Teens Don't Buy Legit MP3s Because They Can't?

iSeal writes "According to a recent study, 13-17 year olds are both the most likely to pirate music, and also the most likely to own a portable MP3 player. Yet, as this article goes on to say, the lack of credit card ownership prevents teens from buying music online. The author maintains that since regular record shops don't sell MP3s, or gift cards to places that do sell MP3s, its practically impossible for teens to buy legit MP3s on their own. From the article: 'If the only way to obtain music online continues to be through illegitimate means, then we are no better off than in the days of Napster.'" I'm not sure I agree with some of the conclusions here (you can buy iTunes cards at Walgreens), but it's an interesting discussion.

Comments

well then

[macadamia_harold]

Yet, as this article goes on to say, the lack of credit card ownership prevents teens from buying music online.

Clearly, the only solution is for the RIAA to start providing teenagers with credit cards. That can't possibly go wrong.

Re:well then

[MassEnergySpaceTime]

Even if teenagers had credit cards, I think teenagers would still more likely opt to illegally download mp3s just because it's "illegal", therefore it's cool to do so.

Re:well then

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess that explains why sodomizing sheep is so popular in Montana.

Re:well then

[galaad2]

i want one of those cards... make it a debit card and tie it to the RIAA main bank account number :) :D

i know what i'll use it for :P

Re:well then

[telchine]

Even if teenagers had credit cards, I think teenagers would still more likely opt to illegally download mp3s just because it's "illegal", therefore it's cool to do so.

When I last used OD2, I'm pretty sure you could pay for tunes with text messages, not credit cards. I suspect the reason they don't buy the tunes is for the same reason that the rest of us don't, awful sound quality, awful DRM, and awful software interfaces.

Re:well then

[sj26]

I think there's an awareness problem as well. Many teens don't think of legally downloading music as pirating music is what they've always done. It's not even necessarily thought of as wrong; after all, you can listen to the tunes on the radio. About the only "well-known" services is iTunes' music shop, which has a fairly low reputation, and is fairly useless to anyone not using an iPod.

Re:well then

[Xymor]

"'If the only way to obtain music online continues to be through illegitimate means, then we are no better off than in the days of Napster.'"

Pff, this guy is living in the past, with bittorrent and gnutella we can pirate music 10x faster and much more efficiently, not mentioning movies, xbox games, pr0n, etc...

Re:well then

[Mike89]

That's not at all the reason why. The reason (at least for me) for getting MP3s 'illegally' is because I have such a varying taste of music and munch through it so quickly, it's not economically viable for me to buy the amount of albums I actually download just to try out an artist. I'll download an artists discography and randomly insert their tracks into my regular playlist, usually as I go to sleep. If a track wins my attention, I'll remember it and it'll become part of my regular listening. However, most bands cannot capture me with more than a couple of songs. For the bands who do, I don't want to buy low-quality DRM ridden MP3s via some crappy software. 3 bands have managed to "Woo" me enough for me to spend money on them, so I go to CDUniverse and use my Paypal account (doesn't require credit card) to get their albums (or DVDs) posted to me. One local band (The Living End) has managed to get me as a fan, and I've bought all their releases bar one since I started liking them. I downloaded the one I didnt buy (illegally), and didnt like that much of it. But, I've gone 2 of their concerts based around that release, so theyve more than made their money back off what I "deprived" them of by downloading it. I bought their live version of the same album because I like the songs live. So, no, we don't download illegally just because it's cool.

Re:well then

[Unknown_monkey]

no, they didn't "make back the money" because if you had paid for the album you unlawfully downloaded, they would have more than they have now.
The alternative question is would they prefer that you not unlawfully download their music and then not go to their concerts that you went to based on that act, or do they prefer people to download and come to their concerts because their artists and really want to just be heard instead of like Lars Ulrich where he wants to sacrifice downloaders during concerts for the amusement of the audience and the **AA's. So if you see them in person, ask them that.

Re:well then

[Terranaut]

I know that the artists usually make more money playing their music live than hawking it on recorded media, but those people who are responsible for the putting the music on the CD or into a downoadable form won't get any revenue from the live performances, you know, the engineers and such (screw the fat cats in their offices). If artists can get their music to sound how they imagine it, or tweaked to a form which the majority of their expected audience would want to listen to them, they wouldn't sell.

Re:well then

[hackstraw]

Even if teenagers had credit cards, I think teenagers would still more likely opt to illegally download mp3s just because it's "illegal", therefore it's cool to do so.

In the US, I have noticed a trend since the 60s and 70s to make more "normal" things illegal, and it makes the tension between the system and the government and the people very high. Abraham Lincoln said it best:

"Prohibition goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation and makes crimes out of things
that are not crimes. A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded."

Which was then followed up by HS Thompson:

"In a closed society where everybody's guilty, the only crime is getting caught. In a world of thieves, the only final sin is stupidity."

So much is illegal, but its not "that illegal", and that is crap. In societies where sex, alcohol, and drugs don't have these insane and intense laws and taboos against them, they do less of them than here. In societies where pornography and nudity are more tolerated, they have much less rape, child abuse, and teenage pregnancies than we do. In societies where drugs are legal, they do less of them than we do. And the legal consequences keep getting more severe here.

Back to MP3s, I think its completely stupid that after 10 years of them being around that its still basically illegal to get them. I just got an iPod, and nobody told me that I couldn't just put MP3s on it. What Apple did, was pretty slick to appease the record business, but its a PITA that I have to go through hoops to put my legal MP3s on it from multiple computers. Honestly, if I knew this from the beginning I wouldn't have bought it. I will never buy "legal" MP3s from "legit" sources, because my freedoms will be limited even more. Instead, my plan for new music is to buy used CDs, rip them, and sell them back. And even that takes a bunch of silly effort. I have so much music, and its a pain to manage it between my home, my car, and work, and elsewhere.

Re:well then

[ZorinLynx]

>but its a PITA that I have to go through hoops to put my legal MP3s on it from multiple computers.

Huh? I've never had a problem putting MP3s on it from multiple computers. The only thing you have to go through hoops for is to copy MP3s *OFF* the iPod; however there are plenty of free utilities (Senuti, etc.) for doing this.

Also, you have to reformat a Mac iPod for Windows (fat32) in order to use it on both platforms... But as far as putting MP3s on it from multiple computers, there are no obstacles for doing this.

-Z

Re:well then

[ggKimmieGal]

Wait a minute... Don't most of these teenagers have something like a parent with a credit card? Honestly, say to your parent, "I got an A on my calculus test. Can I download some songs?" And while the parent stands over the shoulder of the child, then yeah, they can use the parent's credit card. Or am I the only one who thinks parents should be responsible for their children? Now thankfully, when I was a teenager, illegally downloading music was just starting to become big, but it was something my dad was still doing too, so he didn't care.

Re:well then

[Shawn is an Asshole]

He could have a problem with iTunes. I've had a few problems with it erasing the music on the iPod and then copying over that computer's music. iTunes in general doesn't let you use more than one computer per iPod which is why I stopped using it (they may of added the feature, but I really don't give a fuck at this point).

Anyway, I use GTKPod on a few different Linux machines and Yamipod on a few Macs to sync up/trade music with friends (I keep mine HFS+ formatted).

Re:well then

[neelm]

"engineers and such" are paid by the hour and don't have a percent stake in the album they work on. They are already paid before the album hits the public. This is in fact on of the tool the "fat cats" use to never pay the artist - they pay the engineers and make the artist owe them.

to the OP above - that's quite a nice set of logic you've built there to justify your illegal methods.

Re:well then

[ZakuSage]

Depending on how "old" your taste in music is, you could always borrow CDs from a library and rip those. ;)

Re:well then

[Sj0]

I guess you've never heard of the dotcom boom. I know of plenty of engineers who worked 80 hour weeks for nearly no money with the promise of making massive amounts of money with the IPO.

Re:well then

[Sj0]

Maybe in fantasy land. When I was growing up, asking to use my parents credit card for something wasn't just out of the question, it was frankly stupid.

Almost as stupid as trying to market towards a demographic that doesn't have jobs or money. Gee... Who do I know who would do a thing like that?

Re:well then

[MidnightBrewer]

If he bought an album that he had previously illegally downloaded, then, yes, they made their money back. It's reasonable to expect a single person to buy one album, not two. It's like arguing that borrowing from a friend first results in lost sales. The important difference, of course, is that you have to erase those files if you decide you really don't like them; otherwise, the analogy breaks down. The claim that someone's appetite for music is so vast that their wallet can't keep up isn't justification for stealing music, however. You also can't argue that you stole it because you didn't like it enough to buy it. If you don't like it, delete it.

Re:well then

[TheRaven64]

Since Slashdot makes a point of being a US site that the rest of us are allowed on under sufferance, I will share my opinions from visiting the US:

Last week, I walked into a Supermarket and one of the first things I saw (right by the door) was a carousel full of vouchers for music stores (many of which I had never heard of). If you want to buy music from one of these stores without a credit card, you can presumably buy these with cash and then spend it online.

On my last-but-one trip, I noticed that a lot of places were selling disposable credit cards. These could be paid for with cash and then used in any setting where a credit card would be required. They would work up until a fixed limit was reached, and were then thrown away. Again, I see no reason why people could not use these.

Not having a credit card seems like a very strange reason to give for people not using online music stores. I have several credit cards, and I don't use them because I find the DRM gets in the way. The music I do buy is on DRM-free CD from non-RIAA labels. If they want my custom back, they should remember the old maxim 'the customer is always right.'

Re:well then

[seanmeister]

The reason (at least for me) for getting MP3s 'illegally' is because I have such a varying taste of music and munch through it so quickly, it's not economically viable for me to buy the amount of albums I actually download just to try out an artist.

So, you want more than you can afford. Welcome to life, kiddo.

Re:well then

[NaugaHunter]

The reason (at least for me) for getting MP3s 'illegally' is because I have such a varying taste of music and munch through it so quickly, it's not economically viable for me to buy the amount of albums I actually download just to try out an artist.

I hear that, man. What I feel like driving changes from day to day. It's not economically viable for me to own every car model made so when I see a car I want to drive I just take it. If I like it enough maybe I'll buy it.

See how stupid that sounds? Throw in the fact that you can borrow music from libraries and you sound like a completely self-centered jerk with an entitlement complex. Everything else you purchase in life you get a brief chance to see if you'd like it - trying on clothes, looking at couches, test driving cars, buying books, house-hunting - why the hell would you be entitled to music before you pay for it?

If you want to argue music is too expensive that's a different argument entirely. I think Mustangs are too expensive; that doesn't mean I can just not pay if I want one.

Re:well then

[sm62704]

Arr! Avast, matey! Shiver me timbers!

Many teens don't think of legally downloading music as pirating music

Are you part of the pigopoly, or have you just been brainwashed by them? Stop calling a spade a "pointy shovel". It's copyright infringement, not "piracy".

Re:well then

[Mike89]

Throw in the fact that you can borrow music from libraries

Not here you can't.

Everything else you purchase in life you get a brief chance to see if you'd like it

Which is basically what I said I do. I download their albums, give them a brief chance to impress me. As I stated, I brought albums by artists who did manage to impress me. I go to live shows - I don't see what more you want from me? Perhaps I should buy every album that looks like it could be good, you know, Just in case it is.

Oh, and don't suggest I try things like 30 second previews. These are no where near enough to gauge a song. I suppose you're the type of person who pays for all his music, movies, games and software, yes?

Re:well then

[foniksonik]

Back to Mp3s

Typically the things in life you pay for are service and convenience. You want free music? Get together with your friends and make some. Learn the skills, build the equipment, work at the other jobs to pay for it all and start your own label. Then you have the option of giving it away or selling it or just enjoying it for yourselves. You can even set up a password protected web site with a streaming jukebox so all your friends can enjoy the music wherever they are. iPods will play your homegrown MP3s, most other players will as well.

OTOH if you are too busy doing other things you enjoy more or care about more and music is something you'd rather leave up to other people to create and distribute, then don't complain when they choose to sell it rather than give it away. And don't complain when their form of distribution doesn't let you enjoy their music any way you want to at your convenience. OR if they have provided a convenient means to enjoy their music... don't complain that it comes with other limitations and costs money to buy in to.

It is as if the whole world feels that an artist's music is automatically public domain and should be given away in the most convenient form possible.

BTW you can just put MP3s on your iPod... as long as you have regular old MP3s to put on there. iTunes may no longer rip MP3s (is that the case?) for you but there are plenty of alternatives that will do it perfectly, then just drag and drop them into iTunes and sync to the iPod.

I did enjoy reading your post though...

Re:well then

[sm62704]

It's like arguing that borrowing from a friend first results in lost sales.

It's like arguing that listening to the radio first results in lost

Re:well then

[sm62704]

Wow, I screwed that one up. Let me try again.

It's like arguing that listening to the radio first results in lost sales.

Note the GP put "illegally" in quotes, and it should be in quotes. In some countries downloading is illegal, but in most it's uploading that's illegal.

In fact, the US Congress (unwittingly?) legalized downloading with the No Electronic Thieft Act, which says it's illegal to download more than (iirc) $2k worth of stuff in a 6 month period. That's 2000 songe every six months. Set Limewire to not share downloaded files and you're legal.

The idea that someone lost a sale on a song you never had any intention of buying is ludicrous.

Re:well then

[ricree]

I hear that, man. What I feel like driving changes from day to day. It's not economically viable for me to own every car model made so when I see a car I want to drive I just take it. If I like it enough maybe I'll buy it.

If you could make a perfect copy of the car near instantly without depriving someone else of the original car, this wouldn't sound that silly at all. Whether or not you deprive someone else of use is a huge difference between the two.

Re:well then

[ZorinLynx]

This only happens if you configure your iPod to let iTunes manage it completely. It'll also ask before it wipes out anything on the iPod.

If you set the iPod to manually manage music, you can use it on as many computers as you wish without a problem. Heck, you can even copy DRMed iTunes tracks from a number of different authorized machines to it, and it'll play them all without a problem.

Please, stop circulating FUD just because you don't know how to use the software. :)

-Z

Re:well then

[sm62704]

Hey, RIAA shill, I just figured out why your albums suck so bad - you're all shoving piles of cocaine up your nose.

He was specifically talking about sound recording engineers who work for the record companies. Get that goddamned spoon out of your nose.

Re:well then

[sm62704]

I hear that, man. What I feel like driving changes from day to day. It's not economically viable for me to own every car model made so when I see a car I want to drive I just make a copy of it. If I like it enough maybe I'll buy it.

See how stupid that sounds? What's troubling is that in the future it may well be feasable; billions of nanorobots that can build nanorobots or anything else, and anyone can have anything they want (Star Trek replicators?).

It will end poverty. And you bastards will fight it tooth and nail.

Re:well then

[TheSHAD0W]

Actually, that's a brilliant suggestion. Even if a majority of the teens wind up defaulting on the debt, it would mean the RIAA would have some income, as opposed to zero when those teens grab the MP3s from friends or P2P networks instead.

Re:well then

[sm62704]

Now thankfully, when I was a teenager, illegally downloading music was just starting to become big, but it was something my dad was still doing too, so he didn't care.

Thanks for reminding me how damned old I am, kid. When I was a teenager there wasn't an internet, nor CDs. We would tape each others' albums; I had ten times as many hpme made tapes as I did actual albums.

And it was legal. The corporations had yet to completely buy out the world's governments like thay have since done.

Re:well then

[Anonymous Coward]

Heck, you can even copy DRMed iTunes tracks from a number of different authorized machines to it, and it'll play them all without a problem.

So I can legally buy music on more than one of my machines, and listen to all of it on the same iPod!?!? Wow, DRM is super!

The sad part is, they've actually convinced you that's a special feature.

Re:well then

[telekon]

I guess you've never heard of the dotcom boom. I know of plenty of engineers who worked 80 hour weeks for nearly no money with the promise of making massive amounts of money with the IPO.

Yeah, those poor bastards who put their heart and soul into 80 hours a week of audio mastering waiting for Capitol Records to go public...

Recording engineers, not 'software engineers,' you insensitive clod! Unless I missed the step in CD production that involves cubicle farms of overworked young Java programmers?

Re:well then

[ContractualObligatio]

What a wonderful self-justification. The artists that you've paid money to have been paid more than enough even when you've ripped off an album, and those to whom you've paid nothing weren't up to your arbitrary standards and don't deserve any money at all. If you like an artist, and they put in the effort and expense to record an album, but you only like some of it - fuck 'em, let's rip than one for free. Hey, I went to a gig, didn't I?

Presumably you're tight for cash if you've only paid out for three bands, otherwise you really don't like music much. Because 3 bands suggests a limited taste in music, not "such a varying" one. Or maybe you simply lack any respect for the effort it can take even to produce something people don't like e.g. you don't get a refund in a restaurant just because you didn't like the chef's style. Of course, if you want to encourage mainstream middle of the road shit, rather than have artists who feel free to take risks while still wanting to make a living out of music - go right ahead.

That's not downloading illegally because it's cool - it's downloading because it's free.

Re:well then

[spxero]

Do you have a link?

Re:well then

[Anonymous Coward]

I suspect the reason they don't buy the tunes is for the same reason that the rest of us don't, awful sound quality, awful DRM, and awful software interfaces.

You misspelled "we're cheapskates".

Re:well then

[RobertLTux]

the brackets i see are
not old enough to stand -- doesn't need a cc card can't express desire for "item"
to short to see over counter --- doesn't need cc card has to con "daddy'
just tall enough to see over counter ----- Time to start CHORES (assumes not a dancer or something) put the income on a debitcard/PPCC card
14-16 ------ serious JOB time paycheck gets dumped into a bank account (can you say "check card??)
18+ AOM ---- yahknow there is a reason you are getting travel stuff for your birthday
so in short why don't most kids have a CC card of some config??

Re:well then

[kimvette]

You responded selectively, ignoring how he uses download. Let's focus on the essence:

just to try out an artist.

There ya go. There is no current try-before-you-buy except Top40 rotations on pop stations, and they play only singles from a fixed rotation. DJs are a thing of the past, so how does one get exposed to new material?

My experience: during the days of Napster I downloaded RANDOM stuff (I'd download anything containing say, the letter "a"), listen to a bunch of it, then go out and buy the CDs I liked. I discovered I like jazz this way. During that 18 months or so, I bought more CDs than I did in the previous 13 years I owned CD players. I know my case isn't the same as everyone else's, but in my case the record companies made a few thousand dollars as a direct result of the existence of the then-free Napster P2P network. I quit running Napster (and quit buying CDs - since 2000 or 2001 I've bought maybe THREE CDs, TOTAL, from RIAA member labels and affiliates) when they started suing their own customer base, and quit exposing myself to new material as much as possible. I instead listen to classical, classic rock, or talk radio stations when driving, and avoid pop and "alternative" stations (the "alternative" stations play big-label-affiliate "fake" indepdendent label music).

Now I spend my entertainment on movies instead - on DVD - because the MPAA hasn't been quite as evil as the RIAA about the try-before-you-buy thing. I occasionally download movies (usually if I miss on cable) and buy the ones I like on DVD. I record a lot off cable, too, but movies I like I will go out and buy on DVD because I can avoid nasty digitable cable artifacts and get widescreen format for nearly every movie on DVD.

Re:well then

[ClamIAm]

I have noticed a trend since the 60s and 70s to make more "normal" things illegal

I think this time period is very key when thinking about America today. Many changes happened, both within "the system" and outside of it as well.

Institutionally, the Civil Rights Movement outlawed (in theory) discrimination based on race. The space program forced people to think about living on a tiny rock hurtling through the universe. Vietnam raised questions about the ethics of war and government. Student movements and the "New Left" created new political debate and questions.

Non-institutionally, lots of other stuff was happening. Women were becoming financially independent. The hippie and counterculture movements were questioning lots of things.

There was the sexual revolution. It challenged the traditional definitions of family and gender roles, as well as the latent Puritan morality of America. Effective birth control also forced people to think about the nature of sex and biology.

Other tradidtional views were challenged. The recreational use of drugs, freedom of speech, etc.

Oh, and Roe v. Wade.

----

In my opinion, a lot of these things scared the hell out of the establishment. Those in power often use things like religion, race, sex, nationalism, and "morality" to try and control the people. A lot of the movements going on during this period in America were challenging all these things.

Of course, they found allies in social conservatives. Most especially, "Christian" conservatives. People like Jerry Falwell and James Dobson. These folks have worked their entire lives to frame all of public debate as a battle between God-fearing Real Americans(tm) and godless, immoral commie liberal dogs.

Unfortunately, the noise these folks create drowns out much of anything resembling real debate, and we've all suffered as a result. Consider:

The Reagan Administration decided that they anti-trust laws weren't that important, and they would only enforce them if a corporation was gouging the consumer.

