Slashdot Mirror

eMusic.com then. 15 quid a month for 90 or 75 downloads (they're changing from 90 to 75) - you can get 25 free downloads.

http://www.emusic.com?fref=700038 (referrer link - gives me 50 free downloads if you like it)

For you skeptical types, it really is true that you can buy DRM-free music on ITunes.

You just need an Emusic account to do so!

The Magnolia Electric Co. by Songs:Ohia

Seriously though, Jobs is really putting his foot in it if he thinks we are to believe his current bluster. He can sell this example above like thousands of others that are available on Emusic All DRM-free (of course)!

If the music was unrestricted, I'd buy it even at $1 a shitty, uber-compressed song.

Here. http://www.emusic.com/

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

My band sells mp3s without DRM via: http://www.emusic.com/artist/11669/11669917.html There are other competitors in this space, they just don't have the market locked down quite as well as iTunes. Hopefully with time, that will change? rhY

Perhaps, they are realizing that DRM is causing them to lose not only revenue (in terms of people buying less) but market share (people buying elsewhere). I used to buy music that I heard on the radio like everyone else. Since the Sony rootkit mess I get my music from eMusic. I've found a lot of great bands/labels. Now, no matter what the major labels do, I'll never go back to them 100%. Another less techie friend of mine just recently got fed up with iTunes DRM and ask me to help find something else... guess where I'm pointing.

Actually, what DJ Drama has been doing is not sampling. He makes compilations of music, continuously mixed, with additional scratching and effects, and MC freestyles.

An example of his work is Gangsta Grillz 8. One would assume there were seven before that, not counting other mixes. Play the sample of track 6. It should sound familiar.

His stuff is on eMusic.

I'm a little unsure of my opinion of the whole thing. Typically, to sell and distribute a compilation of music, one must license each of the songs on a compilation. This includes mix CDs. Even with electronic compilations produced by independent artists, containing music by independent artists, the music on the CD is licensed. I believe Richie Hawtin, whose mixes manipulate the original songs so much that they might be unrecognizable, licenses songs and credits the producers of all of the original songs. Many of the songs aren't even available on CD outside of his mixes. On the other hand, the artists approve, and requiring approval for every use of every song goes against the core of hip-hop culture. (sampling / derivative use)

But yeah, Drama was definitely not under the radar. Many of the artists on his mixes would not have been distributed on eMusic otherwise, because the majors don't distribute via eMusic. He was too big to not license. He definitely had to see this coming.

Of course it can. Putting allofmp3.com aside for the moment, there is no legal source of non-DRM music aside from CD. Many CDs have DRM mechanisms on them these days, so even that source is not free. Microsoft and Apple will both be mandating DRM in short order, and both already do so when it comes to most types of media.

Sigh. The fact that many artists/copyright owners choose not to licence their content in DRM-free formats is a totally different debate than the discussion over one vendor's ability to use network effects to sustain an actual monopoly. It is within the legal right of the individual artists/copyright holders unless the legislature or the courts say otherwise. What's more, you can find legal music in non-DRM formats where the copyright holders have actually blessed it. If you're an Indie artist, there is nothing to stop you from offering your music for free or for a fee (without DRM) today.

Theorizing that "the man" will somehow force all music to be encumbered with DRM, against the wishes of its creators, is nothing more than wild speculation (not to mention that it is very unlikely).

then I hope you're not planning to use word, which has problems when opening documents from substantially older versions of word, and whose documents are not backwards-compatible.

What is your point? I said this is a monopoly, i.e., it's not a good situation. I use Word regularly and I certainly have plenty of complaints about the price and some of its bugginess (particularly in the past... although compared to Open Office and others its still heads and shoulders better), but I've had very few problems with forward compatibility.

Now I know you're a shill. There is NOTHING stopping you from developing non-GPL software for Linux or other FOSS. Many corporations, including say Adobe are already managing to do this. You are a FUD-spreader. Now that I know you are scum, the rest of this comment will probably be a lot more fun.

