Slashdot Mirror
iTunes One Year Anniversary Sparks Comparison
An anonymous reader writes "CNet News is running a story about the upcoming one year anniversary of Apple's iTunes service. It gives a pretty good summary of the year in online music, with a nice chart comparing each service's user base now and then. The most interesting quote in the article is from a record executive stressing that the industry is quietly hoping that the online music stores will start selling songs in compatible formats. As a sidenote, the headline story at the beginning is based off this page."
I think he means "Formats compatible with our interests, full of DRM."
[puts on tinfoil hat] I'm sure they'd love that. The saying from LoTR comes to mind:
One Ring to rule them all
One Ring to find them
One Ring to bring them all
And in the darkness bind them.
I wouldn't mind having compatible formats either, I just don't want the RIAA having absolutely any say in it whatsoever, because they don't exactly have the best track record of making decisions which are beneficial to customers.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
Although Apple has taken a largely proprietary approach to iTunes, it made one major concession by making its software compatible with Microsoft's Windows operating system, effectively untying the iPod from the Mac in hopes of tapping into the much larger market for Windows PC users.
Which is a massive part of the reason that they have been so successful at totally owning all the competition. If they'd just released iTunes for the Mac, they'd be drowned out by those who supported Windows-based clients simply by force of numbers. A very clever move by Apple: coupled with a huge amount spent on advertising this is a sure-fire way to make money and stay on top.
Google takes a stab at the digital music business before the great IPO launch?
You can't spell LOLCATZPURR without TROLL.
Unlike the hinges however which were a real problem the "burnt powerbook" photos are faked.
You just want free music. Go away.
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
Leave it to a Microsoft spokesman to complain about "closed ecosystems". Heh.
Treehugger? Treehugger... Treehugger!
It's interesting to me the way the three major players have laid out their strategies for digital music...
The Apple camp exists in a silo, as usual. Music purchased at the iTunes Music Store is only playable in iTunes, and only natively transfers to an iPod family portible.
The Real camp is using their proprietary format for audio that only RealPlayer can play in software, and there's only a limited number of portables that are compatible. In fact, only one of those portables is a true music player, the rest are Palm devices because there's a compatible player for Palm.
But Microsoft's only entering into the game as a software provider. That means there's no Microsoft music store, but everybody major other than Apple and Real are using WMA as the secure format of choice, including Napster, Wal*Mart, and BuyMusic. They've also got the largest selection of compatible players.
Really, going the Microsoft route for your DRMed music collection seems like the best answer to me, because you can then shop arround for the best price on single-track buys, and often find the hot songs for 79 or 88 cents. Who says the price of legal music downloads is going up?
Since the first two Slashdot stories about CD Baby getting independent music into Apple iTunes (see iTunes Indie Meeting Notes and Sell Your Music on iTunes Music Store) - things are starting to standardize.
It's actually really interesting watching this happen, from a tech point of view. These big companies appear to have their stuff together from the outside, but I've had quite a few conversations where the techies at the big giant download music service are asking us, Uh... what do you recommend? How are the other companies doing it? Others say things like, This is how Universal Music sent us their catalog - so can you just imitate that? And voila! Watching new standards form.
I get the feeling that immediately after the initial announcement of Apple iTunes, and their 1-million downloads, lots of companies felt they just had to jump in as fast as possible, without any time to think out the long-term strategy. That's part of the reason why they're so incompatible. No time to communicate with others. (And plenty of paranoia about revealing their plans, I'm sure.) Things are settling and standardizing now, though.
Anyway, as you can tell I'm a very open guy, and this summer I'm going to take the time to do some detailed technical write-ups of all the things that go on behind the scenes (including our cool 40-terabyte digital audio warehouse). It's pretty interesting stuff.
(For details of what we do, see the CD Baby Digital Distribution page. Tell any good artists you know who want to get their music onto these services!)
--
Derek Sivers, CD Baby
Will they get their single format? Every provider will have their own format/agenda to push. Some will want DRM, others will have alternatives, users will want more freedom, geeks will want the freedom plus more freedom, etc.
And I still don't see people paying for it all. I haven't bought a CD in 5 years. Most people I know went through their big CD-buying years in their late teens, and most of these people don't have the credit cards required to buy up big at online music stores. Sure, I'd bet that stores have features allowing parents and relatives to set up accounts with $50 to splurge on music as a gift, but that's still not a way for kids to easily take their cash from flipping burgers and spend it impulsively on music.
