Apple Wrong to Require Single Track Sales on iTunes?

The Wall Street Journal took a "Since the beginning of 2006, only the Beatles have sold more "catalog" albums in the U.S. than AC/DC -- also without licensing their music to iTunes. Among the six best-selling catalog artists during that period, the act that sold the most individual songs digitally -- the Rolling Stones -- sold the fewest albums, digital or physical. That is important because while the Stones' six million single tracks sold may seem impressive, they represent low-cost, low-profit transactions. Album sales, on the other hand, are much more profitable."

It would be easy to conclude that many more album only releases would benefit the industry. While clearly an option for some super star acts, album only releases also inhibit music discovery. It's a lot easier to be impulsive at $.99 than at $9.99; and if the only ways a fan can get the single track they want is to pay $10 or to grab it free via P2P; which one do you think they'll do?

The staggered release could...

Apple is wrong to require only single track sales. These kinds of heavy handed policies have led to a steady erosion in label confidence in the retail giant and someday consumers may follow. But a few successes should not lead the industry to conclude that album only releases are the answer to its woes. The music industry should learn from its previous mistakes and remember that in the digital age restricting consumer access is seldom the answer.