Slashdot Mirror

But Apple's iTunes Music Store is by no means the only online music available. There are others that offer flexible pricing models. And guess what? Nobody uses them.

I just searched for a Chuck Berry song I own but I've temporarily misplaced the CD. I would buy another copy. They have it, for $0.99. I couldn't get the "listen" thing to work. The javascript on the site evidently doesn't work with Firefox. See ya!

After listening to Apple's Q1'05 Earnings call I have to say that I am concerned that the music stores besides iTunes will soon go the way of so many dot-coms. Here's two reasons:
- Apple stated in the call they have 70% market share in on-line downloads.
- Apple stated in the call they posted a small profit on the sale of now >230,000,000 songs (admittedly, these were not all in Q1'05).

If the $0.99/9.99 model is so razor thin that one company with 70% of the market is eaking by, how can six other companies who share the remaining 30% of the market hope to survive?

Napster seems to be in the lead (don't they have about 10% market share?) but it is primarily due to the subscription model they have, not selling tracks/albums. Sounds like an opportunity for Apple to swoop in and service the sub-market for subscribers to me.

But back on subject, the Creative statement that they have some type of advantage because their player submits to the DRM of half a dozen music stores that are loosing money just says to me that Creative is tightening their seatbelt on a sinking ship.

> To compare to a test drive of a car, maybe they should allow a free sample, say the first 25% of the song.

A free portion of the song...you had better watch out, that's such a good idea, it wouldn't surprise me if all the other download sites outright stole it from you!

...not quite. When you bought your music from the iTMS, you already knew that you would only be allowed to play it within iTunes or on your iPod.

That's it.

If you want to play it on a different device, there are many other sources for your music, including buying a CD and ripping it into whatever format your heart desires.

Whether you agree that "information should be free" or not is irrelevant. By purchasing your music from iTMS, you agreed to Apple's restrictions.

Interesting that when I vistied buymusic.com on my Mac with Safari (go to preferences -> Advanced -> uncheck JavaScript) I saw a few Buymusic.com exclusives.

Of the FOUR exclusives they have, one is titled "All down hill from here".

This reminds me of some of the song titles Apple had posted in their press releases for hitting certail sales numbers:
10 millionth - Complicated
25 Millionth - Let it Snow! Let it Snow! Let it Snow!
50 Millionth - Path of Thorns

Any HTML app that requires IE might as well have a big banner that says "THIS PRODUCT WAS DEVELOPED BY AMATEURS!". It's user hostile. AND Mozilla is a better browser. You can actually do more with Mozilla than IE, since Mozilla has better standards support.

Some 'tards still don't get it.

if you do use Opera, please go into preferences and stop it 'Identifying as IE' that doesn't help people with flawed stats programs realise people are using alternative browsers.

Yeah, but there are still a lot of dumb ass sites that won't let you in unless you are using IE.

Actually, the link above is a REALLY dumbass site because they don't let you in even if you DO identify as IE. Their web team should be fired. Nothing on that site is out of the ordinary and requires IE.

Maybe except this one and this one and this one and this one and...

As near as I can tell, Napster 2.0 is a store first and a jukebox second. Its jukebox tools are sorely lacking compared to iTunes, and its biggest omission is that it doesn't even include a CD ripper.

iTunes outclasses Napster in almost every way that counts. It would be more fair to compare iTunes to the new and improved MusicMatch, which added online music shopping about a month before iTunes for Windows was released, and compare Napster to BuyMusic instead.

If you notice, the shop for music online feature leads to several different music retailers. One of which is buymusic.com; a site which ONLY accepts internet explorer. Of course that doesn't make what they're doing right at all. BuyMusic.com's IE on Windows only policy is just MS trying to further lock people into the windows platform.

Haha, you're right, and that is funny. :)

Having used Mozilla for over a year now, I've pretty much forgotten that some sites still use automatic popups to convey useful information. You'd think web designers would learn to avoid popups like that by now.

Oh well, at least the site is designed to actually let you go ahead and sign up--notifying you that you'll have to use another computer to access the service. Much better than the horrible design of some other service which won't even let you view the site without IE. *(shock)*

While P2P and HTTP may be excellent ways of file sharing, for better or for worse, the RIAA _will_ stop them. Right now they have attacked legally, which is leading P2P developers to make some advancements in the way of encryption, anonymity, etc. The RIAA seems to realize, now, that there really is no way to stop technology. We have already won.

