Slashdot Mirror


Napster Strikes Deal With GWU

ParticleMan911 writes "In an attempt to thwart illegal music downloads, GWU has struck a deal with Napster to allow every student living on campus a free subscription to Napster's streaming audio service. Every one of the 700,000 songs on Napster will be available to stream on each students' computer. GWU is not disclosing how much the streaming service, available to all users at $9.95/Month, is costing them, but the first year trial of the service has been donated by an anonymous donor. Will this method help get rid of illegal music downloads, or simply be a handy tool to use while your real mp3s are downloading?"

32 of 234 comments (clear)

  1. One in the same by quinxy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    "while your real mp3s are downloading?"

    Given the availability of various stream ripping software (not sure if something is currently available for Napster particularly, didn't see any in a quick search) it would seem reasonable to expect that the Napster streams could become your real mp3s. Surely something could do the DirectSound dumping (as other programs already do) and then slap on the MP3 tags based on text grabbed from Napster's Windows handles.
    Q

    --
    Don't vote for Eugene Papansanovich for Congress!
    1. Re:One in the same by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      A private DRM crypto key embedded into your CPU is not security through obscurity.

      Good luck trying to bypass it.

    2. Re:One in the same by janbjurstrom · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not sure one can say stream ripping equals piracy. Is it? I recall recording a lot of radio shows on old, analog c-60 tapes a couple of decades ago. Quite the 10-year old 'pirate'...

      Anyway, I see no difference between the two (as there are none), and sorry, I don't see it as piracy to record a radio broadcast (or TV broadcast).

      But then, my moral fibre was probably corrupt even in my pre-teens..

      --
      668.5
  2. The real question is... by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The real question is "are the students going to share their 'legit' mP3s with Kazaa"????

    Or simply will they "take orders" from outsiders???

  3. Well THAT's a silly question. by Puls4r · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Of course this won't help.

    The university will not continue to purchase licenses once the "free donor" leaves. Other universities will not follow their lead.

    It's pretty simply - eventually, we will all be tied to an IP adress the same way we're tied to a street address, a telephone number, a license plate, and a credit card number. We will "own" that IP address through the use of our login / password so that we can be tracked just as we are in every other aspect of life.

    1. Re:Well THAT's a silly question. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We will "own" that IP address through the use of our login / password so that we can be tracked just as we are in every other aspect of life.

      Encrypted P2P networks like Freenet will just become more common.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  4. And this is going to be the answer? Right.... by fordgj · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Go walk around a college campus. Count the the people with iPods. OK, now tell me if this is really going to solve the 'problem.' They'd be better of getting a discount rate for students at the iTMS.

  5. Is it just me? by Mindjiver · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I persume the students at GWU pay tution (as many US students do). Do they really want their money to go to a commercial company distributing music over the Internet? Shouldn't that money go into making their education the best that their money could buy?

    I think that if GWU have a problem with illegal downloading of music they should use traffic shaping instead.

    This message was brought to you from a drunk fart from Old Europe.

    I apologize for my spelling mistakes.

    --
    I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
  6. i can't believe it... by John+Seminal · · Score: 3, Insightful
    but the first year trial of the service has been donated by an anonymous donor

    i would not be suprised if this anonyous donor was napster itself, trying to set a precedent so other schools will subscribe. i can't help but think of the stripped down version of windows microsoft is peddeling in asia, or how they give out free copies of its operating system once a government decides to go open source.

    But GWU officials are turning to the Napster service less as a means of wooing prospective students than as a way to tackle the technological and ethical crises posed by the downloading revolution

    since when did this turn into a "crisis"? once again, the rhetoric is being rased by the same people who want to take away your right to back up music, share music, or make copies. the same people who illegally inflated the price of cd's, to which they were sued and lost. since they lost in the courthouse, they have been buying politicians in the congress. am i wrong? didn't they hire senator orin hatch's son?

    Although the subscriptions will allow them to listen to as much music as they want for free through their computers, they will have to pay 99 cents for any song they copy onto a compact disc or portable music player

    are you kidding me? can't people already buy music for 99 cents a song anywhere else? what are they paying for?

    it looks like GWU got raped.

    --

    Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."

  7. Very good idea . . by Jaffanator · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While some technically savvy students (read: /.ers) will continue to use other means to get DRM-free mp3's and movies, most college students would be content to listen to their favorite music off the Napster streaming service. Once the administration tells them it is okay and even probably helps them install the software the ease of use trumps everything else for the average college student.

    --
    Interested in Sports with a brain? --> http://dispatchesofj.blogspot.com/
  8. I dunno by KI4BBO.org · · Score: 0, Insightful

    I honestly dont think this will help at all with the P2P downloads.. I mean why pay for it, when you can have more for free? They keep coming up with all these things to try to "defer" p2p, when in reality its just drving people to it! The whole reason p2p is being used, is to aviod paying for files, so, this kinda defeats the purpose of it, don't you think?