Are (m)any artists releasing MP3-laden CDs to physical music stores and selling them there?
Are the RIAA looking anything BUT greedy when they take away the physical cost of producing an actual CD and liner-notes, and then want to increase the price of a music track online?
Or maybe it's all in the marketing. I work online day in and day out, and I've never even considered buying music online. I just do without. My girlfriend listens to a lot of new/pop music as it comes out, and the first thing she'll say to me with regard to it is something like "Hey, can you download x for me?". The marketing of online music sales must be at a pretty low level on radio stations and television (zilch in Australia).
'Thats they exact same thing a banana wrench monkey.'
+ 4 years +/- 2 years to compund interest approx =$3028 at 3.25% interest. student loans hard at work. unless of course there is a trust fund involved.
interesting, my windows box was fine...
The DRM in the iTMS files is acutally very limited. You can share the music on a few computers, copy it to your iPod, and even burn to a standard audio CD. It only prevents you from sharing it with a bunch of people you don't know.
cant wait until the customers knock this down to the point of there being open, Audiogalaxy like interfaces to buying the music. Making the online stores compatible with every browser and having almost any song, at a decent price, available at-will will be something to shake a stick at. No DRM either...not even Apple's generous Playfair. I want exactly what I get out of ripping a cd. That kind of portability and mobility.
MY SECRET DIARIES
and The most interesting quote NOT in the article is from Steve Jobs stressing that he can't possibly make money if the record industry jacks the prices to $2.50/song and bundles crappy songs with good songs, and is quietly scheming to force the music stores to do.
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
its OK and ontopic (according to the moderators) to trash Microsoft and their software in an Apple story, but when it comes to cricizing Apple, its a no-no.
How is this for censorship and hypocrisy?
Looking at the comparison table, it isn't fair to list Rhapsody in there, with Rhapsody being a streaming service and almost every other player in there is a download service. Interesting to note that , RealPlayer music store is listed in there too and has a pretty good download number for something that opened just one-two months back.
Rhapsody with a user base of 489,000 is doing pretty good I beleive with each user paying $10 / month . Thats like 4.89 million. Apple is way ahead in the competition with almost double the users compared to its successor.
None of the RIAA-approved DRM systems right now plays ball on Linux, period. I know most people who drink the GNU/Kool-Aid absolutely hate DRM because all content should be free, but that just ain't happening any time soon...
So, while Linux tries to capture the desktop environment, this is one piece of technology that is popular on the Windows and even Macintosh platforms, but just simply isn't on Linux. Open Source projects just aren't going to fit the bill here, somebody needs to convince the DRM people that they'll be safe in writing decoders for Linux.
Is there any way that a DRM-compliant music player could survive in the Linux world without risking being captured in the unencrypted digtal form... or is this something Linux just will never be able to do?
I used to download almost 5 full albums every week illegally and once itunes came out I started buying music. I become addicited to things, and I recall purchasing almost 15 albums from itunes in ONE day!
Now, having to burn and re-rip songs to get them onto my flash based player and the increasing cost of albums (Dark Side Of The Moon is 16.99 for _9_ songs) what is my incentive to be legal anymore? It is currently less effort for me to get the album off of a kazaa then spending an hour to make nearly $20.
-eric
Convert the file to mp3 and you can play it on any player. It was done before with CDs. How do you think all those mp3s end up on Kazzaa? If you want to move your music you are going to have to do some work. Sorry. Always been that way. Remember taping albums to listen to them in the new fangled walkman?
Apple might have come out with the first big hit with iTunes, but there are always other that come along, make what was the shiznitz look lame. It will happen, maybe not today or tomorrow, but it will.
Now Microsoft setting up camp with their DRM will be a doozie and might even kill online music sales. I am sure the RIAA is really really sad about that.
Why not a neutral file format that all can use and enjoy - not locked into anything?
...but iTunes gave me the outlet to do what I wanted to do: LEGALLY BUY MUSIC ONLINE.
*NOW* we have options, but until iTMS, we DIDN'T.
Thanks, Apple, for that at least.
