Napster Canada Launched

PunchMonkey writes "Just days after the Napster UK launch, Napster Canada is now online. Tracks start at CDN$1.19 and albums at CDN$9.95. Interactive streaming is also available for the first time in Canada for CDN$9.95 a month. Napster is the the third online music service to be launched in Canada (following PureTracks and ArchambaultZik), not including the branded Puretracks sites Sympatico Music Store and PureTracks from Telus." (Be prepared for a trio of rejection notices if you're neither running nor spoofing IE under Windows.)

Comments

CDN$1.19?

[smonner]

Why would you start a new music service with higher prices than the existing competition? A lot of PureTracks' songs (though admittedly not all) are CDN$0.99. They must really be relying on name-brand recognition, though I doubt they are going to get much beyond "but, but, songs were free on Napster!" Still, nice to see competition, even if only of the inept kind. Now if they would just let me have my songs on both my home and work computers at the same time...

Re:CDN$1.19?

[wo1verin3]

a) Take a look at the selection of tracks available, Napster clearly beats them

b) The unlimited download subscription is $9.95cdn (compared to $9.95USD for USA) which is kinda cool for canucks.

Re:CDN$1.19?

[Bricklets]

What I have a hard time understanding is why the inconsistency in pricing. The Internet is worldwide. It's not any harder or doesn't take any longer if I access Napster from the US or the UK. There are no physical mediums to transport, no physical distances that stand between you and your music. I would think in theory Napster shouldn't price the music any differently for each country. Yeah, yeah, I know that there are different royalities to be paid in each country, etc, etc, etc, but I think this just highlights how out of date the worldwide music industry is.

uh oh, it's the plastics!

[B3ryllium]

Napster used to be so cool, but now it hangs out with the plastics and makes fun of regular people.

What happened, Napster, what happened?

Cheap!

[darth_MALL]

$1.19 Can works out to 0.86 USD. Cheaper than the US non-subscriber version. Still not cheap enuff if you ask me.

Re:Cheap!

[MKalus]

Yeah well,

too bad though that I don't get paid in USD but in Canadian Dollars.

99cents Canadian are exactly that to me: 99 cents.

Or do you think you should pay $1.39 because it's still cheaper than the 99pence the guy in the UK would be paying?

Why pay?

[hunterx11]

Now IANAL and IANAC, but I thought that music downloading (though not sharing) was legal in Canada.

Re:Why pay?

[i_should_be_working]

maybe alot of Canadians, ones who don't spend time on slashdot, think it's just as illegal here as in the states.

i remember some puretracks adds where their pitch was that we should buy from them instead of 'illegally' downloading so that we don't get sued.

$9.95? Used CDs still cheaper

[CaptainPinko]

And I can get a physical copy with pretty linear notes to go with it.

Re:$9.95? Used CDs still cheaper

[CaptainPinko]

I've boughten majour label CDs such as Pearl Jam's vs. for as little as $5 CDN. Considering that at most places you can brin in CDs you don't want anymore for credit it becomes even cheaper. You'll bump into interesting people into music too and you can pick-up real bargains, indie-label, and out of print albums. I don't know how else you'd get a copy of Soundgarden's "Screaming Life/Fopp" EP

For anyone in the London, ON region may I recommend you check out Dr. Disc or City Lights-- which is also a great used bookstore with a cool vibe.

Re:$9.95? Used CDs still cheaper

[sysopd]

Right, used is definitely the way to go. Lots of used stores around here are much more than $5 CDN and more like $12 USD which is total crap. Many stores sell the both new and used and only offer a slight discount for used cds. However there are a few good places where you can get cds for under $5 USD used that have good selection.

BTW, I'd suggest gemm for that soundgarden ep screaming life/fopp. You can find most anything you're looking for there, not always the lowest prices, but many used vendors and a great resource for hard to find material. Oh also, an interesting note, I buy a lot of my import music from canada although I live in the US (seems to be cheaper!).

