The business model is that it'll have users install software that replaces 15% of third party ads on web pages with their own ads. This sort of ad replacement has actually been done plenty of times before: by malware and by shady toolbars. Pretty much no one is going to be okay with this. The music industry and the US government hate the guy's guts; it's directly stealing money from Google; it wants to directly compete with iTunes; it's directly stealing money from every random blogger and press outlet that might cover it; and other companies doing exactly this was responsible for destroying Microsoft Windows' reputation in the eyes of consumers. Oh, and it's a backdoor held by someone considered wildly untrustworthy. So on the list of parties that have a vested interest in seeing it fail, we have:<p><pre><code> - The music industry
- The US government
- All ad-supported press outlets and blogs
- Microsoft, Apple, and Google
- The computer security industry
</code></pre>
Oh, and it's also probably illegal (under copyright and tortious interference grounds). I think this is really just a signaling ploy; Dotcom wants to be able to say that he tried to come up with a monetization model for the music industry. But to say that this is doomed a fairly significant understatement.
I like this guy. I am hopeful that this is successful in establishing a de-facto model that directly supports artists. I'm even more hopeful that if successful, that this will eliminate the need for major record labels to own all copyright and necessarily lead to the elimination of the RIAA and its oppressive actions.
I am honestly pretty excited to see what comes of this. I'm more than fine installing an application to subsidise the music on the site. I am also a big fan of Dotcom giving artists 90% of the profits from the site, it will be interesting to see what feathers are ruffled by this and if it succeeds.