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."
[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.
You just want free music. Go away.
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
I'd be shocked.
Google's business model[s] seem[s] to be based on the concept of charging vendors, rather than users. Is there a single google service that costs money for the average consumer to use? I don't pay to search, to blog, or to get my mail (gmail). I'd be surprised if their first foray into charging customers, if it ever happened, was in the field of online music (especially since I suspect they might have a hard time doing online music and abiding by the whole "don't be evil" thing -- they can't exactly do it without DRM).
What sort of role did you have in mind? The only role I can see Google performing is providing a search engine for digital music (perhaps through Froogle).
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.'
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.
"If we let things terrify us, life will not be worth living."
- Seneca
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.
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?
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.
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.
The RIAA is going to have to be involved in any DRM system that wants to catch on, because simply put, they control most of the recognizable music in the world. Even if new indie labels start to catch on, that still won't account for the massive back catelog.
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.
"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....
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.
The trick is, the ones that are doing this to sell devices have absolutely no incentive to use a format compatible with other devices. For one thing, they make a trivial amount on the music sale itself. For another, once they've hooked you they want to keep you.
For the music execs, however, it's all about music sales. So clearly it would be better if a consumer could go to any store and have all that music in their combined library. I for one would prefer that, too. It would be so much nicer to have a single media library application that could search and buy from any store simply by installing a plugin.
How can we get them to go in that direction?
Freedom to fear. Freedom from thought. Freedom to kill.
I guess the War on Terror really is about freedom!
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!
True, but pedantic. Not everyone has an etymological dictionary with them all the time, and I suspect that most people wouldn't happen to know the roots as well as you do. Usage is a critical mass thing - once a certain expression or meaning becomes popular enough it becomes domninant...
Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
-- Terry Pratchett, Hogfather
Is somebody bitter?
We seldom regret saying too little but often regret saying too much.
How can we get them to go in that direction?
Stop pirating the fuck out of every artists' music on P2P networks for one. We kinda have to show that there's a demand for it.
A lot of execs are probably scared to death of online music stores precisely because so many users use online services to rip them off and pirate everybody's music. No wonder they're hesitant...if people were simply honest and showed an interest in being legal, you'd have what you wanted.
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)
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?)
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.
AAC is open; WinAMP will rip CD's in AAC format.
Now the FairPlay system is proprietary, but then so is WMA's DRM. In fact, of all the music services, Apple's comes closest.
But you knew of this, right?
No. It is our duty to demonstrate that there is a demand for non DRM crippled, portable, music. Currently the only way to demonstrate that demand online is by using a free alternative to the non-free, restricted, music formats currently on offer.
Stop pirating the fuck out of every artists' music on P2P networks for one. We kinda have to show that there's a demand for it.
Fuck that. Things always get worse. Look at DVDs. They started out OK--- movies in a clean format, random access, extra features, all good. Once DVDs became popular THEN it was time to fuck it up by pinching every nickel out of the format. First we had unskippable FBI warnings. Then unskippable movie previews. Now we have unskippable ads and previews at the beginning of disks. Combine that with increased product placement in the movies themselves, "enhanced" region encoding and media companies suing the hind legs off companies that make legitimate products like DVD X Copy and at some point you have to say "Enough is enough!" and start pushing back. The IP rights media companies claim were granted by "We the People" and not the other way around. Abuse those rights and you can kiss our collective asses because you have no rights unless the majority of the people think you do.
Enter p2p file sharing. The computer technology that's being used to systematically break the back of the working man is now bringing the working man some dividends in the form of easy copying of any and all media he can get his grubby hands on. One thing corporations have taught us is that there is only one rule and that is to do anything you can get away with it. Live by the sword, die by the sword. If you twist the rules, lie, cheat and steal then you shouldn't be surprised when others follow your example. That's why the media companies can BITE ME. Every dog has his day and ours is today.
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.