I got an idea

[Stevyn]

I'm going to start my own music service selling songs downloaded off napster. I'll switch back and forth buying them from the US and Canada depending on the exchange rates. Here's how it will go:

1. Buy songs from canada or us
2. Sell to american's or canadians for a penny less
3. Profit!

Re:I got an idea

[l0ss]

Retailers are licensed regionally, as is the media they sell. Although I like the idea of mp3 speculation there are some serious leagl problems (not to mention DRM problems) with it.

Canadian RIAA...

[mythosaz]

Well, at least they only sue you for about $.72 on the dollar...

GAH...where is my Canadian iTunes

[truffle]

Come on iTunes get it in gear! I'm still waiting for mac iTunes.

The leader in online music sales can't seem to sell internationally.

Re:GAH...where is my Canadian iTunes

[Unknown Relic]

Personally I use iTunes as my default music player, and since it isn't able to play Windows Media files (much less DRMed ones) that immediately rules out any services using that format. The apple DRM is also much less restrictive and is relatively easy to bypass by re-encoding songs to mp3, which in my mind makes it the lesser of evils, and most importantly, makes it less of a hassle. As a Canadian I've been waiting for the iTunes store to be available for quite some time, and can only hope that Napster's launch is a sign that Apple may not be far behind.

Re:GAH...where is my Canadian iTunes

[The Lynxpro]

"So honest question. Other then the fact you like Apple, why iTunes? If you have an iPod, then I understand. If not, why? Not trolling, but really just curious."

Uhm, perhaps its a philosophical choice not to support a Microsoft based platform (AAC from Dolby/Apple vs. WMA by Microsoft). Perhaps its an audio quality choice (to me, WMA sounds *tinny*). Perhaps its because of exclusive content on iTunes. Perhaps its because iTunes doesn't want to charge a subscription fee. Perhaps its because of the simplicity of the iTunes interface. Perhaps its because Apple is rather committed to keeping the prices reasonable. Perhaps the parent likes Apple and wants to support Apple. Perhaps the parent doesn't like Napster's name being used in conjunction with supporting the RIAA. Perhaps the parent doesn't like Roxio. Or, like you speculated, perhaps the parent owns an iPod like 55% of the other people buying portable MP3 players... :)

why do it?

[millahtime]

Who would someone pay to "rent" a song. If you cancel the service you loose the song. Unless they got a better license than any of the other services (besides iTMS)

Re:why do it?

[pavon]

I would have no problem with renting music (aka paying for ad-free radio), if the price was right.

The problem I have with Napster is that they are not up-front with you about the fact that you are only renting music, not buying it, and they are charging you the same price as if you were buying it, which is absolutely asinine.

It is as though their business model depends on tricking people into thinking that they are buying music, as noone that I have talked to was even aware that they would not be buying music, and none of them decided to use the service after I informed told them that fact.

So the better question is why rent music in crappy DRM'd form when you can buy it in a more open format for the same price?

Online music prices sometimes can be higher

[prostoalex]

USA Today recently had this article on how some albums were cheaper to buy brand new in offline stores than online.

Basically, any track is sold as 99c (US). Any album on Napster is sold for $10. But then if the album is incomplete, what's being sold is a collection of songs, not album. So if the original CD has 21 songs and costs $13 in the store, but only 20 songs were licensed for online resale to Napster/iTunes, then the product will be a 20-song collection, and cost $19.80 respectively.

Re:Online music prices sometimes can be higher

[The Lynxpro]

"USA Today recently had this article on how some albums were cheaper to buy brand new in offline stores than online."

That's nice, but if there is copy protection on those audio cds, "fair use" does not cover you from the anti-hacking provisions of the DMCA. Thus even if you are not distributing MP3s or whatever you rip them into, they are illegal whereas buying the digital copies - from say, iTunes - is legal. I guess it all depends on what you want to do with the music you purchase. I personally would like to see a Joe Consumer sue the music labels for fraud since the CD patent holder Philips stated that encrypted audio CDs are not actually compact discs and thus the record companies representing them as such are committing fraud.

All the Rush You can Buy!