    --


    _____
    Josh Powell - www.ki4bbo.org
  9. school fee's... by John+Seminal · · Score: 3, Insightful
    i agree with you. and some of those fees should not be allowed. for example, the athletic fee. doesn't the athletic department make money off the football games and sports? why pay a coach millions of dollars at the college level? is it a sports vocational school or a university?

    my school had a $1 charge per credit hour, that went to a scholarship fund for minority students. nobody bothered to ever ask about it. so i decided to ask, and the school said it went to black and hispanic students to pay their tuition. i had to work a job while in college. i told them i did not want to pay that fee, and they looked at me like i was a racist. why don't they not automatically charge those fees but ask if you are interested in contributing instead.

    while i understand that collective buying by the entire student body can drastically lower prices of certain services, should students have a right to say if they want to be included? or is there some special payment made to school officials, some dirty agreements? i can't help but wonder as i walk down the halls of a college that only offers pepsi products in vending machines, at the cost of $1 a can, $1.35 for a plastic bottle? i guess they need the revenue to pay the administrators their $200,000 a year salary.

    --

    Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."

    1. Re:school fee's... by tfoss · · Score: 4, Insightful
      why don't they not automatically charge those fees but ask if you are interested in contributing instead.

      Because 90% of those you ask would say no.

      -Ted

      --
      -=-=- Quantum physics - the dreams stuff are made of.
    2. Re:school fee's... by Astaroth33 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Were I in that position, I would say "no" as well. Most people would for good reason; such a fee is not inherently fair.

    3. Re:school fee's... by jpmkm · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Is it inherently fair that poor white students have to pay for poor black students to attend school?

    4. Re:school fee's... by dtungsten · · Score: 3, Insightful
      my school had a $1 charge per credit hour, that went to a scholarship fund for minority students. nobody bothered to ever ask about it. so i decided to ask, and the school said it went to black and hispanic students to pay their tuition. i had to work a job while in college. i told them i did not want to pay that fee, and they looked at me like i was a racist. why don't they not automatically charge those fees but ask if you are interested in contributing instead.
      Anyone that would expect someone to give money based on skin color (of the "donor" and/or recipient) is the real racist.
  10. For those not keeping track... by Gogl · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...this seems to be almost exactly the same as the deals Napster has made with Penn State and the University of Rochester. As such, this story in and of itself doesn't really raise any truly new questions, it just proves that this Napster-university deal thing is likely to keep expanding.

    And the reason is quite simple: universities are just covering their collective legal asses. It may not be the best way to do it (I go to UR and let the administration know that I felt a deal with iTunes would be superior, although even then I'd be skeptical that it would be used), but they're not doing this because they think it's really right or a good idea in and of itself. It's a simple cost/risk sort of calculation: the cost of this deal is like an insurance policy against the risk of lawsuits. Simple enough.

  11. Irony by telstar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Anybody else see the irony in all of this? The education market used to be Apple's bread and butter when it came to Apple IIe's and other computers. Looks like Napster is trying to adopt that strategy when it comes to the music industry. Personally, I don't think the same strategy will work.

  12. Why? by Cavio · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How on earth does this contribute to the academic experience? Or are universities just turning into semi-adult daycare with toys and music and diversions to keep the MTV generation from having to actually THINK for a change?

    Shoot me, shoot me NOW.

    --

    Please bid on this Karmann Ghia! Please pleas

    1. Re:Why? by ky11x · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That is not the fault of the universities, you know? It's the students who are demanding these things and acting as if they were "customers" of their education experience. The universities, in order to compete, will have to cave in and provide "entertainment." That's what happens when you make everybody go to college, they turn into daycare.

    2. Re:Why? by pmh009 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't think it was the students that demanded to have to pay for something that none of them wanted in the first place. At PSU this was done without students even knowing until the deal was already done. After the deal most of the news stories were about how none of the students wanted to be forced into paying for (on tuition bills) something they never asked for or wanted. How fair is it for a person who already has a subscription to iTunes or something else, to have to pay for another, crappier service and have no choice about it?

  13. What?!! by sockonafish · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How is this going to help any University with their p2p related issues? Schools aren't legally liable for the trading of illegal files any more than any other ISP would, their only concern is bandwidth costs.

    Streaming music is going to cost more bandwidth than a downloaded music collection (a legally, unshared collection), that's a no brainer.

    Why is it that no brainers are so difficult for some people to understand, anyway? Do they have negative brains?

  14. Don't forget iTunes sharing by ryochiji · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In my dorm, everybody put their music into iTunes and turned on sharing so we had some 70,000+ tracks available for streaming on the network. In that kind of environment, I don't think a paid streaming service like the one GWU plans on offering will be appreciated.