My current favorite download service is Bleep
http://www.warprecords.com/bleep/
Great electronic stuff from guys like Squarepusher and Plaid in un-DRM'd 192k LAME-encoded mp3 goodness.
I wish iTunes had a higher quality option. It's not that 160k AAC sounds bad, but if the download is all I get, I'd like a higher quality format to get at the same time.
- "When you want something with all your heart, the entire universe conspires to give it to you" -Paulo Coelho
can be a funny thing... Nowhere else you'll find a sucessfull and innovative company compared to a Soviet grocery store, like Real's CEO did. So as a linux-using Communist (in the words of Mr. Ballmer of MS-Fame) I now can buy music in a Soviet Grocery Store located in the USA. Did I miss anything in the Cold War?
but reading the group manager of Windows digital media unit say:
gets me all choked up. Not in the "it brings tears to my eyes" kind of choked up, but the "the irony is so thick I think may I need a Heimlich maneuver" sort.
... and other russian LEGAL services are conspicuously absent.
Here's some food for thought (I understand that this is common and not just in b-school). I am a business major at UConn and my management professor insists upon keeping her test questions secrets outside of the classroom. If a student is caught distributing questions from past exams (and these are exams given through a web browser), they will be cited for academic dishonesty. The reason? These are supposedly valuable test questions that have been used over and over again and do not cause students to complain about unfair wording, etc. Now, I think the real reason is laziness combined with a disregard for the academic environment. She wants me to take time out of my schedule to review the test at her convenience because she doesn't want to do more work. There's a parallel to this article here.
I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but this whole idea of proprietary information is simply being taken too far in our society. It is now common for people to grasp at any hint of value they see in their information, capitalize on it, and try to lock others out at the same time. They will then proceed to hoard this information for as long as they are capable. The real innovators in the business world will always have a place as they have value. For every one of them, there are ten parasites (Darl & Company?) who merely create an illusion of value but contribute nothing useful to society.
Why have so many different file formats developed over the years? Perhaps a programmer can help me out here, but what would have been so difficult about making an open format that could handle anything you threw at it? For example, an open text file format that could be extensible to handle Word's change tracking and other features. These days with the proliferance of XML parsers, couldn't one write programs that would read/generate XML files, silently ignore unknown tags and would just work? I understand that the file formats associated with digital music are much more complex, but even considering the 'need' for DRM, where's the collaboration that makes businesses work more efficiently and offer enhanced value to the customer? It's very disappointing, and I can tell you that at least at this school, nobody even mentions a subset of this broad issue. It should be a required course in my opinion. Thanks for reading.
Useful to some, for sure, but useless for those among us who are trying to find ways of acquiring musical samples to "try out" various musical bands.
That is called "radio". It is any medium in which you don't get direct control over what song plays next, and therefore can be exposed to music you haven't heard of yet.
That's why that format of pushed-content pays less per song than any format that lets the user directly edit the playlist.
The most interesting quote in the article is from a record executive stressing that the industry is quietly hoping that the online music stores will start selling songs in compatible formats.
Why not strong arm the media playes to support more formats and let the fucking consumer decide?
-1 redundant
Have we come to the point, with "monthly anniversaries" and similar perverted uses, that the actual meaning of "anniversary" has to be explained?
Oxford Dictionary: The yearly return of a noteworthy date... [L anniversarius returning yearly, f. annus year + versus turning + -arius -ARY1; used as n. in med.L anniversaria (sc. dies day), -arium (sc. festum feast); cf. (O)Fr. anniversaire.]
I intended to download some songs from Evanescence. But I don't see any of their songs showing up in my searches! Next I tried Linking Park, but no luck there either. I did find "Ordinary World" by Duran Duran, so that was good. But then "P Control" by Prince doesn't show up...iTunes seems to have every song imaginable by Prince, but my favorite club song is not there. Next I tried Led Zeppelin, and they don't seem to have any of their songs either! They do have lots of Cranberries stuff, including things I haven't seen before so I could try those. And they have Moby tracks (although not any from Animal Rights. Which is good since that CD sucked). Finally, I decided to try for "I am the Walrus" by the Beatles. No dice there either, although I discovered that there are 6 covers of this song, including one with explicit lyrics (that shockingly I actually enjoyed the preview for)!
So I liked iTMS overall, but they really need to get more songs in their catalog.