Reagan, both Bushes and Clinton all gave huge presents to the rich. Taxes were restructured so that corporations and rich people pay much less than they used to. This of course means either deficits or less funding for things, and less funding for the EPA is always good for people like Exxon. The estate tax is also old, we don't need that anymore. Oh and anything that supports "free trade" is awesome.

And of course then there's the "wars" on drugs and terrorism.

Anyway, I'll stop rambling now.

Re:well then

[nEJC76]

Are you afraid of google? ;)
http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/17-18red. htm or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NET_Act

Re:well then

[seanmeister]

You responded selectively, ignoring how he uses download. Let's focus on the essence:

just to try out an artist.

There ya go. There is no current try-before-you-buy except Top40 rotations on pop stations, and they play only singles from a fixed rotation. DJs are a thing of the past, so how does one get exposed to new material?

I do it via eMusic - for a reasonable price, I get n downloads per month, plus free stuff every day. All of it in MP3 format with no DRM. And there's no shortage of indie music freely available on the web - Salon's Audiofile is good for a daily fix, and Insound and Pitchfork have huge amounts of stuff up for grabs. Just the tip of the iceberg.

If there's something from a major label that I want, I either buy it or copy it from an actual, real-world friend who bought it, which IMO is fair use.

Re:well then

[Sj0]

How many high school students actually have a job? The number is likely lower than you'd think.

Regardless, I know that I made more on my first paycheque out of college than my best three paycheques working full-time beforehand. I just don't see how those margins can be all that impressive.

Re:well then

[Sj0]

Yeah, you've found me out. I've been on slashdot for seven years, built up 50 karma and a few thousand posts on hundreds of different topics, and gotten in more "downloaders vs. RIAA" debates than I can count, all as an evil scheme to get paid to mention dot-com engineers once.

Yeah, those Micheal Firth, Ratatoskr, game remix, and librivox MP3s, as well as the songs I've written and performed myself, I've got on my Nomad as part of my "I don't even bother downloading the music of those assholes because it means they've got my mindshare and even that contributes to suing little old ladies, welfare mothers, and dead people" boycott? Just a part of my complex and multi-faced lie, designed to make everyone in life and on-line think that I'm totally against the RIAA right before I toss off a one liner one time.

I'm not going to lie, I wasn't paying much attention, I just saw the statement that engineers don't blah blah blah, and fired off the first thing that came to mind. You're still pathetic for jumping to the conclusion that I'm a shill.

Re:well then

[Sj0]

Like I said to the other guy, I wasn't paying much attention. I just saw the "engineers don't..." thing, and replied with the first thing that came to mind. Saturdays are like that.

Re:well then

[dangitman]

Not here you can't.

Where's "there"? Practically every library system in the world loans music on CD. Are you saying there are no libraries or Universities where you live?

Oh, and don't suggest I try things like 30 second previews. These are no where near enough to gauge a song. I suppose you're the type of person who pays for all his music, movies, games and software, yes?

Well, go into a record store and listen to the album in their headphone listening suites. Listen to the radio. Listen to a firend's music collection.

Re:well then

[dangitman]

It will end poverty. And you bastards will fight it tooth and nail.

So, where do the resources come from, to make the replicated products. Where do we store all these products? The Earth has finite resources and space, you know.

I'd be pretty pissed off if my home became a wasteland because of some greedy consumer sending out his clouds of replicating nanorobots, trashing the environment I live in, so he could have another car.

The ability to easily make stuff will never end poverty or war.

Re:well then

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone commenting that it is technically possible for a teenager to possess a debit card tied to a checking account, or to schlep to the drugstore to buy an iTunes *gift*card and then go home and use it to buy a song online, miss the point. These are still obnoxious barriers.

Most teenagers don't have debit cards, and they aren't going to open an entire scary bank account just for the privilege of paying for something they can quickly and easily illegally download for free. And imagine the opposite of case b: you can't just drop into the drugstore on your way home from school to buy a candy bar, you have to use your computer to print out a voucher to take to the store first. Who would do it?

I used to browse in record stores for tapes and CDs. But these days, record stores are harder and harder to find, and they don't sell MP3s. It would be easy for Apple or somebody to make a kiosk like one of those Kodak digital photo printer booths you see in every drug store, that lets you listen to any song on iTunes, pay in cash and download directly onto your iPod.

iTunes Store is a lot better than what the industry had 5 years ago, but it still has to learn that you can't compete against illegal, free, convenient and open with legal, expensive, inconvenient and closed.

Re:well then

[sm62704]

That's true, but it's an artificial word loaded with meaningless emotional impact, and sticks in my craw. So's "pigopolist" but I'm not bringing a knife to a gunfight.

Don't get me started on the word "gay"...

Re:well then

[denali99755]

most of the libraries i've been to don't loan the kind of music that the 'average american listener' wants. i've seen a lot of jazz, 'world' music, and orchestral stuff, but you don't so much find the latest popular releases there. as far as thirty-second previews, i suppose that works for music that has a single verse and a single chorus repeated constantly, but what if you listen to music that actually has some sort of progression in it? what if (god forbid in this day and age) you actually think an artist can put out a whole album of good music, and that an album might even be greater than the sum of its parts? then again, if that's the kind of music you listen to, most of the albums you're downloading probably aren't released on RIAA labels anyway, so maybe it's less of an issue.

Re:well then

[hikerhat]

I know what you mean. I have such varied and eclectic taste in liquor that I have to knock over liquor store after liquor store, sampling bottle after bottle, until I find one I like. Then I pay for that one. I'm not some asshole, after all.

Re:well then

[Anonymous Coward]

"It is as if the whole world feels that an artist's music is automatically public domain and should be given away in the most convenient form possible."

unlike physical goods, a song CAN be distributed easily and freely and without restriction.

so fuck yeah, if you expect someone to PAY you for something they can just as easily get FREE, you better fucking well believe it's your responsibility to make it's easy to get. if the BETTER PRODUCT is free, I'll take it.

Re:well then

[Sapphon]

The alternative question is: Would they (The Living End) prefer that you not unlawfully download their music and then not go to their concerts (that you went to based on that act), or do they prefer people to download and come to their concerts because they're artists and really want to just be heard

(original post edited for clarity)

As someone who has spoken with "them" (The Living End) several times about this issue, let me give what I remember* as being their views.

The Living End are, as a rule, against piracy (aren't all bands?). However, they accept that it happens, and if it wins them a fan they're not really fussed. Personal anecdote: I burned some mates in Germany a few early TLE CDs, and at an instore signing pinched some more than I gave to friends. After both occasions I offered to reimburse the boys for their lost revenue, but they wouldn't let me do so much as buy them a beer.
What the guys are against is the folks who just pirate their stuff and leave it at that. If you pirate their albums, but come to the shows and buy the merch, they probably wouldn't mind. When I moderated an ftp server to share rare live and other unreleased TLE material, the rules were: nothing that's commercially available, and no bootleg versions of new songs until a few weeks after those songs have been released commerically. These were worked out with the band (through their management; they don't post much themselves), who gave us their implicit consent.

Look, your mileage will vary from band to band; The Living End just happen to be a terrific bunch of guys with the utmost respect for their fans, who may be able to shrug off a little piracy on account of their relative success (at least in Australia). I haven't raised that last point with Chris & Co, though, and I won't - I doubt they know enough details about revenues lost & such that they'd be able to give a proper answer.

*I unfortunatley cannot provide evidence because my information is a result of personal conversations or from posts on the band's forum, which was unfortunately haked a few months ago.

(Disclaimer: I use the same method to "trial before I buy" music that the GP does - download a CD, listen once or twice, and if I like enough (3 or more songs that grab me is my rule of thumb) stuff from them I'll buy the CD. Either way, I delete the CD after I listen: means I have to buy it to get the music I like, and gets rid of the crap that I'm not willing to pay for. Also, I happen to love the band the GP is talking about, so I'm a little biased 'cause he likes them *grins*)

Re:well then

[senatorpjt]

I usually try it in a bar, which proportionally for one drink is like downloading a one-time play DRMed song for a nickel. That's about my limit of what I would pay for a DRMed copy.

Re:well then

[dangitman]

most of the libraries i've been to don't loan the kind of music that the 'average american listener' wants.

Well, you aren't the orginal poster, yet you seem to assume that he is from America. What do you base that on?

Other than that, what you're saying is that, yes, libraries do loan music.

but you don't so much find the latest popular releases there.

There are plenty at the University libraries I frequent.

as far as thirty-second previews,

So, go listen to the whole thing at a record store.

what if (god forbid in this day and age) you actually think an artist can put out a whole album of good music, and that an album might even be greater than the sum of its parts?

Then I buy the whole album. Pretty obvious, really. But if I happen to like an individual song, but not the rest of the album, I have that option with downloaded music, too.

if that's the kind of music you listen to, most of the albums you're downloading probably aren't released on RIAA labels anyway, so maybe it's less of an issue.

The seems like a knee-jerk stereotype. Many artists on mainstream labels release whole albums of goodness. The RIAA labels don't just cover top-40 pop, they publish music across the whole spectrum. I'm not defending the RIAA, but get a grip on reality. Most artists want to be on a major label, whether the artist is brilliant or mediocre.

Re:well then

[Lesrahpem]

You might have a point there, but there is something else here which I think is being missed. One of the record industry's largest sales demographics is teenagers. This demographic wants to obtain their music in a format which is hard to obtain for people of their age. Rather than complaining that teens are stealing music and trying to scare them, how about making it easier for them to obtain mp3's?

I even have an idea along these lines. Nobody is confused by a vending machine. Vending machines in the right areas also make plenty of money, even if they sell something odd rather than candy or drinks. Why don't we have music vending machines? You put in some money, pick songs you want off iTunes or something like that, and then you plug in any standard USB removable hard drive (since that's what most mp3 players are), and the music is transferred over.

There are of course logisitics problems with how to get the music to the machines, but it's not really that big of a deal if these machines are put in malls, shopping centers, walmarts, and commercial music stores.

Re:well then

[ZzzzSleep]

Quoth foniksonik

iTunes may no longer rip MP3s (is that the case?)

Errr... Just checked it then. When I put a CD in the drive it brought up a dialog asking if I wanted to import the songs. You can also select the songs on the CD in iTunes and choose "convert to mp3" from a right click menu.
So they may have removed the big "Rip this" button, but it's still fairly easy to rip MP3s.
ZzzzSleep.

Re:well then

[Teqila]

As a teen I download music from p2p networks because it's free. I hate steryotypical generalizations such as "they do it because it's illegal and that makes it cool".

Re:well then

[cloricus]

So how's your pirate camp? ;)

Re:well then

[cloricus]

I'll use the living end as an example of how I justify 'copyright infringement' to myself as they fit well. I know I'm stealing, I know I can't afford any where near the enoguh of music I enjoy listening too (as I like everything excluding opera and country) even if I could buy it online easily - note I'd go out of my way to support a drm free high quality mp3/ogg service if one existed - and I know I do my best to support my favourite groups. The living end is one of those bands...When I was young I grabbed their self titled and loved every track though unfortunately (like now) I had little money due to schooling (and now uni) so I downloaded the rest of their gear. Over time I've collected every one of their cds when I've seen them on special around the place and I've had the cash plus I've been to several concerts when they come by.

So really I do as much as I think I should to morally justify it to myself - they aren't losing sales because I buy what I'm able too - so in reality the thing I'm stealing is an unfair use of their content.

It is my opinion that if I continue to do this sort of thing that I am at least going some ways towards fixing the moral divide created by using their content unfairly. And it's nice to see the living end kind of respect that...Hopefully butterfingers are the same. :P

Re:well then

[Randseed]

You misspelled "we're cheapskates".

Oh, so you know of a service where I can get an assortment of music I want, playable on whatever software I want, in MP3 or OGG format, and which I can transfer between devices that I legitimately use? All I've seen is DRM-laden crap which requires some proprietary software, a list of "blessed" operating systems, and which use proprietary formats. Add to that the fact that I can legally make a recording off the radio, make an MP3 out of it for my own use, and put it on my devices, and the entire point becomes moot to anyone but the RIAA apologists.

Re:well then

[shark72]

"There ya go. There is no current try-before-you-buy except Top40 rotations on pop stations, and they play only singles from a fixed rotation. DJs are a thing of the past, so how does one get exposed to new material?"

If somebody wants to use P2P as a "try before you buy" mechanism, then that's fine with me, but they are pulling your leg if they tell you that they have no choice but to use P2P.

Like you, I enjoy a wide range of musical styles, and my current taste is a constantly moving target. My collection of music grows rapidly, is hugely varied, and I rarely make a bad purchase. How do I do it, without using P2P?

• I listen to XM. They have channels dedicated to all sorts of stuff, and while some channels do indeed emulate the terrestrial radio style of fixed playlists and tight rotations, many do not. XM's streaming service sounds better (to my ears, anyway) than the uplink, so I put on the headphones while I code, and change stations quite often. When I hear something that I think is worth buying, I get it on the iTMS. If it's not worth buying, I don't buy it -- but I don't P2P it, either.
• Speaking of iTMS... they offer dozens of radio stations (it's the bottom link in the first section on the left column) which have a wide variety of eclectic musical styles, much like satellite radio. And, the iTMS will let you hear a 30 second sample of any song. If I'm wondering whether to buy the album, and risk falling prey to the "only one good song" monster, I read reviews from other iTMS users.

As I stated above, I have rarely made a purchase I've regretted.

Nobody is forced to use P2P. "Try before you buy" is a reason to use P2P, but it does not make it a necessity.

Re:well then

[Guitarhero1000]

I completely agree with you. It's gotten to the point where there is no middle class anymore. And if people don't wake up and smell the roses, We'll be like peasants to the king once again. That's Why if I ever talk to someone who is "Bitching" about the way things are. I ask them if they vote. If not, I tell 'em to shut up and that their opinion don't matter. Good article.

Re:well then

[Tiiba]

I thought the dirty word is stealing. He said piracy. The only kinds of piracy I know are copyright infringement and robbing ships.

Re:well then

[UnderDark]

Ahrg, I be goin' matey

Re:well then

[iamacat]

There is no current try-before-you-buy except Top40 rotations on pop stations

Where do you live? In SF Bay Area there are Hear Music shops with a bunch of headphones that can be used to listen to every song of every CD they sell. If you are using Windows, there are a plenty of cheap streaming services that you can use to sample music, although you have my sympathies otherwise. If you like something, you can always buy a used CD from Amazon and import into MP3/ogg.

Re:well then

[jamar0303]

That, or he can come to China- where even legit CDs are cheaper than in other countries (60RMB for a CD+DVD set that costs 3000yen in Japan- Love Cook by Ai Otsuka). That's why I think that iTunes refuses to open in China- everyone's so used to getting cheap stuff that Apple would get no profit off of iTunes if they tried it here (that or sales would be 0).

Re:well then

[The Lawnmower]

How is that not funny?

Re:well then

[jamar0303]

Fine- what about foreign music (especially J-Pop)? Before I came to China I could not find any shop that stocked non-American music. Maybe you can find some of the really popular albums, but lots of others don't make it outside Asia at all (except for online import shops, but that's not "try before you buy" now is it?) through official channels. I don't like being "illegal" which is why I bought the CDs of the stuff I downloaded when I was able to (legit, not the pirated stuff) in China. Video is another matter- nearly impossible to find J-Drama for sale on DVD in the US.

Re:well then

[chawly]

I have teenagers at home and, clearly, you are absolutely correct. My only thought (as tears of laughter roll down my face) is that the RIAA should not be allowed to discriminate - what's good for teenagers is good for pre-teens also. Clearly though, we must set limits. I suggest that the RIAA give their first credit card when the child reaches the age of five. (To prevent the said child from eating the new card, of course).

Re:well then

[chawly]

Suggest you remeber that not everybody has visited Montana. The lack of donkeys and young camels is not immediately obvious. I got a laugh this Sunday morning though

Re:well then

[redcane]

Aside from the potential "russian mob" ties, there is that site, allofmp3.com.

Re:well then

[redcane]

You should do what I do, rock over to a friend who always has a well stocked bar, make a *perfect digital copy* of all his liquor, put it on my usb key, and sample it at home over the next few weeks. Pretty good since I don't have to deprive my friend of his bar stocks.

Re:well then

[Wakko Warner]

You honestly think kids go around at school bragging to their friends about how many MP3s they downloaded the night before, simply to score "cool points"?

What the HELL, man?? Go back and reread what you wrote. Kids aren't retards.

Re:well then

[Anonymous Coward]

>Please, stop circulating FUD just because you don't know how to use the software.

You know, if /. geeks can't figure out how to use the software, maybe it just isn't well designed...

Re:well then

[Randseed]

The RIAA and friends don't get profits off of allofmp3.com. Therefore, it's just as illegitimate, but it's more convenient.

Re:well then

[ClamIAm]

Voting is good, but it's not the only thing you can do. Personally, I think that starting or being involved in a non-profit or civic organization is at least as effective as writing letters to your elected representitives. Of course, there's probably other stuff you can do, too.

The key component though is to actually do something.

Re:well then

[x2A]

If you're a sheep.

Re:well then

[bit01]

That's not downloading illegally because it's cool - it's downloading because it's free.

No, it's downloading because it's sensible.

---

Creating simple artificial scarcity with copyright and patents on things that can be copied billions of times at minimal cost is a fundamentally stupid economic idea.

Re:well then

[emilper]

try www.magnatunes.com ... you won't find Britney Spears there, though ...

Re:well then

[Some_Llama]

"Set Limewire to not share downloaded files and you're legal."

This is what I do, and setup my friends and family to do, it's leeching but I don't feel bad for doing it.

If I like songs i'll pay for them to own a CD, or visit the artist when they come to town. If I was actually stealing something physically or taking something instead of paying for it (meaning i would have paid for it but stole it instead) then maybe I would feel bad..

I do the same thing for games.. I downloaded COD2 the other day, I liked it.. not 40 bucks liked it but for 30 or less I will buy the game because I liked it that much.

This is a new era, and with digital information being bascially free to copy and produce copies, I feel no remorse sharing this data or "downloading" it as I know it isn't really depriving the company of a sale from me. If I couldn't have downloaded it I certianly wouldn't have bought it.

Those that produce something worth having get my money. For the cost to produce software/digital music I feel things are way over priced as it is right now...

DRM

[BerkeleyDude]

I don't buy MP3s because there's no freaking way to just buy the files - not stream them, not download DRMed crap, but just buy the plain old MP3s.

Rhapsody? iTunes? Can't do that.

Only independent websites (e.g. magnatune.com) have the decency to give you something worth paying money for.

Re:DRM

[reub2000]

Try eMusic. I *heart* their merge records and matador collection.

Re:DRM

[bartron]

because there's no freaking way to just buy the files
Where I buy all of my mp3's from I can do jsut that....DRM free ;)
Bartron

Re:DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

or eMusic?

Re:DRM

[eatmadust]

allofmp3.com ... but the RIAA doesn't like them very much either! -- splayground@dodgeit.com

Re:DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

All of my mp3's are belong to us.

Re:DRM

[LordEd]

hey, are you trying to imply something by placing some of your word's letters in bold? Or am i just reading extra meaning from your odd message colouring?

Re:DRM

[TheRaven64]

Allofmp3.com pay artists at the same rate as radio stations; something to the order of $1 per thousand listeners (which means a thousand downloads in their case). And that's only if the artists actually claim the fees, which is likely to cost more to do than they will receive. While it may be legal, and certainly is convenient, it doesn't address the key problem:

I want to be able to download music, in a format of my choice, at a reasonable price, and have the artists compensated adequately.

This is a real problem for our society, and it extends beyond music. Did you know that someone who puts an amazon link to a book on their site receives a greater share of the sale price than the author? Which do you think contributed more to society? Napoleon described the British as a nation of shopkeepers. Two centuries later, his comment could be applied to much of western civilisation. Advertisers and sellers are worth more than creators. Just look at the darling of Wall Street, Google. The only product they sell is advertising.

Re:DRM

[soliptic]

The electronic music world is much more progressive, so if that's your taste, you're in luck. For example:

• bleep.com
• beatport.com
• trackitdown.net/

All sell you drm-free 320 kbps mp3.

Re:DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I think I was buying all of my mp3s from the same place, but for some reason they aren't taking Visa right now. :-(

Re:DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

Except that's just as illegal as downloading the mp3s from anywhere else. Just because you're paying for pirated copies (no royalties paid means it's pirated) doesn't make it any better.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for an economical supplier of high quality non-drm music files (mp3 for preferences, but I'll take AAC), but piracy isn't the best way to convince the labels that it's a good idea.

Re:DRM

[ZorinLynx]

allofmp3 is nice, but the idiots don't accept MasterCard. Only VISA, which I don't have. And I'm not getting another credit card just so I can buy MP3s.

What the heck kind of payment processor doesn't do both Visa and Mastercard? I bet they're losing a non-zero amount of business due to this stupidity.

-Z

Re:DRM

[linuxci]

What the heck kind of payment processor doesn't do both Visa and Mastercard? I bet they're losing a non-zero amount of business due to this stupidity.

