Listen to the Music

Early last week, a pair of MIT students announced a system of their creation that would have let Tech students listen to copyrighted music through the university’s cable television network for free. But by the end of the week, the idea had been withdrawn; apparently, it would have illegal for MIT to broadcast the files—3,500 CDs worth of music—that had been purchased for this purpose. As file-sharing download systems continue to flourish on the web, however, it is clear that the music industry needs to abandon the methods it has used in the past—regulation and litigation—and develop new ways to generate revenue in a world of high-speed Internet connections. The plan developed by the students down the Charles was a step in that direction.

Reminiscent of a control-your-own radio station, the system the MIT students designed would have allowed users to share control of the system—signing up to generate 80-minute play-lists on one of 16 channels. All students on campus would have been able to “tune in” via their dorm-room cable television connections to hear any of the 16 simultaneous broadcasts.

Because all the music was licensed by MIT, and because relatively lax regulations remain for analog broadcast through cable wires—digital music transfer has been highly guarded by record companies since the high-quality music downloads compete with CDs—it was thought that this system would have satisfied all. The elegant setup might have allowed MIT to simultaneously keep students and record labels satisfied while mimizing the amount of network bandwidth used by illegal music downloads.

The idea of broadcasting music over a university network is one with true potential. But even if MIT had gotten the rights to broadcast the music, the new system’s methods would have failed at schools like Harvard, which does not have a cable network. There were also sacrifices made with the MIT system—not all students could control the music, the analog quality was not as rich-sounding as its digital counterpart and a fixed broadcast was an imperfect substitute for playing downloaded MP3s, when the listener easily controls every song he or she plays.

A better system would allow schools, Harvard included, to allow streaming play—but not downloads—of digital music files over their Ethernet networks. Like premium cable television stations that provide an “on-demand” service—with which viewers can play, fast-forward, pause and rewind any of the “Sex and the City” episodes that are in the database—record labels should allow college students to have on-demand access to files. The record labels could charge the schools for the right to stream the music, and the cost would be passed onto the students, who would enjoy access to a huge library of music with the knowledge that their music-listening was legally protected. Such an ambitious new method of addressing the file-sharing crisis would have the blessing of schools and students if the cost was low enough. And with the understanding that such an on-demand music system is likely the future of the private sector, the music industry should appreciate the opportunity to pilot this concept at colleges. The work done at MIT is pushing the industry in the right direction; it is now the record labels’ responsibility to maintain this momentum.