[beatleadam]

Does this mean that the only available download artists are Bryan Adams, Alanis Morrisette and Barenaked Ladies while the "Classic Rock" section is filled with Rush and Gordon Lightfoot?

wait. canada?!

[Anonymous Coward]

interesting that an online music pay service would decide to launch (and obviously spend a lot of resources on this launch, especially when it's so soon after the previously noted UK launch) in of all places, canada. why is this interesting? well, because in canada, file sharing (uploading, i believe) is legal. this means that people are really open about using p2p networks, and they're really popular. what makes napster think that with their drm scheme they can be more popular than the already (legal) free standard up there in canada? i'll be curious as to how the canadian people react to this, and the whole "wait-we're-getting-it-for-free-legally-already-an d-you-want-me-to-pay-for-it-though?" thing...

Cheaper!

[dj245]

It is interesting to note that the Canadians have it cheaper than the US. According to this currency converter, 1.19 CAD is .87 USD and 9.99 CAD is 7.23 USD. Perhaps a lack of litigation is to blame?

Re:Cheaper!

[MKalus]

Perhaps the fact that *I* get paid in CAN$ and thus pay a higher price?

I don't make more in CAN$ than you do in USD, so no, it is NOT better for me, I am getting jacked on this (if I would buy anything from there, they don't let me as I don't run Windoze).

Re:Cheaper!

[The Lynxpro]

"Canada has lower standard of living as well as lower average income..."

But a *free* health care system (of various quality), supposedly a better education system than the U.S., cleaner streets, etc. But then again, since we're [USA] next door, they don't have to spend as much money per capita towards their defense.

quick survey

[MasTRE]

How many ppl here use US Napster?

Rejected

[loomis]

As the poster mentions, non-ie browsers get rejected by the Telus service.

"Thank you for visiting Puretracks from TELUS" Currently our website supports Internet Explorer 5.0 and above on the Windows operating system (Win 98SE / ME / 2000 / XP / 2003), and is available to Canadian residents only."

"We value our Mac audience, however the Windows Media player for the Mac platform is not currently compatible with Microsoft protected audio content."

No mention of other OS users. It still really bothers me that companies are too stupid to write websites that are standards-compliant and work on all platforms.

Re:Rejected

[finkployd]

it isn't the website, it is the wma9 drm format. It only plays on windows media player 9 on windows.

Finkployd

Finally! I can legally download ...

[burgburgburg]

Anne Murray
Gordon Lightfoot
Rush
...
Celine Dion
....
......
Why do I need this again?

Re:Finally! I can legally download ...

[Dr Caleb]

Why do I need this again?

Give them a ten and you can get a Nickleback.

Thanks folks, I'll be here all week.

Downloading seems legal; uploading might not be

[Saucepan]

Downloading is apparently legal in Canada, but uploading might not be.

Canadians are currently permitted to borrow a friend's CD and make copies for personal, non-commercial use. However they are not allowed to make a copy for someone else. It is widely believed that this allows downloading but not uploading.

The CRIA has launched John Doe lawsuits against uploaders but recently suffered a legal setback when a judge ruled that they had failed to provide sufficient evidence of a copyright violation to subpoena the identities of some anonymous uploaders. However, members of the federal government have promised new legislation to close what they call "legal loopholes". That may just have been election year pandering. We'll have to wait and see.

In any case there are many Canadians who would willingly pay a reasonable amount per song to purchase music via download in order to get known quality, selection, and lack of liability. I would be one of them except that I refuse to pay money for DRM-encumbered files -- if I pay to buy something, I expect to own it.

Re:Downloading seems legal; uploading might not be

[Chess_the_cat]

Uploading was ruled legal in a later decision. The judge equated it to putting a photocopier in a library. Just because you put the material in your shared folder doesn't mean you are actively distributing it.

Re:Downloading seems legal; uploading might not be

[madprogrammer]

But you're not buying it. You're paying for the right to have a copy of it to listen to - and not make copies of it.

Read here

and here

Don't get me wrong... I think some major reforms are needed in the music industry. I'd rather pay my money directly to the band if I have to pay for the music I listen to.