No amex either :)

It seems odd that it's like that on allofmp3. Perhaps in Russia MC has higher fees that Visa. Most countries though seem to lump Visa and MC together so there's no real difference what card you have, they're both accepted equally.

In the UK, a retailer who wants to start accepting cards usually is offered the following:

• Debit cards only - Maestro (Switch), Visa Debit (Delta), Solo, Electron. These are the cheapest to accept
• Credit + Debit cards - as above + Visa and MC

Then the merchant is free to add Amex and other more expensive to process cards to their system should they choose. I try to use Amex when possible because their rewards are better but I do understand why merchants may not want to accept it.

Re:DRM

[linuxci]

We'll have to wait for artists to realise they can do better off by bypassing the RIAA before we see that thing happening.

In general people will pay for something that they like, they're only going to avoid paying for something if the price makes it worth the hassle to get something for free, so yes not everyone would pay for music if it was not DRM encumbered (but those people don't pay now anyway) but those who could afford it would pay for it if three conditions are met:

1. They know a fair share supports the artist
2. Available in an unrestricted format that by default just about any player supports such as MP3 (so average user will know it PlaysForSure(TM)) and preferably an option for people who know what they're doing to download in another format (at least offer a lossless option)
3. They're able to pay for it - the topic of this discussion

People will pay for convenience if the price is right (otherwise people wouldn't use allofmp3.com when you could get it free elsewhere), and the three points above would convince people that paying for songs was the right thing to do.

However, these days you're not paying for convenience, you're paying for extra hassle. Buy a track online from a 'legal' store - DRM ridden, may not PlayForSure(TM) on your brand of player. Buy a legal DVD be treated to a bit you can't fast forward through telling you why piracy is bad. But Genuine Windows (TM) and have to put up with activation, in all these cases the bootleg copies are less hassle.

Firefox is an excellent example of something that is given away free but can make money out of its supporters. They got hundreds of thousands of dollars donations from users to run an ad in the New York Times, they get regular donations from supporters - no one forced people to donate but because they appreciated the software they were willing to. So why wouldn't the same people be willing to pay to download music from their favourite artists if they knew that the money would be going to them.

Re:DRM

[SnotBob]

because there's no freaking way to just buy the files

I discovered the coolest thing a while back. There's these stores that sell these little round shiny things that come in clear plastic boxes with a little book inside that has all the song lyrics and pictures of the bands. Then I put the round thing into my computer's cup holder and iTunes makes mp3's out of all the songs. And when you're done you can throw them at your coworkers. I don't know if they sell them where you live but I know you can buy them in some of the larger cities like where I live.

Re:DRM

[rdoger6424]

It's most likely an unfortunately acquired habit. A fairly exotic one at that.

Re:DRM

[ndixon]

SWMBO bought some tracks from Tesco Downloads (just another branded reselling of the 24/7 MusicShop service) and found that:

• about half of the tracks couldn't be burned to CD because of an Unknown Error from WMP10.
• one of those tracks, after being downloaded a second time, could be burned to CD
• 2 of the others, after a second download, still wouldn't burn to CD (Unknown Error again)
• DRM only allowed 2 downloads of each file; I would have liked to try downloading the tracks again until I got a good burnable copy, but that wasn't an option.

I ended up downloading hooky copies of those tracks via Gnutella2 - no DRM, and burning to CD worked flawlessly.

So it turns out that illegal P2P music downloads work, legal music downloads don't, and the simplest way to get music on a CD is to... er... buy the CD.

More productive research

[Seiruu]

IMO, much more interesting to know is who

1. Wouldn't buy them anyway if they couldn't have gotten them through illegal means (IMO the majority)
   
2. Would buy them anyway after getting them through illegal means (somewhat split with the third option)
   
3. Wouldn't buy them after getting them through illegal means
   

Re:More productive research

[Lorkki]

You forgot to add one variable, the artist. I've seen lots of people buy music they first downloaded for free, but unfortunately (for record companies) it tends to require more from the artist than just one hit song.

Re:More productive research

[helfom]

Exactly! Studies always seem to suggest that every song downloded illegally is a lost sale, which just isn't true. That is why figures of billions of dollars lost is completely bogus. There are many more variables that I think studies are flat out ignoring. Many people would not buy stuff even if it cost a penny. Many people just want exposure to things that they can't get at any store, and paying to take that risk is too much. Sometimes exposure due to illegal methods leads to discovery and increased sales for that area of interest. There is a large, multi-faceted dynamic taking place and I think any study would be hard pressed to take everything into account. Just remember, not everything is simply black and white.

Re:More productive research

[nine-times]

Wouldn't buy them anyway if they couldn't have gotten them through illegal means (IMO the majority)

Yeah... This is just anecdotal, but a lot of the people I know who download movies and music illegally are just digital packrats. They might listen to the songs a couple times or watch a movie once or twice, but I've even known people who will download things and never watch it or listen to it. It's just a compulsive behavior to accrue a "library", which they want to be complete as possible, even though it's not used for anything. These people, as far as I can tell, are bored and willing to spend hours on this little hobby, but aren't really willing to spend the sort of money necessary, so you get someone with a hundred downloaded movies and a thousand downloaded CDs worth of music. Maybe this person would have bought a few things that they downloaded instead, but for all the downloads, the record/movie companies probably haven't lost more than $100 in sales.

The people I've known who aren't this sort of packrat are usually very casual about the whole thing. They've ended up with a few hundred illegal songs over the past 5 years or so, but not really purposefully. The process is more like, they want to listen to a song, and they want to hear it right then. If it were on the radio or MTV or something, they'd just listen to it, but since it's not, they take 20 minutes to find it online and download it. They listen to it a couple times, after which they might very well forget about it and never listen to it again, but they just don't bother to delete it in case they might want to download it again. I myself am kind of like that, but I download it from iTunes in that case. For me, the 99 cents is worth paying if it cuts those 20 minutes of searching and downloading to a 30 second search and 1 minute download. I don't like the DRM, but I'm not trying to accrue a library as much as listen to a couple things when and where I want to, and convenience outweighs pretty much everything else.

Re:More productive research

[nine-times]

Or here's another thought: Why don't we put the money spent on this research on another purpose altogether? Maybe we should throw it into a thinktank that can come up with new ways for society to fund the arts, so that we don't have to worry about piracy anymore. Or we could skip all that and give the money to the artists straight-out. I wonder, if the record companies stopped researching piracy and stopped paying lawyers to sue their customers, would the savings be sufficient to give their poor artists a little extra money?

Re:More productive research

[Mana Mana]

> IMO, much more interesting to know is who

      1. Wouldn't buy them anyway if they couldn't have gotten them through illegal means (IMO the majority)
      2. Would buy them anyway after getting them through illegal means (somewhat split with the third option)
      3. Wouldn't buy them after getting them through illegal means

What?! I can't not misunderstand you not.

And I am a native English speaker.

Re:More productive research

[tatersalad]

You forgot to add one variable, the artist. I've seen lots of people buy music they first downloaded for free, but unfortunately (for record companies) it tends to require more from the artist than just one hit song.

Exactly. I have downloaded a fair amount of music. Usually I don't go for a full discography of an artist/band, but instead download one album. If I like that album enough, I'll go buy the band's other albums. Had I not downloaded the illegal copy in the first place, I would never have bought any of the band's music. Specific examples I can think of are Underoath, Wu-Tang Clan (and subsequently the solo albums of the members of the Wu), and The Number Twelve Looks Like You. That's three groups that would have not gotten my money had I not pirated some of their music.

Re:More productive research

[mackyrae]

Don't forget those who download a couple songs from an artist that ARE NOT singles (singles can be misleading--one good song on a crappy album) to get a feel for the artist then go buy their cd. That's my use for downloading. MySpace's music player means I've slowed down on this though. I can just listen from their page and see if I want to go buy their cd. Still, if you like it, buy the cd. If you don't, don't download more from them.

Re:More productive research

[nine-times]

Do they really count an album for every song downloaded? It seems like the most they could account for in lost profits per song is the amount they make from selling on iTunes. (80 cents or so?)

Debit Cards

[jjeffrey]

OK Credit Cards aren't available to under 18's but in the UK at least you can get a debit card from as young as 13 - a lot of kids have them and they work on iTunes here.

Not the same in the US?

Re:Debit Cards

[jjeffrey]

Oops sorry slip of the tongue - I do know the difference between the US and Canada - apart from anything else the US would never get in to the Commonwealth :-)

Re:Debit Cards

[DarthChris]

How many American sites accept, say, Switch? How many UK sites accept US debit cards, for that matter? When I first bought a game off Steam, I had to wait for the bank to give me a Mastercard.
(Yes, I know you can get e.g. Visa debit cards.)

Re:Debit Cards

[jjeffrey]

iTunes is effectively a different site in each country though, accepting the local methods of payment. For example in the EU, Maestro/Switch.

Re:Debit Cards

[Anonymous Coward]

And on the iTMS you can buy Pre-Paid cards from Tescos/Sainbury's/Asda, you can set up an allowance funded by your parents' credit card or can recieve a non-physical gift over the internet. There are plenty of ways that an under 18 can access legal music, the reason they don't is because 79p is worth a lot more to a 13 year old than it is to a 24.

Re:Debit Cards

[Pc_Madness]

Indeed, the prepaid cards for iTunes are everywhere, so its not so much an excuse of not being able too cos of a lack of a credit card.. but more the fact that most teens that age don't have money, and if they do, why would you want to spend what little you have on something everyone else is getting for free? I know I got funny looks when I announced I bought some songs from iTunes (and regret it since cos of all the hassle the DRM has caused me).

Re:Debit Cards

[Overzeetop]

Yeah, but there's no dynamic allocation of resources with iTunes Cards. If you have a credit/debit card, you can buy 2 songs from itunes and the rest of your money is still allocatable for other things. Once you buy an iTunes card its good only for iTunes.

Besides, I don't buy the whole "no credit card" thing, unless they really mean that they can't overspend and run up huge debt by buying more than they can afford. Debit cards (aka Visa Check Cards) are given out like candy at all the banks I know.

Re:Debit Cards

[b4jts]

But then again on the other side, there are alot of countries where having a credit card is a pretty rare sight independant of age, simply because there's little use for them.

Re:Debit Cards

[KingOfBLASH]

It's the same in the US. I think the bigger issue is money? Why would a kid spend money (a very limited resource for kids) on something they could get for free?

Re:Debit Cards

[jrmcferren]

Yes, even FYE (For Your Entertainment) sells iTunes cards.

Re:Debit Cards

[SimonInOz]

No, absolutely not.

We're not letting them in until they pay the tax on that tea ...

Re:Debit Cards

[Anonymous Coward]

iTunes is effectively a different site in each country though, accepting the local methods of payment. For example in the EU, Maestro/Switch.

A side-effect of that is that the music selection is different. There is a lot of music I would buy from iTunes, but it is only available on the UK site. (Presumably my account is tied to my credit card address.)

Re:Debit Cards

[nxtw]

I've seen the cards for as low as $15. Not very much at all, if you ask me.

Re:Debit Cards

[lwells-au]

I just checked on the Australian iTunes Store* and the options listed are Visa, Mastercard or American Express. No debit card option that I can see. I would also point out that whilst teens don't have credit cards because they can't, I would estimate a reasonable percentage in their late teens and early-20s also don't either because they have no great need or don't trust themselves not to get themselves in to debt (like me!).

Just as in the UK and US, iTunes Store cards are easily available in Australia (in Coles supermarkets no less). There are two problems I see with the cards though:
1) You can't just pay for the songs you want as you basically are buying store credit. Cards are available in A$20, $50 and $100 which makes perfect sense as a gift, but if one only have a small amount of disposable income (as most teenagers do) the idea of having to expend what s/he might consider a reasonably large amount in one go to buy the couple of songs s/he wants is probably less appealing than the individual song purchase system available to credit card holders.

2) Having to buy a "music card" takes away from the immediacy of a purchase. One has to get off one's backside and go and get a card. Why wouldn't I just go to the record store and buy a CD single (or album) instead (particularly given point 1) since the effort is about the same?

Basically I think it makes the barriers just high enough that even those within the teen demographic that would go to the effort of purchasing the music if they had a credit card, are more likely to opt for the illegal download because they can have it Right Now and not have to worry about expending a large (in their eyes) amount of capital.

Two quick provisos: I'm not endorsing this behaviour and excusing copyright infringement, and I certainly don't believe that every teenager -- even if they did have access to a credit card or the above two issues were not evident -- would purchase music rather than illegally download it (but that holds for all ages, to varying degrees).

Re:Debit Cards

[rizzo420]

i believe in order to even use the itunes card, you have to register on the music store with a credit card. i prefer not to buy from itunes for obvious reason (DRM), but i do regularly "buy" their free downloads. it required me to put in a credit card for that.

Re:Debit Cards

[LordLucless]

Most debit cards I know of (ones issued by St. George, IMB, ANZ) use the VISA network. I believe Commonwealth Bank debit cards use the Mastercard network. Anything that accepts payments by VISA/Mastercard can accept payments by these cards. It functions exactly the same as a credit transaction, except it debits your account instead of extending your credit.

Re:Debit Cards

[Terranaut]

a US debit card functions as a Credit card outside of the US & a UK debit card works perfectly as a credit outside of the United Kingdom.

I know, I use my Barclays Connect (Delta) card for many purchases online, & my wife has used her US bank's ATM card at UK sites.

P.S. I am living in the US.

Re:Debit Cards

[nikkiana]

Most debit cards in the US are through some major credit card company so they work fine... However, many American teens (particularly the 13 to 16 demographic) don't have debit cards either.

Re:Debit Cards

[lwells-au]

I know that a number of banks offer a "Visa debit"-style card, but as far as I am aware its usually not the default debit card, which are typically just Plus or Maestro/Cirrus style ATM cards. Furthermore, the enhanced debit cards aren't (AFAIK) available to those under 18 and sometimes not available on the basic savings accounts that younger individuals are likely to hold . Regardless, I should have noted this in my original post :)

Of course some banks, like the NAB (my bank), don't even offer this style of card, instead preferring to push such "innovations" are Visa Mini *sigh*. Must get around to switching to a different bank...

Re:Debit Cards

[Anonymous Coward]

Not true. Debit cards use EFTPOS, rather than credit facilities, hence require a PIN to be entered. They cannot be used as credit cards unless specifically issued as one ie. VISA/MasterCard debit cards.

Re:Debit Cards

[dthree]

That was what I was thinking. It wouldn't matter that much if the did have a mechanism for buying because they often don't have money anyway. When I was a teen, we traded tapes with our friends because we couldn't always afford albums/CDs.

Re:Debit Cards

[Lumpy]

You are forgetting something.. what did you do with your friends at that age???

traded tapes of your music. I recorded many of tape,LP and then CD later when I was 18 and they showed up on the scene. well out of highschool and into college.

mp3 trading is 100% identical to trading tapes of your music. and is only getting attention because the RIAA has a bug up their butt and it's easier to share that mp3 with 60,000 of your friends.

I dont care if a kid has a $100 a week allowance, he/she will still trade mp3's and download. it's what all kids have been doing for decades. nothing new, nothing has changed but the transport.

Re:Debit Cards

[flight_master]

I'm old enough to buy my own music now, but I used to just use my parent's CC to pay for music from iTMS, and then transfer the money back to it (online banking, I've had a chequing account since I was 10, and I'm in Canada :D)

Re:Debit Cards

[blincoln]

How many UK sites accept US debit cards, for that matter?

In America, we don't have a Switch/Interacc type of debit card. Anything issued by a bank is Visa or Mastercard branded. I thought it was completely bizarre when I lived in Canada for three years and they'd done it the other way. I couldn't figure out why anyone would think it was a good idea to introduce a new, incompatible card type.

So, to answer your question, any UK site accepts my debit card, because to them it looks like I'm using a Mastercard credit card.

Re:Debit Cards

[TheRaven64]

I thought it was completely bizarre when I lived in Canada for three years and they'd done it the other way. I couldn't figure out why anyone would think it was a good idea to introduce a new, incompatible card type.

In the UK, the reason is historical. In the '70s, there were three credit card suppliers; Access, Mastercard and Visa. Visas were only issued by Barclays (Barclaycard and Visa were synonymous when I was growing up). Mastercard was predominantly a US brand, and was quite uncommon. Access has since been bought be Mastercard, and so they are more common.

Most banks didn't issue debit cards at all. They would give you a cash-card, which you could use to withdraw money from a machine and (optionally) a credit card. The Switch brand was created by a group of UK banks to avoid paying fees to a third party for issuing debit cards. Barclays, already a Visa issuer, issued Visa Delta cards under the band of 'Barclays Connect,' as a replacement for cheques which were still common at the time.

These days, there is still a distinction between cards issued by banks (which are tied to a bank account) and credit cards, which are often issued by a third party. My credit card, for example, is provided by Egg, with whom I do not have a current account. For minors, Visa Electron and Solo cards are common. These are similar to normal debit cards, but perform a balance enquiry prior to authorising payment, so you can not go overdrawn using one (minors can not enter into contracts placing them in debt in the UK).

Re:Debit Cards

[j-pimp]

The States that make up the original 13 colonies could join the common wealth. France is techincalyl elgible to join as The Crown has declared itself ruler of France for years, even though they never properly managed to kick its ass. Granted it would be unconstitutional to do so, but the 15 states that make up the original 13 colonies could jsut Seceed from the union.

Re:Debit Cards

[blincoln]

Interesting. Thank you for elaborating on that.

These days, there is still a distinction between cards issued by banks (which are tied to a bank account) and credit cards, which are often issued by a third party. My credit card, for example, is provided by Egg, with whom I do not have a current account.

It's the same in the US (actually, most of what you said is true here as well), it's just that debit cards are branded the same way as credit cards instead of having a separate system like Switch or the Canadian Interacc. For example, I have two credit cards (one Visa, one Mastercard), and one debit card (Mastercard). The credit cards are not from my bank.

I assume that the banks were able to work out a deal with Visa/MC where the fees would be low enough that it would outweigh the cost of implementing a competing system. On the Visa/MC side, I'm sure they now collect a LOT of merchant fees that - while smaller than a credit card fee - add up to a large amount of income that they wouldn't see if people were using cash or checks instead.

Re:Debit Cards

[sm62704]

Why would a kid spend money (a very limited resource for kids) on something they could get for free?

Because they don't know the value of money. Some adults don't, either. Ever seen someone buy bottled water? A bottle of the same stuff that falls out of the sky for free and out of your tap for a negligible cost people are willing to pay more for than gasoline!

Re:Debit Cards

[sm62704]

Not true. My ATM card is not a credit card, but I can use it as one (even though the machine asks TWICE at the checkout if you tell it credit; use it as credit and they pay the fee, use it as debit and you pay).

In th eUS at least, nost ATM xards are like this.

I can also use both my credit cards as debit cards to get (expensive) cash out of an ATM.

Re:Debit Cards

[Mr2001]

In America, we don't have a Switch/Interacc type of debit card. Anything issued by a bank is Visa or Mastercard branded.

Actually, we do... your debit or credit cards probably have logos on the back like Star, Plus, Cirrus, Instant Cash, Interlink, etc. Those are debit networks, and when you use your debit card at a store and they give you the option to enter your PIN instead of signing, they're trying to get you to use those networks instead of the Visa/MC network (which charges higher fees). Before the Visa check card was introduced, that was the only way to pay electronically from your bank account.

Re:Debit Cards

[TheRaven64]

In the UK it's more or less the same now. My debit card has a Visa logo on it. Switch is now part of Maestro, which is half-owned by Mastercard, and so caries a logo that looks like the MC one, but with different colours.

Re:Debit Cards

[dangitman]

No, you can register for iTunes with the code on a gift certificate or prepaid card.

Re:Debit Cards

[Pc_Madness]

Actually, I tried to get a Debit card a while back and got rejected cos I didn't earn enough. :confused:

Re:Debit Cards

[Overzeetop]

I was refering to the Visa Check Card version. You get one with just about any checking account around me unless you specifically deny it. I had to specifically request _not_ to get one on my checking account in favor of a standard ATM card.

Re:Debit Cards

[Pc_Madness]

How many teenagers have checking accounts? :blink:

Re:Debit Cards

[Anonymous Coward]

You essentially described a VISA/MasterCard debit card, which is what I was talking about.
Anyway, we were talking about Australia. Here, unless you sign up for one of these debit-credit cards, you receive a regular EFTPOS-only card.

Oh, and no bank will give you a VISA/MasterCard debit in your own name unless you're over eighteen, which obviously makes that method of payment for 'legit MP3s' useless for teens.

thts a reality....

[Anonymous Coward]

thts a reality....
http://www.newskicks.com/

I'm sure someone can help them out...

[Von Helmet]

... Someone in a call center, perhaps.

Maybe tens simply lack the money?