Fileformats are not the only key to success. I mean, where are all the big European online strores, for example? How many ITMS competitors sell outside US?
I think there are lots of potential customers outside US just waiting the oppoturnity to spend their hard-earned money on good and legal music.
If you are my kind who prefer to keep searching for variety of genres of music that are not mainstream like global music and celtic, then you should definitely look into Rhapsody. Its something that you begin to appreciate once you try. Unbelievable collection that is very eclectic and different comprising a wide range of genres on world music (mali, rai, west african, new age). Its defintely worth 10$/month
"the industry is quietly hoping that the online music stores will start selling songs in compatible formats" we already have a compatable format arseholes, it's called mp3
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
you will understand that anyone in Bill Gates position would have done what he did!
Your own question: Why not a neutral file format that all can use and enjoy - not locked into anything?
Your own answer: How do you think all those mp3s end up on Kazzaa?
The dumb-user's urge to file share things that under copyright is why the content industry doesn't want to release things in open formats anymore.
I'm sick of the all the special formats. As the consumer (rather, a potential consumer) I should be able to determine the format I want. I choose 192k mp3s. I already have 10,000+ mp3s, all between 128 and 192, if I am going to buy music it has to fit with the rest of collection. Some of these formats are horrendous, like wma. Get some quality in there, please!
Not really... I'm on a weak little laptop running XP and it was fine... using firefox at least. dunno what would happen if i used internet explorer.
Remember taping albums to listen to them in the new fangled walkman?
I bet a lot of the kiddies here don't remember that.
Google Answers
The great thing about this service is the fact that all the answers are public, and there are some mighty good answers!
to be a total nitpicky ass, that's not the headline, it's called the "lead" or "first paragraph." and i found the website a bit upsetting - dude couldn't even recycle all those bottles?
burn karma burn
disco inferno
Karma: T-rexcellent.
Why don't more people seem to mention or know about the legal alternatives to these services.
www.allofmp3.com
www.3mp3.ru
club.mp3search.ru
It's legal even in the US due to international copyright law.
(www.museekster.com/allofmp3info.htm)
on the day Apple declared the iTumes MusicStore would support Windows they already accounted for something like 90% or 95% of all online music sales........ seeing as that was ALL online music sales coming from the 5% or so Mac users........ that says something. i am not 100% sure what it says. it says something about Mac users, or the store or both or...?
no matter how you spin that data, it's obvious the iTMS works to a degree that customers will come back.
that being said i should go use up the last of my pepsi bottlecaps! (they expire this week)
I think we need to bring up the fact that Apple should license the AAC format to other music stores as mentioned in a slashdot article a while ago. It would be pretty funny if Apple beat Microsoft at monopolizing something and took the market before Microsoft even gets Janus out.
Very true, as I do have a tendency to only listen to the bands I already own until forced to listen to others (usually this means going into someone else's room, car, etc.).
And before someone answers the parent with a cynical "but there's only crappy top-40 stuff on the radio", there's plenty of great satellite and internet radio stations that can cater to almost any musical taste. Check 'em out.
[SIG] It's like putting a moose in the blender -- a recipe for disaster!
It's really too bad that 90% of the radio stations in my area that play music I enjoy listening to seem to have a single playlist of about 40 songs that they just endlessly repeat on shuffle.
There is a 30 second sample available for free for every single song available from the iTunes Music Store.
For many tracks, the previews are significantly longer than 30 seconds. At least some classical tracks and spoken-word tracks have previews that are as long as 90 seconds.
I write in my journal
can anyone tell me if it that is real/fake? it looks so real, but I can't see much fakeness in it, I dont' have my glasses on, so I can't see anything anyways, are they fake?
Sig: I stole this sig.
If the DRM server ever goes away (like the Circuit City DIVX one did), you'll eventually lose authorization (from upgrading to new computers, if nothing else). Anyone with only DRMed AACs will be out of luck. Anyone with audio CDs will be able to make new AACs -- but at the cost of an extra generation of lossy compression.
In practice, this is complete BS. Aside from Playfair, there are innumerable programs out there that provide "virtual sound cards", so you can rip the output of any sound player straight to your hard drive.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
Here's the idiot's comment:
"My career at this point realistically is going to depend on how successful this business model is."