Now they are taking the overused advice of "adopt a new business model", which seems to be services such as Apple's iTunes Music Store (Soon for Windows), BuyMusic.com, Rhapsody, and soon Roxio Napster 2.0.

The new RIAA attack plan is to offer B2P services. The problem? DRM. If I buy a CD from iTMS, for example, it may be $9.99. I would buy the same CD in store for $14.99. No, I'm NOT paying five bucks for the album art, professionally burned CD, etc. I'm paying for the right to do with it what I want. There's something about having "SOMETHING" in your hands. They can't take that away from you, like they can with digital music.

P2P for me is a way of sampling music before buying the CD. This will never be replaced by a $0.99 deal, since I like to download it, and listen to the song throughout the day. At work I listen to different music than at home. At night, different music from the day. Walking music is different from sittin' or driving music. Rhapsody fails here, so does iTMS... you can only sample certain portions, while in front of your computer. It's not the same.

Why P2P is better than HTTP? It's easier. More people use it, than HTTP was used for MP3 trading. Does it matter? No, B2P will overtake them both. There IS a large number of people who ONLY want digital music, that's why they turn to P2P. These people will turn to B2P once it becomes "mainstream."

For the most part the RIAA doesn't have to do legal battles any more (though it is a nice source of income), they can attack it by offering new online services, just as EVERYONE has been saying for years. Me, I'll stick to brick and mortar, and P2P though.

Do services such as the iTunes Music Store, Buy Music really represent the future of music like Steve Jobs and Scott Blum would like us to believe, or are they just another way to deliver music along with CD's, cassetes, and the radio?

It's not enough to beat consumers into legal downloads with a stick. Unless there are positive reasons to switch to legal downloads, people won't do it.

...don't you think?

follow this link... you'll have to use IE 5.0 on a windows machine, or turn off javascript in your browser to view it. http://www.buymusic.com/support/help.aspx#Howto_Bu rn

That's not a link, that's just a piece of text.

This is a link.

(Retrieved using a Mac, OS X and Safari, with JavaScript enabled... thank you, Debug menu :-)

These 80's compilations must have made their dough, because they are 79 cents.

These 80's compilations must have made their dough, because they are 79 cents.

These 80's compilations must have made their dough, because they are 79 cents.

i just sent an email to Jody Whitesides explaining that there is this wonderful, benevolent group of kindhearted people called the RIAA, and that they are "in it for the struggling artist".... they are always there to crush a 12 year old for downloading a Britany Spears single, or some guy that wanted to listen to a Metallica song on his work computer that he has on CD back at home...

i suggested that he contact them have have them shut down BuyMusic.com by sending them a subpoena (like they do for other music pirates) because buymusic.com has been accused of illegally distributing copyrighted music without consent of the copyright holder (jody whitesides).

No seriously - it is one thing to share files with friends for nothing... but these assmongers at SublicenseMusicThatWeDon'tOwn.com are making a LIVING off the backs of small musicians. I'm the first guy to tell someone "yeah, i limewire for songs i can't buy in iTMS".. and i also almost beat the crap out of kid when he told me he was gonna make CDs and sell them at school.

AsshatMusic.com is nothing more than a shady character that hangs out at the top of the subway with a carboard box full of self-ripped DVDs and CDs and $5 Laker jerseys. These pluggers at
85 Enterprise
Suite 100
Aliso Viejo, CA 92656
are not music stealers a la Kaaza users.. they are making a living off of the work of others that they have no rights to.

They are no better, albiet smaller, than Enron or GlobalCrossing.... they steal from others work to enrich their own lives.

I can't think of many good things about the DMCA, but this, by gawd, is one.

i just sent an email to Jody Whitesides explaining that there is this wonderful, benevolent group of kindhearted people called the RIAA, and that they are "in it for the struggling artist".... they are always there to crush a 12 year old for downloading a Britany Spears single, or some guy that wanted to listen to a Metallica song on his work computer that he has on CD back at home...

i suggested that he contact them have have them shut down BuyMusic.com by sending them a subpoena (like they do for other music pirates) because buymusic.com has been accused of illegally distributing copyrighted music without consent of the copyright holder (jody whitesides).