[Swizec]

Just look at the average teenager, mummy bought them a snazzy new mp3 player and gives them perhaps some allowance each month which is usually spent on fags and alco. Asking for more money to go and buy music usually doesn't work but parents are already paying for broadband anyway. The next logical step? Get music for free.

It's really that simple imho.

Re:Maybe tens simply lack the money?

[williamstome]

The average teenager doesn't randomly get things bought for them by their parents. That's what the "fag and alco" money is for. Responsible parents make their kids learn the value of money by making them save.

Re:Maybe tens simply lack the money?

[satoshi1]

I don't know if you've noticed or not, but parents these days are not at all responsible. Well, most, anyway. There are good ones out there, but they're hard to come across.

Re:Maybe tens simply lack the money?

[Matt Edd]

Insightful? You must either be younger and have no idea what parents where like a generation ago or older and have forgoten what parents where like a generation ago. I bet every generation thinks the previous generation's parents where so much better.

Re:Maybe tens simply lack the money?

[Gilmoure]

That reminds me, my daughter's 6th birthday party is tomorrow and I need to pick up a case of beer. Kids like Miller, right?

Re:Maybe tens simply lack the money?

[drtomaso]

Be a good parent, and get her a cake- one big enough for the stripper to hide inside.

Re:Maybe tens simply lack the money?

[gangien]

really? or do you just not hear about 99.9% of the parents who aren't idiots? i'm sure they're not perfect (mine probably weren't) but not idiots.

Re:Maybe tens simply lack the money?

[sm62704]

From Frederick Lewis Allen's informal history of the 1920s Only Yesterday:

A FIRST-CLASS REVOLT AGAINST THE accepted American order was certainly taking place during those early years of the Post-war Decade, but it was one with which Nikolai Lenin had nothing whatever to do. The shock troops of the rebellion were not alien agitators, but the sons and daughters of well-to-do American families, who knew little about Bolshevism and cared distinctly less, and their defiance was expressed not in obscure radical publications or in soap-box speeches, but right across the family breakfast table into the horrified ears of conservative fathers and mothers. Men and women were still shivering at the Red Menace when they awoke to the no less alarming Problem of the Younger Generation, and realized that if the constitution were not in danger, the moral code of the country certainly was.

Parents' fault, I guess. I remember seeing a quote somewhere from one of the ancient Greeks decrying youth, but I can't find a citation.

They don't buy MP3 files because nobody sells them

[TERdON]

I'm not at all surprised that teens don't buy MP3s. Almost no one sells them! iTunes sells AAC tunes, so that doesn't count, and almost all others use WMA. The only exception I can think of allofmp3.ru and indie record companies which only cater to a niche market...

It explains ring tones at least

[LiquidCoooled]

They can pay with mobile phone credit.

iTunes gift cards

[Rik Sweeney]

In the UK there are quite a few places you can buy iTunes Gift Cards / Vouchers (Tesco, Sainsbury, Argos). Coca-Cola are doing a promotion at the moment where you get a free download from iTunes with each bottle bought. Of course this is limited to 3 per household and you also need to like Coca-Cola*

You also need to have an iPod and iTunes.

*This isn't strictly true as you could buy the bottle for the voucher and give away the drink, or not drink it at all

Re:iTunes gift cards

[Anonymous Coward]

Thing is, don't bottles of Coke cost about 80/90p (standard price)? Someone elsewhere mentioned the relative importance of 79p which I assume is the cost of a track (never used iTMS), so if you weren't already going to buy the Coke it's actually more expensive? Admittedly it's a nice bonus for Coke fans, but are kids just wasting their money on false economy and unhealthy drinks? No wonder there's all this furore about Britain's kids becoming more obese on average etc...

Re:iTunes gift cards

[fermion]

Not only that, but for the few non-iPod kids parents can purchase a subscription service. Parent can also set up allowances on iTunes.

This is really not about lack of funds, but about limited funds and opportunity costs. Listening to the average kid, they want all the music that is popular. However, there is not enough money to buy all the popular music, and making choices is not so easy at an early age. To solve this, the kids buy copied music for $4 instead of legit music for $12. $12 represent too much of an opportunity cost, not only limiting the music choices, but also other consumables, of which music is only one of many.

What credit cards do is push back the opportunity cost a few years for a fee. You can buy all the music you want now, pay only the minimum payment, and not have to make sacrifices immediately. OTOH, by this logic, the report could read kids don't buy music because they have no house equity, and if parent would only share any equity they have in the family house, then kids would not have to steal music.

Re:iTunes gift cards

[YetAnotherStupidComp]

It's five per iTunes account, actually.

Re:iTunes gift cards

[sm62704]

Admittedly it's a nice bonus for Coke fans, but are kids just wasting their money on false economy and unhealthy drinks?

As opposed to that health food drink "tea"? They're both flavored water with added sugar, the only real difference is cola is carbonated. Last I heard, CO2 has no calories, fat, salt, carbohydrates, or cholesterol.

Re:iTunes gift cards

[dangitman]

No, Coca Cola is sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup, not real sugar. But more to the point, who puts that much sugar in their tea? That's not even counting the artificial colorings, and other chemicals added to sodas - especially the "diet" ones with their augar substitutes. Many people don't even add sugar to their tea. Those that do, tend to add just a little. Coke is more like sugar with added water than "sweetened water."

Re:iTunes gift cards

[Phroggy]

No, Coca Cola is sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup, not real sugar.

Is this also true in the UK? I know it is here in the US (mostly due to corn subsidies and sugar tariffs, I believe), but when I was in Europe a decade ago Coke was made with sugar (and sold in 33cL steel cans, slightly smaller than our 12floz aluminum cans).

Oh, so it was the kids

[merryXIV]

Yeah, they don't have credit cards. And they don't make any money either, to "refill". RIIA's problems will all go away as soon as kids of 13 to 17 will be able to work in Apple's factories for $50/month, so they can help fatten shareholders.

I disagree

[Propagandhi]

I had a debit card when I was 15-18 so I could have bought music off the web had I chosen to and had the option been available. The real problem is that teens don't have that much cash. All my money was going into my ball and chain at the time (otherwise known as D&D), the ability to pirate music was there so I did it. Pirated music was a lot better than no music at all.

Re:I disagree

[lumkichi]

For the fortunate ones that have a bank account when they were very young that might have worked. The fact is there are a lot of teens who don't have bank accounts until they go to college. They simply don't need it -- their life is cash. And as far as I know, anyone can buy an iTunes card at Walgreens or CVS. But teens without credit cards cannot use them in iTunes program until it is validated -- the validation process requires a credit card before the stupid system will give them access to the credits that they paid for. The message is clear: Don't pirate software, but you can't buy our mp3's because you don't have a credit card. So you'd better go somewhere else or steal a credit card number from your parents. Stupid iTunes...

Re:I disagree

[jellomizer]

For your case that is a bad (Really Bad, So bad it makes me angry) excuse to illegally download music. Saying I do not have enough money form of entertainment because I spend to much money in an other form of entertainment, so I have to steal the first form. There is a thing in life called "budgeting" it is a concept that most Americans fail to grasp.
The first step to this "budgeting" is to realize what You need to live Food, Shelter, Heat, Water, these things you always need to make sure you have enough money for, as you are probably a bratty teenybopper, who thinks they are a supper smart hacker type, I will assume that Mommy and Daddy give that to you. The next thing to budget for are for things that will allow you work with society, Taxes, Cloths, culturally relevant Communication tools, transportation, and education. still Mommy and Daddy are still flipping the bill for most of these. Finally the rest of the junk you can buy with your spare money because you really don't need it. Now if you want some junk more then other junk. Then you have a choice how much of Junk A you need vs. Junk B. So fyou example you can buy a book for $30.00 that tells you all about different attributes of Dragons xor (xor is a computer science term meaning "exclusive or" meaning one or the other but not both) 30 songs off of iTunes, or you can balance the approach and get the old version of the book for $15.00 and get 15 songs off of iTunes. But saying I need to steal music because I spent all my money on D&D is no excuse and I hope the RIAA sues your ass.
There are other reasons for illegally downloading music some I agree with and others I respectfully disagree with, but yours is wrong and stupid.

Re:I disagree

[unapersson]

The industry always wants to have it both ways though. They want to create this desire to have the hottest new things they are producing at the time. While pushing this desire at a group that doesn't necessarily have the resources to buy what they're demanding they "must have". So this whole sharing situation is a natural result of that marketing.

They want teens to buy CDs, DVDs and games by getting hold of as much of their part time job or parents money as possible. That's why the losses to piracy figures are so laughable, they're claiming loss of money that just isn't there. It's the money budgeted for luxuries that has already been absorbed by another one of their arms.

Re:I disagree

[eepok]

Watch your vocabulary friend. He said nothing about his reason being an excuse, so get off your holier-than-thou rant and read the post for what it said.

Summary: I believe teens just don't have enough money to entertain themselves in all the ways they'd prefer. Music is easy to get for free, so they pirate.

Was there a request for validation or suggestion that his reasoning was just? No. Ok, so back off.

Re:I disagree

[Anonymous Coward]

Then you have a choice how much of Junk A you need vs. Junk B. So fyou example you can buy a book for $30.00 that tells you all about different attributes of Dragons xor (xor is a computer science term meaning "exclusive or" meaning one or the other but not both) 30 songs off of iTunes, or you can balance the approach and get the old version of the book for $15.00 and get 15 songs off of iTunes.

Please mod the parent post -1, Pedantic imbecile

Re:I disagree

[It'sYerMam]

You probably disagree that it's a good excuse because it isn't an excuse at all - it's a reason. It doesn't have to justify pirating, but it is one cause of it, so we can understand it.

Re:I disagree

[prichardson]

I can just imagine someone using that argument, "Sorry, I had to pirate the music; all the marketing made me want it so bad. It's society's fault."

I guess that really doesn't fly with me. Yes, I do think that marketing is definitely high-pressure, but that doesn't mean absolve people of personal responsibility. I'd much rather people stand up and say "I pirate music because I don't want to pay for it" than to try and pass the blame on to society.

Yes the piracy losses figures are a joke, but that doesn't mean piracy isn't an issue. Certainly some sales have been lost, even if some sales may have been gained. In many ways it's the fault of the record companies. We used to be under the illusion that buying a CD supported the artist, but with that gone it's hard for a lot of people to feel bad about pirating music. Even worse, given the behavior of some record companies, to buy a CD from them could be considered wrong or dangerous (I'm looking at you SONY).

Re:I disagree

[Anonymous Coward]

All my money was going into my ball and chain at the time (otherwise known as D&D)
 
Because a girlfriend was obviously out of the question.

Re:I disagree

[Anonymous Coward]

who thinks they are a supper smart hacker type

xor (xor is a computer science term meaning "exclusive or" meaning one or the other but not both)

Uhhhh....

Re:I disagree

[jb.hl.com]

An excuse is just a reason given for doing something wrong.

Re:I disagree

[ronocdh]

Yes, it is very good to expound the virtues of budgeting, especially (I think) to young Americans. However, you must understand that the concept of budgeting is innately obscured when the ownership of an item not well defined. I'm sure you believe that the artist or the record company holds exclusive ownership of a CD, as that's what it says on the paper documents those parties've hard arranged. The problem is, digital content is infinitely duplicable!

If you purchase a car, and it's sitting in your driveway, I would have a very hard time convincing myself that it is also mine. If, however, you zap that car with a ray gun, making an exact copy of it, and offer it to me, it becomes more difficult for me to resist believing I can own it, too, as it is an item separate from yours (though identical in likeness). The fact that you bought it means it's yours, and the fact that you then offered me something derived of it implies that I may take it without informing the builder of the car, because you own the car--you aren't just "leasing" it; you gave money and need never give the car back.

Another example, addressing your budgeting argument: Johnny likes to cook, but he also likes to decorate his house with flowers. If he spends all his money on food to practice his cooking, then he won't have any left to buy flowers from the florist. Perhaps, though, just out his window, in his neighbor's lawn, is a garden full of gorgeous flowers. His neighbor bought the seeds from the florist and tended them until they grew into many pretty specimens. Perhaps Johnny could lean out the window and dig up just one flower, to plant in his own yard, waiting for it to be properly pollinated and then reproduce into his own lush garden. The likelihood of this "perpetration" (as I suspect you'd call it) increases proportionally with the neighbor's acquiescence to Johnny's plundering.

This means that in order for this to stop, one shouldn't be scolding Johnny, but the neighbor, for not respecting the florist's hegemony in dispensing the ability to culture plants.

Music is a cultural force, and the people, not the corporations, own culture. I am not defending ripping off artists, but I am suggesting that you examine your notion of "ownership" of intellectual property. There was a time when it was a magnificent compliment to have one's ideas reproduced in another's work (think classical Greece), and don't act like monetary gain was the motive. Perhaps the difficulty we're having now is that the bands making music today are doing it for entertainment rather than for artistic purposes. The internet is here, and social networking hasn't been, perhaps never can be, documented in its fullest extent; the record companies are no longer necessary. I want to experience music in the social environment of the internet, then electronically send money directly to those who created it. This means that I could download Britney Spears if I wanted, but you know what? I wouldn't pay for it. That awesome obscure metal band, though, that I think understands all I love about heavy metal? I could PayPal them $50, a hell of a lot more than they'd get from a regular CD purchase. Money should be used only to support what one wants to see more of, at least when it comes to art. Record companies fear the transition to such an economic model, but they know that people wouldn't shell out the big bucks for cookie cutter bands and trashy entertainment. Integrity would rule, and the record companies can't capitalize on that, because they work on exploiting the current economic system, that demands money before experiencing the art.

Also, if you don't believe people would spend money like this, zero dollars for some things, and fifty for others, then you haven't found an artist you truly love, and that's sad.

Re:I disagree

[sm62704]

You know, you can discuss an issue or argue. The GP is discussing, you're arguing. His point is NO MONEY IS LOST. He's not arguing that downloading's not wrong (although I have argued such), he's arguing that you are either stupid or disingenuous.

We're talking about kids here, you can't expect them to act like responsible adults because THEY'RE NOT.

Re:I disagree

[sm62704]

Most likely. We ARE talking with a D&D playing slashdot nerd here.

Re:I disagree

[kaidadragonfly]

You didn't have a radio?

Re:I disagree

[prichardson]

parent: "We're talking about kids here, you can't expect them to act like responsible adults because THEY'RE NOT."

We still hold children and teens responsible for their actions. As soon as children are allowed to speak they are disciplined (mildly) for their wrongdoings. Teenagers suffer more consequences for misdeeds: expulsion from school and juvenile justice. Just because we don't consider people under eighteen responsible enough for some things (like voting, owning property, etc) doesn't mean that they can't be (and more to the point, aren't) held responsible for their actions.

Also, you brought up argument versus discussion. You [the parent post] seem to have missed some of the subtleties of both my and unapersson's posts. Unapersson presented a thought for discussion:

"The industry always wants to have it both ways though. They want to create this desire to have the hottest new things they are producing at the time. While pushing this desire at a group that doesn't necessarily have the resources to buy what they're demanding they "must have". So this whole sharing situation is a natural result of that marketing."

For the purposes of further discussion, I turned that into a possible justification for piracy. From there I made my point about personal responsibility, which I have partly elaborated on for your benefit in this post. After that I tossed in a few of my ideas about reasons for pirating music that seemed more apt.

Finally, in your penultimate sentence you accuse unapersson of arguing that "you are [I am] either stupid or disingenuous". Unapersson made a point, but said nothing about people who hold different views. I didn't get that idea from that post anywhere.

Re:I disagree

[It'sYerMam]

That may be how it's used, but the name does actually give it away - an actual excuse excuses you from your action. For example, if you don't hand your homework in, then a reason would be because you forgot. An excuse would be because your dog ate it.

I don't buy MP3s because...

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no fucking point. If the cops ever stop at my house, I'm screwed anyway: I copy CSS protected DVDs (illegal), I listen to copyprotected CDs on my MP3 player (illegal), I have and know how to use Wireshark (formerly known as Ethereal, soon to be illegal where I live), I encrypt my data (my own data, not illegal but encryption means I'll never get my hardware back). I might as well go all the way. That's what legislators need to get through their thick heads: If you make normal behaviour illegal, you produce criminals. Not only do you hang a sword over the head of good citizens, you also cause more illegal behaviour. If people don't have a fighting chance to be law abiding citizens, then they stop caring about the saner parts of the law as well.

Re:I don't buy MP3s because...

[dballanc]

That's what legislators need to get through their thick heads: If you make normal behaviour illegal, you produce criminals.

The point of law is to produce criminals. The people in power (mainly corps and special interest groups) could care less about what people want and the current definition of normal behavior. What they really care about is creating the future definition of normal behavior.

Legislators are simply shepherds herding the masses or shepherd dogs doing the work for someone else. They take away you freedom a little at a time, until you have no choice but to go with the flow or be trampled. You can go your own way for a while, but once the herd is taken care of they'll come for the stragglers.

Re:I don't buy MP3s because...

[isorox]

I have and know how to use Wireshark (formerly known as Ethereal, soon to be illegal where I live)

Where's that?

Re:I don't buy MP3s because...

[Oligonicella]

Right, stealing was made illegal by the government. Thou shall not... Laws are codifications of things people want. Prohibition was driven by people and codified. Later, people decided it was a bad idea and 'decodified' it. Do the same for copyright, drinking, or whatever else you don't like. If you're in the minority opinion and the law truly doesn't abridge your civil rights. Oh well, be a criminal. Just don't whine when caught.

Re:I don't buy MP3s because...

[Anonymous Coward]

Germany. (Wireshark is in a gray area, but Nmap will certainly be illegal to have.)

Re:I don't buy MP3s because...

[transporter_ii]

"Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against - then you'll know that this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We're after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you'd better get wise to it. There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens' What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."

- Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

Re:I don't buy MP3s because...

[Anonymous Coward]

In all discussions about copyright I haven't talked to a single person yet who thought it's ok that you aren't allowed to make MP3 copies of your CDs for your MP3 player. Not a single person thought it was ok that you aren't allowed to watch a DVD that you rightfully own on a Linux system. Copyright law does not codify the will of the people.

Re:I don't buy MP3s because...

[LordLucless]

"To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt."
        - E. C. Stanton

Re:I don't buy MP3s because...

[jimicus]

know how to use Wireshark (formerly known as Ethereal, soon to be illegal where I live)

Really? Where's that - I need to knock it off the list of "places I might like to live"?

Re:I don't buy MP3s because...

[dptalia]

"The more laws and order are made prominent, the more thieves and robbers there will be." -- Lao Tsu

Re:I don't buy MP3s because...

[kfg]

. . .people don't have a fighting chance to be law abiding citizens. . .

Where on Earth did you get the idea that we want you to be law abiding citizens?

KFG

Re:I don't buy MP3s because...

[Anonymous Coward]

Gah. Slashdot should just make a script to autopost this on every mp3 / copyright / DVD / etc story to circumvent karma-whore slashbots such as yourself. Not that the quote doesn't raise an interesting point, but :

i)IT ALSO DID SO THE PREVIOUS 4 MILLION TIMES IT WAS POSTED
ii)Most slashbots would violently disagree with the rest of Rand's philosophy (completely unchecked megacorp power etc) so the irony of them constantly posting this is annoying.

Re:I don't buy MP3s because...

[drcagn]

Sometimes people, sometimes large corporations with fat pockets.

Do you really think that if you polled everyone in America they'd vote that downloading copyrighted music off the internet should be illegal? Hell no.

Re:I don't buy MP3s because...

[Anonymous Coward]

>Most slashbots would violently disagree with the rest of Rand's philosophy (completely unchecked megacorp power etc) so the irony of them constantly posting this is annoying.

So highways are therefore wrong, as they were one of Hitler's "gifts" to the people of Germany before the war?

Yes, I invoke Godwin, because, well, your argument is incredibly idiotic. I really don't care if I "lose" because you've already lost it.

Re:I don't buy MP3s because...

[sm62704]

Right, stealing was made illegal by the government. Thou shall not...

You don't think the ancient Hebrews had government? Yes, it was a theocracy but so what?

I'm also curious why you used "steal" rather than "commit adultery" or "have no other gods before me".

Laws are codifications of things people want.

Yes, in a monarchy the people are the kings and their families, not the rest of the populace.

Prohibition was driven by people and codified.

That's what the history books say (at least the one I read about the period), but my grandma was there, live and in person. She said the women jawboned it into law while the men were all in Europe fighting the Kaiser. "People" think copyrights should last two or three lifetimes- a few thousand media moguls and their bought and paid for congress, as opposed to the 300000000 other Americans.

I'm sure the British populace would, if put to a vote, repeal their stupid TV tax.

"The people" as in "all of us" as opposed to "a few of us" went away long before I was born, if it ever in fact existed.

Oh yes, the problem of paying.

[WWWWolf]

Sure, I'd buy a lot of stuff online. If only paying for the stuff wasn't such a great big pain.

