Slashdot Mirror
Mandriva Linux to Offer Online Music Service
dysfirkin writes "Mandriva 2006 is to be the first Linux distro to offer built in online music service. The service will compete with the likes of emusic.com for the music business of Linux users. I have not used Mindawn before, but the service is offered in Ogg Vorbis and FLAC."
and annoying auto playing video with sound!
Doesn't mention how much this will cost. I'm guessing from the text of the article that this is a pay-per-song service rather than a subscription model, but it doesn't explicitly say.
Interesting that it will support Linux, Windows and OS X - is this the only music service that can claim this kind of compatibility?
MacBook Pro. Worst name since the Bicycle
Given that they likely won't use DRM with their downloads (after all, a Linux distro doing DRM would be quickly abandoned by many of its users and be excommunicated by RMS)... that would seem to mean that the major labels would not allow their songs to be put on it, counting out the majority of popular music today.
Shame.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
Maybe Apple will finally decide to port iTunes to Linux if they see that there's a market.
TFA tries to put this up as a competing service to iTunes/Napster, but there's a pretty large gaping hole there.....content. While it looks like an interesting service, especially for people who like unsigned/indy type releases, that's not really competing with the other services. Their customers are buying mainly releases from "mainstream" sources (the big record companies). Saying that this is serious competition to iTunes is more a delusion of grandeur than a realistic statement.
Some bring out the best in others, some the worst. Some bring out far more.
http://www.mindawn.com/news/34?PHPSESSID=109de8547 5f3274709a8bd0cb78e05d0
Some of you miss the point completely. Mandriva isn't after iTunes neck. It's trying to carve a niche market: That of Linux users. They add the other clients just to better their chances of profit. And the music offering not being the popular bands is no problem at all: Linux users aren't looking for gangsta rap, they have a brain, and use it.
It's also non-DRM music from independent artists.
What nifty freebies will Mindawn be giving away to the lucky recipient of their billionth download? Tickets for the 2050 World Cup final!
That would be because they're the incumbent monopoly in the desktop operating system market. Much as we (Mandriva) would like to be, we're not.
I don't know other European countries' laws but in Czech Republic allofmp3 is definitely legal - you're allowed to download any audio/video you want (even from "illegal" source) but you must not share the data with someone else. I call this a good law.
And if you must have major label stuff, Real Rhapsody has a beta version FireFox plugin that allows you to use the entire jukebox service. Given, you can't download and keep it, but at least you can listen to the service, and Real is doing something for us Linux users.
If there's no God, Why do people keep asking Him to bless and damn everything?
The Shit/Size ratio is exactly how "better" is defined in this argument.
Once you get up to around 256kbps there's no huge difference between any of them -- the reason OGG/WMA/AAC are considered "better" is because you can get away with a 128Kps or less file in some circumstances.
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
Many banks allow you to generate one time use CC numbers. I know MBNA does. I wouldn't trust 'em with my real card either.
Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
This is a revolting development - they're obviously subversives trying to torpedo Slashot.
A (maybe) non-DRM music system;
A non-Apple music system;
A non-MS music system;
A music system that supports Ogg and FLAC.
Nothing left to talk about. *sniff* Cue crickets.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
They've been in the game longer then just about anyone. Changed hands about half a dozen times and still offer fair (I pay $19.95 for 90 tracks a month, DRM free and mine to keep, play, etc forever). While I appreciate sites like Bleep they are somewhat limited in their scope (which can be a good thing) and E/M's cataloge is big enough that I end up finding a lot of music I wouldn't have found otherwise. For the big bands allofmp3.com is still a pretty good bet (not so much my thing, but good to fall back on) and they have a nice new iTunes-like (Windows) application that makes finding and buying music dangerously easy. Of course if your a 'believer' you can't fail to mention Magnatune for being probably the most moralistically upstanding label/service going. But their catalog hurts, probably proportionally.
I'll still fall back on iTune's if I have to, but the trouble of the DRM and their pricing make them my last choice. I'd love to see Last.fm do something other then partner with amazon.com. I'm too impatient to order music I just fell in love with when 90% of the time I don't have to.
Quack, quack.
Downloading music (from anywhere, foreign or domestic) isn't importation, so 602 does not apply. Even if 602 did apply, you would not have an exemption under 602(a)(2) because of 602(b).
Importation is the act of taking copies or phonorecords across a border. Look at the definitions of "copy" and "phonorecord" in section 101. Copies are "material objects [...] in which a work is fixed by any method now known or later developed, and from which the work can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device." Copies are real, physical things. Copies are not broadcasts or transmissions. When you have a song on a CD, the CD is the copy. When you have a song on a hard drive, or in RAM, the hard drive (or the RAM) is the copy.
When you download from allofmp3.com, or anywhere else, you're not transporting an actual copy, in tact. This is obvious because the copy is a physical thing: the copy of the song is the disk on which allofmp3 stores it. They didn't send you their disk. So, what happened? You made a copy of the song, and the new copy is the song fixed in your disk.
So you didn't import the song. You reproduced it. Reproducing a copyrighted song without permission of the copyright holder, or an applicable exemption, infringes the copyright holder's reproduction rights. Just because allofmp3 has the right to make those songs available to you under Russian law, does not mean you are authorized under US law to make your own copies, which is what you're doing when you download music from them.
For instance, let's say that merely "making available" does not infringe copyright. So, I put up a directory on a public webserver filled with music I bought from emusic.com or somewhere else. I may have a perfect legal right to place those songs online, merely doing so isn't distributing them for instance, but you still don't have a legal right to download them. It is no different with allofmp3.
Now, in Canada, in constrast, it is probably legal to use allofmp3.com. The private copying provisions of the Copyright Act do not not require that private copies be made from legitimate or authorized sources, merely that they are made for personal use and that they are made onto a recording medium that isn't prescribed.
Life after capitalism? The participatory economics project
Got a question that the allofmp3 site doesn't answer, since a lot of users are probably in this thread... are the tracks they sell tagged? They list insertion of id3 tags as a feature of their Windows front end so it makes one wonder. If I have to tag everything manually it would certainly be a reason NOT to use them.
Democrat delenda est