In a much hyped move Google <a href="http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2009/10/hands-on-google-music-streams-useful-not-revolutionary.ars">changed their search presentation</a> for musicians/music this week. The business implications of what this means to Google, iMeem, LaLa, Pandora, MySpace and other industry players is undergoing some <a href="http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/102909google">hefty</a> <a href="http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/content_display/industry/e3i0a82a4070f2192ec2e4a58b9053acdbc">analysis</a>.

<blockquote>So, why is Google such a clear-shot winner?  The answer lies in the way the deals are being constructed.  Google is organizing and pointing to on-demand streams, images, lyrics, and other information -  but not paying royalties, haggling with labels, or otherwise getting their hands dirty with messy music content (of course, YouTube is another story).  On top of that, Google is not splitting AdWords advertising revenue with its partners, according to sources close to the arrangements.</blockquote>

What seems to be overlooked in all this navel gazing is - what information is the user actually getting?



