At least that is the argument apparently put forth by those companies who seek to prevent music from being copied and shared on the Internet for free. The actual result, which the article does not seem to consider, could be that technology makes record companies completely obsolete as a means to find, record, and distribute talent. In fact, as the article notes, technology has made it possible for people to record their own music, and edit it with almost professional quality. People are already doing this, and they are placing their music directly to the public on social networking sites like "My Space." The article claims though, that the record company will still be needed to "filter" content and bring the best to market, and thus will have claim to charge high prices for their official album releases. The impact of social network access to distribution and the copying of music

However, if people are free to choose from a wide variety of music, and the cost of both recording and reproduction fall to near zero, then there is no need for a middle man in a suit looking for top talent. The public, through mechanism such as social networking, can directly decide who becomes "big." Further, given the immensity of the Internet, and the limitless tastes of those online, the whole concept of the rock-star may go out the window. In a time when as the article states, four companies could effectively control the majority of music presented to the population, it makes sense that only a few key bands will become...

When one can access whatever music one wants, at any time one wants, and when countless groups are out there wanting people to listen to their music, then there is no reason to defer to any record company or other official channel to get ones music. One simply goes for what one finds to be appealing. This produces a decentralized music distribution system where no one can gain dominance without appealing to every particular musical tastes all at once. This is ironic because we may see both an increase in the variety of music available, and an increase in some groups trying to be as "pop" as possible in order to reach everyone. Those with the widest appeal are thus likely to be the most simple and easy to get into.
Conclusions

Monitoring how many times a particular song is copied may be a good way for music groups, and even record companies to judge the success of a particular group. While this may not bring revenues in terms of the reproduction of music itself, it can be used to decide what large shows are put on. It is in the arena of live shows where the record labels would still have an advantage due to their size and the amount of funds they can bring to bear towards obtaining large venues. Ironically it seems that technology has made the reproduction of music so cheap that it is no longer a profitable endeavor. The future of music is therefore not in yet another new way of reproducing it, but rather in performing it live as it was done for thousands of years before.