Why are you proxying the https port? One of the points of SSL is the explicit verification that the remote end is who they say they are. If you're proxying the https port, you're essentially inserting a "man in the middle" of the connection, which I wouldn't expect to work. iTunes likely has the iTunes store's public key stored somewhere and there's no way your proxy is going to be able to insinuate itself into the connection without iTunes knowing about it. If the use of SSL is to mean anything iTunes has to reject the connection if the keys don't match.
You're saying that the format the customer can share music with their friends with will result in more sales. And you say that's a fact. Sounds rather counter-intuitive to me, but if it's a fact, you'll have some evidence to back it up, won't you?
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.
You realize that in actuallity you are calling mp3's a niche. I have a DVD player, computer (whatever OS I want), a PDA, and a boombox that can play mp3s. They can't all play aac, they can't all play windows media, or even ogg.
The standard they want is actually mp3. When they give up on their addiction to DRM and actually sell mp3s I will be in line to buy.
When I was a teenager was in the days of 8-bit home computers and games on cassette. Originally they were easy to copy, you just loaded the game up and then saved it again on another tape. My group of friends bought very few original games, and those we did we shared with everyone. Then they put rudimentary copy protection on the tapes. You couldn't do load/save copying anymore. Tape to tape audio copying was possible, but even that was made more difficult after a while by cunning copy protection mechanisms. Now people had to crack games or get a set up with a couple of good tape machines in order to copy them. It wasn't impossible, but it wasn't a casual matter anymore. And we started to just buy the original game more often, rather than mess about.
Technological means will not stop the major 'pirates', they will just serve to annoy customers.
Nothing will stop the dedicated pirates, both professional and amateur. It's the casual copier that DRM combats. Take a look at the figures in the article. P2P illegal file sharing is much higher right now than legal downloading. But it isn't really growing anymore. Legal downloading (with DRM) is very much in it's early days still, but is growing rapidly. In a years time it will probably have overtaken P2P, and go on to be much bigger than it. P2P isn't going to be stopped, it's just going to become an irrelevant activity for the dedicated cheapskate.
Don't try too hard - Apple appears to have a fix posted inconsicuously at apple.com/support - the bastards!
If that doesn't work, and I have no idea how technical you are or if you are interested in making this work but this guy looks to have had the same issue - can do everthing but buy music via his firewall. (Start at bottom of page and read up.)
Lastly, try a Google search for 'itunes firewall 443' and see what pops up!
It isn't that difficult to figure this stuff out man. And just for comparrison, try talking to someone live about your issues with other freeware (iTMS is free) and see how far you get.
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
It sounds like you have identified the critical issue - the firewall. I assume you have tested this theory by disabling the firewall and trying to purchase music. If that is the case, then this is truly a simple solution!
Just open up the ports one at a time until iTMS functions properly. This cannot be that big for adea. Even if you are simply using Windows' built in (piece of crap) firewall, you can open ports, allow either TCP or UDP traffic (my guess is iTMS is using TCP) and specify the port number.
Did you try the Knowledge Base suggestion of registering phobos.apple.com and phobos.apple.com.edgesuite.net with your adblocker/firewall/etc software to expempt them from restrictions?
How can you expect Apple to help you though configuring your third party software you are using to block network traffic?
Me thinks you best play with your firewall configuration.
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
Sorry, I for one reject your arguement.
When you bought the Dark Side of the Moon in the 70's, you most certainly were buying the vinyl and cardboard that contained the music. If someone had stolen it from you, you wouldn't have reported to the cops that the worthless cardboard and vinyl had been taken - thank goodness you still have your music rights!
I think you have convinced yourself that pirating the music from the library is okay because you bought the same song, in a totally different format, long ago. Or maybe that you pay taxes and therefore you kinda bought a little piece of that CD anyway...whatever helps you sleep. You are a theif.
And so what if you buy a used CD to keep the RIAA from getting any money? The artist didn't see a dime of that money either.
The arguement is weak. Justify it however you must but at the end of the day, even a digital download is not a lifetime license to that song. (Not to mention a remaster or stereo version of a once mono song or whatever the future may hold - THX version.)
Stop stealing and part with your ten bucks. Dark Side of the Moon is worth it.
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.