No seriously - it is one thing to share files with friends for nothing... but these assmongers at SublicenseMusicThatWeDon'tOwn.com are making a LIVING off the backs of small musicians. I'm the first guy to tell someone "yeah, i limewire for songs i can't buy in iTMS".. and i also almost beat the crap out of kid when he told me he was gonna make CDs and sell them at school.

AsshatMusic.com is nothing more than a shady character that hangs out at the top of the subway with a carboard box full of self-ripped DVDs and CDs and $5 Laker jerseys. These pluggers at
85 Enterprise
Suite 100
Aliso Viejo, CA 92656
are not music stealers a la Kaaza users.. they are making a living off of the work of others that they have no rights to.

They are no better, albiet smaller, than Enron or GlobalCrossing.... they steal from others work to enrich their own lives.

I can't think of many good things about the DMCA, but this, by gawd, is one.

Read all the restrictions. (It goes on for a few pages!!!)

They advertise as low as 79 cents, but after after skimming through about a dozen prices, the lowest I fount was 99 cents, and many of the songs were $1.14.

Example

My record is on there It is also on CD NOW but that was during the contract and all cool with us. I don't have the contract (another member of the band has it) and I don't remember what it says. I haven't spoken to the other guys yet, but I'm pretty sure that contract ran out awhile ago.

Every song you buy off of buymusic.com is not paying the artists, that's for sure. And I don't know how Orchard could even have copies to sell, we sent it to them to distribute; they aren't manufacturers.

We payed for that record out of pocket, and still have a zillion. :( If you like the samples here, let me know and I'll get you a CD. We still have boxes of the album, since the band went down right after releasing it. Ah, the sad stories of Minneapolis...

You know, I don't care if its on P2P, but someone *selling* songs off my record is not fucking cool. I sure not getting any $$$ Orchard is NOT a label! It is/was? only for distribution. They have NO rights to this. This was paid out of our pockets. All of it.

Hmm - this may make it to my journal...I've got some calls to make tonight. BTW - We have some CDs left (the band is no more), if you like the samples, email me and I'll get you a CD... might as well make lemonade... grrr. ;P

As reported on MacSlash, Buymusic.com is violating copyrights. Jody Whitesides, a musician, found an old CD he made for sale on the Buymusic.com site without ever being informed/asked/paid. He checked and also found albums from friends of his. As it turns out, they all had dealings with a brick and mortar distribution company called Orchard in the 90's that supposedly went out of business. They didn't and now it seems that anyone who had dealings with them might be on Buymusic.com without their knowledge, consent or recompense.

iTunes Music Store does not "check" to see where you are via IP address, or any other network method.

Music you own is never "deleted".

The only reason this user encountered the issue is because he had to reinstall his entire OS, and reauthorize the computer with a credit card whose billing address had since been changed to a non-US address - this didn't specifically disallow him from playing his purchased music; rather, it didn't allow him to REauthorize the computer in order to play the purchased music. As others have said, this seems to be more of a unique situation/accident than intentional on Apple's part (notwithstanding the valid legal considerations Apple has).

Music you burn to CD from iTunes Music Store is yours to keep - FOREVER. No matter where you move. You DO own the music you buy from iTunes Music Store. (Unlike other sites).

As soon as international licensing arrangements are worked out, more and more countries will have iTunes Music Store available.

Apple did much better than anyone else with keeping broad rights with the user/customer, where they belong.

And, finally, a letter from the Canadian equivalent of the RIAA:

The reason why the Apple iTunes Music Store isn't yet available outside the US is because Apple hasn't made arrangements to obtain the rights outside of that country (this is called "clearing the rights" in the music business).

I run the largest music licensing agency in Canada, CMRRA. On behalf of our clients from around the world, we represent the owners of the vast majority of songs used in Canada.

Yesterday afternoon I placed a call to Apple Canada to open a discussion on the licensing of Apple's online music store in Canada. Apple's Canadian office is basically a sales operation; no products are designed or produced by Apple in Canada, to the best of my knowledge.

I'm hoping to set up a meeting with Apple, probably in Cupertino, in the next two weeks. We're looking forward to doing business with Apple - among other things, our clients don't make any money saying, "no". Until we've cut a deal with Apple, it won't be possible for them to do business in Canada - that's why I'd like to negotiate that deal and have it set up as soon as possible.

We love Mac and iTunes, too! We're sure that a substantial number of Canadians are going to want to do business with Apple, and we look forward to our discussions with them.