Odd

[localhost00]

I am running the real Internet Explorer under XP, yet I still get rejected.

Something tells me they want JS and Cookies enabled?

My version of the kick message

[danigiri]

I'm sorry, my wallet is not currently compatible with your store.

Napster is currently compatible with MS's flag OS's.
Other OS's are not supported at this time and never will.

If you are planning on getting me to spend my money on this store, the service will not be compatible and you should discontinue trying to do any business with me. If you will support *my* computer and *my* operating system, please continue.

Ah, and MS will eat you for lunch, good luck.

Yet another iTunes plug

[tokachu(k)]

0.99 USD = $1.37 CDN

...so technically Napster Canada is cheaper than iTunes. But this is assuming you only listen to music on your computer. They charge extra to transfer the song, unlike iTunes, where it's the same price whether you burn it to a CD, transfer it to your iPod, or whatever.

Napster and the others need to deal with the fact that they've been beaten by Apple.

Russian Napster...

[Canabinol]

Forget Napster, iTunes, et al.

The Russian equivalent to iTunes - allofmp3.com - is the way forward for all your music needs!!

You pay 1 cent a megabyte so $10 gets you a gigabyte of mp3 download - and you can pay using Paypal in case you're worried about your Credit Card getting stolen by a shady Russkie...

Cheap, cheerful and legal (at least in the eyes of Russian law) and they have a great selection (better than iTunes as it includes European chart music also).

Re:Russian Napster...

[rduke15]

allofmp3.com would be almost perfect: non-protected mp3, at the bitrate of your choice, for an unbeatable price.

The only problem is that it doesn't look like being very "legal", despite whate the site pretends.

In fact, my problem is not whether it is technically legal or not. It is that the money certainly doesn't go to the artists. So it's just the same as non-legal.

What we want is high-quality non-DRM files, and knowing that the artists get their share from what we pay of it. But the companies don't seem to understand that, so it will continue to be P2P, allofmp3.com, et al.

Re:Russian Napster...

[Teh_monkeyCode]

I'm more scared of Paypal ripping me off

Re:Russian Napster...

[jimmy page]

Forget what the (Allofmp3.com) says. There are other sites claiming it is legal. And they give a much better description of why.

[Museekster] http://www.museekster.com/allofmp3faq.htm#Is%20All ofmp3%20legal?

I do have to agreee with you regarding the rate of payment though - it seems awfully low in USD. Maybe it's OK when converted to Rubles?

I will purchase music online:

[big_groo]

IF (and only if)
1. No restrictions on what I do with it.(any player)
2. I can use the OS of my choice (Slackware)
3. The price more accurately reflects the production/distribution costs.
4. There has to be something worth purchasing.

In other words...never.

Re:I will purchase music online:

[nwbvt]

"1. No restrictions on what I do with it.(any player)"

I think people should be more flexible on this. All you really want to do is listen to the music, right? So is it really so wrong to accept some limitations that do not effect that in exchange for the advantages of online music?

"3. The price more accurately reflects the production/distribution costs."

Thats a bit difficult to calculate, considering intellectual property requires a near zero marginal cost and a (relatively) large capital investment. So for a large record label selling millions of Brittney Spears (or whatever pop group is popular) songs, that cost would be low. For a small label with less popular (though not necessarily lower quality groups) artists, they would have to charge a lot more just to break even. That seems a bit backwards to me, and may make it difficult for smaller labels to compete.

I agree on the other points though.

Browser detection?

[AdrianFletcher666]

Apparently I am running Windows XP on a mac... I had no idea.

Thank you for visiting Sympaticomusicstore.puretracks.com

Currently our website supports Internet Explorer 5.0 and above on the
Windows operating system (Win 98SE / ME / 2000 / XP / 2003),
and is available to Canadian residents only.

We value our Mac audience, however the Windows Media player for the Mac
platform is not currently compatible with Microsoft protected audio content.
Puretracks is currently working to make our service available to Mac users.

Re:Browser detection?

[KenBot_314]

If you are not in Canada, maybe they are using a method of checking IPs... That could explain it, since the quote from their site clearly says that only Canadian residents are allowed...

