Music lawyer Nancy Prager takes issue with a statement that is being heard more and more these days, that music is a commodity:

A product that is a commodity generally is something that is interchangeable with others of the same class. Cotton is a commodity. Even some services have become commodities, as the telecommunication services for pre-paid telephone cards have.

But music? Led Zepplin is not interchangeable for Linkin Park. Yo Yo Ma is not interchangeable with Yaz.

I once had a lovely shirt that was 100% Sea Island Cotton. It felt amazing. It was not interchangeable for generic cotton. Organic cotton isn't interchangeable either. Within a commodity, there are always exceptions, items that differentiate themselves by their quality. Even in screws! I go to Home Depot and can buy generic no name screws cheap, or pay extra for special, unique nails that are teflon coated or have a special head that makes them harder to strip, etc.

Music is more of a commodity now than it has ever been. People listen to it in the background, and they're not that picky about what they listen to. The difference is they're listening to music more than they've ever listened to it before. That doesn't mean they don't have non-commodity music they like. They always have those special songs they love.

Music is a commodity with the average consumer; but it's a non-commodity with music lovers. There are just so many more commodity music users now than music lovers. (And I don't think that's because the music lovers have decreased).