All Apple has to do is call me back to set up the meeting.

David A. Basskin
President
Canadian Musical Reproduction Rights Agency Ltd.
Toronto, Canada

So after it was mentioned in the intro to the story, I looked at this BuyMusic.com, and read their terms of sale....man, this is a shitty music service...

Who cares about the freaking security, did anyone read the TERMS OF SALE AGREEMENT?

Check this out:

Content Use Rules. All downloaded music, images, video, artwork, text, software and other copyrightable materials ("Content") are sublicensed to End Users and not sold, notwithstanding use of the terms "sell," "purchase," "order," or "buy" on the Site or this Agreement.
Your Digital Download sublicense is nonexclusive, nontransferable, nonsublicenseable, limited and for use only within the United States. End users may play the Digital Downloads an unlimited number of times on the same registered personal computer to which the Digital Download is originally downloaded.

So are you saying I don't actually own what I'm "buying" on their site?

How can you unlicense your computer too? So if I get a new machine, I lose all my songs!? I couldn't find any mention of switching "primary computers" so that I can keep my music when I upgrade my machine. What about the next time I have to install a fresh version of XP over my current install? Has anyone checked out this service?

Should I sell my RHAT shares?
Should I install T2 Extreme DRM tonight?
Should I pay for music at BuyMusic instead of P2P?
What are you going to do when Hollywood and Dean join forces?

from my blog: Tonight I read about a new online music service called "BuyMusic.Com" for the first time. It is billed as a "iTunes for PC users" and this is a conspicuously empty niche in the music business at the moment. I've looked at other services such as Pressplay and MusicNet, but so far they have all sucked in terms of sound quality, value and ridiculous limitations on what you can do with the music that you legitimately purchase. Is BuyMusic any better? Let's find out. I found the link on the front page of Google news. It was attributed to an article from TechTV.com which comes off as both a commercial for the new service and a fairly harsh dig at Apple and iTunes. They make the point that the tracks are slightly less expensive at BuyMusic ($.79 as opposed to $.99) and the obvious problem that only people who own Macs are currently capable of accessing iTunes. They also make a big deal about the service's music catalog which stands at around 300,000 tracks. So I go to the BuyMusic site. The home page is fairly well designed, with top 100 singles and top album listings front and center. At first glance the selection is about what I would expect - Norah Jones is here, as well as Justin Timberlake, Shania Twain and 50 Cent. Okay, so it's not my favorite music but this is what sells so I can't blame them for putting it up front. The real test will come when I try to find some of my favorite music - in other words, something a music fan (as opposed to a 12 year old girl) might actually want to buy. There are some ads on the page, but nothing too intrusive. One is for Windows Media Player 9, which is interesting because it contains an implementation of Microsoft's latest Digital Rights Management technology. WMP9 is also notable for its very open-ended End User License Agreement (EULA) which means basically that if you install this software then you also give Microsoft the legal right to download and install updates to your computer at any time and without asking for your permission. Maybe I'm paranoid, but I just never liked the sound of that. I wonder if it is a required download to use the service. Yep. That makes the other ad somewhat ironic - it is for a Nomad 20GB MP3 Jukebox. Ironic because regular MP3s don't have any DRM built in and a good DRM system would probably prevent the user from transferring legitimately purchased music onto the player. I have yet to find out exactly what format of music this service is actually selling... Are they MP3s or Microsoft Media Player files or some other proprietary format like the one that Apple is using? Time to forge on and find out... So I begin to look around the page for the catalog navigation buttons. Off to the left is a list of genres... Looking down the list I notice that although there is a separate category for "Blues" there is no category at all for "Dance Music." Weh oh. Not a good sign. So I click on Pop/Rock which I figure is the closest thing to dance music they have listed here. Although it lists twenty-something variations on Pop/Rock such as "Teen Pop" and "Experimental Rock" there is still no indication of dance music. Scrolling down the page I do find an album I like however - John Mayer's "Room for Squares." The album price is listed as $12.69. Not too bad, I tell myself. Clicking onto the album info page I encounter my first harsh truth about BuyMusic: They don't have everything that's listed in their catalog. For example, even though the album price was given as $12.69, a note on the album's page says "For Sale as Individual Tracks Only." Furthermore, only four of the twelve tracks can be downloaded, for $.99 each. The first single

Have you seen their ads?