I'm no shill. This is also an ad hominem attack. First, porting your code to any wholly new platform/SDK/APK/etc creates very real hurdles. Second, I assert that Linux does create high hurdles for proprietary developers relative to other platforms (e.g., MacOS X). The lack of high quality application development tools and the GPL licenses of many important libraries create very real problems for proprietary developers. QT, for instance, is licensed under GPL v2. Developers that link to it must either GPL their code or pay TrollTech money for their dual-license (which would allow them the chance to actually sell more than 1 copy of the application). Third, the proprietary developer also must contend with the "everything must be free" mentality of a significant percentage of Linux users so they have a reduced incentive to port. You can't exactly claim that there's a lot of proprietary applications available for Linux or that there are a lot of superior quality Linux applications.

But we're not really talking about a monopoly here, we're talking ubiquity. Some media simply can not be gotten without DRM, and that DRM is there specifically to prevent you from exercising fair use rights, to stop you from format-shifting, and the like. They don't just want to entice you to buy the white album again, they want to force you.

The artist is not obligated to give you what you want. The artist isn't obligated to record music, why should they be obliged to provide it to you on your terms? Vote with your feet if you don't like it. Besides, most content is still available without any DRM on CDs.

If it's so damn easy to crack DRM, what's your problem? You're on slashdot, right, this is supposed to be easy for you.

Yes, the musician can decide that they want less exposure, that's true. What a choice!

I love eMusic, but this is a very stupid feature of theirs. It _is_ possible to browse without signing up, but they make it really hard to find.

Try this: http://www.emusic.com/browse/all.html I think this will work for you.

"Does anyone know how to browse the eMusic catalog without signing up (i.e., giving them your credit card info)?"

The splash-screen is a bit of a silly design. To bypass it, click one of the boring-looking links at the bottom. For example, 'About eMusic' takes you to http://www.emusic.com/about/index.html?fref=700736

Apple's DRM sucks _the_least_. IS it there? yeah. Does it impact 99% of the people that use the iTunes store? Not really.

You mean not at the moment. I know it's unfathomable, but years down the road, if another company made a better (sexier, easier to use, less expensive, or more reliable) portable music player (or just provided better customer service), and people decided not to buy iPods, it certainly would. Anti-trust suits take a long time. Better to start early.

Okay, you're stuck with Apple's iPodlike devices. So what? They're really good.

Of course they are. My 40 GB, 4th gen iPod has only suffered complete hardware failure 2 times since I bought it (2 years, 3 months ago). Cost of iPod: $400. Cost of extended warranty: $60. Cost of repairing it today: $40 - $140. Total cost of owning for a device owning an iPod for 2 years: $230/yr, not including music. Of course, I am an "Apple Hater". (I could call you a "Fanboy", but that doesn't make my argument any stronger)

Apple has managed to negotiate with folks that can't be negotiated with. Further, they were able to do so in a way that greatly benifits the customer. In doing so, they managed to jumpstart the current, DEVELOPING, download industry.

Does that entitle them to use anti-competitive business practices to keep their position in the digital audio / digital audio player markets? Will the market continue to develop? By comparison, Microsoft "jump-started" the home computer market in the 1980s. Are they entitled to break their competitor's software on Windows to gain/keep market share now?

Do the permit renting the music? No. and I can see why: Rentals rely on the end user getting complacent and 'forgetting' that $15 a month fee. Once it gets past their notice, and they fall into complacency, the bult of that $15 is free money to the vendor. (Assuming they don't get bought or go out of business, or whatever)

Because Apple has decided that subscriptions are not the best business model, and you agree; no one else should be allowed to offer it? I prefer eMusic's model (it costs me $.22/song if I don't forget to download my music) to iTMS ($.99/song). If eMusic wanted to protect their music, I wouldn't be able to play it on my iPod. Apple doesn't support other DRM, and they won't license their own to competitors in the music market.

DRM may be an unnecessary evil,

And in some cases, Apple continues to add DRM, even when other companies don't. Tell me again that it's only because the labels make them.

