM]

@Jamie

Are there really that many artists on eMusic that are not on iTunes ?
Might have to give it closer look and see if I can find some gems. I can appreciate how it would be easier to find decent new music without all the more mainstream drivel getting in the way.

[Jamie @ Jul 31st 2007 1:04PM]

That was exctly the problem I had. So much chart bilge, and not enough decent stuff, easy to find. I also like the suggestions from emusic, that are always better than the suggestions I got from iTunes. Also, with emusic at £8 per month for 40 tracks, iTunes can't compete.

[Vasilis @ Jul 31st 2007 1:12PM]

"and since the iPhone-maker somehow failed to include iTunes direct downloads to its device"

I am not sure it failed as much as it was too constrained by the DRM of the iTMS music.

Since all the iTMS music needs a "hub" to track in how many other "devices" any specific track is loaded on the iPhone could take one of either roles:

The role of an iPod: That would be almost impossible given that as an iPod it cannot track on how many devices the song is loaded and thus it would have to sync all the loaded music to a computer first. That would open the way for "legal" transfer of songs from iPods to computers which would cause for the breaking of the DRM tracking system allowing unlimited devices to have the song.

Instead it could take the role of a hub. However as a hub it would be only able to load music to other computers as there is no really a way to connect it with other ipods. There would be roundabout ways of filling your ipod but still they would not be elegant at all.

So until they change the DRM system to accommodate for this new link of the iTMS ecosystem they just wont do it.

[minimalist @ Jul 31st 2007 7:58PM]

eMusic is a fantastic service but I suspect this mobile plan is not going to crash and burn. I get 90 songs a month from eMusic for 20 bucks which is better than the newer price structure but all of those plans are 10 times better than 7.50 cents for 5 songs a month.

To make the situation even weirder, eMusic appeals largely to indie/experimental music lovers. Their low prices and lack of drm make it much more likely for you to try out new artists and to download complete albums. But come on...5 songs a month? This ain't the place to go pop in and get the new top 40 track you heard on the radio.

This plan just seems doomed to fail.

[iRobot @ Aug 1st 2007 4:29AM]

$7.50 for 5 songs!!!!! Are they crazy? Come the hell on -- there's padding the profit a little and then there's raping the customers. Get real?

I would pay .25 cents for a song, I would pay a $1.00 for a song ---- but I sure as hell wouldn't pay a $1.50 for a crap-tasic DRM ridden low razed version for my cell phone. This is when p2p comes in handly, (which is free) and in THIS CASE I wouldn't feel once ounce of guilt.