Let's see now, they have people in front of plain white backgrounds singing (semi-badly) to songs they downloaded while listening to said songs on what is obviously a hard-drive-based music player.

Hmmmmm.... wonder where they got the inspiration for such ads.

Such originality!

Nice catch about the large center banner and the commercials of people singing on their personal music players with a white backdrop. Their creative department must have brainstormed all night to come up with those ideas! Once I started drilling down into the site, I really wish they stole the "feel"iTMS user-interface, instead of just the "look". All those broken images and poorly located links makes me think the whole thing is a rush job.

Another thing I don't understand is how their top two album downloads (Dangerously In Love by Beyonce and So Long Astoria by the Ataris) are only for sale as individual tracks only. Riddle me how this happens?

An hour of navigating and I'm still looking for a better deal than iTMS on a currently-popular song (actually I haven't found one anywhere, but I've only seriously tried to look under current hits). They either nab you with the restriction on the number of downloads (vs iTMS 3), or number of "transfers"(vs infinite), burns(vs infinite), or they leave out one song so you can't buy the album, or they charge you more than $9.99/album $.99/song.

When you allows the labels to dictate the term, you end up with a big mess! Some of those terms are a bit silly, after all, it makes sense to have a less restrictive license on "transfers" than iTMS because I'd imagine the iPod, with its large capacity, high speed interface, and easily accessible hard drive would be far more dangerous than the pathetic "approved" players (the only good one is the bulky, hard-to-navigate Zen). Then again, Apple's AACs are watermarked, who knows what happens when you transcode WMAs (assuming you go through all the hassle and isn't it a violation of your "license"?).

Where's the one-click? Why can't I unregister a computer? Where's the find as you type? Where's the cross sell? Where's the lateral navigation? How come my page keeps reloading--no need for Apple's WebObjects, if you're demanding IE5 and developing on dotNet, why not use a bit of remote scripting? The user interface is so poor, no wonder it comes with a manual in which they need to hire a model to get you to click on their links--insert reference to the old MicroWarehouse/MacWarehouse catalogs.

I guess we're going to have to give Buy.com some time on this one before they get it right. We waited for Apple to bring the indies on board and we're still waiting for a Windows iTMS and international versions. I guess we can wait.

But please, be a bit more original with the commercials and website design. And definitely put more thought into the user interface! This sort of copycat attitude which misses what makes their competitor work is why they got their a**** handed to them by Amazon. I can excuse Apple for simplistic editorial content, limited cross-sell and no community interface; I cannot excuse a company who makes a business of doing exactly those three things without my head screaming "incompetence."

I hope they fix this site. The PC world (heck! the Mac world too if Apple has to change their pricing or improve their features to compete) could use a decent competitor to iTMS.

Nice catch about the large center banner and the commercials of people singing on their personal music players with a white backdrop. Their creative department must have brainstormed all night to come up with those ideas! Once I started drilling down into the site, I really wish they stole the "feel"iTMS user-interface, instead of just the "look". All those broken images and poorly located links makes me think the whole thing is a rush job.

Another thing I don't understand is how their top two album downloads (Dangerously In Love by Beyonce and So Long Astoria by the Ataris) are only for sale as individual tracks only. Riddle me how this happens?

An hour of navigating and I'm still looking for a better deal than iTMS on a currently-popular song (actually I haven't found one anywhere, but I've only seriously tried to look under current hits). They either nab you with the restriction on the number of downloads (vs iTMS 3), or number of "transfers"(vs infinite), burns(vs infinite), or they leave out one song so you can't buy the album, or they charge you more than $9.99/album $.99/song.

When you allows the labels to dictate the term, you end up with a big mess! Some of those terms are a bit silly, after all, it makes sense to have a less restrictive license on "transfers" than iTMS because I'd imagine the iPod, with its large capacity, high speed interface, and easily accessible hard drive would be far more dangerous than the pathetic "approved" players (the only good one is the bulky, hard-to-navigate Zen). Then again, Apple's AACs are watermarked, who knows what happens when you transcode WMAs (assuming you go through all the hassle and isn't it a violation of your "license"?).