The guy is a college student, he's fixated on itunes (he spent $2,500 last year), and he thinks his success is tied up with Apple's an iTMS?
Huh?
This is what I say every time. People who use iTunes think there's a magic juju to Apple. People, Apple is the same as everybody else. Holy cripes. If you find yourself agreeing with this guy, get a pistol, put the barrel in your mouth and keep pulling the trigger, never stop.
Cripes...people like this should be sterilized.
Looking at the chart in the article, it seems strange that the next closest rival to iTunes is Walmart. Didn't they just start their service a while back? Also, has anyone heard of someone getting music from walmart? It just seems strange is all.
Shame that the iTunes music store is only available in the USA. The rest of the world has to put up with stores that supply music in the WMA format.
You mean that honest decent people want to share music they like with each other?
Why, those crooked thieves! They must be stopped!
I think Apple really oughtta release an iTunes client for Linux, but they'd have to retain full control of it for obvious reasons. I think an excellent soultion would be 'iTunes Express' which would be a Java client that lets us access and buy music from Apple. I don't think they'd release a straight-binary because there are too many camps to play to (redhat, mandrake, gentoo, linspire, etc.). A java client would be nice though, as it would work under Win32 and MacOS as well, letting you 'run iTunes' without affecting the host machine.
"Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
Apple is, as we speak, repeating the mistake it made in the PC realm, only this time in the digital content arena. Don't get me wrong, I love their products (own 3 Macs and an iPod), but they just don't understand the dynamics at work here.
Consider where they are right now with iPod/iTunes/ITMS:
Now re-read the above, only now as a description of where they were in 1980/81 with respect to the Apple ][ and the PC industry they had recently created.
Apple is still failing to understand the critical importance of owning the platform. In this case, whoever ends up controlling the DRM technology is going to control the digital content universe. And this will eventually include all movies, TV, books, and anything that can be digitized. By locking out every other vendor from using Fairplay, they are virtually guaranteeing their irrelevance in the DRM endgame.
For Apple to have a chance here, they need to:
Just this past week Apple snubbed Real, which will push the rest of the industry that much closer to Microsoft's WMA. MS, for their part, are crystal-clear on how to win a platform war. I predict that in three years Apple will have Superbowl ads encouraging us to break from the DRM shackles of Big Brother and return to their platform. Yeah, right.
Just had to get that off my chest. I hate to see good companies make bad decisions.
I purchased an ipod-mini, back when they first came out.
However, I had no idea that iTunes would not work
behind a windows firewall.
Had I known about the problem, I would never have
bought one.
After 2 months of complaining to Apple, I've not
received *any response* from them about the firewall issue.
It seems the iTunes software is hard-coded to use
the https port 443 for music purchases, and does not
recognize any firewall configuration which proxies that port.
the upshot for me is that i am unable to purchase
anything from the iTunes web site.
it's interesting, however, to see that it is still
possible for me to "preview" music and book selections,
as the software does use the firewall configuration
for browsing.
The support for this product really sucks.
just my opinion.
let the buyer beware.
. In reference to lincoln park in chicago, roundabout glenview way, not to be confused with sleepy hollow park, where grizzly headless horseman are said to roam, looking for little girls skipping class from lyon.
iTunes 'could cost $2.49 per song'
w sI D=8493
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?Ne
Anyone have any figures on how many songs emusic.com has sold ? I just signed up with them recently, they are not a pop chart outfit but they have a lot of bands I Like to listen to. $10 for 40 songs at 192 kbps mp3, no drm, no bullshit and very reasonable terms of service. When you break it down that works out at about 25 cents a song which I consider a reasonable price to pay for consistant sound quality, speed and the fact that you are giving something to the artists who make the music you like.
_________________________________________________
...compatible formats...
<geek>Ogg! Ogg! Ogg! Ogg!</geek>
Nothing to see here, move along.
It's a fake, created by the owner of this site
And the grandparent is an anti-Apple troll, probably penis envy as he's stuck with windows 98!
It's also the one year anniversary since I purchased a CD.
From the CNet article:
But some rivals said they expect Apple's dominance will be temporary.
"Apple is probably still riding the wave of their initial launch," said Jason Reindorp, a group manager in Microsoft's Windows digital media unit. "They have spent an inordinate amount of money to generate awareness around their closed ecosystem. (But) as people get more sophisticated in this area they are going to be getting more frustrated with a closed ecosystem. I think the market will kind of self-correct as things get more mainstream."
