Doug was obviously one of the main forces behind the nearly universally panned RIAA lawsuits, but does that mean he looks back on that consumer attacking move with regret? Of course not!

Were the RIAA lawsuits a good idea?

It was an act to try and publicize that this is stealing and this is wrong. That's one way to look at it. Did it work? I don't know. Maybe it stopped some people from stealing, maybe it didn't . . . Did they deserve to get caught? Probably. People don't like policemen. I understand that. And maybe they're right. But when you see all the stores close and you lose half your employees and you can't sign bands to record them because people are stealing, we do things to try and stop it. You have a lot of people who think that things should be free. I don't know how they think we should produce it for free, but there's a lot of people who aren't logical.

Speaking of not logical, clearly we peanut-gallery types in the blogosphere haven't been terribly kind to Doug at times, but what does Doug think about the scoffers? He ignores them! I mean, he has a drawing by Bono in his office!

The lawsuits have been rough from a PR standpoint, in terms of developing a real hubris from a certain subset in the blogosphere and magazines like Wired. I felt, and many others I spoke with felt that Wired-a magazine I once wrote for, by the way-took some cheap shots in a November 2007 article that you were interviewed for. How did you feel about that piece?

They can write whatever they want. I think they see things differently than I do. My job is to protect artists, the people that work here, the copyrights . . . they have a feeling that I stop technology by trying to stop companies from infringing on our products-that we stopped the growth of all these companies because we don't like the use of our product without a license. I think that's their point of view. I have no problem with their point of view. I thought the magazine was funny because it's supposed to be a professional magazine but then they try to ridicule people to make a point.

They were trying to make fun of me because I'm older and because I come from a different era. But like I told you from the beginning, there's a couple of things that just don't change. People don't get that. They're so entranced and enthralled by all the shiny, new technology, they don't understand that it doesn't work unless you have music that people want. No one's going to download music they don't like.

What I take seriously is the fact that we're people who create art. Whether you like our art or not, it's what we do. My whole point of view is this problem we're in, which is caused by technology, will be solved by technology. Some genius on the other side will figure out how to stop the piracy that seems very logical to me. So all these people who come up with these opinions that they should have done this and that, it's all ridiculous.

Meanwhile, what have they done? We're running the most dominant company that there ever has been in the industry. We're trying to do it in a way where we're really respectful to people, where the people in this company are treated great, where they're paid properly, where women are working in key positions in the company, where two of our chairpeople are people of color. Our greatest asset in our company is our people.

It's such a bizarre equation that requires thought to separate what is real from what people would like people to think. I don't understand. There's a lot of unreasonable people in the world. You start with that. Frustrated, disgruntled people with their own lives who attack people who have done really important work. And I can judge this company because I've been here from day one, hired everyone here, and I know how we're doing. For me there's a great level of satisfaction.

I never listen to people. What will affect us is if we make a big mistake and we don't get any hits and as a journalist I'm happy people write whatever they want to write. Some of the records we've put out I hate much more than I did that article, but I've held my nose and said they're entitled to do it.

There should have been a follow-up question here, Billboard! What records made Doug Morris hold his nose? The public demands answers, or at least, I do. Still, I think he's got journalists pegged. I tend to be frustrated and disgruntled, sitting at my keyboard trying to destroy the real artists. I never heard it put that way before, but he really nailed it.

After I recovered from my psyche being destroyed, I wiped off the tears and moved on to Doug's real shining moments. Did you know that Universal and the other labels were cheated by MTV? Honestly, I didn't either.

What about the promotional value of YouTube?

We don't look at anything as promotion. Take a look at MTV. It turned out to be a disaster for us. We sold some records, but they built this huge company and we gave them our [music] for nothing, and what did we get?

Three years ago we were losing $7 million a year in the production of videos.

It's a little strange that Doug Morris feels like MTV ripped the music business off, especially during the era when the network's programming consisted mostly of music videos, but still Doug's sitting in his modest office cursing the millions stole for him. His perspective is vastly different than mine, although that could be because I was someone who spent way too much money on music purchased after seeing videos on 120 Minutes or Yo! MTV Raps. I guess that's not the type of promotion Doug was interested in.

Exclusive Billboard Q&A: UMG's Chairman/CEO Doug Morris [Billboard]

(As a note, Universal is an investor in Buzznet, the parent company of this site.)