Where's the one-click? Why can't I unregister a computer? Where's the find as you type? Where's the cross sell? Where's the lateral navigation? How come my page keeps reloading--no need for Apple's WebObjects, if you're demanding IE5 and developing on dotNet, why not use a bit of remote scripting? The user interface is so poor, no wonder it comes with a manual in which they need to hire a model to get you to click on their links--insert reference to the old MicroWarehouse/MacWarehouse catalogs.

I guess we're going to have to give Buy.com some time on this one before they get it right. We waited for Apple to bring the indies on board and we're still waiting for a Windows iTMS and international versions. I guess we can wait.

But please, be a bit more original with the commercials and website design. And definitely put more thought into the user interface! This sort of copycat attitude which misses what makes their competitor work is why they got their a**** handed to them by Amazon. I can excuse Apple for simplistic editorial content, limited cross-sell and no community interface; I cannot excuse a company who makes a business of doing exactly those three things without my head screaming "incompetence."

I hope they fix this site. The PC world (heck! the Mac world too if Apple has to change their pricing or improve their features to compete) could use a decent competitor to iTMS.

Songs are tied to ONE computer, without the ability to change that. Depending upon the particular song, burns and transfers to a (select) number of mp3 players is limited to a discrete number.

Don't get me wrong. I'm a a huge Apple fan, but the information you give is not quite accurate. It varies by song.

If you look at the restrictions on the current number one BuyMusic download (Justin Timberlake's 'Rock Your Body' - need to be on Windows with IE), you'll see that the usage rules are: Downloads - 3, Transfers - unlimited, Burns - 10

Fired up IE for the first time in months to look at the site. Noticed lack of "Electronic" genre on the left navigation bar, so tapped a few searches for my favorites.

Searching for Photek produced 734 matches, none of which having anything to do whatsoever with the DnB pioneer. The #1 result? Patsy Cline.

The voices are telling me to give in to Buy.com/Microsoft/RIAA and listen to shitty country music. What was I thinking all these years?

y

Gossip Folks by Missy Elliott for $1.79.

Hi,

I used this form to fill out an e-mail complaint. Selected 'Website Comments' as subject and left the order number field blank. There is an automated reply at once, and they say a live rep would reply within 24 hours, unless your e-mail gets bumped up the queue like mine, I still haven't got a reply though :)

Here.

The year 2003. Now we are allowed to copy music we have paid for - our legally acquired songs - between different media and computers only a limited number of times.

From the help page:

[picture of a CD] The Compact Disk icon shows the number of times the song can be downloaded to compact disks.

[picture of a set of headphones] The Headphone icon shows the number of times you can transfer the song to digital media

[picture of a monitor] The Computer icon shows the number of computers you can download your music to in total.

Expect in the near future, this addition to the license:

[picture of an ear] The Ear icon shows the number of times your player will play the song.

And, without any greater stretch of imagination, we finally end up with this:

[picture of a brain] The Brain icon shows the number of times SDMI/DRM/XXX will let you experience our product ("listen to the song") without upgrading your account/brain.

Can I buy music from outside the United States?

No. Due to licensing restrictions, BuyMusic.com content is available only to residents of the United States.

Hmmm. I wonder how they are enforcing that?

$12.89 for the whole album $0.99 * 10 = $9.90 when buying all the ten songs individually. Hmmm....

Artist: 50 cent
Album: $9.99

The ads on BuyMusic are complete rip offs of the Apple ads. Compare the original Apple iPod ads to the new BuyMusic ads.

At least they could do something original!

Minimum System Requirements

Downloading Music from BuyMusic.com to Your Computer

See Manufacturer Contact Information for support information.

Pentium Class PC computer. Our music downloads are not compatible with any Mac OS. Pentium class is required for individualization settings to enable music licenses. Internet browser - Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.01 or newer. Note: If you browse the site with Netscape you cannot purchase and download music. Windows Media Player 9.0 or newer. Note: Windows Media Player version 9.0 or newer is compatible with the DRM encrypted music files BuyMusic.com sells. Other players might not be compatible and might not play, transfer, or burn your music files satisfactorily. Media Player is a free download. (See Manufacturer Contact Information for free download.) Operating System - Microsoft Windows® 98 Second Edition, Windows 2000, Windows Millennium Edition, Windows XP Home Edition, or Windows XP Professional. BuyMusic downloads are not compatible with any Mac OS. Processor - 233 megahertz (MHz) processor, such as an Intel Pentium II or Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) processor

Jolly Terry Bradshaw

thanks for the reply mentioning William Shatner, I remembered Terry Bradshaw, 70s QB for the Steelers, recorded an album.