(Let's ignore the fact, for the moment, that CNet decided to end the article with such a poorly written presentation of Apple's "rivals" that think the "dominance [of iTunes] will be temporary" by quoting a Microsoft rep and... hrm... just that one MS rep.)
Is that some sort of joke? A Microsoft employee says that the folk at Apple, "have spent an inordinate amount of money to generate awareness around their closed ecosystem" and that "the market will kind of self-correct as things get more mainstream"?!!
No, Mr. Reindorp, the market doesn't always self-correct. Let me refer you across campus to your OS development building see when it doesn't. You, of all companies, should know the advantages of spending inordinately more than anyone else is prepared to spend to effect dominance in a market. Lucky for you OS consumers haven't reached the level of "sophistication" when it comes to operating systems that you expect from them in the digital music arena.
I'm heartened to see, at least for the time being, a market where Apple is comfortable betting the farm (the market Apple calls a "digital lifestyle" where the Mac is a "digital hub") and MS is not. I'm not sure I 100% believe what Cringely recently said, but this is one case where I hope Apple does ignore MS and keeps releasing a superior product with an inordinately high budget behind it.
And this hope isn't just b/c I like Apple and use OS X daily at home, but also because I'm a stockholder. Apple's plan as you characterize it, as every MS employee should know, is often inordinately successful.
It's all 0s and 1s. Or it's not.
I am shocked and amazed at how rapidly Walmart has dominated the WMA market. I am equally shocked that iTMS has been surpassed by the WMA alternatives. March 2004 numbers:
iTMS - 4.9MM (Fairplay)
Walmart - 2.7MM (WMA)
Napster 2.0 - 1.9MM (WMA)
Musicmatch - 1.5MM (WMA)
BuyMusic - 0.5MM (WMA)
That's Fairplay - 4.9MM to WMA 6.6MM (1.7MM more WMA than Fairplay songs - or 34% more than iTMS!)
As an Apple fan (DOS 2001) I want to deny this but the numbers speak for themselves.
It is the truth that whichever format sells more songs will become the standard because to switch to the other format will require not only the re-purchase/re-rip of the song library but the re-purchase of the player as well.
Unless Apple is fibbing on the small margin they make (not likely as they have stated it openly and SEC may have a fvew questions if they have been) then it seems like Apple needs to support WMA with the iPod as well as Fairplay for DRM so that the iPod can remain King, Queen, and Jack of the hill.
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
Don't forget KDX http://www.haxial.com which is client/server based for Mac and PC, with a Linux version in the works. indenticle interface between all platforms.
...but you can't buy "birthday" from the beatles on iTunes.
"I forgot my mantra."
Apple never had any dominant market share of computers--it was never even number 1 in units. In 1981, just prior to the introduction of the IBM PC, Apple and Radio Shack COMBINED for about a third of the Microcomputer market with Radio Shack having the edge on units and Apple having the edge on revenue. Even then, Apples cost more. Apple never got over 15% market share in units but maintained about that amount until the Apple][ was dropped. Then with only the Mac, Apple dropped under 10%. From as late as 1984, the only companies that have continued to make PCs are Apple and HP--both of which have always been high cost providers. (Sun emerged about this time as a latecomer in terms of market share.)
This will be their solution. If you are not compatible on all devices, you (Apple's iTunes users) pay a premium. This will cause me to look for alternatives, especially some of the reports of albums costing more on iTunes than the CD in the store after the price increases.
My justification? I already bought the album. Technology has made the 20 cents worth of vinyl and cardboard obsolete, but I wasn't buying the vinyl and cardboard. I bought the right to listen to the music.
The current attempt at DRM will fail because it is so Draconian and seems designed to profit RIAA companies. A good legal arrangement protects both sides. Existing copyright laws do a good job of prohibiting unauthorized copies while ensuring fair use. Copies are permitted to ensure compatibility with changing technology, but anyone who sells unauthorized copies will be arrested. Copyright laws work because they protect the artists. But DRM is just a way of leasing you the music rights, and charging again every time the technology results in a different format, or you buy a new computer, or....
Even though I resent the RIAA's greed based policies and short sightedness, I still buy CDs when I didn't already own the rights to listen to the music. But I try to buy used CDs, so the money doesn't go directly to the RIAA.