You might assume that Doug is be given the star for his stalwart pose against technology, or as some might call it "progress". However, Doug had an legacy already built for himself before taking UMG to the top. He wrote the Chiffons' hit "Sweet Talkin' Guy":

You can even still listen to the track on YouTube, albeit as the soundtrack to a tribute to JFK.

His label, Big Tree Records, brought us such artistically groundbreaking acts as England Dan & John Ford Coley, Brownsville Station, and Lobo.

Sadly, the Lobo he popularized was not the comical television sheriff, but a sensitive singer/songwriter.

Morris isn't the only legend with ties to music the committee chose to honor this year. Look at the stature of these honorees, and you'll understand why they'll have stars next to Keanu Reeves, Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen, and the televison show Rugrats.

John Stamos!

Dave Koz!

Robert Downey, Jr.!

The Village People!

The Miracles, Babyface, Shakira, and Rush will receive stars, too. Of course, let's not let that take away from Doug's moment in the sun. Enjoy it, before your customers take away the last bit of enjoyment you find in your job.

Diaz, Downey, Jackman Flex Star Power [E! Online]

The thing is? This installment of the web comic "Hijinks Ensue" actually makes Universal Music Group CEO Doug Morris sound a little more au courant than the Shmoo-crazy Wired profile of him that we linked to last week. "The Napsters" did, after all, appear on the scene within the past 10 years.

Robots are everywhere, and they eat old people's medicine for fuel [Hijinks Ensue; HT Chris Molanphy]

Discussing Universal's various initiatives, Caraeff, an even-keeled 32-year-old in a crisply tailored suit, is explaining that it's important to be "invigorated and challenged by the opportunities of digital music." At this, Morris puts down his tuna fish on white, wipes some crumbs off his khakis, and clears his throat. I expect him to deliver an explanation of how he learned to stop worrying and love the MP3. Instead, he launches into a rant about a creature that resembles a misshapen bowling ball.

"There was a cartoon character years ago called the Shmoo," he says in a raspy tenor. "It was in Li'l Abner. The Shmoo was a nice animal, a nice fella, but if you were hungry, you cut off a piece of him and put onions on it, and if you wanted to play football you just made him like a football. You could do anything to him. That's what was happening to the music business. Everyone was treating the music business like it was a Shmoo.

"It was only a couple of years ago that we said, What's going on here?' Really, an album that someone worked on for two years — is that worth only $9, $10, when people pay two bucks for coffee in Starbucks?" Morris sighs. "People never really understand what's happening to the artists. All the sharing of the music, right? Is it correct that people share their music, fill up these devices with music they haven't paid for? If you had Coca-Cola coming through the faucet in your kitchen, how much would you be willing to pay for Coca-Cola? There you go," he says. "That's what happened to the record business."

I'd argue that the average consumer's perception of artists is different—and much less negative!—than her perception of the industry, especially its denizens who have corner offices where they can eat their tuna on white. But those sandwiches are merely fueling Morris up for more ire at the digital age!

Back in his dining room, Morris is incredulous. He's once again talking about how his job should simply be finding and breaking new acts. The problem, he says, is that "there's sympathy for the consumer, and the record industry is the Shmoo."

Aw, it's so sad, isn't it? Although why do I seem to not remember the Shmoo having lawyers at the ready. After all, if it did, surely it would've sued the pants off whoever was trying to turn it into a football.

Universal's CEO Once Called iPod Users Thieves. Now He's Giving Songs Away. [Wired]

When an unanswered question about your new line of music players is whether you can use it to play MP3's, it might be time to go back to the drawing board, but Morris and his blind rage towards Jobs and his music marketplace must prevail! Irving Azoff says so!