I'm running Mozilla 1.4 and whenever I go to anything on that server, I get this page.

"It needs to be consumer-friendly and protect the interests of the artists as well."

Har har har. While I'm sure it'll be relatively easy to pay and download, doesn't the fact that the music is in Windows Media format mean that you can't play it in any device that doesn't support Windows Media files?

On this page: http://www.buymusic.com/support/help.aspx, it says:
"Before tracks are copied to your CD, they are inspected and, in some cases, converted to a file type. This process takes several minutes." Since it doesn't specify what file type is being created, should we assume it'll be all-device compatible WAV-files? Or is that a nebulous way of saying it'll stay in WMF?

Last, since I've seen nothing more than *1* track from various indie artists on the site, I'll have to guess that all money from the purchase of music here goes directly to the label, not the artist. How again does this protect the interests of the artists?

I'll pass.

Here is the link to complain. Unfortunately you'll have to load up IE on win to use it.

http://www.buymusic.com/support/email.aspx

Check the EULA for this shit. Pure crap. I don't want an EULA that tells me I'm restricted to legally using my music only on approved players - isn't it bad enough that they use a fucking proprietary format, now they want to legally restrict me from using "unapproved" players? They can go fuck themselves up a tree with that attitude - when I buy a CD, I can play it on any damned player I want, and I expect the same rights when I buy music for download. At least with iTunes, you can transcode, burn to CD-R, etc. If I can't transcode it to MP3 and put it onto my mini-CD/MP3 player, you aren't getting a penny from me. And did I mention, go fuck yourselves buy.com.

These songs are licensed case-by-case and can have different limits set by the publisher as to how many times they can be burned to CD, transferred to a portable music player, etc. And if you lose the music on your primary system, you'd better have made backups: "...Once a song is on your computer, it is your responsibility. If your computer is lost or damaged, BuyMusic.com is not obligated to replace your music after it has been downloaded..." (this from their help page).

Overall, pretty restrictive, and (of course) no iPod support. There seems to be little to differentiate this from previous services, except for the lack of a membership fee and a $40 million budget for an advertising campaign...

• Pentium Class PC computer. Our music downloads are not compatible with any Mac OS. Pentium class is required for individualization settings to enable music licenses.
• Internet browser - Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.01 or newer. Note: If you browse the site with Netscape you cannot purchase and download music.
• Windows Media Player 9.0 or newer. Note: Windows Media Player version 9.0 or newer is compatible with the DRM encrypted music files BuyMusic.com sells. Other players might not be compatible and might not play, transfer, or burn your music files satisfactorily. Media Player is a free download. (See Manufacturer Contact Information for free download.)
• Operating System - Microsoft Windows® 98 Second Edition, Windows 2000, Windows Millennium Edition, Windows XP Home Edition, or Windows XP Professional. BuyMusic downloads are not compatible with any Mac OS.
• Processor - 233 megahertz (MHz) processor, such as an Intel Pentium II or Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) processor
• RAM - 64 megabytes (MB)
• Free Hard Disk Space - 100 MB PLUS 1 MB of memory per minute of downloaded music
• Optical Drive - CD or DVD drive (DVD playback requires compatible DVD decoder software)
• Sound Card - Required: 16-bit sound card. Recommended: Compatible 5.1 multichannel audio sound card (for example, Creative Sound Blaster Live! 5.1 or Sound Blaster Audigy; Echo Audio Layla24 or Mona; or M-Audio Delta 1010, Delta 1010-LT, or Delta 410).
• Internet connection - High speed highly recommended but not required.
• Speakers, or headphones, or connectivity to home stereo.

• Your digital media player must be SDMI compliant or it will not play music from BuyMusic.com. To verify if your player is SDMI compliant, check the manufacturer's specifications or contact the manufacturer.
  Your digital media player must be Digital Rights Management (DRM) compliant, because your music download files use DRM license encryption technology. Non-DRM compliant digital media players will not decrypt or play your music files.

There are also primary and secondary licenses (secondary licenses so you can play the song on a second computer but NOT copy it to an SDMI DRM digital music player). Each label decides if and/or how many times you can copy a song.

So the whole "relatively open, exceedingly easy" part of the iTunes Music Center just completely passed them by. Good to know.