I can't say that alternative has _ever_ acted with the consumer's interests in mind

Which alternative is that? I get the feeling you are assuming Microsoft is the only alternative in this market. Even if that is the case, it's generally accepted that in a free market, competition is in the consumers' interests. Although PlaysForSure was a technological failure, Microsoft's licensing of it to multiple companies who make digital audio players and sell digital audio files did promote competition in those markets. It might have also locked people into the Windows OS (vendors, at least), but hey Microsoft helped "jump-start" the market, remember?

I've got absolutely NO qualms with sticking with Apple. Their products mesh extremely well with my needs.

It appears you are missing a "big distinction". That is that not every consumer has the same needs and values as you do.

The big problem with FairPlay is that it allows Apple to use their monopoly in the digital audio player market to maint

Apple's DRM sucks _the_least_. IS it there? yeah. Does it impact 99% of the people that use the iTunes store? Not really.

You mean not at the moment. I know it's unfathomable, but years down the road, if another company made a better (sexier, easier to use, less expensive, or more reliable) portable music player (or just provided better customer service), and people decided not to buy iPods, it certainly would. Anti-trust suits take a long time. Better to start early.

Okay, you're stuck with Apple's iPodlike devices. So what? They're really good.

Of course they are. My 40 GB, 4th gen iPod has only suffered complete hardware failure 2 times since I bought it (2 years, 3 months ago). Cost of iPod: $400. Cost of extended warranty: $60. Cost of repairing it today: $40 - $140. Total cost of owning for a device owning an iPod for 2 years: $230/yr, not including music. Of course, I am an "Apple Hater". (I could call you a "Fanboy", but that doesn't make my argument any stronger)

Apple has managed to negotiate with folks that can't be negotiated with. Further, they were able to do so in a way that greatly benifits the customer. In doing so, they managed to jumpstart the current, DEVELOPING, download industry.

Does that entitle them to use anti-competitive business practices to keep their position in the digital audio / digital audio player markets? Will the market continue to develop? By comparison, Microsoft "jump-started" the home computer market in the 1980s. Are they entitled to break their competitor's software on Windows to gain/keep market share now?

Do the permit renting the music? No. and I can see why: Rentals rely on the end user getting complacent and 'forgetting' that $15 a month fee. Once it gets past their notice, and they fall into complacency, the bult of that $15 is free money to the vendor. (Assuming they don't get bought or go out of business, or whatever)

Because Apple has decided that subscriptions are not the best business model, and you agree; no one else should be allowed to offer it? I prefer eMusic's model (it costs me $.22/song if I don't forget to download my music) to iTMS ($.99/song). If eMusic wanted to protect their music, I wouldn't be able to play it on my iPod. Apple doesn't support other DRM, and they won't license their own to competitors in the music market.

DRM may be an unnecessary evil,

And in some cases, Apple continues to add DRM, even when other companies don't. Tell me again that it's only because the labels make them.

I can't say that alternative has _ever_ acted with the consumer's interests in mind

Which alternative is that? I get the feeling you are assuming Microsoft is the only alternative in this market. Even if that is the case, it's generally accepted that in a free market, competition is in the consumers' interests. Although PlaysForSure was a technological failure, Microsoft's licensing of it to multiple companies who make digital audio players and sell digital audio files did promote competition in those markets. It might have also locked people into the Windows OS (vendors, at least), but hey Microsoft helped "jump-start" the market, remember?

I've got absolutely NO qualms with sticking with Apple. Their products mesh extremely well with my needs.

It appears you are missing a "big distinction". That is that not every consumer has the same needs and values as you do.

The big problem with FairPlay is that it allows Apple to use their monopoly in the digital audio player market to maint

Lacking any other information, I will assume that you want the same songs I do, in which case http://www.emusic.com/ is what you want. They have a use-it-or-lose it subscription model, with the current cheapest monthly plan providing (I think) 30 songs for $10 ($.33/song), no DRM, MP3, usually encoded VBR with LAME 3.96. Sampling my purchases, the bit rate reported by iTunes is usually between 160 and 195kbps.

I have not purchased any songs on iTunes since I signed up for eMusic.