Either that, or yet another wacky side effect of the /. affect!

Hey wtf, the Dayglo Abortions in a Napster Ad?

[smcavoy]

I really wasn't expecting hear that tune whilst watching the flash animation.
I would've thought they would've been more picky about who uses their songs (i.e. a company that is in bed with all the big evil record companies).

Why such huge price differences?

[mrdaveb]

Napster price comparison:
(at current exchange rate)

Napster Canada: $1.19 Canadian = $0.87 US
Napster USA: $0.99 US
Napster UK: 0.99 GBP = $1.80 US

Why do us Brits get such a raw deal? I guess music prices have always been this unfair. I was going to say that hopefully when some more services launch, competition will bring the price down, but this is the RIAA we are talking about...

I think I'll be sticking to independant labels and 2nd hand LPs :-)

PureTracks & Non MSIEWin

[infowantsto]

(Be prepared for a trio of rejection notices if you're neither running nor spoofing IE under Windows.)

Funny thing about that; I fired up Safari under OS X, set the user agent to IE6Win, and then went in to the site. I think the reason they reject other browsers is that I was somehow able to bypass bits of their DRM and listen to their tracks. However, I quickly realised there was no content I was actually interested in that they were selling, so I haven't been back since. They may have since corrected that DRM mistake, but I won't be going back until they officially support OS X.

Report on changes to the Canadian Copyright Act

[emaveneau]

Recently (May 12) the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage issued a report on proposed changes to the Copyright Act, whose relevant recommendation is as follows:

RECOMMENDATION 3

The Committee recommends that the Copyright Act be amended to provide that Internet service providers (ISPs) can be subject to liability for copyrighted material on their facilities. The Committee notes, however, that ISPs should be exempt from liability if they act as true "intermediaries," without actual or constructive knowledge of the transmitted content, and where they meet certain prescribed conditions. ISPs should be required to comply with a "notice and takedown" scheme that is compliant with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, with additional prescribed procedures to address other infringements.

If you overlook the last vague line, the proposed changes to Copyright Act seem harmless to those who do not download, but those who do, may become customers of Napster et al.

The Act would force ISPs to cut off access for uploaders after they have been identified by the CIRA. But the report does not specifically address the disclosure of customers' information (to the CIRA), nor does it address the download v.s. upload meme.

The vagueness of the report is replicated by media reports which further mention WIPO treaties, P2P and anti-circumvention devices, all of which are not specifically addressed in the report.

The EFC has not, AFAIK, commented on the report and the Toronto member of Parliament who chaired the committee, hasn't yet responded to my inquiries (will P2P or anti-circumvention be left legal?).

Re:Obligatory question

[mrdaveb]

Obligatory joke question maybe?

All the downloads are DRMed WMA files. You can play them in Winamp in a playlist along with your Ogg files if you want to. That's about as far as Ogg 'support' goes. To convert the WMA files to Ogg, you would have to circumvent the DRM. Most likely by burning a CD then ripping it and encoding to Ogg. The sound quality would suffer.

upload/download is legal

[Anonymous Coward]

Uploading and downloading of mp3's via p2p is legal in canada, see:

http://www.canadiancontent.net/commtr/itemid172. ht ml

Why pay for something when it's already free? They aren't going to sell ice to this Inuit.

Re:no need for ie

[Socket Scientist]

At least unlike Apple they're trying to make a successful *music* business, as opposed to hardware business.

I'd say Apple's *music* business is a darn sight more successful than Napster's, even ignoring iPod profits.

Allofmp3.com Still Cheaper, Better

[Fearan]

At about $0.05 ($0.01/mb) per 192Kbps (OGG,MP3,WMA) or less for 128Kbps encodes per song, Allofmp3.com is still better than any of the pay-to-download music services. And also, no OS restrictions or browser restrictions, although the auto-downloader program is only available to Win32 systems. I still love being to download the songs on my Linux box and pay by Paypal. http://www.allofmp3.com Seriously, give it a try. I find it's better than using KaZaA or any other P2P system even though I have to pay a few cents per song.

