1. Releasing music for free is not enough
And i defenetely agree with that. According to Owinsky giving away music for free is a part of a global strategy that uses free music simply as a tool. Instead of the old "media" marketing strategy (mainly radios and -m-TVs), 3.0 musicians use music as a marketing tool. By releasing for free a potential "infinte" products (our music, which should be infinte..) we expand our fan base. 
And.. yes, in my opinion it works. I mean, releasing free music is not enough. For example, some times ago i released a set of free music on my SoundCloud page and it's has been streamed almost 1000 times in a week. And that's good, i mean. But it was streamed. Do you want to know how many download i got? Only 20. Why? Because, basically, majority of listeners simply stream music. Expecially if is the first time they listen to it. 

2. Relations and tribes
The author, after reviewing the last 50 years of usual music business, develops an interesting analysis on who the main actors are in this new scenario. And guess what? Tribes won. Tribe, or fanbase, or fans, indicate a group of passionate listeners that follow whatever the artist (you) will release. And not only are avid consumer of your music, but they share it with their friend. The good point here is: no matter how big your tribe is. You can have a tribe composed by 3 person... and this will be a good point to start. Taking care and feeding the relation between the artist and his tribe is defenetely a new thing in this new music frame. And this is a real break point if compared to the past. In the past the artist was in the "hands" of the record labels (at least in the very early years) and there was no way to directly communicate with him/her. Now things changed a lot: the direct relation is a key component of Music 3.0 business. 

3. Case study
Another good part relates what some "big shoot" made out there. In particular, the author focuses on the NIN Trent Reznor experiment with Ghost I-IV album and Radiohead's "In rainbow" pay what you want release. We all know these stories, and we all think "Well, it's easy if you are Radiohead or NIN", and probably that's true. But also remember that these two artists came from the "old school" of music business and for them it perfectly worked. Basically they had everything to lose in approaching this new DIY method. So... yes, it was probably easy with such huge fanbases, but also it's interesting and inspiring to learn what they did and how they performed. 

4. Signing a contract?
At the end, Owinsky makes a list of some good reason that should lead the artist to sign a contract with major labels. And you know what? Except for some rare cases, there is none. At least, talking personally and at this stage of my "music career" path - I am not saying that it's wrong to sign a contract with a major record label, i am saying that differentely from the past we can choose. If we ever reach a resonant tribe, if our music will be on the table of some record company out there it will mean that the most difficult part will be already done. It means that our music run fast on the net and even faster during the live shows. At that point, who needs a record label?

More feedback about to come. In the meantime, i am REALLY curious to read YOUR comments on this :)