I've purchased songs by (output of "ls -1" in the appropriate folder): Asobi Seksu, Bettie Serveert, Bjo??rk, Brave Combo, Dar Williams, Frank Zappa, Gillian Welch, Johann Johannsson, John Fahey, Kaki King, Led Zepplin Tribute, Mission of Burma, Nouvelle Vague, Pere Ubu, So Percussion, The Go-Betweens, The Mountain Goats, Tracy Grammer and Various Artists. You might want to use this as a sort of a guide to what they do or don't have in their digital inventory. I have no problem buying my quota each month, and at $.33/song I am perfectly willing to take a chance on a second album by So Percussion or Bettie Serveert.

and notice that I am not even spamming you with the canned "tell a friend about eMusic" mail that gets me free songs if you sign up. I'm doing this because I want these guys to succeed.

There is a great benefit for it, which I stated before. One of the things I've heard people moan about is having to rebuy their CDs when one is lost. With ITMS anything you buy is now attached to your account (by way of DRM). You now basically permanently own that song.

That has nothing to do with encryption and everything to do with identification. eMusic, for instance, has no DRM and allows you to re-download everything you've bought from them as many times as you like. Locking up music behind encryption provides NO benefit whatsoever to the consumer.

Why don't you help your friend and tell her to call apple so she can re-activate her songs instead of trying to push your itms, apple sucks agenda on her.

I'm not. She's the one who feels cheated. The look of surprise and disgust on her face was priceless. That's the best way to educate people about the evils of DRM, let it bite them on the ass and they'll learn soon enough.

I looked at iTunes but their prices are way too high - basically the same as buying a CD at Amazon.com - and the DRM restrictions were just enough to make me want to stay away.

I've been very happy with emusic.com, which offers a growing catalog of music, prices that are about 1/3 of Apple's, and completely unrestricted MP3 files.

Sure you won't find top 40 dreck at emusic.com, but if your tastes are the least bit adventurous there's a lot of great music at reasonable prices.

Bill Evans, Thelonius Monk, Lucinda Williams, Kirsty MacColl, Tom Waits....

I would prefer to say that they are guilty of very confusing advertising...

Just to be clear on what is meant by "subscription only", they are NOT like Rhapsody, et al, where you are only renting the songs for as long as you subscribe. What you get are unadulterated and DRM-free mp3 files which are yours to keep forever. In fact, you can download them again and again - as long as you are a current subscriber and the songs are still in eMusic's catalog.

The biggest complaint with eMusic's FAQ pages is that they are not easy to get to, especially for the new user who comes to the site cold or via a promotional ad link. They're not impossible to get to, but they sure don't make it easy and it requires a bit of browsing.

You can find eMusic's own Help pages here which include answers about subscriptions, including price. Also, there is a very good eMusic FAQ here which is maintained by an avid eMusic fan.

I also tell him that iTunes would lose every cent of our business if someone started selling unDRMed mp3s for the same (or lower price).

It's called eMusic.

Umm... have you ever heard of emusic? They don't use DRM, either. They pay royalties to the indie labels; however, some lesser known artists from larger labels are part of their catalog. The difference is that AllOfMp3 pays an amount settled upon by the Russian copyright group (org? association? I'm not sure), not one dictated by the American cartel.

You might try eMusic. They offer VBR quality mp3s at a pretty low price and can be redownloaded and shared (DRM-free) to your heart's content. Mind you, they don't have the pop-hits artists of iTunes and MTV but they do have a pretty wide selection.

Hope it helps!
GR

Check out bleep.com it's 1GBP per track and then there's also eMusic which is a subscription service. Both are DRM free and offer good quality music, you can't offer the prices AllofMP3 offer but you can offer the quality and freedom it offers at a similar price to iTunes and Napster given a bit of economies of scale there's no reason with Major Label backing you couldn't offer the product. The majors will just not accept it, unfortunately.

I also notice eMusic is not very comprehensive. For example, they have nothing by Radiohead. They have three albums by Elvis Presley - one live performance and two compilations. And if you put in Elvis Costello, the only hits they have are for Karaoke. No Gnarls Barkely, no Beatles, no Rolling Stones, no Enya, no Alanis Morissette, no Death Cab For Cutie (well, once again Karaoke). Speaking of which, there are 5988 tracks with Karaoke in their name...

