Ask HN: Why don't the labels create a torrent tracker?

The labels currently generate not a single piece of value from file-sharing, it costs them a huge amount of resources to pursue their current strategy and as we all know, its not going amazingly for them.

When I say value I mean across the board: data, cash, IP.

Lets assume for a second that the people who buy music buy music because thats their preferred method of acquisition (I am going to investigate this further) and the people who don't acquire media through the labels favourible methods (which in my opinion includes Spotify etc) will simply never buy music then this puts then in an actually pretty good position.

I am suggesting that they do not promote this in anyway, they could even make it invite only in the early days to prove the model. I say this because I understand the risk of opening up this channel could lead to "hey, you still pay for music? Don't be a chump, its not illegal anymore, you know the labels let you", or "ahh, whats this torrent thing? I'll do a quick google and maybe I'll find a real simple guide that helps me get setup".

What this does in my opinion is lets them do a massive land grab. Lets face it, file sharers still appreciate high bitrates, new releases, exclusive content, they just don't want to pay for it. The labels go from zero to community, zero to MASSES of data on what people are consuming, current tastes and trends and as we all know data is big bucks. They also get the IP's, I'm not so hot on what they could potentially do with that but I know that data's worth something (Bluekai, etc).

I think the exclusive content aspect of this is actually a nice bonus, file-shares now get value add. Exclusive content gets shared. Artists get discovered, loyalty grows.

But how are they going to make the money? Good point. I think that the albeit light strategy above allows some time to sit on this decision for a while, test out a few things (after all, its already a major victory) - well:

Dont charge at all = Be happy that some guy in New Zealand isn't getting rich off your content, its your data now, its YOUR community.

Charge models = I think any charge model depends on the cost being pretty nominal, $1/£1 lifetime type thing.

* Pay based on what genre's you want to access ($1 a pop) * Buy an invite into the whole service ($1)

I hope this whole submission doesn't live or die based on the revenue models, I just threw that out there. I think personally, if I was the chief in charge and less the politics of it all I don't think I would charge. I would assume my initial assumptions were correct and that we've lost nothing, and gained everything (data, tastes). I'd be interested to know what suggestions were around monetizing something like that.

In addition, I guess a final thought on monetization was that if you delivered this tracker through the web - you could very well have lots of video content, lots of ticket/kickback related items and gasp banners. There's a lot of people listening to music, lots of people watching videos'.

I'd say it sure as hell beats their current model. Lets the labels stop being a middle man, and gives them a distribution channel that they command, and they rule the roost for.