Getting my head around US-digital music service Lala.com has always given me a headache, because since their launch last year they've dabbled with various rights and revenue models that are different to those of their competitors.
Some of those models have become redundant - such as the sort of clever way to overcome the old DRM dilemma, by delivering iPod compatible AAC files that were in theory DRM free but which were delivered directly to the iPod reducing the chances of them being illegally copied. And some of their models have been adopted by others - such as the fully-licensed on-demand music streaming jukebox funded in the main by an up-sell button that hopes to persuade those who access the free music to then pay for actual downloads.
Lala's latest innovation basically sees it move into the digital storage domain previously occupied by MP3.com founder Michael Robertson, providing a service where people can upload their existing digital music collections to a Lala server meaning they can then listen to that collection wherever they go via the web. The service will enable users to upload both DRM-free music as well as files with Windows or Apple DRM embedded. Unlike Robertson's similar service, Lala, which is partly owned by Warner Music, seemingly has all the licensing sorted with all the majors and some indies on board.
From what I can see the revenue model works like this - users have to pay 10 cents for each track they put into their Lala player (they can listen to each track once for free I think, but realistically they need to pay the albeit nominal fee to properly use the service). They can subsequently add new tracks directly from Lala.com for 89 cents, a purchase which would also let them download the MP3. Or at least I think that's how it works.
The labels seem to like it, possibly because it forces us all to pay another ten cents to listen to tracks we've already paid for. Though new tracks will be available for ten cents cheaper than the iTunes standard rate, and I'm not sure the service will be able to do anything about those MP3s in your record collection that were obtained from not-quite-legit sources.
Giving his support to the new venture, Warner's Exec VP Of Digital Music Strategy told reporters: "It is a significant new model, and even more significant as a consumer proposition. What I think is really interesting is the idea of virtual ownership - creating a value proposition that's between the sampling of a stream and the purchase of a download".
Lala founder Bill Nguyen adds: "If the goal is to get consumers to buy more music, then the existing model of how it's priced and sold doesn't work. Look at subscription music. They pay for every single song that's streamed, but they get a fixed revenue from the customer. So if you're a big music listener, you actually may cost the service more money that it makes. Instead of a streaming access product, think of it as if it were a real product. It's just virtual. It doesn't have the bits, but behaves in the same functional way".
So there you go, I think I got all that right. Now I need to go and take a paracetamol.