My main point is that there is no way for them to make the programs available to you that doesn't cost them money. This is especially true for older programs. They have to get them from the old tapes and such and convert and encode them. Then they have to distribute them somehow. Even if they used p2p, they would take a hit from being the initial seeder. Someone would need to manage all this, and IT stuff isn't cheap. So they would have to get money for this from somewhere.

Also DRM-Free and great! http://www.emusic.com/

Given that I pay 25 cents a song (actually it might have gone up for new people now) and get it legit and DRM free, 11.7 for an illegal copy with the added hassle of doing it yourself doesnt seem that good a deal. Even more so because none of my 25 cents goes to the RIAA (I assume, all the labels are indy). Plus I would have to find 15 friends, cue sad slashdoter joke :)

I take that back: http://www.emusic.com/browse/all.html

It seems to me that for-profit corporations are simple creatures. They seek one thing: profit (some are better at it than others). They respond to pleasure (profit), desire (for profit), pain (loss of profit), and fear (of loss of profit). If you want them to change their behavior you must employ these carrots and sticks.

Penalize record companies for their membership in the RIAA. Purchase no music from members of the RIAA. This can be tricky as many record labels that seem to be Independents are actually subsidiaries of RIAA members. Also, you cannot reliably identify whether an album or single is published by an RIAA member just by the artist. Many acts begin their careers on independent labels and then move to majors that are RIAA. There are resources that will help you to identify whether a given album or single is RIAA-member published or not:

www.riaaradar.com
wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_RIAA_member_labels

Don't buy records, CDs, tapes, or downloads published by these labels. You don't have to avoid *listening* to works published by RIAA members. Just refuse to *purchase* them.

Reward the labels that are not members of the RIAA. Purchase music from labels that are not RIAA affiliated. It shouldn't be hard. Unless you live completely in a mainstream media wasteland, some of the musicians that you like are on independent labels.

If you enjoy purchasing music on-line, consider doing so through eMusic.com. Although they are the #2 on-line music retailer after the iTunes music store, almost all their tracks are from non-RIAA members. As a bonus each song sold by eMusic comes in a DRM-free MP3 format!

If you do these things don't count on industry executives being astute enough to figure out from the sales numbers alone why their fortunes are declining. Consider contacting the Big 4 major labels and tell them exactly why you are avoiding their products and the products of their subsidiaries.

• EMI
• Sony BMG Music Entertainment
• Universal Music Group
• Warner Music Group

Then, sit back and enjoy music and the schadenfreude.

The general populace cannot properly build a PC. I have experienced firsthand the results of someone trying to build their own PC, time and time again. There are just too many things that can go wrong. But they should not have to settle for Dell if they do not want. That makes it my job to select quality brand name parts and assemble a quality PC, and if a person wants a $300 PC, then that's what I will build for them. If they want a $600 PC, ok. The more you pay, the more power.

Of course, the other great choice to be offered is Linux, or Windows, or both? Dual boot, VMWare Player, or both? I have now 250 customers, many local, a few not, who enjoy their linux PC and receive tech support and software updates from me, free for the first year, or longer if they wish (for extra $$).

Right now many of my customers are enjoying their new 3D accelerated desktops (video!), and hopefully everyone will have this by christmas. Flash player 9 is also going on select customer desktops, those who are comfortable trying out new software which is not official. All of my customers recieve emails describing services from rhapsody.com, emusic.com, abc.com, new features from KDE and related software (amarok!), and other news of interest.

The main theme here is support. It should not be as difficult as it is with Dell. I think it should be more personal, and that is what i hope to offer. That and, of course, a better quality PC than can be found elsewhere. That, above all, is why I entered this business.. working on Dell, Gateway and Compaq etc PCs for years left me wanting something more for my customers, like quality name brand parts, painless and inexpensive hardware and software updates, and of course, personalized tech support.

Cheap legal downloads with no DRM, MP3 files with VBR: emusic.com, bleep.com. There's a lot more, you search for them.

