On the other hand...
Professional musicians are thinking about the consequences in the changes made to the business side of their careers. There was already a Canadian coalition (led by Steven Page and Barenaked Ladies) but now British musician Billy Bragg is looking into commercial sites using a “social networking” model:
Will Social Nets Be The New Monopoly On Music Rights & Earnings? | paidContent.org
Previously, Bragg had looked into News Corporation’s MySpace:
Billy Bragg’s MySpace Protest Movement
Billy Bragg prompts Myspace rethink
(Apparently, MySpace has changed its terms, since then.)
Actually, was just thinking about the new economies of music earlier today. (Even before noticing Mrs. Bronfman’s comment here, and these latest news items.) It might be time for some people involved to think more creatively about what money there is in music. My take is likely to be too naïve but given the RIAA’s own approach, even naïve ideas could go a much longer way than intimidation tactics. Should ask an MBA to get the figures but the public knowledge on the monetary value includes things like:
For a typical year, audio recordings make about thirty billion USD (sales of CDs, tapes, records, and digital downloads). Advertising alone is at least ten times that amount and music is often involved in television, radio, and movie commercials. At least for one recent year, ringtones (short, low-quality audio samples used for cell phones) accounted for about 10% of the amount from sales of audio recordings overall.
Out of the more than a trillion USD for media and entertainment, how much is related to music, directly or indirectly?
There are also markets for music-related merchandise, audio equipment, musical instruments, musical scores, music education, music therapy, etc. While none of these is likely to be enormous, how do these segments compare, as a whole, with sales of audio recordings?

More importantly, where is there money for musicians? In contracts to produce albums? In connection with commerical “social network sites?” In tours? In contracts with television shows? In providing jingles for television commercials? In providing samples for specific uses (such as ringtones)? In teaching music? In composing music for movies? In mixing previously recorded music? In small shows at coffee shops? In grants from the Canada Council? In research on diverse aspects of music? In musical accompaniment to diverse activities? In preparing musical content to be used by would-be musicians? In donations from rich patrons pleased to be sung? In association with political, religious, or social groups?
Is there really a single answer?

No, music isn’t a commodity. But many musicians want to earn a wage directly from their work in music. A “record deal” isn’t the only way to do it.
Of course, other people (more numerous than many seem to think) make music for other reasons. From the parent singing a lullaby to a postal worker whistling a tune at work, music is a lot of things to a lot of people. Not that the financial aspect is unimportant. But the money which relates directly with the “music industry” is clearly but a fraction of what music really represents for the world.<—9b6e25df7bfc59d116b29f46a825d2fb—>