"When I came to the RIAA there was only one revenue stream. There was no radio performance right [in the US - there still isn't - ed ] but now there's webcasting, Zune, and lots of other revenue sources and a lot of diversity. It's not one versus the other, but there's no question we're moving to licensing," said Bainwol.

"When I came in it was before the first lawsuits, and we were in a tailspin downwards. There was confusion in society, confusion in the law, and we've gone from zero digital revenue to $2bn digital downloads revenue."

Um, yes, we wondered. But wasn't that $2bn entirely due to an initiative from outside the RIAA's membership - from a computer company, Apple?

Apart from exceptions such as Jac Holzman, where was the innovation for finding new containers for rights coming from within the industry?

Bainwol didn't name one specifically, but pointed to "four or five hundreds" deals going on.

"There's lots of energy and commitment and focus on experimentation," he said. "To me the subscription model has enormous potential. I have three kids aged between eight and 14 and they're not growing up with a perception of music as a physical product. For them though the 'all you can eat' model is irresistible."

We also got a glimpse into where the RIAA expects revenue to come in the coming years. It's pushing for a public performance license for radio in the US, where by a historical fluke it doesn't exist (radio stations in most countries pay the performers for playing their music). John Kennedy of the IPFI said performance from karaoke machines in China offered potential revenue.

"It's going to be a combination of the three: physical product, digital product, and licensing".

[...] 

[via TheRegister ]

related articles:
The new Business Model of UMG?
The biggest Record Label emerges