Why is it that international banking is such a great big headache? When the money or goods - virtual or not - cross the borders, everyone seems to be grabbing part of it, if not the governments then the people who transfer it?

Why isn't there a simple, universal, reliable, regulated method for transferring money internationally, no matter how big or small sum? A simple service you'd get automatically when you open a bank account, anywhere, in any bank in the world?

Because people go for the "it works for me" kind of approach. To American companies, credit card "works for me". As long as there's a stopgap measure that covers 85% of who they consider their market segment at the time, there's no problem. They just happen to ignore the tons of people who silently mutter "well, I'd love to get this, but I can't".

Sure, I'd love to buy music. I'd love to buy tons of music. I use Linux and have a (non-Visa-logo) Visa Electron. No iTunes for me? Well, looks like I'm still sticking to ocremix.org and remix.kwed.org for my music needs, then, it's not like other people are producing much music worth listening to anyway.

There used to be some sort of non-DRM MP3 store that had grand total of two songs available and required SMS messages as payment. That rocked. Yay. Too bad they never went past the pilot phase. Would have been the perfect model.

Think of Google. They went for the "long tail" thing - index every nook and cranny of the web, make web advertising easy for small sites, both as advertisers and as advertising space sellers, and make life easy for advertisement viewers too. Then think of search engines of 1996. Small indexes, tons of big-name advertisers, ludicruously priced annoying ads, "let's just focus on the big sites because that's where the money is". That didn't go too far, now did it? And where's Google now?

(Not saying Google Money Transfer would be a particularly good idea - PayPal is a private company and has a lot of problems not found in banks. Not saying Google should necessarily go to the music store business either. =)

Re:Oh yes, the problem of paying.

[jellomizer]

Sure, I'd love to buy music. I'd love to buy tons of music. I use Linux and have a (non-Visa-logo) Visa Electron. No iTunes for me? Well, looks like I'm still sticking to ocremix.org and remix.kwed.org for my music needs, then, it's not like other people are producing much music worth listening to anyway.
Perhaps you work on getting the Linux and Open Source community more open to the concept of allowing DRM, and not making it as evil the Devil. Because God forbid people actually making money off their labor, and how dare they try to protect their work! The Linux and OSS Community is great at screwing them selves over.

Re:Oh yes, the problem of paying.

[WWWWolf]

Perhaps you work on getting the Linux and Open Source community more open to the concept of allowing DRM, and not making it as evil the Devil. Because God forbid people actually making money off their labor, and how dare they try to protect their work! The Linux and OSS Community is great at screwing them selves over.

I guess this has been explained tons of times already, but here goes: Random Linux users probably don't care if there's DRM or not. Random Windows or OS X users probably don't care if there's DRM or not. I don't personally mind if iTunes would run on Linux with the exact same restrictions it has on Windows or OS X.

It's just that trying to fit DRM in existing open source projects is extremely problematic because everyone wants transparency. Current DRM depends on secrets. It depends on technology that wants things to be secret, all the while Linux folks are all about openness and interoperability.

Open source folks are more than happy to implement your DRM if you have a completely open specification. If you can't release the specification because it depends on a "secret" part and releasing it would undermine the whole thing, then it's a crappy attempt at DRM that will be undermined by l33t Hax0rz one day anyway, so why bother.

And as for myself, nobody needs to copy-protect things they sell to me. I won't copy them. Honest. The only P2P client I have at hand is Azureus, and that's for legit downloads only. I buy books and computer and video games and DVDs - not that much music, because CDs are overpriced and I have a radio too - and none get copied around. At worst I lend the stuff to my friends and family, and at that time I can't use them myself. So if you're a content provider, I have to ask, what is this DRM thing actually helping you for, anyway? What's the point of "protecting" the files, if I'm not copying them around anyway? (Don't say "you could" - stick to the facts. Don't say "someone else could" - stick to my case.)

Re:Oh yes, the problem of paying.

[Elbows]

Open source folks are more than happy to implement your DRM if you have a completely open specification. If you can't release the specification because it depends on a "secret" part and releasing it would undermine the whole thing, then it's a crappy attempt at DRM that will be undermined by l33t Hax0rz one day anyway, so why bother.

The reason there's no open-source DRM software is not because the content companies are short-sighted or too dumb to make "good" DRM algorithms. It's because open-source DRM is flat-out impossible. When you distribute software that can play DRM files, it has to include
a) the decryption algorithm
b) the decryption keys

When you open-source that software, you've just given away everything. Anyone can tweak the software to output non-encrypted files, or take the keys and write their own. DRM only works if the software is closed-source.

Re:Oh yes, the problem of paying.

[electronerdz]

Most of the people who really push/develop DRM (Microsoft, Apple, RIAA) DON"T have problems making money. Before or after DRM.

Re:Oh yes, the problem of paying.

[sm62704]

DRM isn't just evil, it's stupid. Nerds don't usually put up with stupid. As long as there is an internet DRM will never ever work. All DRM does is inconvinience the paying customer, not the commercial "pirate". Nerds know this, I wish you RIAA employees would learn it.

DRM on a compressed music file is especially imbecilic because all it takes to break is a CD player and a patch cord, and one person to have figured that out. Right now I'm listening to an MP3 I made from a CD that I copied from a cassette that I'd copied from another cassette, and it sounds exactly like it would have had I repurchased the cassette in CD form and ripped form it, and likely better than an AAC I could buy from iTunes.

The parent said, plain and simple, that DRM is causing the music industry to lose business - his. You industry cokesniffers are NOT going to convince anyone with a 3 digit IQ that DRM is acceptable any more than you'll convince them that fire is cold and water is dry.

DRM is not making you a single sale; not one. It has beeen shown to you that it is costing you sales, yet you still insist on your fantasy. If you would stop the DRM nonsense (and produce a better product at a less unfair price) your sales would increase dramatically.

You're pitiful. I'd cry for your industry's stupidity if it weren't for its lack of ethics and morals. As it is, I'm rooting for it to die (especially Sony!) so a better system can take hold.

Re:Oh yes, the problem of paying.

[sm62704]

open-source DRM is flat-out impossible

So is closed source DRM, with music at least. There isn't a CD out there that can't be ripped, or a WMA that can't be resampled.

Re:Oh yes, the problem of paying.

[dangitman]

DRM isn't just evil, it's stupid. Nerds don't usually put up with stupid.

So, how do you explain things like Star Trek: Enterprise or Microsoft Windows? Both very popular among nerds. Heck, have you seen fan fiction written by nerds? Sheesh.

Re:Oh yes, the problem of paying.

[WWWWolf]

It's because open-source DRM is flat-out impossible. When you distribute software that can play DRM files, it has to include
a) the decryption algorithm
b) the decryption keys

And the reason closed-source DRM is flat-out impossible, right now, is that they're doing exactly that thing now in closed source circles. The decryption key is exchanged somewhere. The decryption algorithm just happens to be buried in assembly code. All the while DRM companies are saying "well, it stops most people. We're hoping it stops all people. Well, we're marketing it as if it stops all people, and when people ask, we just say it stops most people."

It's not that open source DRM is impossible. It's just that effective DRM of any kind is impossible, what exists is ridiculously difficult to implement, and broken six ways every weekend.

Security through obscurity doesn't make the system work any more secure, just a tiny bit harder to break. The security plan has to depend on the presumption that the enemy knows how your system works.

A somewhat working analogy: If you have a bank, you don't want your guard work schedules and patrol routes to fall into the hands of criminals in any case. But in the unlikely event they do fall in wrong hands, what do you rather want them to find out: a) the schedule reveals that without a doubt there's 3-hour period every day where the vault is completely unguarded, or b) the schedules reveals without a doubt that there's six guards in every frigging room all the time and no one can get past them?

iTunes & MP3s?

[Aceticon]

I'm not sure I agree with some of the conclusions here (you can buy iTunes cards at Walgreens), but it's an interesting discussion.

iTunes is selling MP3s? Since when? Last i heard they where only selling DRM encumbered stuff (which is the reason i personally haven't bought anything from iTunes ... and i do own an iPod).

Re:iTunes & MP3s?

[williamstome]

also in order to buy stuff off itunes you have to use itunes. Which means you have to like itunes. Which is not a very great program for listening to music currently. WinAmp FTW!!!

Re:iTunes & MP3s?

[Anonymous Coward]

very true, but you'll get modded down by the people who go "oh, iTunes DRM is fair...". I'm now taking the stance of "fuck them, they'll lose everything they've paid for, good job it "just works"!"

Lack of CC ownership... I don't think so

[RulerOf]

I believe it has something to do with value.

I have bought music from iTunes. Once. After buring one CD (I don't have an iPod) and then reformatting and not being allowed to redownload the files (which is bullshit. I paid for them.), I haven't done it since. In that time, I've discovered that I only really like maybe one or two of the songs I purchased, and my total ran me over $25. $25 to listen to TWO songs occasionally? There's something wrong with that.

Most of the stuff that comes out tends to be crap. It is enjoyable to listen to and then a month later you never want to hear the song again. That's not a worthwhile investment. In fact, it's a waste of money. Top it off with DRM and you run into the realization that you can't even give away something you consider to be worthless, and piracy starts to looks pretty attractive.

Since my iTunes blunder, the CD I burned is scratched to all hell now, I've downloaded a few albums and after finding some I enjoy, I've actually bought the CD. Granted, if I was a teenager, I probably wouldn't... seeing as how I wouldn't have a job and all... I'd probably rather go buy overpriced clothes or something.

Re:Lack of CC ownership... I don't think so

[cplater]

First off, Apple has changed thier policy, and will not allow you at least one redownload of content after a catastrophe. It amazes me that people assume this function is there in the first place. When you buy a CD, and then you loose it / scratch it /etc., do you expect the record shop from where you purchased to replace it? Why do you think iTunes constantly reminds you to backup your content? It's your responsibility to manage your data, not Apple. As far as buying music you don't like, the same thing happens w/ CDs these days. This is one of the reasons that iTunes has a place. You can buy just the one song you're interested in, and skip the rest of the CD if you don't like it.
It seem the bigger problem is with the music industry today, and the crap that's out there these days. I couldn't agree more. Hopefully iTunes, et. al. will force the record companies to rethink their stratagies, and stop pushing out crap. IMNSHO they have yet to realize that the problem with the music industry is that the current artists are putting out crappy records which is the reason for the decreases in sales.

Re:Lack of CC ownership... I don't think so

[cliffski]

So you dont love every single song on every album you bought. how is this different in the digital age? I'm sure that albums had hits and duds for as long as albums have existed. Yet these days you keep hearing again and again "all albums have one hit song, and the rest is filler. its a con. therefore I pirate music".
This sounds like a flimsy excuse to me.
Nobody is forcing you to buy whole albums, buy the singles you like, or borrow a friends CD to see if you like it. Besides, music is pretty cheap. I dont understand why people think its fine to spend £10 on a meal that satsifies them for maybe 6 hours, but if they spend that £10 on music / games / software / anything digital, they expect to get enjoyment out of it for thirty years. So you bought an album you dont listen to as much as when you first bought it. Big deal. I think 99.9% of the planet can say the same.

Re:Lack of CC ownership... I don't think so

[Overzeetop]

Actually, the old B&M store Mothers would replace damaged/worn out/broken tapes, essentially free of charge. But that was the exception. Audible, one of the first large online vendors for digital audio (spoken, of course) will let you retrieve your audio from the library you've bought in the past.

If you "license" content from iTunes, you're not buying a physical product. You bought a licence, and you should damned well expect that that license - unless othewise stated - is perpetual. There is no media to replace. I could see a minimal bandwidth charge for re-download ($0.01-0.02) if you want to be a pita about it, but an iTunes song and a CD are entirely different items.

I'm with you on the limited "good" tracks thing, though it's not exclusively a modern phenominon. There have always been better and worse tracks on most albums. Not every song is a "hit," and not every song an artist creates is going to stike a particular listenesrs fancy. The great thing about iTunes, et. al., is that you can purchase the tracks you like. Me? Oh, no. I screen most of my music (what little new music I actually listen to) by checking it out on usenet or from allofmp3. Good albums get purchased in CD form and ripped to FLAC. Lousy ones languish on my hard drive until I decide I need more room.

Oddly enough, I rarely download movies - I usually buy them in DVD form. Every year or so I cull the ones I don't like by selling them on ebay or amazon. The difference is that a new DVD, on sale, is usually under $15, often obtainable for $10-12 or less on the used market in good condition, and holds a $7-10 resale value (say $5-7 net after transaction fees). Any given disc might "cost" me $2-5 to "rent" indefinitely. Contrast that with new CDs, and you're forking over more cash (initial cost is higher and resale is generally abyssmal) for shorter playtime. I have yet to figure out why the soundtrack to a movie can cost more than the movie itself. Here's an example: Amazon has X-men 3 for $13.99 on DVD, the soundtrack is also $13.99. Resale prices on the soundtrack are $2 lower than the movie. The original x-men movie is $9.99, but the soundtrack is $18.98.

(Disclaimer: I'm not a teenager)

Re:Lack of CC ownership... I don't think so

[mce]

Applying your own reasoning to your own example: I have CDs that I bought 15 years ago and they still work. My parents have vinyl records that they bought 40 years ago (and even a few that are over 60 years old) and they still work. Nevertheless, we only payed your symbolical £10 for each of them. So there's nothing new or "digital" to the idea of buying once and expecting to get enjoyment for many years.

Having said that, there's no reason why things should not be allowed to change. Today's technology allows us to do and expect things that were impossible when I was a teen. Must I therefor consider these things bad? Allow society to evolve, for $DEITY's sake!

Re:Lack of CC ownership... I don't think so

[ben there...]

First off, Apple has changed thier policy, and will not allow you at least one redownload of content after a catastrophe. It amazes me that people assume this function is there in the first place.

OK, where is it then? Do you have to click "Buy" again?

They don't make it obvious.

Re:Lack of CC ownership... I don't think so

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry... I have to disagree with you. Yes, it is your responsibility to back up you data. HOWEVER, when was the last time YOU lost 1,000 CD's in the blink of an eye? Nothing short of a house fire, natural disaster, etc would wipe out a collection of plastic discs in a matter of minutes. An iPod or a computer can do that to the equivalent amount of digital music with little to no warning. A system that can store that much music on a device that can fall in the toliet, drop and break, get stolen, get wet and die, etc with no option to redownload music already purchased is retarded. How many times have you had to repair a virus infected PC by formatting and reinstalling windows? Or any other windows problem that resulted in lost data at best, or a format at worst? Are you suggesting people need to have an additional 30-80gig storage device sitting around just to back up a $300+ iPod? And how would you suggest that work? Can you have your iTunes music on more than one device at a time? Last I knew that was a "no". Maybe they've changed that, but I don't see an products out there to backup the iPod. Strange... Maybe that option doesn't exist?

For me, the cd's I purchased stay in their cases in a carry case. Away from kids, pets, friends and scratches. They're all ripped to MP3s and get burned to disc for use in the car and truck. Even with my music backed up I have lost tracks due to hard drive errors from power outages and windows errors. The difference is with my non-drm collection I can do whatever I want with it to back it up or put it on other devices.

I can also do a search and re-download the missing items.

Re:Lack of CC ownership... I don't think so

[blugu64]

"(Disclaimer: I'm not a teenager)"

In the best of slashdot tradition I think you ment "IANAT"

Re:Lack of CC ownership... I don't think so

[Anonymous Coward]

You aren't buying a physical product. You're buying a perpetual licence to use the content. You aren't paying for the media.

Compare to buying computer games on Steam, as it's a closer analogy than buying CDs. I've bought a number of games on there, and I can delete them and redownload as often as I like. The licence terms specify that I will have this ability in perpetuity (essentially as long as they're still selling games on Steam, the older ones will still be available).

They even allow you to download the games if you never bought them on Steam! If you enter the CD key of any of the old games from Valve, you can download and install the game, even if the original CD is scratched or lost. Plus, you can install and play the games on as many computers as you like, anywhere in the world, the only restriction is just one at a time.

This doesn't seem to cost them much money, so why shouldn't Apple offer the same service? iTMS would sell a lot more copies if people had the ability to log in to iTunes on any computer and have access to their entire collection of music.

Oh, and it's "lose", not "loose".

Re:Lack of CC ownership... I don't think so

[sm62704]

When you buy a CD, and then you loose it

When you open your CD tray you're loosing your CD. When you drop it out of your car accidentally you're losing it.

I don't mind typos unless they change the meaning of what you're trying to communicate. Lose <> loose. When you let your dog out of his collar you're loosing him. When he runs away you're losing him.

Don't say "car" when you mean "cat."

Re:Lack of CC ownership... I don't think so

[sm62704]

There have always been better and worse tracks on most albums.

But all albums sold weren't simply random collections of unrelated tunes like today. We used to have "albums" that were meant to be listened to from beginning to end, or the side from beginning to end; The Who's Tommy, The Beatles Magical Mystery Tour, Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon and in fact most albums made in the era.

It's funny, but there's only one Jimi Hendrix song I don't like. No Zepplin songs I don't like. Where are their kind today?

There were, as you say, always albums like today's CDs, simply collections of songs. BUt we used to have albums that were more than this, it's gone by the wayside. I think it's sad.

I'm 54, I've noticed that when folks in their 20s put money in a bar's jukebox they usually pick the same 70s songs I listened to when I was in my 20s (and still do). Too bad nobody in the recording industry has noticed this, if (and I doubt) they're smart enough to notice.

Not every song is a "hit,"

...and that is the exact problem. They're no longer making art, they're making product. Pink Floyd never tried to make a "hit", although their later albums were hits. When Aerosmith's first album came out I didn't buy it. When I heard the whole thing I did - the only song I didn't like was "Dream On", that sappy piece of unrock shit that was the only song the radio was playing.

But I've never been good about following the crowd. In fact, I hate crowds.

Re:Lack of CC ownership... I don't think so

[sm62704]

So you dont love every single song on every album you bought. how is this different in the digital age?

The opnly difference is quantity. I got burned by albums with one good song once or twice, and stopped buying albums unless I'd heard the whole thing.

There isn't one single crappy Led Zepplin album. There is one crappy Hendrix song. We used to have lots and lots of full albums of great listening, or at least one side. It seems to have gone away for some reason, as did the concept album and the 15 or 20 minute song.

Re:Lack of CC ownership... I don't think so

[sm62704]

Huh? Vinyl lasted forever and digital doesn't and you consider that "evolution?" I'd call it de-evolution.

In 1969 I worked in a drive-in theater. Tape rentals WERE better than drive-ins so the drive-in died. That's evolution.

And what's worse, the de-evolution is on purpose. When I worked at that drive-in we had a refrigerator manufactured in the 1920s. These days you're lucky to have a frige last fifteen years. That's not evolution, it's thieft.

Re:Lack of CC ownership... I don't think so

[cliffski]

except dream theater. (if you like that kinda thing). Octavarium doesnt really get going for 12 minutes :D

Re:Lack of CC ownership... I don't think so

[mce]

You'd be better of reading my posts before replying. I posted to seperate paragraphs, each covering a different side of the same argument. You're mixing them up.

On top of that, the word evolution means exactly that: things evolve. Nothing more and nothing less. There is no implied meaning of improvement attached to it at all!

A little story on personal preference

[JensenDied]

I believe it's more up to personal preference, I was talking with one co-worker about music and he was suprised at how little people 'had' in iTunes or otherwise at college. After pointing out that some people with probally a lot more actually know how to turn off the sharing feature of iTunes, and other devices, or dont use them. *As another co-worker walks by* Then again there are some people *points at passing co-worker* who have alot more music than I doubt you have, and payed for all of it, and still have it on the CDs.

No card?

[AlecLyons]

I got a debit card when I was under 18.

Re:No card?

[Dantu]

I got a debit card when I was under 18.

I think that in some countries there are debit cards that work like a credit card. Here in Canada, debit cards use a seperate system (INTERAC) and cannot be used for online purchaes. I had a debit card for ages, but couldn't buy anything online until I had a (Visa) CREDIT card.

Another problem...

[Anonymous Coward]

As mentioned, iTunes doesn't sell MP3's, nor any of the other "big guys". This problem became painfully apparent when my brother, who's a techno moron, had a buddy download some "MP3's" onto an MP3 player. No surprise that the songs that were bought didn't play on the MP3 player. They thought there was some problem with the MP3 player, which there wasn't. I put an MP3 on it and it played just fine. Please note I'm saying MP3 player and not portable digital music player, which is what an iPod is.

International Teens

[owlman17]

I live outside the continental US. If I were a teen, I couldn't buy from iTunes or Napster or Rhapsody, etc even if I wanted to. Heck, not even if I begged. Probably the only legal option available for us outside the USA is eMusic.com. (Which is also good since they sell regular non-DRM mp3s.) So teen or no teen, people living outside the US are far likelier to just get that stuff off illegal file-sharing.

