Universal Music Group's proposal for the Total Music service -- rally the other majors, get a hardware manufacturer to absorb the monthly fees -- has the Internet all abuzz. In a blog post, Jupiter's Mark Mulligan pointed to some potential trouble spots but gave a thumbs up to the idea of getting hardware manufacturers to absorb the service costs.

"The idea of working with device manufacturers to get revenue directly for music is not actually that crazy an idea. In fact, we’re working on a report which incorporates that exact theme. We’re still working on the numbers, but based on the scant (rumoured) details we have on Total Music, I think the approach we’re suggesting is more workable for all parties."

Can't wait to hear about that winning approach. Mulligan began the post by explaining how labels make for far better scouts and promoters than they do service operators (MusicNet and PressPlay are examples A and B). Very true. Over the last eight years or so, labels interests have not overlapped well with the needs of consumers Labels' unending desire to convert consumers to a DRM'd music service probably won't be met by a stampeding crush of consumer demand (and it probably won't help that somebody else has the domain). Billboard's Antony Bruno has been told the specifics of Total Music are still changing and the final product -- if it ever makes it to market -- could be very different than what was portrayed in recent articles.

For a different view, read Podcasting News' "Five Reasons Total Music Will Be A Total Failure."

[music jobs] HR Manager at EMI NA; New York, NY.