Cingular will allow people to download music to compatible phones for free, although consumers will pay a monthly charge in the range of $15 for the ability to download songs from those services to a portable music player. "

"Right now, we're focused on getting people to view mobile music as something that's interesting and exciting. You've got to build a base. Once you do that, there are all sorts of ways to drive revenue from it," says Jim Ryan, vice-president of consumer data services at Cingular.

What about http://www.emusic.com/? I use them to buy from alot of independent artists. Just a thought...

I have an independent label. We have interns manage getting the releases out to all of the major sites.
We track royalties and sales data from all of them.
in addition to iTunes store, the catalog is available on most pay sites:
http://www.playittonight.com/
http://www.dancerecords.com/artists/Synthique
http://www.last.fm/
http://www.emusic.com/artist/11616/11616213.html
http://www.napster.com/view/artist/index.html?id=1 1638090

I just noticed that I have stuff on the WalMart music site. That's disturbing, since I don't remember anyone contacting them..
http://musicdownloads.walmart.com/catalog/servlet/ ArtistServlet?id=36183 //teh evil

The subscription is very inexpensive. The only difference to, let's say, iTunes, other than the lower price, is that they sell you a basic pack of 'x' downloads the first time in a month, with the option of purchasing packs of additional 'y' downloads if you wish more music, instead of individual downloads, but that's it. And, believe me, you'll usually want more. On top of that, you can redownload the musics you purchased whenever you want, provided your subscription is active. And if you unsubscribe, your music keeps being yours. Just don't expect finding big labels there. They're out.

And no, you don't need to subscribe the service to browse the catalog and listen to samples. Just click the href="http://www.emusic.com/browse/all.html">BROWS E button on the top bar. Actually, I suggest you click all the links on the top bar. It's worth it. The reviews, and the dozens selections, are a must.

In short: it's a very, very good service. I'm currently unsubscribed because I've little time for searching music nowadays, but I plan resubscribing in future.

The subscription is very inexpensive. The only difference to, let's say, iTunes, other than the lower price, is that they sell you a basic pack of 'x' downloads the first time in a month, with the option of purchasing packs of additional 'y' downloads if you wish more music, instead of individual downloads, but that's it. And, believe me, you'll usually want more. On top of that, you can redownload the musics you purchased whenever you want, provided your subscription is active. And if you unsubscribe, your music keeps being yours. Just don't expect finding big labels there. They're out.

And no, you don't need to subscribe the service to browse the catalog and listen to samples. Just click the href="http://www.emusic.com/browse/all.html">BROWS E button on the top bar. Actually, I suggest you click all the links on the top bar. It's worth it. The reviews, and the dozens selections, are a must.

In short: it's a very, very good service. I'm currently unsubscribed because I've little time for searching music nowadays, but I plan resubscribing in future.

The subscription is very inexpensive. The only difference to, let's say, iTunes, other than the lower price, is that they sell you a basic pack of 'x' downloads the first time in a month, with the option of purchasing packs of additional 'y' downloads if you wish more music, instead of individual downloads, but that's it. And, believe me, you'll usually want more. On top of that, you can redownload the musics you purchased whenever you want, provided your subscription is active. And if you unsubscribe, your music keeps being yours. Just don't expect finding big labels there. They're out.

And no, you don't need to subscribe the service to browse the catalog and listen to samples. Just click the href="http://www.emusic.com/browse/all.html">BROWS E button on the top bar. Actually, I suggest you click all the links on the top bar. It's worth it. The reviews, and the dozens selections, are a must.

In short: it's a very, very good service. I'm currently unsubscribed because I've little time for searching music nowadays, but I plan resubscribing in future.

The subscription is very inexpensive. The only difference to, let's say, iTunes, other than the lower price, is that they sell you a basic pack of 'x' downloads the first time in a month, with the option of purchasing packs of additional 'y' downloads if you wish more music, instead of individual downloads, but that's it. And, believe me, you'll usually want more. On top of that, you can redownload the musics you purchased whenever you want, provided your subscription is active. And if you unsubscribe, your music keeps being yours. Just don't expect finding big labels there. They're out.

