It doesn't matter if a music industry conference is held in the U.S. or Germany, the same rehashed statements and vague directives will be uttered by panelists. A few bits of wisdom and vision have come from the conference, but most of what I've read has been tired talking points. One new, common theme was the 360-degree artist contract. A number of panelists look to such contracts as a practical solution for industry woes.

I shrugged when I read a recap by Paul Resnikoff of Digital Music News. The Orchard founder Scott Cohen, he wrote, wondered out loud about the revenues that could be generated if all the world's music-related P2P traffic could be monetized. At $0.99 per song and a conservative estimate of 12 billion tracks annually, "it doesn’t even come close to replacing the old business," he said. Cohen admitted the calculation was pure fantasy, but it's both disturbing and an outright shame that industry panels bother to entertain such notions of business fiction.

The rest of the panel was equally short on substance. Later, Cohen tossed out another rehashed idea that lies somewhere between fantasy and unlikely: The well-worn P2P tax proposal. "Monetizing mobile users" -- whatever that means -- was mentioned by the panel. Comprehensive, 360-degree business relationships got a nod as well. That actually has a chance of stemming the tide...mainly because music companies are already switching to that model. (Best to worry about what can be done, not what is unlikely to be done.) To build a multi-service music group, all a company needs to do is to go on an acquisition binge. Finding the debt capacity to rebuild a company is a lot easier than finding the magic wand needed to monetize P2P and equitably distribute the money to rightsholders. I might have a different opinion if anybody had put together a coherent plan for legit P2P. To date, I've heard too much "it could look kinda like this" and not enough "this is how it will work and benefit all parties." Details, please. Details.

Billboard.biz's recap of day three had some very insightful comments by manager and agent Carl Leighton-Pope. He theorized that concerts are growing in popularity right now because people are relatively isolated in the Internet era. "People migrate to where other people are," he said. "We want to be with other people."

Christof Ellinghaus, owner of German independent label City Slang gave a vote of confidence for broader artist contracts. "For me, 360 degrees is the only model if we're to survive," he told the audience. "Music (only) is a thing of the past. If I have the expertise to book a tour in-house, then I'll do it."

On the first day of Popkomm, Bragg put populism over capitalism. "If the industry wants to move forward than it needs to move with the artist, and have less of a standoff way of doing things.... If industry has any sense, it will refocus itself around the artist and give catalogs back. So much of the way the record company is configured doesn't fly anymore." Novel, but off the mark. Chances of record companies voluntarily giving away its recorded music assets: Zero point zero zero. Again, my beef here is that panelists are talking about events that have only the slightest chance of ever happening. They need to inspire the audience by discussing what should and could happen.

Much more sense came from Michael Baylor, CEO of Rights Marketing Group. "What we need to do is look at the 360-degree franchise of the talent and go to companies saying 'what marketing problem can we solve for you?' Not 'how much money can we make from you, or how many records can we sell from you? Management of talent needs to be much more outwardly focused, and much smarter at helping consumer brands solve marketing problems. It's a difficult dance and it's really hard work."