While I agree with the premise that yes artists should be paid more the basic retail model is that at the retail level retailers raise the cost 100% as the basic markup. Apple's .35 is actually .15 less than standard. It is not the retailers obligation to ensure the vendor at the bottom of the chain is being compensated adequately. I completely agree with the premise. The system is fucked for artists, but, raggin on iTunes in this fashion just makes the critic sound ignorant. It is entirely beside the point as far as iTunes is designed whether that .64 goes to a record label or the artist but Apple is certainly not going to, and shouldn't, ensure artists get adequate compensation by giving up any more points. Those points are the price of doing business and marketing in the retail sphere. Actual profit will of course be much smaller after overhead is accounted for. Downhillbattle also seems to find meaning in the downward trend of iTunes sales per day. I do no know anything about Apple's business model with iTunes. But given the figures on the website I reckon Apple's .35 per song comes out to roughly $3,150,000.00 in gross sales. Once again I do not know anythng at all about Apple's costs for this convenient service but if my business were grossing $1,050,000.00 per month I'd consider it a success. But that's just me.