And no, you don't need to subscribe the service to browse the catalog and listen to samples. Just click the href="http://www.emusic.com/browse/all.html">BROWS E button on the top bar. Actually, I suggest you click all the links on the top bar. It's worth it. The reviews, and the dozens selections, are a must.

In short: it's a very, very good service. I'm currently unsubscribed because I've little time for searching music nowadays, but I plan resubscribing in future.

The subscription is very inexpensive. The only difference to, let's say, iTunes, other than the lower price, is that they sell you a basic pack of 'x' downloads the first time in a month, with the option of purchasing packs of additional 'y' downloads if you wish more music, instead of individual downloads, but that's it. And, believe me, you'll usually want more. On top of that, you can redownload the musics you purchased whenever you want, provided your subscription is active. And if you unsubscribe, your music keeps being yours. Just don't expect finding big labels there. They're out.

And no, you don't need to subscribe the service to browse the catalog and listen to samples. Just click the href="http://www.emusic.com/browse/all.html">BROWS E button on the top bar. Actually, I suggest you click all the links on the top bar. It's worth it. The reviews, and the dozens selections, are a must.

In short: it's a very, very good service. I'm currently unsubscribed because I've little time for searching music nowadays, but I plan resubscribing in future.

On music selection, you're right. It's not an iTunes Store.

Being a DRM-free music store probably keeps the major labels away, and others that are afraid of selling MP3s.

Actually I don't know if emusic is fair in their deals with artists. But if you want to browse the emusic collection: http://www.emusic.com/browse/all.html.

I first decided to subscribe because I did find some artists that interested me. Since then (10 months already) it has been a quite nice way to discover some music I would never have listened to.

I know a lot of Slashdotters hate iTunes for "DRM", "not HD(TV) quality", "too expensive", or whatever other B.S. excuse they can come up with, but...

Q: No, but you've asked them not to raise their prices, when some of them wanted to. A: Our core initial strategy on the store was that if you want to stop piracy, the way to stop it is by competing with it, by offering a better product at a fair price. In essence, we would make a deal with people. If they would pay a fair price, we would give them a better product and they would stop being pirates

...THIS is why I support iTunes. [...]

And THIS is why I support emusic, that is DRM-free.

Without it, there would be no music stores with major artists [major labels] who expect to get paid.

You responded selectively, ignoring how he uses download. Let's focus on the essence:

just to try out an artist.

There ya go. There is no current try-before-you-buy except Top40 rotations on pop stations, and they play only singles from a fixed rotation. DJs are a thing of the past, so how does one get exposed to new material?

I do it via eMusic - for a reasonable price, I get n downloads per month, plus free stuff every day. All of it in MP3 format with no DRM. And there's no shortage of indie music freely available on the web - Salon's Audiofile is good for a daily fix, and Insound and Pitchfork have huge amounts of stuff up for grabs. Just the tip of the iceberg.

If there's something from a major label that I want, I either buy it or copy it from an actual, real-world friend who bought it, which IMO is fair use.

Circuit City sells prepaid downloads for eMusic, it's much cheaper than buying CDs, and you get DRM free MP3s that can play on iPods, Zens, car decks, etc.

If you think 'music nowadays sucks', then you probably haven't really seen much new music. Either that, or you've already fossilized, and your music tastes are stuck in the past. Radio sucks. Get over it, and go out there to find the new places where you can find good music.

My favorite is eMusic. Songs without DRM (straight mp3), from tens of thousands of independant artists going it alone or with smaller labels. Many of them suck (Sturgeon's Law: 90% of everything is crap), but there's definitely some cool artists out there that you won't find on any radio, or even in many stores. At less than 25 cents per song (at their lowest and least-efficient plan) you really can't go wrong trying out various artists.

Another option is Garage Band, where you can download music for free, as long as you review the music so the artist can see what you liked or hated about it. I haven't looked at it much, but I bet there's a ton of cool artists, mixed in with all the idiots too... that's what reviews are for, and you can see the artists that everyone else liked.