While the details are in flux, insiders say Morris & Co. have an intriguing business model: get hardware makers or cell carriers to absorb the cost of a roughly $5-per-month subscription fee so consumers get a device with all-you-can-eat music that's essentially free. Music companies would collect the subscription fee, while hardware makers theoretically would move many more players. "Doug is doing the right thing taking on Steve Jobs," says ex-MCA Records Chairman Irving Azoff, whose Azoff Music Management Group represents the Eagles, Journey, Christina Aguilera, and others. "The artists are behind him."
Morris and Jobs were once the best of allies. When Jobs began pushing his idea for a simple-to-use download store in 2003, Morris backed him. Industry insiders say Jobs felt that Morris, unlike many other music executives, understood that they had to adapt or die. And in the years that followed, Apple and Universal moved in near lockstep.
But before long, Morris realized he and his fellow music executives had ceded too much control to Jobs. "We got rolled like a bunch of puppies," he said during a recent meeting, according to people who were there. And though Morris hasn't publicly blasted Jobs, his boss at Universal parent Vivendi is not nearly so hesitant. The split with record labels—Apple takes 29 cents of the 99 cents—"is indecent," Vivendi CEO Jean-Bernard Levy told reporters in September. "Our contracts give too good a share to Apple."...
With the Total Music service, Morris and his allies are trying to hit reset on how digital music is consumed. In essence, Morris & Co. are telling consumers that music is a utility to which they are entitled, like water or gas. Buy one of the Total Music devices, and you've got it all. Ironically, the plan takes Jobs' basic strategy— getting people to pay a few hundred bucks for a music player but a measly 99 cents for the music that gives it value—and pushes it to its extreme. After all, the Total Music subscriber pays only for the device—and never shells out a penny for the music. "You know that it's there, and it costs something," says one tech company executive who has seen Morris' presentation. "But you never write a check for it."

It seems to be a common theme with music companies that any amount of money that isn't flowing directly into their coffers is heading the wrong direction, but it seems somewhat ridiculous to bite the hand that feeds with Apple, especially to go in the direction of furthering the perception that the music itself has no value. As wonderful as the collected catalogs of the biggest three music distributors are, a player that only works with their music is going to be worthless to most consumers when they realize that "This Is Why I'm Hot," "Walk It Out," or "We Fly High" aren't available. As important as the feelings of the artists might be to Doug Morris and Irving Azoff, it's hard to imagine any device that shorts the consumer so throughly getting off the ground.

Universal Music Takes on iTunes [Business Week]

Morris isn't sure he is cut out for the role of enforcer but believes he has no choice. 'The truth is that I'm the most unlikely candidate because I don't like being in the middle of the sandwich,' he said.

Ah, but what would type of sandwich would he be, exactly? Morris clearly wants everyone to believe that he's a Po' Boy, but he's not getting much sympathy from us: The war on Internet music distribution is like the war on drugs, and Morris and his pals will be stuck turning their deep pockets inside-out as the one-a-day calendar pages fly off the wall. If there are going to be some pre-dawn raids, best to go after Apple and Microsoft rather than YouTube and MySpace, as Jobs and Gates might be scared enough to pony up. Besides, you guys chose long ago to treat music videos and streaming audio as free advertising; you can't blame us for getting used to them.

Universal CEO tough on licensing deals [AP]

[Morris] added: "I hate being in the middle of this and I don't want to be looked at as the suing chairman.

"It's the worst thing that could ever happen to me," he said, while vowing to continue defending Universal's content.

Someone get this guy a Livejournal! How about this, Doug—once you get MySpace to settle out of court, which you're apparently banking on, we start calling you "the bullying-by-judicial-force chairman." It's a little bit of a tongue twister, but if it'll make you feel better, we'll happily change our tune.

Universal Music sees MySpace settlement [Reuters, via No Rock&Roll Fun]

This comes just a few days after Universal honcho Doug Morris declared a forthcoming war on the video-sharing site. So will he back down and follow Warner's lead? Or could this be part of some secret conspiracy to turn YouTube into a money pit for the majors? Most importantly: Is it too early in the morning to be boring you with this crap?

"Warner to license music in YouTube videos" [Techcrunch]

And then Universal honcho Doug Morris goes and spoils it all by saying something stupid, like "I hate YouTube." From an investors' conference held Tuesday:

"The poster child for (user-generated media) sites are MySpace and YouTube," said Morris, according to a transcript obtained by Reuters. "We believe these new businesses are copyright infringers and owe us tens of millions of dollars. ... [MTV] built a multibillion-dollar company on our (music) ... for virtually nothing. We learned a hard lesson."

We're not sure how, exactly, Morris will deal with these evil infringers—you know, those greedy buggers who were turned on to Fall Out Boy via MySpace and YouTube, and then went on and bought almost 2.5 million copies of their album. Maybe he'll make them work it off—get his coffee, pick up his dry cleaning, walk his dogs, clean his jets with a toothbrush. Or perhaps he'll force every last infringer to buy up the remaining stock of the last Hoobastank album until it's all gone. Either way, we hope he heads out to some shows soon, because if anyone's deserving of a "Hey, Asshole!" shout-out, it's this guy.

"Universal Music pressuring YouTube, MySpace" [Reuters]