Preview the New Napster

*ZiggyP0P* writes "Napster has finally released a preview/teaser of their new business model. Seems kind of sad that so much work will be done on something that noone will use. Quite interesting the part about their own file format..."

Comments

Napster investors, Please Read!

[toupsie]

Have I got a deal for you!!! You see, I have a bridge surplus in my inventory right now and I have this gem of a bridge that I hate to part with but I must. Its located in New York City and connects Manhattan to Brooklyn. It will pay off even faster than your Napster investment. Only serious inquiries need apply!

I thought Napster was dead. Guess this is the death rattle for the investors sake. Sad, sad, sad. No one can seem to find out a profitable scheme of ripping off the evil Record Labels.

Wrong category.

[Tackhead]

Lessee here. The new Napster...

• It costs money.
• It's not MP3.
• It's MP3, but with copy protection wrappers.
• You can only download a certain number of tracks per month.

And last, but not least, from the "new FAQ": "Why should I pay when I can get it for free somewhere else?", the answer is "You mean aside from the fact that Napster is the coolest?"

After I wiped the coffee off my keyboard, I kept reading, and saw "file sharing communities that pay copyright holders and provide simple, useful tools to help you do what you want with your digital music collection are going to prevail."

Well, sure, but the last time I checked, paying for the privilege of being Hilary Rosen's bitch and copy-crippling my MP3s qualified as "what I want to do with my music collection".

I propose that for 2002, all articles concerning RIAA-endorsed music subscription services go under "It's funny. Laugh".

Re:Secure Format?

[Bandman]

How much you want to bet the first person that cracks this secure format lands a 5 year jail sentence and $500,000 to napster?

Maybe that's their business model? A couple of people being caught for DMCA violations, and they've done better than any other DotCom so far. The bastards...it's almost TOO clever...

Cracking .NAP files

[--daz--]

So, anyone want to start putting numbers on the time it'll take before .NAP files are cracked?

Somewhere between 1-2 hours is my guess =)

Will the app becalled "DeNAP"?

Re:Why I'll Use It

[Tim Doran]

What's going to be in place to stop me from claiming I own "Who Let The Dogs Out".

Jeez, I dunno... self-respect perhaps? ;)

The .NAP format

[Alsee]

I am on the Napster team that created this new Digital Rights Managment file format.

We did extensive research and analysis on all of the available encryptions schemes. We even considered rolling our own. Based on the fact that all client programs would be required to have the decryption algorythm, and at some point the content must be presented to the user, we concluded that security rested entirely within the DMCA.

After reaching this conclusion, we did what any good programmer would have done. We decided not to waste time writing redundant code. We reused an available package. At the insistance of the lawyers, we spent a few minutes customizing the package to be incompatible with the original. The .NAP format is hereby implemented using ROT-14.

-

Re:The .NAP format

[Alsee]

OK, you just gave the roadmap to NAP files "encryption" so therefore under DMCA you are guilty

What I posted was purely expressive speach, devoid of any functional aspect. It was therefore covered by the first amendment. All I did was reffer to an encryption scheme by name, without discussing any implementation details. Had I included implementation details I might have violated the DCMA by "providing aid or advice". Had I posted executable code then the functional aspect would have exceded the expressive aspect, and would not have been protected by the first amendment. The courts are still arguing over the expressive aspect / functional aspect in reguard to source code. So far the concensus seems to be to allow source code to be restricted based on it's functional aspect because of the fact that any other resolution would totally gut the DCMA.

As you can see, the situation is quite clear, and there is no justifacation for any good American to break the law. That goes for the rest of the world too. If you're not with us, you're against us. Any failure to comply with our copyright laws is not only unamerican, it's an obvious attempt to undermine the US economy!

Terrorists everywhere!

-

Re:Why Won't Anyone Use It?

[DocSnyder]

Assuming this is the implementation, in order to crack .NAP, you'd need a mechanism of sending your private key along with any .NAP file you send to another user.

That's quite easy:

Hi! How are you?

I send you this file in order to have your advice

See you later. Thanks

Speaking of FAQ's

[MulluskO]

I just bought a new computer and I can't find my files. What happened to them?

I always wondered when using Napster, "What group of people used this service?" Then I remember, during it's peak usage, everyone. I think that's why Napster was so great. It gave me something about computers to which my non-geek friends could relate. I remember knowing people who bought computers and subscribed to the internet because of Napster.

On a side note, the recent recession must be realated to Napster use in some way to the recent economic downturn.

NewNap?

[sulli]

Try crapster

Re:Hah!

[Howie]

Don't forget the risk of paper cuts in handling all those checks. That sure would suck too. I hate it when I get lots of money.

[seriously, I think that it's truer to say it's currently the artist who gets a cut, rather than the label]

Read the FAQ

[Anonymous Coward]

The FAQ sums it up best:

Why should I pay when I can get it for free somewhere else?
You mean aside from the fact that Napster is the coolest?

Check the link. I'm not kidding. Really.