Music isn't getting worse... the big distributers are. Fuck 'em. Do an end run around the major labels and ClearChannel, and look at places like eMusic and GarageBand for your new music. The major labels are just gonna have to deal with the fact that they no longer have an oligopoly anymore, and they're gonna have to deal with a (*gasp!*) value and price driven market like everyone else.

The Raven

nobody offers legal MP3 downloads of music.

You are 100% correct, the fact that they don't let you see the catalog before signing in is absolute crap.

Luckily, if you go to their 404 page, you can start searching their catalog from there. Of course, once you do, you will discover (as you suspected) that their catalog has more holes than a fishing net.

I think the point was that they are a legitimate distributor that "plays for sure", since they distribute mp3s without DRM. But I must question your "spy/adware" comment...

First of all, there is a difference, between spyware and adware.

Secondly, I've been using their service for almost a year and have never had adware pushed on me. Frankly, the first site's description of the adware looked like shortcuts to sign up for their services. "Desktop and start menu links"? Come on...

I'm not even sure how accurate this information is. It was last updated almost a year ago. I do have an option to uninstall the eMusic download manager. And if you're concerned about your personal information being shared you can opt out. Most people do not seem to have a problem with is, as eMusic is the second largest legitimate download service.

Also, how do they "push" these files to you? Based on the links you provided it sounds more like Winamp and other free software are bundling these shortcuts to help support their business.

I will say that I hate spyware, adware, and malware as much as the next guy, but it sounds like you're mostly spreading FUD here. I like eMusic and haven't had any problems with adware from them. Do you work for Apple?

This is Apple's entire business model. When you purchase anything at all from Apple it's designed to work only on other Apple products to ensure quality. It's your decision to purchase music from other sites that don't DRM (ex, http://www.emusic.com/) for other media players. If you buy music from I tunes, expect it to only play on your I pod. I don't understand why people still fuss over this stuff. Now quit bitching like you didn't know about the DRM (and if you didn't, it's your own fault for not informing yourself). Be responsible for your own actions.

Creative Commons

Defective by Design's List of DRM-Free Music Sites

dmusic

Electronic Frontier Foundation List of "Artists Online"

emusic.com

Fading Ways Records

FreeCulture.org

harveydanger.com

Janis Ian.com

last.fm

Lime Light Radio

live365.com free downloads

MagnaTune

myspace.com

Nettwerk Download Store

R.evolution I.n P.rogress

RIAARadar.com

uncoolcentral.com

Vision Metal Records

I keep a list on my blog and welcome more suggestions.

Your definition of "behind" must be a very interesting one.

There are plenty of players out there that do what the iPod does and more, from a technical point of view they are superior (easy access to songs, playlists, adecuate controls, and obvious add ons like voice recording, radio, and recording from radio).

The stroke of genius from Mr Jobs was to tie in iTunes to the iPod. Now, if you think it is to be behind the times not to accept a DMRed store as your main source of music, well, all the power to you, may you enjoy your pink Koolaid, in the mean tiem we, backwards people will drown our sorrows in emusic or similiar costumer friendly stablishments.

It flabergasts me why we are not seeing more countries questioning the legality of Apple's bussiness model. Conditional sales (to get iTunes music in a portable device you *must* buy an iPod) is ilegal in all the places I have lived (not the US, so I can't comment). I remember a couple of countries have touched some points of how the unholly duo iTunes-iPod works but nobody has addressed the forced conditionality of this (France seemed set to do it, but obvioulsy Apple have got quite good lobbyists in Paris).

I appreciate that rant wholly. I actually felt a flash of anger, because, dumbass that I am, brain fried by thesis in progress, I expected this to, you know, be a site where I could go download a fucking movie. Oh emusic.com you've spoiled me so, advertising content that you make available to anyone who can play an MP3 file. Look at me carrying that expectation that my Xubuntu box and iBook will be allow me to avail myself of this new service.

But no. Windows XP only, it says. Well, screw that.

Someday I'll learn that nobody in the RIAA/MPAA extortium wants to sell me anything anyway.

For now, though, I'll just laugh heartily that the Office Space DVD version is available used, including shipping, for less than the IdiotBox version and feel a little smug for noticing that. Ha!