It's too bad CDs aren't around anymore

[bwalling]

I remember back when I was young, we could go out and by music on optical discs. They played in your stereo, in your car, and you could even rip them to MP3. You could even head down to a used record store and pick up used CDs for around $8. Of course, back in those days, we had to walk both ways, up hill, in the snow.

Re:It's too bad CDs aren't around anymore

[evilviper]

I remember back when I was young, we could go out and by music on optical discs.

Yup, I remember those days too... $20 a disc, for a CD that is 66% empty, which has exactly one song on it you actually like.

Those were the days.

Re:It's too bad CDs aren't around anymore

[Jesselnz]

Where the hell does everyone get the "$20 for 1 good song and a bunch of fillers" thing from. When I buy a cd I pay $10 or $15 for 40 to 60 minutes of music that I actually like. If an artist is able to release a whole album with just one good song... then that probably means they suck.

Re:It's too bad CDs aren't around anymore

[evilviper]

Where the hell does everyone get the "$20 for 1 good song and a bunch of fillers" thing from.

A) CDs used-to be more expensive. It wasn't unusual for CDs to be near $20.

B) There are many recorded cases of a single song being very popular, causing people to go buy the CD, only to find the rest are crap. It's known as the Chumbawamba effect, and is perhaps the main reason for the iPod and iTMS' popularity.

Re:It's too bad CDs aren't around anymore

[Technician]

I remember back when I was young, we could go out and by music on optical discs. They played in your stereo, in your car, and you could even rip them to MP3. You could even head down to a used record store and pick up used CDs for around $8. Of course, back in those days, we had to walk both ways, up hill, in the snow.

Back in my day, Technics came out with the SL10 Linear tracking turntable. It would run on 12 volts and play at any angle, even upside down. It still skipped badly when trying to use it on a bumpy road. About 10 years later Philips released the Compact disk. However there was no DRM to prevent you from ripping it to a Compact Cassette tape for the car.

Boy did I date myself on that one.

Re:It's too bad CDs aren't around anymore

[jb.hl.com]

The solution to that is to NOT BUY SHIT CDs.

There are things called "listening posts" which you can use to listen to a CD, in its entirety if you like, and I'm sure if you go to a nice independent record shop they'll let you hear a bit of a CD before you buy it. You don't have to get a nasty surprise.

Re:It's too bad CDs aren't around anymore

[shark72]

"Where the hell does everyone get the "$20 for 1 good song and a bunch of fillers" thing from."

Why, from the Big Book of Piracy Rationalizations, of course! Here's the TOC:

1. CDs cost $20.
2. CDs only have one good song.
3. All CDs have DRM. All of them.
4. Artists Don't Make Money Selling CDs
5. Except The Ones Who Are Really, Really Rich, So It's Still OK
6. Artist Only Make Money Touring
7. "If they can't or won't play live, or their musical style is not fit for live performances, then they're just not good artists and don't deserve to be compensated through music sales" And Other Comebacks When People Inform You That You Are Wrong
8. If An Artist Is In It For The Money, They Aren't Really An Artist: Beethoven, Strauss, Mozart and Others Who Were Fabulously Wealthy
9. Record Companies Don't Deserve To Make a Profit, and All Record Company Employees Should Work For Free
10. "The Record Company Provides No Service" : How A Sheet Of Lyrics Is Identical To A CD
11. The Artists Are Needy: Record Companies Don't Pay Them Enough, So You Don't Have To Pay Them At All
12. The Artists Are Greedy: They Don't Deserve Their Fame. Piracy Lets You Take Them Down a Notch.

Appendix:

1. Why Musicians Aren't Deserving Of Your Respect, While Other Artists Are
2. The Montgomery Freedom March, Gandhi, and P2P: Great Examples of Civil Disobedience
3. Why The Golden Rule Doesn't Apply When You're Dealing With Musicians
4. "I Pirate Because I Don't Have Any Money!" : Explaining How You Manage To Pay Your Broadband Bill Each Month, But Music Is Too Expensive
5. "Artists Did OK For A Thousand Years Without DRM, So Why Do They Need It Now?" : Why YOU Deserve The Benefits of Broadband, P2P, and Other Modern Technology, But Content Creators Don't

Re:It's too bad CDs aren't around anymore

[evilviper]

The solution to that is to NOT BUY SHIT CDs.

Right. People shouldn't be ALLOWED to get what they want, ala carte. They should be FORCED to pick a bundle, or nothing at all.

Re:It's too bad CDs aren't around anymore

[jb.hl.com]

...when did I say THAT!?

Re:It's too bad CDs aren't around anymore

[bwalling]

Right. People shouldn't be ALLOWED to get what they want, ala carte. They should be FORCED to pick a bundle, or nothing at all.

Ever hear of a single?

Suggestions for Teens who want MP3s

[cplater]

1) Take your lazy butt down to the store (indie record shop, Best Buy, Circuit City, etc.) buy the CD you want, and use your computer to rip the CD into MP3s (although I'd suggest you use AAC, but that's a personal preference.)

1a) If ripping a CD is too techincal for you, you could always just buy an iTMS "gift card" as the big box stores, or even your local gas station.

2) Ask P&M to give you an iTMS (is it just iTS now?) allowance so you can buy your tunes.

3) Ask P&M to take you to the bank to set up a savings acct with a Visa/MC debit card, and use that to buy your tunes.

(If P&M doesn't make sense, please go read / watch A Clockwork Orange and then you'll get it.)

Re:Suggestions for Teens who want MP3s

[soxerus]

1) Take your lazy butt down to the store (indie record shop, Best Buy, Circuit City, etc.) buy the CD you want, and use your computer to rip the CD into MP3s (although I'd suggest you use AAC, but that's a personal preference.)

And break the law trying to rip a DRMd CD.

1a) If ripping a CD is too techincal for you, you could always just buy an iTMS "gift card" as the big box stores, or even your local gas station.

Wow, more DRM

2) Ask P&M to give you an iTMS (is it just iTS now?) allowance so you can buy your tunes. 3) Ask P&M to take you to the bank to set up a savings acct with a Visa/MC debit card, and use that to buy your tunes.

From where, more DRMd sites? The fact of the matter is, you can't buy the mainstream music in MP3 format (except maybe allofmp3, but then you're not paying the artists). The record labels need to pull their heads out of the sand, realize that their music is available for free un-drm'd (whether they drm it or not) and make it available as MP3s. Sell MP3s off their website and include them on the store-bought CDs etc.

Re:Suggestions for Teens who want MP3s

[rizole]

So where do you suggest I download a legal copy of a Clockwork Orange then?

Re:Suggestions for Teens who want MP3s

[sm62704]

Sell MP3s off their website and include them on the store-bought CDs etc.

I don't agree. They should embrace P2P and make their CDs value-added. They should post MP3s for free and describe what you'll get along with the CD; cover art, lyric sheets, guitar tabs, maybe even concert tickets. (BTW and OT concert prices have gone stupid. Paying over a hundred dollars for a two hour show... are you people crazy? In 1969 I saw Delaney and Bonney open for Blind Faith and they all got on stage and performed after the Blind Faith part. Five bucks. In 1977 I saw a 3 act show, Golden Earring opened, followed by Journey, followed by ELO. Three bucks. Note these were bands that were being played on all the radio stations with hit records at the time. You kids are dumb about money and the corporations know it.)

See, the problem is that it used to be the "record industry" and now it's the "music industry". That was an incredibly stupid change on their part; you can't buy music, you can only either rent it or buy its physical container. And I don't like renting, and probably few others do either.

a more important cause

[l3v1]

A more important cause for not being able to buy legitimate mp3s for a lot (!) of people is that such services are not available. And I'm not talking here about hundred feet deep windowsless cell under the Anctartica ice.
 

Re:They don't buy MP3 files because nobody sells t

[kjart]

I'd mod that 'pedantic' if I could - seems that's usually seen as 'insightful' here.

so buy a debit card...

[alizard]

Next to the POS terminal at your grocery store, you'll see gift cards by the dozen from various vendors (probably including iTunes) and a couple or three debit card brands. I use the one from Netspend. I can use it almost anywhere (some smaller stores going through third-party accesss to credit card companies can't handle my card) either in RL or online, and I can transfer money to another card holder by going to the site and providing the transfer info, practically instantaneously and free of charge, and there are any number of places (some Safeways, some check cashing places - more info on site) where the card can be reloaded.

Since they require some sort of ID to purchase (I don't think the non-reloadable gift debit cards from that vendor do), this is something a parent can do for a younger teen. (upside for parent: if it isn't loaded onto a card, a kid can't spend it, and of course, this means the parent's credit card doesn't get used for online purchases) Check the URL for more info.

Whether or not one thinks online music is worth buying is up to the user, but there are lots of other things to buy on the Net.

So?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not sure I agree with some of the conclusions here (you can buy iTunes cards at Walgreens)

So? iTunes does not sell MP3's.

What does buying a gift certificate...

[ltning]

...or whatever it's called help, if you need a CC to register on iTunes in the first place?

Re:What does buying a gift certificate...

[shawngarringer]

You _dont_ need a credit card to register for iTunes. Just an email address.

Re:What does buying a gift certificate...

[ltning]

Weird. I did. And my sister did, as a result she still doesn't have one.
We're in Norway though. And it's some time ago.

I apologise if I've been in error.

Re:What does buying a gift certificate...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm in Canada and iTunes says I need a CC to register...

Er...

[Peet42]

"(you can buy iTunes cards at Walgreens)"

How does that help someone who owns a portable MP3 player? (As distinct from an iPod)

Re:Er...

[Anonymous Coward]

Then it's probably an iPod, so it'll play fine.

Or did you mean to say "other than an iPod"? "Portable MP3 player" isn't distinct from iPod, it's a strict superset of iPod.

not just teens

[Scudsucker]

I would bet that the vast majority of pirates have a very high debt to income ratio, and couldn't buy more than a small fraction of their collections even if they wanted to.

Re:not just teens

[deanj]

They should do what the rest of us do. Wait until they have to money to pay for it.

Otherwise it's just an excuse.

Re:not just teens

[Scudsucker]

It's not an excuse if it's not going to make any difference. Content industries are certainly entitled to set whatever prices they want, but the content is only worth what people are willing and able to pay. A large majority of a pirate's collection is likely to be stuff he would never buy at the **AA's prices, even if he had plenty of money to spend.

Re:not just teens

[Sj0]

Making a moral arguement on behalf on the music industry of all people seems like self-parody to me.

"Please, remember the bitches and hos when you're stealing music. Who will think of the bitches and the hos? And who will think of the coke addicts and amphetamine junkies? And who will think of the good, honest, hard working rap star whose parent company just sued a dead person for downloading a song they wouldn't possibly listen to? And what of the children? Britney thought of the children, she wanted the women to be unafraid of their bodies, so they could go out and lay the first angsty emo boy they found. What have YOU done for the children lately? And what of Marlyn Manson? He'll starve while your little hell-spawn download his music about how great being a minion of our dark lord and master Satan is, all without paying for it."

Marketing vs. Legal vs. Morality. Very thin ice, but hilarious hilarious self-parody.

Umm, no

[Klaidas]

Teens Don't Buy Legit MP3s Because They Can't?

Umm, I don't think so. Most likely it's because they don't really understand WHY they should buy them legally. Or if they do and have an opportunity to buy, they most likely don't want to spend their lunch money.

One solution...

[dotdevin]

It seems to me that if you believe that alofmp3.com is legit (or are OK with the questions about it) then a USD20 account credit would go a long way for keeping your teanager in MP3s.

Re:One solution...

[DanielNS84]

Indeed it will...I put 20 in during the 20% more promotion and I've been running for months off that...if iTunes was a better program, they sold MP3's, and the prices weren't highway sodomy, then I might consider using it. As it is I'm sure you can go grab a preloaded credit card at the store and spend all you like on AllOfMP3 and it would be easy even on a 13 year old budget (1 lawn and you've got it!).

Bizarre

[Anonymous Coward]

I dunno... It's been decades since I was a teen, but I know that the reason I buy online is for convenience. How does selling a gift card at WalMart seem more convenient? I don't think gift cards are the answer. Maybe bill to the phone or paypal. Paypal is easy to fund too.

CD burning kiosks

[ferd_farkle]

I seem to recall that, in the early days of Compact Discs, a lot of hype (naturally) predicting that record stores would be burning custom cds. That is, cds of tracks the customer wanted, rather than albums.

What's wrong with that business model? (aside from DRM, obviously) The RIAA could choose to sell instead of 'protect' their product.

The solutions

[jonwil]

Get gift cards out there a lot more (some aussie stores sell gift cards for the australian iTunes service but there needs to be more)
Another option would be to push use of prepaid credit cards (basicly, those cards that you get and load up with a certain amount of money and can then be used like a credit card) or debit cards (credit cards that take the money straight out of your bank account). Unfortunatly, for some stupid reason, you have to be over 18 to get prepaid credit cards or debit cards too.

Re:The solutions

[vidarh]

Many countries let you get debit cards from you're 13. The main limitations is that those debit cards usually don't have visa or mastercard numbers tied to them, and so depend on merchants supporting various local debit card schemes (such as switch/maestro or solo in the UK)

Re:The solutions

[thethibs]

You have to be over 18 to get a credit card because you have to be over 18 to enter into a contract--the mechanism by which the credit card company can feel sure you will pay the bill. Without that, there is no way they can collect if you renege.

Debit cards are another matter. They are basically plastic cash because the bank, by giving you an account, is assuring payment.

Not only teens

[cabinetsoft]

I live in a country that doesn't have an iTunes store. If I want to create an account on itunes.com I can't because I have no fuckin' US address. Even if I have a good credit card and all that I simply can't create an account. And more... even if I receive a gift certificate I can't benefit from it because of the same reason. As much as i like apple, they fucked it big on this... there are somewhere around 5.7 billions people that don't live in US and some of them want to buy their mp3...

Well thanks for the tip captain obvious

[Skythe]

I happen to be at the far end of that age bracket (and shall hence be exiting it in 80~ days), and besides from it being rather troublesome to buy stuff online (my parents don't even own credit cards and i only buy online using ebay/bank transfer) - it would require a further amount of effort to drive down to my local coles and buy an itunes card. I can honestly tell you that 95% of my un-techono saavy friends probably don't even know about the cards. What's more is, they probably wouldn't even care. Why pay for something that you can get for free..?

This brings me to the advertisements that play at the start of DVD's here in Australia; something along the lines of you wouldnt steal [item - ie a car] so dont steal movies piracy is a crime etc etc. The problem is piracy or 'stealing music' is different to stealing physical items. When you download a song your not taking anything from anyone - only potential profit. Its like if you walk into a shop and try to decide between coke and pepsi - whichever you choose, the other is going to lose out on potential profit.

As long as online piracy exists and the only consequence is risking winning the RIAA lottery people will keep doing it. Its also far less troublesome than other 'criminal acts' and has far fewer consequences.

Re:Well thanks for the tip captain obvious

[lwells-au]

I'm not sure what tip you are referring too, but you're welcome ;-)

I see no contention in your post. My point was that of those that would/might be inclined to purchase probably won't because the current system available to them lacks immediacy, is a hassle, and necessitates purchasing large (in their view) lumps of credit.

I agree that a lot of people probably would acquire their music through illegal means regardless of the ease of purchase as I noted in the final line of my original reply.

Re:Well thanks for the tip captain obvious

[dthree]

This brings me to the advertisements that play at the start of DVD's here in Australia; something along the lines of you wouldnt steal [item - ie a car] so dont steal movies piracy is a crime etc etc.

What bothers me the most about these messages is that you can't skip them even though you have already PAID FOR THE DVD! It's ironic that people who use P2P to download movies ripped from DVD's will never see the message so all the message does is annoy the paying customer.

Re:Well thanks for the tip captain obvious

[sm62704]

It's ironic that people who use P2P to download movies ripped from DVD's will never see the message so all the message does is annoy the paying customer.

All DRM is like that. It doesn't even slow down the folks who are selling counterfeits (REAL thieft, not just copyright infringement) in the least, it only affects those who paid for the thing in the first place.

Odd how we never had DRM until this century, yet the media people are still in business.

Re:Well thanks for the tip captain obvious

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm in New Zealand. WE GET THE SAME DAMN ADVERTISMENTS TOO!

I'm glad I'm not the only person to have that exact same response to those damn ads!

wrong

[Unknown_monkey]

Clearly the solution is that the **AA's should be able to prosecute any teenager that doesn't have an actively used credit card. Because they're stealing music. That has to be the conclusion of the article.

Re:wrong

[jZnat]

Or maybe they already maxed out their sub-$400 credit limit on gas and food? Credit cards suck ass until you've used them long enough to be useful, and at that point, you avoid them because you know that debt is bad and paying it off sucks.

Re:wrong

[TheRaven64]

Seriously, what?

Credit cards suck ass until you've used them long enough to be useful,

When I turned 18, I got a credit card from my bank with a credit limit of £350 (about $650). For the next couple of years they doubled the maximum every six months. As a first-year student, £350/month was more than I spent regularly (discounting rent, which was paid by direct debit).

and at that point, you avoid them because you know that debt is bad and paying it off sucks.

My credit card is paid at the full amount every month by direct debit. As long as there is enough money in my current account to cover it, I don't need to even think about it. This means that money sits in my account for six weeks longer than it otherwise would, meaning I can have a months income extra in my savings account earning me interest. I get money back on everything I spend on my credit card, so it's like having a (small) discount on every purchase, and I get buyer protection not available with other forms of payment.

Re:wrong

[Unknown_monkey]

They probably steal gas and food along with their MP3s if they don't have credit cards. People with bad credit turn to a life of crime rather quickly if I understand the **AAs. That's why they have to prosecute little old ladies, thirteen year old girls, and dead people. Because they all usually have bad credit, and therefore they steal music and pirate movies, and now we've been able to add gas and food to the list of things they steal.

Itunes dioes not sell MP3's

[ac7xc]

In the article the author states that you can buy itunes cards in stores. However I tunes does not sell MP3's and when you convert itunes to MP3 you lose quality in the sound. In order to lessen the effect of the loss you must use a very high bit rate that makes the file larger.

Premptive Strategey

[kruhft]

Just throw all the children in jail right now. If they have it and they can't buy it then they must be stealing right?

That'll teach them to want what they can't even buy.

Maybe this is the credit card companies' fault?

[smchris]

I know a kid who went bankrupt in high school so I see the problem. But this is a good point. In today's economy, _shouldn't_ a teenager have access to credit in order to participate?

The question is how to do it. Being old, I remember when credit card companies had "learner's" college accounts with limits like $200-$400. Maybe the companies have become so insanely greedy sending out applications for $10K-$20K limits for people's dogs that they just don't want to be bothered with miniscule accounts that train young people to be responsible? But they should.

Re:Maybe this is the credit card companies' fault?

[FooAtWFU]

Dunno about credit, but they have debit cards that function wheverver you would use your credit card these days. They just take money from your bank account. Sometimes they're branded as "check cards".

Keeps you from spending money you don't have.

Re:Maybe this is the credit card companies' fault?

[Miseph]

The question is how to do it. Being old, I remember when credit card companies had "learner's" college accounts with limits like $200-$400. Maybe the companies have become so insanely greedy sending out applications for $10K-$20K limits for people's dogs that they just don't want to be bothered with miniscule accounts that train young people to be responsible? But they should.

It's not that they can't be bothered to do it, because the time and resources it would take them to make such a thing happen is virtually nothing if you consider the budgets most of the credit companies work with. It isn't even that they wouldn't be able to profit on such small amounts of money, because the fact of the matter is that the credit business is one of making very small amounts of money many, many times such that it adds up to a very large amount of money. In the long term, there is no amount so small that it's "not worth it" for the credit companies to deal with. The real reason that they don't want to do that anymore is that the creditors don't want people learning to be responsible. They want people to grow up to be irresponsible spenders, and to owe them massive amounts of money for their whole lives. It is not in their best interests to educate you. Consumer ignorance and irresponsibility are what keep the credit companies not just in business, but some of the wealthiest and most influential private institutions in existence.

They don't really even care if you declare bankruptcy, forclose, or have it all reposessed, because they still get their money, one way or another. Even if your debts are cancelled at death, they are making the gamble that you will have already more then paid off your debt, regardless of the final balance. They don't care about getting back the money they lend, they care about getting the interest on the money you never pay back; whether you pay for it yourself, or they auction off everything you think you own is completely beside the point.

Offering such a service, while socially responsible, morally commendable, and financially feasible, is actually unprofitable for the creditors in the long term. It cuts into their bottom line when ordinary people understand how money works, managing and budgeting debt against income, long-term invetsments, and how to be generally responsible with their spending. They want you to go and max out all your high limit credit cards. They want you to owe them money you'll never pay back. They want you to believe that making the minimum payment is affordable and easy. They want you to refinance your home once every 5 years, especially if you want to use the money to purchase more debt on decreasng value property (cars, appliances, and expensive toys). They want you to do all the things that anyone who knows anything about how interest and debt really work wouldn't do in a million years. That's what they do to keep food on the table and fuel in the Leer jet.