What I plan to tell those I support...

[danharan]

The "legal" download services require you to use an unsafe browser, and you don't even own the songs in a format you can use anywhere.

Until the companies offer a good deal for consumers, it's tempting to use free services like Kazaa. However these services have a lot of problems: they install "spyware" and often crash computers. If you download such programs, you are asking for trouble.

There is however one legal way of getting music: copy your friends CDs. I have a whole bunch of them you can borrow so you can make copies for personal use.

If this is useful for you, feel free to use it. If enough of us geeks send this type of message to those we support, the corporate pachiderms might eventually get it. And if one day one of those companies lets us download mp3s with a standards-compliant browser, we should recommend everyone use that service. Until then, I'm not buying Cds.

Insulting to Canadians flash animation...

[Nuke101]

Did anybody else watch their little flash movie about canada... http://napster.ca/flash.html I'm seriously pissed off, beavers biting people, hick looking guys drinking beer in almost every scene, leaf fan with stanley cup rioting, pick up truck skidding around (as if drunk, shows people drinking beer before and after) etc.. I am seriously appalled at this blatant stereo typical - hell I dont even think these are stereotypes, its just extremely messed up and I'm VERY insulted over this... meh, no way in hell they'll ever get my business...

Please mod parent down: incorrect

[Rumor]

I'm sorry, Chess, but you're referring to the same case as Saucepan, and the judge did not rule that uploading is legal. He expressed that it was similar to placing a photocopying machine in a library, yes, in an allusion to a recent Supreme Court of Canada case (CCH vs. Law Society of Upper Canada) but this opinion was purely obiter dicta, meaning that it does not have binding force. This case was tossed by the judge on evidentiary merits, or the lack thereof, so no new legal precedent has been set.

At present, the law still suggests that uploading is a violation of copyright with no exemption under the Private Copying provision.

Mod -1 False

[brunes69]

From Puretracks.com....

Beside each song listing there are a few small icons. These icons indicate how you can use the song file once it is downloaded.

To get more information on usage restrictions for each track, click on the associated icon. A window will appear with information on exactly how you are permitted to use the file once it is downloaded.

Listen:

You can listen to your music downloads as many times as you like from the computer that holds the purchased license.

Burn:

You can burn your music downloads to CD 3 times.

Burn:

You can burn your music downloads an unlimited number of times.

Transfer:

You can transfer your music downloads an unlimited number of times to 3 separate portable devices

---

So... it would seem you're totally wrong. Sure, not all files can be burt, but a) Those files are clearly labeled on the site before you pay, b) It does not cost money to burn such files ( WMP does not even support this, have no clue where you came up with this nonsense ), and c) You can't "uprgade" a non-burn allowed file by paying extra money.

CDN = CAD

[hampton]

There's no such currency as "CDN". The Canadian Dollar is "CAD".

Ummm...

[Bricklets]

This is the second time I've seen this in two days. Google for "Song of the piracy apologist" on slashdot and you'll be amazed. Moderators: please mod this back down.

Open music

[Dwonis]

(Be prepared for a trio of rejection notices if you're neither running nor spoofing IE under Windows.)

Yet another reason why Magnatune might be worth looking at again. Magnatune has greatly increased its selection since it started up (e.g. it actually has some music I like now), so if you haven't taken a look in the last few months, you might want to look at it again.

obligatory eMusic plug

[Groucho]

eMusic gives you tracks for 22 cents each - Lame VBR encoded MP3s - and of course there's no copy protection. And they have great independent labels like Matador, Kill Rock Stars, 5 Rue Christine, Thrill Jockey, Mille Plateaux, Schematic, etc. plus a shitload of jazz and classical. I have the 90 songs a month for 20 bucks deal - you can buy more if your downloads run out before the month is up.

I refuse to buy into this dollar a song for inferior closed formats with DRM deal. eMusic may not be perfect but it's the closest thing going.

eMusic

Who cares

[future assassin]

>albums at CDN$9.95 I get full album cd's at local pawn shops for $2.50-4 CDN.