This isn't news, but in order to survive the RIAA needs to take the long view, embrace technology instead of obstruct it, and consider what works best for their customers. The current RIAA has opened a market opportunity big enough to drive a tour bus through. All it'll take is some emerging artist with a few brain cells and vision to self-promote and embrace technology and the top heavy record industry will collapse from its own bloated stupidity.
You're making the mistake of equating IP with something tangible (I can tell that you're an idiot). The days of COTS (commercial off the shelf software) are numbered by the fact that it's very easy to duplicate bits now. Never mind the fact that not everyone agrees that computer-only-readable binaries should be copyrightable (guess who championed that cause? your good friend billg@microsoft.com). I suppose that if you had lived back in the early 1900s, you would be screaming about how the evil automakers were stealing the livelihood of the buggy whip makers too.
I've got news for you: You can't steal something intangible. Just because companies have been able to make a profit in the past from COTS (an aberration, to be sure) doesn't mean that they should be entitled to do so in the future just because technology changes.
You act as though copyright law is a natural right and is fair and balanced, but it isn't and hasn't been for a long time. So go fuck yourself you self-righteous prick (and say Hi to Jack Valenti when you go suck him off).
Why would I care who the money goes to as a consumer? As long as I get what I want as conveniantly as possible. Rather than a program that lets me go to many stores (which to the customer, would only be distinguished by its invoice), I want a store that has everything I want.
Unlike physical stores, location isn't the issue, and since pricing tends to be similar across the board (with subtle variation) that's not much of an issue either. Selection is an issue, but only if the store you want to use doesn't have what you want?
Think for a second - why do you think the average customer wants a choice of 12 "stores" they can buy the same Brittany Spears song from? The answer is most customers don't care - they just want it to be easy.
I think Apple's move has made a lot of sense. People aren't begging them to use other stores because their store is so much more conveniant (if you already use iTunes, that is) and they probably already have the songs the person wants (if it's available as a legal download at all). Most people don't care too much about where their music money is going (especially if they tend to buy music from the big five labels) - they care about the conveniance of the process. Opening up the formats doesn't achieve that in any way.
As the consumer (rather, a potential consumer) I should be able to determine the format I want. I choose 192k mp3s.
AllOfMp3.com lets you choose formats (Ogg, MP3, AAC, and so on) and bitrate/quality settings as part of your download process.
If questionably legal sites like this can offer such services, I can't see why it is so difficult for the "offficial" distributors.
Da Blog
My car's CD player plays them fine, bitch-tits.
Then why didn't you just buy the REAL FUCKING CD and get it in a format that won't destroy itself in a few years.
CD-Rs aren't know for their durability.
Out of curiousity, why use the iTunes encoder for the 128 kb files when you have a higher quality professional codec available. I was under the impression that iTunes, while perfectly fine for the average consumer, wasn't exactly the best encoder for high quality distributable work.
Download it here boys and gals:
.. quite a bit 'snappier'.
http://www.apple.com/itunes/download/
Looks like a reasonably solid improvement
Funtage Factor: Purple
This goes right to the heart of why the RIAA and the music industry as a whole are so evil. C'mon, $11.99? $14.99? Those are CD prices! At least CDs are physical copies that took *time* to reproduce! Digital copies cost next to nothing to reproduce, and take little to no time to make.
Soooo... What the hell? They're going to start "price tiering??" I mean, you can blah blah blah all you want about how that's capitalism, etc., but this seems outright criminal. It is basically telling people, "You may as well either stick with P2P, or get off your ass and get to Wal-Mart and buy the real CD, because you ain't gettin' a discount here."
This from the label execs, among others. The same labels that never engage in any sort of price fixing. And then I read something like this article, and I, of course, see that the labels are doing the right thing.
No, I don't trust the labels on pricing any more.
Do not touch -Willie
Apple will continue to benefit from the fact it has sold so many iPods--devices that work only with Apple's service. Last quarter Apple sold 800,000 of the portable music players
This should really say that iTMS only works with iPods, and not the other way around. As it stands, the statement is blatantly incorrect.
SELECT quote.text AS sig FROM quote NATURAL JOIN attribute WHERE attribute.description = 'witty';
0 rows returned