  15. Sure, people will use it by ThousandStars · · Score: 4, Insightful
    But I suspect that the downsides of Napster will quickly become apparent. The service will be practically useless at home, on airplanes or during travel, and it will also not be transferrable to portable music players, particularly the most popular portable player.

    In addition, I think a fair number of students use p2p applications to find songs they can't find elsewhere -- live cuts, unknown bands and other miscellaneous tracks they can't find anywhere else. The GWU officials may misunderstand the very demographic they try to serve.

    Then there's the problem of alternative platforms. From the Napster website: "PC only, Windows XP/2000, Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.1 or higher, Windows Media Player 7.1 or higher..." No thanks. I'll take my Powerbook and find music elsewhere.

    Add to that the lack of ability to burn songs to CD and the ease of most p2p networks, as well as simply ripping CDs, and I think that GWU is burning its money.

    Others have pointed to the availability of stream ripping software, and I suspect that such software will quickly become widespread and popular. I'm sure students, particularly the Comp Sci ones, will find ways around the system.

  16. Solves What Problem? by Paulrothrock · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The big issue with downloading at my alma mater (PSU) was that it ate up bandwidth. (Or at least that's what they claimed.) Students doing real research didn't have the speeds to do it with.

    Streaming doesn't solve this problem, it just exacerbates it. Would you prefer a kid downloading 100 MP3s in 2 hours or streaming those MP3s for 5 hours?

    Is this supposed to cover the university's ass? I don't see how. If they make the kids sign agreements not to use the connection to break laws, they've effectively absolved themselves from any liability. And without forcing kids into DRM-hell.

    So what problem does this solve, exactly? The problem of finding money for pay increases.

    --
    I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
    1. Re:Solves What Problem? by PythonCodr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem it likely solves is that when the jack-booted RIAA thugs come after the university, they can show that they paid their protection money ... er ... subscription to Napster and say "See? What else can we do?" Expensive? Sure ... Less options for the students? Sure ... A huge waste of bandwidth? Debateable but the case can be made. But I suspect this is more about making sure the University doesn't get sued than anything else. Someone likely crunched the numbers and said "If we do this, we could save X dollars over being sued at any time in the next Y years given our students' habits."

  17. DRM is a doomed concept by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Any technology that uses encryption to "manage" (read: remove) rights of the purchaser requires that the purchaser somewhere have the key in order to use the content provided.

    This is the failing of DRM as a concept. Since the person you're trying to prevent from using content illegally needs to have the key in order to use the content legally, eventually someone's going to figure out how to get the key out and use it to extract the content so it can be used by the consumer in any way they see fit.

    Software companies have been fighting "piracy" since the advent of the Apple II and Commodore 64 home computers - trying to do stupid stuff to fool software designed to copy diskettes into thinking the disk was bad. They've been fighting this battle for 20+ years, and the "problem" hasn't gone away.

    Guess what, it isn't going to go away until content providers choose to sell content at prices that are reasonable by the consumer's standard. I'm perfectly willing to pay $15 for a game that has a week's worth of play time in it. I'm not willing to pay upwards of $60 for that same game. Similarly, when CDs first came out, the industry said they'd be cheaper than tapes because the cost of duplication was less. Guess what - the prices were fixed higher and so people started looking for ways to duplicate the discs.

    When you let the market determine what's a fair price, theft goes down. That's a basic economic principle.

    1. Re:DRM is a doomed concept by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      When you let the market determine what's a fair price, theft goes down. That's a basic economic principle.

      The market is already determining it. People want it to cost less; music companies want it to cost more. It's balanced out. (Unless you consider the music companies as a cartel, or such, which is a fair point.)

      I think most people want music to cost $0 and if it costs more, it's too much. No matter what price it's set at, people will always want it cheaper. If prices fell to $2 per CD today, you'd get a whole bunch of people posting to Slashdot saying it's not a fair price, but they'd buy more music if it was $1 per CD.

  18. I see loopholes by DuctTape4Windows · · Score: 3, Insightful

    yeah, actually, i don't think stream ripping is illegal. Because when VCR's came out, they were worryed that it would used to break copyrights, but the supreme court said they were ok, so you can record whatever you want from TV or Radio, so i guess stream ripping is legal.

    Was GWU one of the collages that had students that the RIAA sued?

  19. RIAA Education Works! by MacWiz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm glad to see that the college students have learned the RIAA lesson about the evils of downloading music without paying for it, with the reward being that now they get to download as much as they want and not worry about paying for it.

  20. Re:I'm a GWU Student by t_allardyce · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They just figured they cant stop people doing it on their network so they either pay off the mafia COUGH sorry i mean RIAA, or they get sued for 10 times as much, then they really will be bitching.

    --
    This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
  21. The REAL question by gazbo · · Score: 1, Insightful
    The real question is: "are the students going to share their 'legit' MP3s with Kazaa"?

    Or will they simply "take orders" from outsiders?