<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Radiohead - Pay What You Want For Their New Album</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mikeyounglaw.com/wp/2007/10/01/radiohead-pay-what-you-want-for-their-new-album/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mikeyounglaw.com/wp/2007/10/01/radiohead-pay-what-you-want-for-their-new-album/</link>
	<description>"Attorney Mike Young focuses exclusively on Internet law and online marketing"</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 21:22:10 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Music Piracy - Even the Experts Get it Wrong</title>
		<link>http://mikeyounglaw.com/wp/2007/10/01/radiohead-pay-what-you-want-for-their-new-album/comment-page-1/#comment-4777</link>
		<dc:creator>Music Piracy - Even the Experts Get it Wrong</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:27:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mikeyounglaw.com/wp/2007/10/01/radiohead-pay-what-you-want-for-their-new-album/#comment-4777</guid>
		<description>[...] Radiohead&#8217;s model was successful despite the piracy because of the buzz that it created for the album. As noted in a comment to my prior post on the Radiohead album, the band&#8217;s downloadable mp3s were produces at a low quality bitrate as an encouragement for fans to pay for the higher quality CD. Although a bad marketing ploy because the quality disclosure wasn&#8217;t made up front prior to the customer&#8217;s decision on how much, if anything to pay, the concept has merit. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Radiohead&#8217;s model was successful despite the piracy because of the buzz that it created for the album. As noted in a comment to my prior post on the Radiohead album, the band&#8217;s downloadable mp3s were produces at a low quality bitrate as an encouragement for fans to pay for the higher quality CD. Although a bad marketing ploy because the quality disclosure wasn&#8217;t made up front prior to the customer&#8217;s decision on how much, if anything to pay, the concept has merit. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Young</title>
		<link>http://mikeyounglaw.com/wp/2007/10/01/radiohead-pay-what-you-want-for-their-new-album/comment-page-1/#comment-4616</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Young</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2007 16:17:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mikeyounglaw.com/wp/2007/10/01/radiohead-pay-what-you-want-for-their-new-album/#comment-4616</guid>
		<description>RIAA is probably laughing over this one. &lt;a title="radiohead music downloads" target="_blank" href="http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1571737/20071011/radiohead.jhtml" rel="nofollow"&gt;Radiohead released the music&lt;/a&gt; for download with poor audio quality. Not content to have it attributed to tech ignorance, the band's manager was stupid enough to say the poor quality downloads were just a promo stunt to encourage buying the physical CD. If the downloads had been free (instead of pay what you want without knowing the poor quality), that would be one thing...good viral marketing. Instead, Radiohead just took a serious hit in its fan base with a stunt that disrespected those who appreciate their music the most. Dumb marketing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>RIAA is probably laughing over this one. <a href="http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1571737/20071011/radiohead.jhtml"title="radiohead music downloads" target="_blank"  rel="nofollow" onclick="javascript:urchinTracker ('/outbound/comment/www.mtv.com');">Radiohead released the music</a> for download with poor audio quality. Not content to have it attributed to tech ignorance, the band&#8217;s manager was stupid enough to say the poor quality downloads were just a promo stunt to encourage buying the physical CD. If the downloads had been free (instead of pay what you want without knowing the poor quality), that would be one thing&#8230;good viral marketing. Instead, Radiohead just took a serious hit in its fan base with a stunt that disrespected those who appreciate their music the most. Dumb marketing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