Re:Maybe this is the credit card companies' fault?

[assassinator42]

Does it keep you from spending money you don't have? I've never had a $0 balance on my account, so I'm not sure what happens when you try to spend more than you have.

Re:Maybe this is the credit card companies' fault?

[jb.hl.com]

One time, I went accidentally overdrawn by about 50p (about $1 in crazy American money), paid it back the next day and then found myself being charged £35 (about $70) because of an unauthorised overdraft. After much ranting and raving at the bank concerned (NatWest) they refunded the money they'd taken out (which, incidentally, had put me overdrawn again).

Funny enough, this was an account that had a debit card which does not allow overdrafts, but for some reason did on this occasion.

Re:Maybe this is the credit card companies' fault?

[Anonymous Coward]

Quite, and are a much better tool for today's moronic youth. (And those under the age of 18, who while probably no less moronic, are not helped in getting a card by being under 18.)

God, I remember an episode of 'The View' once (Don't ask, I couldn't find my remote one morning.) The four insipid harpies were going on about how "evil" credit card companies are, and how they "trick" your children.

Hello?

If your child is unable to realize that a credit card is not a magic money machine; that it's effectively a hassle-free microloan that needs to pay back, YOU HAVE UTTERLY FAILED AS A PARENT TO INSTILL EVEN ONE ATOM OF FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY INTO YOUR CHILDREN.

Companies should never be blamed for the stupidity of consumers.

Re:Maybe this is the credit card companies' fault?

[edschurr]

Unfortunately Visa debit cards aren't distributed in Canada, and MasterCard prepaid cards aren't available to me locally.

Re:Maybe this is the credit card companies' fault?

[Anonymous Coward]

In today's economy, _shouldn't_ a teenager have access to credit in order to participate?

No. Next stupid fucking question, please.

WTF?

[dthree]

Besides, I don't buy the whole "no credit card" thing, unless they really mean that they can't overspend and run up huge debt by buying more than they can afford. Debit cards (aka Visa Check Cards) are given out like candy at all the banks I know.

How is it possible to run up debt from a debit card?

Re:WTF?

[blugu64]

By using someone elses?

Re:WTF?

[jZnat]

Ever heard of bouncing a cheque? That induces penalty fees as well, so there's even more debt to be paid off at that point.

Re:WTF?

[TheRaven64]

I don't know if this is the case in the US, but in the UK there are two categories of debit cards. The fist are things like Visa Delta and Switch. The second, newer, ones are things like Visa Electron and Solo. They can only be used in places that use an electronic system, and perform a balance enquiry before authorising transactions. The traditional type, however, can be used anywhere, including places that use the old-style machines that take an imprint of the raised portions of the card. A payment with one of these cards will always go through[1]. If you do not have enough money in your current account to cover it, then you will go overdrawn. Once you are overdrawn, you are in debt, and have achieved this using a debit card.

[1] Up to a per-transaction limit guaranteed by the bank. This is typically £50-100. Any transaction bigger than this will only be honoured if the money is available; electronic machines check this before performing the transaction.

Re:WTF?

[sm62704]

How is it possible to run up debt from a debit card?

When you do it with a paper check it's called "bouncing" and it costs a hell of a lot more than any legit interest rate; bounce a ten dollar check and you're charged forty bucks or more. That's a 400% interest!

I'd say that's a BIG debt.

My bank has what they call "overdraft protection". Slick and evil, made for fools.

Re:WTF?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, see, in my case, when I think Debit card I actually think of New Zealand's EFTPOS system. It's not possible to overspend, because the transaction completes right then and there.

If I spend $100 using EFTPOS, my account balance has gone down $100 when the terminal displays the magic word "ACCEPTED". If I don't have the money? "INSUFFICENT FUNDS". No extra fee, an unsucessful transaction (for whatever reason) doesn't incurr any cost.

Yes, this means that EFTPOS terminals are 'live' connected to the EFTPOS network, traditionally via a phone line, and the EFTPOS network in turn connected to the various bank's computers all live, but it works brilliantly. (No connection means I get the message "COMMS FAILURE" or something similar - the transaction has not happened at all.)

It is quite simply impossible to run up debit on Debit/ATM card here.

Re:WTF?

[dthree]

All the debit cards I've used on the VISA system prevent you from overdrawing, at least more than one transaction. "Running up huge debt" sounds more like what you do with a traditional credit card than a debit card.

Re:WTF?

[c0reboarder]

The US is different. Here "Debit Cards" are much more like credit cards. Most of them have some debit system like Plus, or Star, or Pulse, but nobody really thinks about it as a Star Card. All those cards tend to have a Visa or Master Card log on them too, and can be used anywhere a credit card is used. I don't know anyone (in the US) that has a debit card that doesn't work like a credit card. However, I know that in Europe, and Oceana (aus/nz) it's much more common to have just a debit card like you describe that is on a system of it's own. When travelling I think people just assume my debit card is a credit card... Hopefully that makes a bit more sense to you :)

OT: [Re:Debit Cards}

[Joey7F]

Actually you can get both underage. My parents gave me a credit card at 16 with the understanding it was for gas, groceries, and "emergencies".

The closest thing to trouble with it, that I had was I was in Norway and used it to get a cash/kroner advance at an ATM. After I got the money, I paid it off.

But the card had a policy that you get a 5 dollar fee if you have not paid off the cash advance + interest, completely. They calculated new interest everyday so by the time you received the bill, paid it, and they received it, there was more interest. It took two months to get it straightened out (I ended up sending a lot more than was due) but had I not been watching, I would still be paying that off.

For the most part, parents should give teens a cc (with a low limit) and a debit card so that way when they are "on their own" they never get stranded.

--Joey

Re:OT: [Re:Debit Cards}

[ptbarnett]

For the most part, parents should give teens a cc (with a low limit) and a debit card so that way when they are "on their own" they never get stranded.

I'm not so sure about a debit card: it's too easy to wipe out a checking account with fraudulent activity, and you are at the mercy of the bank to reinstate the funds on a timely basis. A better choice would be a 'stored value' card like Visa Buxx. I've known a few parents that have used it for their child's 'allowance'.

But, once they are at driving age and not yet a good credit risk, I agree with the 'low limit' card for emergencies. But if you trust the child to use it responsibly (or want to give them a chance to learn), co-signing a credit card is a way to start a good credit history for them. There are a couple of card issues in the US that offer them.

They sell it where I always go,

[bahwi]

Target. Wait. Shit. Nevermind, I'm old now. :(

No gift cards?

[Shadyman]

The author maintains that since regular record shops don't sell MP3s, or gift cards to places that do sell MP3s, its practically impossible for teens to buy legit MP3s on their own.

Sure they do. I think the author doesn't get out much.

Prepaid debit cards

[argent]

You can buy prepaid debit cards in all the drugstores and supermarkets around here.

Haphazard article...

[dthree]

It's kind of silly for the article to insist that teens don't buy MP3's because the only place they can shop with cash, record stores, won't sell them. Besides the fact that it's partially untrue, that iTunes gift cards and similar are sold in stores, the article seems to ignore the thousands of media files sold in stores on small plastic circles that can almost effortlessly turned into MP3s.

CD is the new Casette

[Inks]

"regular record shops don't sell MP3s" But MP3 files come from CDs, which record shops do sell. Please tell me someone still remembers CDs!

Lousy parent!

[Servo]

What kind of moronic horrible parent would give Miller beer to their children?

Given the time of year, I'd highly recommend one of the sweeter german Oktoberfest beers.

Re:Lousy parent!

[Gilmoure]

I have 2 cases of Paulaner Oktoberfezt Marzen (not sure on the all z's and metal dot placement in the name) but that's my beer. And Miller High Life is a mild beer, and it's not too bad, for a mass market American beer. Besides, will likely have some older family members at the party and, unfortunately, most of them think Bud is something to be glad about. Sigh.

Re:Lousy parent!

[jackbird]

If you must buy mass-market American beer, get Yuengling.

Walmart sells cards...

[Caeda]

Walmart sells 4 brands of music download service cards + both brands of satellite radio on cards. So Bullshit, they can buy cards to download music.

Pfffttt, why should they?

[pedalman]

Hmmm.....I can either go to Starbuck's and spend my money on caffeine, or I can buy MP3s.

Why buy the cow when the milk is free? :p

No rocket science required here.

Prepaid iTunes cards STILL need credit card to use

[lumkichi]

Why is it that I go out to purchase an iTunes card for $15 or $25 (plus tax) that's paid for at the store with a debit card, then have to use my Credit Card when I try to use the freakin' card in iTunes?

The stupid program won't let me use the $25 credit I paid for without a credit card number, which it stores in the computer.

It's not about not having money to purchase music - it's about many teenages not having a CREDIT CARD to freakin' use their cards even if they DO purchse iTunes credits with cash.

Look at eMusic

[MWales]

Circuit City sells prepaid downloads for eMusic, it's much cheaper than buying CDs, and you get DRM free MP3s that can play on iPods, Zens, car decks, etc.

Teens Are Lazy

[DoomfrogBW]

This is BS. Teens don't buy legit because they are lazy. They don't have the capital to purchase music nor do they have the motivation anymore to go out, get a job, and buy legit music. Plus, why be the good guy buying legit music when most of their friends are buying it illegally or sharing it with each other? It's counter-intuitive. Additionally, I would say that there are three or four songs most people like on an album.

[soapbox]
Most people take three or four songs from an album and combine them with other artists to make their own mixed albums. Maybe instead of turning bands into music generating machines that all sound the same, maybe bands should put more effort into their music so people actually WANT to buy the entire album.
[/soapbox]

Bottom line, there are plenty of ways for them to purchase music legally.

Re:Teens Are Lazy

[sm62704]

They don't have the capital to purchase music nor do they have the motivation anymore to go out, get a job, and buy legit music.

You don't get out much, do you? My 19 year old daughter works at GameStop. Almost all of the retail clerks in the mall and grocery stores are teenagers; adults can't afford to live on what they make.

Just because your fatassed kid is lazy doesn't mean they all are.

About your soap box, there ARE bands that put effort and artistry into their music. They just don't publish under the major labels.

Re:Teens Are Lazy

[DoomfrogBW]

What do teens honestly /have/ to buy? Clothes, music, and food. Most live under their parents roof. Plus, the article said 13-17 not 19. You have a complex. Get a life, loser.

Exactly

[Kenshin]

Exactly. That's the point I was going to make.

One of the draws of buying music online is that you DON'T have to go to the mall. But if you have to go to the mall, or wherever, to get a card simply to buy that music, that specific draw is lost.

Broader issues

[scottsk]

Maybe teens aren't the mindless droids that the RIAA members think they are and don't want the sort of junk that RIAA members are producing? Maybe they're buying used CDs and ripping them? Maybe they're discovering classical, jazz, and progressive rock? Who knows, but I have trouble believing that any segment of the population would be inhibited by friction in collecting money in this day and age! Hard to imagine a teen couldn't use a family paypal account. Or that some venture capitalist wouldn't throw a few million at TeenzMp3Rockz.com to create a way for parents to pre-pay for music at MyDRMLockin.com or iLoveDRM.com...

Re:Broader issues

[sm62704]

Maybe they're discovering classical, jazz, and progressive rock? Who knows

I do, my oldest just turned 21. She listens to rap (she's "learning disabled" with an IQ of 65) while my other daughter (the one with the 130 IQ) listens to ska, punk, and indie music. She does listen to some jazz, classical, and progressive rock as well.

Maybe these 2 kids aren't exactly at the top of the statistical curve, but I think probably most of their friends are.

A more interesting observation about teens...

[Anonymous Coward]

In America, you can't enforce a contract against a minor - which is a big reason why teens don't have credit cards. You can't enforce the contract to make payments, and the teen can just repudiate the contract after using the card without ever repaying a dime (might ruin their credit rating though, hehe.)

But then when it comes to any EULAs or TOSs attached to pay music services, you can't enforce those against minors, either. Of course there could potentially be criminal charges stemming from the DMCA, but as far as telling teens they can't do something for contractual reasons, they definitely could.

A Matter of Seriousness

[dasunst3r]

Given the many available means of securing forms of payment for legitimate music (i.e. getting parents credit card and getting prepaid cards), I think that the alleged inconvenience of paying is simply an excuse. Teens should exploit their power to be able to find ways to circumvent this barrier if they are truly serious about getting legitimate music.

So, let me get this straight

[acidrain69]

"I'm not sure I agree with some of the conclusions here (you can buy iTunes cards at Walgreens), but it's an interesting discussion."

So you're saying that kids who (most of them) cannot drive a car, must go to a STORE, so they can go back home to buy things ONLINE. Why not just GO TO A LOCAL MUSIC STORE (while there are still some left).

No. Here's a better solution. Apple or somebody has to set up either prepaid accounts that parents can initiate for their kids, or quotas that their kids can't bypass.

Re:So, let me get this straight

[Phroggy]

No. Here's a better solution. Apple or somebody has to set up either prepaid accounts that parents can initiate for their kids, or quotas that their kids can't bypass.

Apple already did this years ago.

Re:They don't buy MP3 files because nobody sells t

[KenSeymour]

And of course, you can't listen to AAC tunes.

Almost all teens are so concerned about DRM that they won't listen to AAC files.

Oh wait, Apple is selling millions of iPods and millions of AAC files.

So it is only the teens on /. that don't listen to AAC tunes.

Oh wait, I see "I like iTunes and my iPod" posts on /. from time to time.

So it is only 60% of the teens on /. and maybe 5% of teens in general won't
listen to AAC files because of their strong feelings about DRM.

Sounds like a great business opportunity to me!

I think a lot of /.'ers want the copyright holders of music they hear on the
radio to see the world the way they see it. "Make your music available in MP3
format." Or "Make your music available in OGG format."

You could argue that not all teens have parents or aunts or uncles that
can afford to buy them iPods. Fair enough. I have seen teenagers (and older folks)
on the subway with a portable CD player, headphones, and a CD wallet.

gift cards at retailers

[holistah]

I have not been to a music store in a very long time (radio is sufficient for me since most music is crap these days), so I don't know if they sell mp3 gift cards, but I do know that ever since the napster name was bought out for a company that sells mp3s, I have seen napster gift cards (and soon after, other brands as well) in every single retail store I go to whether it be a department store, grocery store, convenience store or even furniture store.

DRM free music

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.johnnyowl.com/music/mp3_lofi/

Preview any track for free as 32kbps mono MP3s. If you like the music, you can donate any amount (through PayPal) and download them as 128kbps stereo MP3s.

Totally.

[lullabud]

My first thought was "Man, that was exactly the step just before the problem I'm having as an adault where I totally *would* buy a new McLaren but my credit card limit doesn't go up that high!"

Complete Bullshit

[deesine]

More kids today have credit cards than in any time in history.

Re:They don't buy MP3 files because nobody sells t

[TheRaven64]

Well, I'd rather buy AAC or FLAC than MP3. Unfortunately, iTMS doesn't sell AAC as standardised by the MPEG group, it sells an AAC bytestream in a proprietary DRM wrapper, which means they don't work with my mobile 'phone, Nokia 770, or FreeBSD-running ThinkPad; all of which can play AACs.

(-1 Pedantic)

Stop analyzing, it's pretty simple!

[Anonymous Coward]

Evey few months we read another study that tries to determine why people (teens or adults) download illegal music. These studies have blamed everything from costs to inconvenience or no credit card but none of these is the real reason. The real reason is: human nature! We, as humans, want stuff for the absolute lowest price we can get it. Even at .88cents USD per song, that's still more expensive than FREE. People download music illegally because they want it for free. Nothing more motivates them most time. It doesn't have to be analyzed. Why pay anything for it if you can get it for free with a VERY low chance of getting caught?

Free legal MP3s for all!

[sm62704]

You can get MP3s off the radio; it's a lot less hassle than downloading. Connect your radio's headphone jack to your sound card's line in jack, turn on EAC and go about your business. In St Louis you can get 7 albums this way from KSHE every Sunday night, often before they're even available in the stores. It's not CD quality, but neither is MP3. Once you've converted the wav to MP3 your file is every bit as good as one from Limewire or iTunes. What's better, they're usually 20th century albums with a lot less science and a lot more art.

You can also rip CDs, LPs, and tapes you've bought, shoplifted, or checked out from the library.

Or you can tell the pigopolists to kiss your ass and stop listening to their wares altogether. Not hard to do these days; the only major label band I've heard this century that's any good is Buckcherry. I buy my CDs from the local bands who cut them; imo they're better than the pig's shit, probably because they do it artistically out of love of music rather than as a soulless calculated way of making cash. This century's music is formulaic and repetitive; it all sounds like advertising jingles.

Or you can download music from bands who WANT you to download it. Haves some free music courtesy of some friends of mine. Album names link to M3U playlists, and the other links are to MP3s. Click to play, or right click to download (may vary depending on browser or operating system)

Posamist Live - Volume 1
01-Loom Up.mp3
02-Feelin Alight.mp3

03-Days like These.mp3
04-Gotta Get Over You.mp3
05-The Joker.mp3
06-Long Train Running.mp3
07-What Would you Say.mp3
08-Only One.mp3
09-Redhouse.mp3
10-Silky Smooth.mp3
11-Watchtower.mp3

12-Sweet Home Medley.mp3>
13-Yellow Ledbetter.mp3

Posamist Live - Volume 2
01-Gotta get over you.mp3
02-Loom up.mp3
03-Champagne and Reefer.mp3
04-Only One.mp3
05-Sympathy for the Entertainer

Re:Free legal MP3s for all!

[Anonymous Coward]

While the music isn't to my taste I won't criticise that. What I will is the recording quality. Both the drum kit and the vocals are very badly mic-ed up, at least in the first track. I didn't want to stick them in my iPod after that...

Re:Free legal MP3s for all!

[sm62704]

You're right about the recording quality, but I couldn't get them to listen to me; plus, they're live shows in bars with bad acoustics.

But hey, they're free!

Pay by Cheque or Postal Order at www.mvine.com

[rdfield]

OK, so they don't have a huge selection of well known tracks - but there's about 1000 songs from unsigned bands that have no DRM.

All can be bought with cheques or postal orders as well as the usual plastic.

Loads of free stuff to download too.

PEOPLE don't buy legit MP3s because they can't.

[assassinator42]

At least, we can't buy legit MP3s of most of the more popular music. eMusic sells MP3s, but many of the bands are less famous, and as far as I can tell there's no way to just buy albums or tracks without a subscription. Of course, I'm not sure how much selling MP3s would reduce piracy. And I don't consider allofmp3 "legit" even if it's legal. (Is it legal?)

Re:PEOPLE don't buy legit MP3s because they can't.

[Phroggy]

And I don't consider allofmp3 "legit" even if it's legal. (Is it legal?)

My understanding is that it's legal in Russia, but not legal for someone in the US (or most other countries).

Not exactly true

[93 Escort Wagon]

There are banks that offer pre-paid credit cards to teenagers, with their parents' approval. My daughter gets her allowance on one that USAA offers. It's gotten to the point where she hates cash - when she gets paid after babysitting, for example, she'll immediately give it to me and ask if I could transfer money to her card.

Apple should be happy, because that seems to be where the majority of her money goes (and yes I have regular backups in place for her computer).

Complete bullshit

[aichpvee]

What MP3s?! Where would kids even buy MP3s from if they did have credit cards? A few bands sell MP3 downloads of their music, but that's about it. All the major online music stores sell DRM'd AAC (itms) or DRM'd WMA (everyone else). I know that these kids are all ignorant enough to not even know there is a difference, let alone what that difference is, but everyone here on /. should know the difference and understand why it is an important distinction.

allofmp3.com

[sdo1]

You might as well just download off usenet or something because the legality is about the same. Don't kid yourself into thinking they're any more legit than the "free" sources.

-S

Re:allofmp3.com

[senatorpjt]

allofmp3 is more convenient.

And, I always hear how much cheaper allofmp3 is than itunes. Well, if you download high quality files, it isn't really that much cheaper. I think that demonstrates more than anything, that if files could be bought legitimately as high quality files without DRM, that people would do it.

They need to realize that as long as the illegal files are still available, their real choices are to either make money selling what people want, or not make money not selling it. The idea of preventing the actual download is only theoretical.

Wait a minute

[/dev/trash]

You pay your own kid to babysit??

Re:Wait a minute

[93 Escort Wagon]

Yeah, I hand her the money and then she immediately hands it back... :-D

Sorry, I meant when she babysits for other people!

Bank-card discrimination in the UK

[lu-darp]

Coming from New Zealand, banking on the internet was really simple. I had a card that would spend MY money on the internet. This is called a "debit card": anyone can have one, no questions - because you're spending your own money. I've had one since I was 14 (some 16 years ago now), and even back then I could use it in stores with a PIN number. Once internet shopping was "invented" it also worked online.

I've since moved to the UK, and here it's a completely different story. If you don't put £1000 into the bank every month, you don't get a "good" debit card. (NB: I'm in the good category, so I'm not moaning about myself!) No... if you aren't rich enough, the banks give you some crappy card that only works in 30% of the stores and almost never on the internet.

Why do they discriminate like this????

The only logic I've come up woith is that it encourages "not-so-rich people" to go get Credit cards instead. I'm guessing the banks want you to spend their money on the internet. The "not-so-rich people" are more likely to get trapped not paying off the interest each month... and the banks cash in on the interest fees.

I guess this is the same bank-card black-hole that the school kids are in. Their parents and banks (quite rightly!) disallow them from usung credit cards.

SOLUTION: Why not simply give out "internet quality" debit cards to everyone with a bank account? Surely it's technically possible to check a bank account balance during an online transaction?!? They've managed to do it in NZ for 10+ years.

I'm interested: what's it like in the US? Other countries? Can people trivially spend their OWN money online, or are many people forced to use credit cards too?

Re:They don't buy MP3 files because nobody sells t

[sm62704]

The problem is that DRM does not work. There isn't a single tune on iTunes or anywhere else that you can't get from P2P. Those who want to use Kazaa use Kazaa. DRM only inconviniences those who are paying for the files and doesn't affect the P2P downloader one teensy bit.

DRM is stupid, as is anyone who would lock their art in it. DRM doesn't save one single sale or prevent one single illegal download, but it DOES cost sales. Lets see, I can have a free, unencumbered copy of that file or an expensive one with restrictions. Really hard choice there, eh?

The recording (yours, I'm sure) industry is run by witless, amoral, unethical people whose mothers should have used birth control.

In New Zealand, MP3s Buy You!

[Motley Phule]

It's even worse here in Aotearoa. Here they sell ipods very successfully (all the kids have 'em), and we can use iTunes; but we don't have access to the iTunes music store! Of course this means that all the kids must be converting their legal cds into legal MP3s, otherwise who could use them?

Don't fix what ain't broken

[Sarcastic Assassin]

The author maintains that since regular record shops don't sell MP3s, or gift cards to places that do sell MP3s, its practically impossible for teens to buy legit MP3s on their own.

Who wants to walk out of a record store with a card with which to buy music later, rather than a physical copy of an album?

Too many of these posts seem to be missing the point. Sure, you can buy iTunes cards at Walmart (or the British equivalent), but what teenager hangs out in Walmart? Maybe if they sold iTunes cards at McDonalds or the local pizza joint, they might see a small bump in sales.

Addressing the larger question, teens don't buy legit MP3's because it doesn't make sense to fix what ain't broken: Napster was popular before online music stores were, and was a convenient, easy way to get the music you wanted. I used Napster when I was 13, and when it was taken down I moved to Kazaa. Why? Probably because online music stores weren't popular yet (if memory serves me right; if not, please feel free to correct me). My point is a teenager would rather find another program to download music (music that is of acceptable quality) than convince their parents to let them spend money (money of their own, or their parents' money) to download music. (On a personal note, I'd rather download an album than buy it, but if I Really Like(tm) the album, I'll buy a physical copy)

I also question how often and how much an average teenager downloads. I'll probably download about an album a week, but I almost never get around to listening to it (they're usually archived), and more often than not I'll delete it after I do listen to it. Hardly any of the albums I download make it into my regular-listen MP3 collection (which is ~1000 songs, and very few complete albums).

Re:Don't fix what ain't broken

[dangitman]

Who wants to walk out of a record store with a card with which to buy music later, rather than a physical copy of an album?

Plenty of people. For example, those who want to take ther time to decide what music to buy, and not be pressured into deciding on the spot based on what is physically in-stock at the store. Also, people buying for others - such as parents for the teens in question, or as birthday gifts. Would you rather have your parents decide what music to buy you, or would you raather choose yourself?

Of course, there are also those who are budgeting their music, and maybedon't want to buy a whole album. If I buy a music card or gift certificate, I can go and buy those songs I'm interested in. This leaves money aside for buying future items, I don't have to pay for a whole album if I don't want all the songs. So, I can manage my budget by buying $X per month in music cards. If I don't find anything I like that month, I still have the money in the "account" for when stuff does come out, but I am still sticking to my $X per month budget.

Lack of money, not lack of credit

[Belgand]

It's not that teenagers (and college students who are also a very large group for piracy) lack credit cards it's that as a group they largely lack money. Pirated music is readily available and since they're not physically stealing it from a store, but rather violating the copyright by acquiring it illegally it's easily justified. Combine this with a very, very low chance of being caught and punished people are going to do it.

A similar example would be speeding. It's viewed as technically illegal, but socially acceptable. While there is a (admittedly higher) risk of being caught it's low enough that most people do not view being caught and punished as a significant deterrant.

People have often shown that if they think they have a strong chance of getting away with it and especially if others feel the same way then there is no fundamental power behind something being illegal.

Ever see an mp3?

[Form-o-Stuff]

"since regular record shops don't sell MP3s... ...its practically impossible for teens to buy legit MP3s on their own." This is the voice of someone who doesn't know what an MP3 is. "I done ain't even SEEN one o these newfangled MP3 records. But maybe someday I'll throw away all these CDs and buy mp3s of 'em."

Re:They don't buy MP3 files because nobody sells t

[KenSeymour]

Songs are free on Kazaa, unless you get caught.

I prefer not to worry about finding myself in court someday trying
to explain to a judge how evil coporations are ripping off artists.

YMMV

iTunes != MP3

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not sure I agree with some of the conclusions here (you can buy iTunes cards at Walgreens)

Yeah, because we all know that iTunes uses MP3s...

Canada... no DUH

[thenewme91]

I don't know if anyone else noticed, but this article links to a PC World CANADA Article. Do any of you live in Canada?

FYI, Banks in Canada do not issue Credit Cards to persons under 18? Why? Because they need a credit check, for which permission can only be legally granted by a legal adult (person 18 or over, assuming they're not detached from their parents (you can be independant from your parents @ 16 and then grant the bank this permission) or whatever that legal term was). Want to be sure? E-mail Toronto-Dominion Canada Trust (TD Canada Trust), RBC Royal Bank, Scotia Bank, the Canadian Imperial Bank of Canada (CIBC) or any other Canadian bank and ask. Their websites can be found with Google.

Prepaid credit cards are sold in Canada as gift cards by two small bank companies in B.C., and the service fees are extravagant... not to mention no one has heard of the things. ( Visa and Mastercard think that Interac (see below) removes the necessity for prepaid credit cards. The government seems barely aware of them, since it doesn't recommend them as part of their choosing a credit card pages on their website. ) While it *IS* possible to get a debit card in Canada from a young age, this debit card only comes with the "Interac Direct Payment" service (and maybe access to PLUS in the USA). Until recently, it was impossible to use this online, and even now, with "Interac Online" only a few retailers support the system. Most Canadian retailers (iTunes Canada anyone? How about Canadian Tire? Best Buy? Future Shop?) still want credit cards... not to mention credit card companies are practically the only way to get money outside the country. (Interac is a CANADIAN debit system.)

I know things are different in the USA (prepaid credit cards) and UK (online debit) and other European countries (Swatch/Maestro or whatever), but at least look at the source. In Canada, where we probably have (I think) one of the lowest rates of population per square kilometer, kids can't buy legitimate MP3s online.

And there goes the problem of the Internet - it's world wide. But business isn't. And because laws are different in different countries. For now, anyway.

Re:They don't buy MP3 files because nobody sells t

[sm62704]

On Limewire too, and if you don't share your upload directory you won't get caught. Probably why the RIAA is suing them.

But there are a hell of a lot of songs out there that people WANT you to download, songs they've poured their soul into and put on P2P themselves. If I search for "scatterbrain" (and there are hundreds of different songs with that name) and I haven't heard of the artist (or whoever wrote the tags goofed) how am I supposed to know if it's legit or not?

Really?

[east coast]

From the blurb: I'm not sure I agree with some of the conclusions here (you can buy iTunes cards at Walgreens), but it's an interesting discussion.

Everytime you add another step into purchasing your product you're going to lose some more of your customer base. The same 13-17 year olds that don't have a credit card normally don't have a drivers license. So unless Walgreens is within a few blocks of your home these kids are even more SOL. My guess is that most of the population doesn't live within walking distance of Walgreen.

The only flip side to this that I can see is that if these kids are willing to go and buy iTunes cards are Walgreens they'd probably just walk to Sam Goody and buy CDs too.

Re:Really?

[shark72]

"So unless Walgreens is within a few blocks of your home these kids are even more SOL. My guess is that most of the population doesn't live within walking distance of Walgreen."

If a teenager is not capable of either (a) getting to the store or (b) having a parent buy something for them at the store, then they likely don't have an MP3 player, either. Buying an MP3 player is remarkably similar to buying music: if you buy it online, you typically must use a credit card, and if you buy it at the store, you can use a credit card, or cash. Or, you might receive either as a gift.

In short, it's not intrinsically easier for a teenager to obtain an MP3 player than it is for them to obtain legal music. If they manage to get one, they can get the other.

Re:Really?

[east coast]

I owned a skateboard. I didn't live near a skateboard shop. Think about it.

Re:Really?

[cr0sh]

My guess is that most of the population doesn't live within walking distance of Walgreen.

Unless "most of the population" lives "out in the sticks" or BFE (which I doubt, otherwise it wouldn't be called "the sticks" or BFE), I really doubt it.

I live in Phoenix, Arizona - the greater metro area is pretty big. Certainly not as big as LA or NY, but pretty large, and growing constantly (which sucks, IMHO, because I enjoy our desert beauty). There seems to be a Walgreens on every corner. Indeed, I have seen Walgreens move to opposite corners of an intersection - most of the time because they were in a strip mall that was going south. Furthermore, if it isn't a Walgreens, it's an Osco or CVS.

I have a Walgreens within walking distance from my home. Closer to home is an Albertsons with an Osco inside it. Across the street from the Walgreens is a Fry's grocery store, and on the other side is a Circle K. On the last corner is an Autozone.

I am sure there are many people who don't live near a Walgreens, even in the Phoenix area. Most of these people are likely living in new subdevelopments in areas which were once considered "the sticks" not too long ago (
It is really funny to see this herd mentality. Many of these people came to the Phoenix area or moved to these new subdevelopments to "get away from the 'city'", but in the end they end up recreating exactly that which they were trying to escape. The truth is, they can't live without it. If they could, they wouldn't move a mere 20 miles or so away - they would be out in scrubland 100 or more miles out, with their own well (or water tanker/truck), septic system (and/or methane digester), solar/wind/water system for electricity, DirecTV for entertainment/broadband, and cell phones for other communication (or nothing at all, depending on how far out they are). It galls me to see this, as these people are doing nothing more than wasting natural resources, of which we don't have as much as people think we do here in the desert (duh, that's why it is a desert). We're beginning to fight with Nevada and California for water already, and it is only going to get worse. If people were intelligent (I can dream, can't I?), they would congregate within cities in the desert, and build vertical instead of sprawling horizontal, while attempting to use and preserve the natural environment, instead of raping it. The most intelligent would attempt to implement more of Paolo Soleri's arcology and desert living ideas. We need think in more of a "hive" mindset when it comes to living, cities, and scarce resources, especially here in the Phoenix area - because even a city can become a ghosttown if the water runs out.

pre-paid CCs and debit cards are available

[Haydon Jurai]

While I cannot attest to their legality and availability in Canada, in the US not only can this age group open a checking account and receive a VISA or MC debit-card (that can be used just like a credit card), but anyone can purchase a pre-paid VISA or MC, regardless of age. For more info, google:
prepaid credit cards

I think a lot of you have a misguided perspective.

[Anonymous Coward]

The guy who said downloading music is comparible to stealing a car is obviously very simple minded. Copying music doesn't cost anything to the maker. It is a theoretical loss. While stealing a car directly causes someone to lose something worth thousands. Also just so you know most dealerships let you test drive cars Einstein.

Here's my point of view. I do download music all the time, but I buy what I like in a physical format and delete what I don't like. Or I simply keep the music I do like, but can't find anywhere else. If I couldn't try music before I bought it, then I would probably have about 5 cd's total instead of buying over 50 in the last year alone. Surely musicians have profited way more from my free downloads than they potentially and theoretically lost due to my download habits.

As for buying mp3's I think that is also useless to begin with. Why would I pay nearly full price for an inferior product? I'd rather try it for free and buy full fidelity Cd's than pay $10-14 per album for a lossy format. When companies start selling music on a lossless format like .shn online then I'll consider paying for it.

Why? Simple. Convienence.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's just easier to be sittting at a friend's house and tell them about your new favorite band and have them fire up LimeWire/whatever (yes, I know LimeWire is horrendous. Most teenagers use it. It sometimes works despite being Java-based, and it's easy enough for them to understand) and download some of their songs/albums than to have to show them the songs you happen to have with you, track the album down, and buy it with/for them.

No online music purchase service has every song by every artist, but large distributed P2P networks can come fairly close (or close enough for most teenagers). Often a song isn't on the service it should be on.

Also, differing DRM from different stores that prevents use of some/most MP3 players makes finding a track legally online even harder. But it's not creating a push to buy more physical CDs rather than tracks from online stores. Instead teenagers just download the MP3s, because it's a thousand times easier than driving or finding a ride to the store.

Credit cards are also an issue. Buying online is impossible without a credit card and there's no point in going to buy or using a gift/refill card as it defeats the entire point of music buying online (that it's simple and quick).

Thus teenagers download. Until someone can find some sort of method to A) Prevent piracy alltogether (utterly, completely, undeniably impossible) or B) Provide a simple, non-DRM-encumbered, diverse music store that does not require a credit card (how do you buy stuff online without a credit card? how do you cut agreements with lots of indie bands and the RIAA at the same time? How do you do all of the above without DRM?) piracy will continue.

I guarentee it.

Uh, Not so much.

[nkuzmik]

I'm not sure I agree with some of the conclusions here (you can buy iTunes cards at Walgreens), but it's an interesting discussion.

Uh... not at my Walgreens... Nor at my Walmart, nor at either of the Targets in my area

....only took them a decade for it to sink in

[StormKrow]

...I've only been saying this for 10 years now. These numbers of "estimated profit losses" are completely fabricated because teenagers wouldn't be able to purchase "legit".....only took them a decade for it to sink in....so it's going to take 50 years for the RIAA to get it thru their head, they're fighting a losing battle.

CCs not the root of the problem

[Risen888]

You're Big Music. You spend multi-millions every year telling the teenage demographic "All your friends already have this, you know you want it, it'll make you smarter, funnier, and more attractive to the opposite sex," then price it out of their range (most of them, at any rate), and then have the gall to be shocked - SHOCKED - when they take the illegal (not to mention easier and more reliable) route?!

This economic model is dead! Deceased! It has ceased to be!

...maybe they haven't the money?

[DreadN]

Teens (or just people) don't buy mp3 because they haven't the money, or they don't want to spend money for. ...there are more important things before mp3 & dvds: - mobile connectivity - garments - drinks & food - fuel and tickets for mobility - periodicals & magazines Digital content is just not too much important to share a high percentage of founds from the weekly family income or some extra bucks from daily working, expecially at the thief prices it's sold. I mean: people all over world how many mp3 from P2P have donwloaded since the era of FTPs and P2Ps? Billions? Hundred billions? Multiply them by 0.99$ (the medium price at wich you can buy legal musc) by one trillion: you get 1/6 the public debt of an european country, it is worth to spend this money in music? I think no. I've got about 10-15.000 illegal mp3 (lot of them are in full rar discography) and 60-70 xvid on my media, and -i give you a hint- i'm not teenager, but university student, simply i'm not so stupid to spend the value of a car in mp3s when i can take them for free. If P2P one day will be completely erased, simply I'll stop listen music for something more useful.

Perhaps a solution ?

[mind_of_delusion]

I've note read the whole comments (too much for me ^^'), but I've thinked of one thing : In place like mine (France) where you have to own a credit card to use Paypal, ppl who don't have cannot buy anything on the net, online music included. So perhaps the solution could be, like the article says, to have PCs on stores, with the whole catalog of title on it ; it's nothing sureal, I'm used to work on stuff like that (for clients like SEITA (tobacco french firm), or TOTAL, or Photoservice (a big photo shop chain) etc. In this way, ppl can buy music on there classic music store, majors rent stuff and receive money for "location" of the music, and everyone is happy (just kidding there ;)).

You can still get that, actually.

[patio11]

a) Go to Bank of America, tell them you're a college student, ask for student checking (free for five years) and a linked credit card account ($500 max).

b) Go to any credit card provider. Get a card for $2,000, which they will give to you if you have a pulse and haven't previously been a deadbeat. Call their customer service line, ask to get your credit limit lowered. (Did you know you can negotiate just about ANY number on your credit card contract? Try it, its fun. If you've been good about being ontime, call up your credit card company and say "Hiya, I deserve a few points off my interest." Doesn't cost you a dime and the worst they can say is no. Similarly, you can ask for a credit line increase, a higher grace period, whatever.)

c) Go to a credit card provider specializing in subprime borrowers (Orchard, Capital One, etc). Get a low credit line because thats essentially what they default to giving people. (Stupid idea, though, as most will also charge an annual fee).

d) Secured card from your favorite lender.

MP3 players

[Oshkoshjohn]

Why people who listen to MP3 music are still screwing around with I-pod devices escapes me. My year-old 1-gig Samsung MP3 player with FM radio and voice recorder, when plugged in a USB port, looks like another drive on my Windows Explorer. Drag-and-drop some tunes, and then listen to them until they suck, repeat as necessary. I just saw the newest incarnation of my player for under 60 dollars at Best Buy.

Real problem!

[rtechie]

Back when I was working for an internet music company (around 2000), this was one of the "big issues" that I spend a lot of time discussing with my peers:

1. We want to sell music on the internet, particularly Top 40 music.

2. Currently, you need a credit card to buy stuff on the internet.

3. Most people who listen to Top 40 (13-19 year olds), do not have credit cards.

P: So how to you sell Top 40 over the internet profitably?

It's a problem we never solved, or even came close to solving. We did come up with solutions in retail involving kiosks in Korea and the UK that would take cash, but since Americans hate kiosks I suspect that wouldn't take off here. The notion of pre-paid cards was also considered but rejected because we would have to pay retailers to carry the things, and we would have to pay a LOT because the retailers we would want the most (record stores) considered us "the enemy".

The solution to the problem that seems most promising is combined cellphones/MP3 players that allow teens to purchase songs with prepaid phone credits. In 2000, teen cellphone usage wasn't anywhere hear what it is now and it wasn't yet common to make purchases (ringtones, games, etc.) through cellphones. Currently such combined decives suck ass, but eventually one of the cellphone manufactures will push out decent products (probably Sony, they seem to be the leader) and online music will become somewhat more popular.

Frankly though, a huge percentage of teenagers have more time than money, and it that situation they would much rather spend time hunting around on the internet for free music rather than pay anything at all. I consider this a GOOD thing because (hopefully) it will lead to the collapse of of the record industry in general. Most artists don't make a dime on album sales, in many cases they have to pay the labels to sell their music. ALL of the money comes from touring and swag. So it's not like the collapse of the industry would hurt artists.

Economics

[GWBasic]

The answer, deduced by simple economics, is that music is too expensive. Let's say a teenager makes, after taxes, $5 per hour. A legal album costs two hours of work. For two hours of time spent on the illegal P2P networks, the teen can get much more.

As a result, the music industry might want to consider selling downloads for about $3 / album. Specifically, the music industry is getting commoditized. There's no reason to spend $10 / downloaded album when the overhead is much less then a CD.

Credit cards are the only tool? I think not!

[RockDoctor]

The initial commentary about this deeply unimportant topic continually talks about the joys of giving teenagers credit cards. This might be a cultural lack in the United States, but here in the Real World (you know - those places that you need a passport to go to, and so most Americans are banned frrom getting to) there are things called DEBIT cards. Unlike a CREDIT card (where the card provider loans you the money that you spend, and hopes that you're going to pay it back later), a DEBIT card accesses money that you've already deposited into an account, and lets you transfer that money to another legal entity (say, a shop) for the exchange of a 16 (decimal) digit number and a 2, 3 or 4 (decimal) digit cross-check number. You see, it's rather similar to a CREDIT card, but has next-to-zero financial risk for the card management company (they already have your money before you spend it - they don't need to send the repo man round to get it).

Sheesh - my 14 year old step-daughter has a DEBIT card for her bank account, and I wouldn't have any qualms about giving her my (debit) card to get something off the net if she wanted it. Infact, I don't use anything else for shopping on the net, because there's no way that account can be raided for more money than is in it. Much safer than a credit card.

Come to think of it - that's the card that I used to set up my PayPal account with. So again, I really don't need to do anything but laugh at the incessant PayPal Phishing spam I get - the only thing that's at risk is the contents of that account - today thats £372.62, but I should get another couple of hundred quid of expenses in there next week.