Slashdot Mirror
Sony and Universal Prohibit Sharing Via Zune
ack154 writes "Engadget has a story about Sony and Universal Music apparently denying Zune owners the ability to 'squirt' songs by certain artists to other Zune users. That's right, if you've actually purchased songs from the Zune marketplace and happen to run into another Zune owner, you're prohibited from sharing certain songs. From the article: 'In a non-scientific sampling of popular artists by Zunerama and Zune Thoughts, it looks like it's roughly 40-50 percent of artists that fall under this prohibited banner, and the worst news is that there's no warning that a song might be unsharable until you actually try to send it and fail.'"
So basically, the Zune is even more useless?
Why even bother including a transmission service if it isn't just limited to be barely useful, but not have it work at all for half of the songs you can legitimately get?
got sig?
Every song is treated identical, whether it's idie or big label crap it's all exactly the same.
So 40-50% of randomly-selected songs by two major labels can't be shared between Zunes. How much do you want to bet that the songs that can't be shared are top 40 hits and everyone already has them anyway? As long as people can still share indie labels and underground artists, then they can still expand their horizons by listening to songs their friends have and like. Personally, I just prefer a large LAN with everyone sharing their thousands of MP3s.
I remember reading about Steve Jobs complaining about the RIAA and the prices they want to charge (while he tried to keep it at $0.99 per song, regardless of song) and the RIAA complaining back that iTunes was too powerful and whatnot and was steamrolling them.
Now Microsoft was fairly nice to the RIAA and even paid them a royalty per MP3 player and now the Zune's most vaunted feature, their crippled wireless, can't even be utilized correctly. If the Zune had any steam amoung any geek circles (not that I think it did), this will surely kill it because it had few other advantages. It seems the RIAA and its member companies have royally screwed Microsoft.
I guess this shows how business truly gets conducted and how the RIAA should be dealt with when it is whining.
A present to Microsoft:
http://allaboutfrogs.org/stories/scorpion.html
So lemme get this right, Sony and other music companies that force Microsoft do implement DRM.. but Microsoft is still at fault?
Its not as if Microsoft has a choice in this matter.
I've said it 1000 times but I'll say it again:
I haven't paid for music in almost 10 years... until this year: I've spent almost $700 on AllOfMP3.com
And all the evidence points to the fact that I'm not alone. AllOfMP3.com is making millions.
Illegal? Yes. Sure, whatever. So is Limewire. And there's no potential for revenue generation there.
Say what you will about AllOfMP3.com but there's a profound lesson there that the labels and the RIAA should learn from:
They're getting people who don't spend money on music to spend money. That's huge.
When the "real, de-facto" option for consumers is free vs. DRM crippled -- they should be rejoicing the fact that
there is, in fact a middle ground: DRM-free, high-quality music (not 128bit crap) at a price that
makes sense given the lack of shipping, manufacturing and retail overhead.
I still contend that if the labels embraced the pricepoint and the formula they'd be making multiples over
what they're making now.
The problem isn't piracy. The problem ultimately is greed.
Their business model is hilariously weak, and instead of adjusting to market forces like all other industries
must do -- they're attempting to ram it down the throats of consumers.
Good luck boys.
------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
I don't get it either, but it's certainly not surprising to see the music industry completely fail to apply common sense and go out of their way to shoot themselves in the foot yet again.
On the other hand, I'm reasonably sure this move is going to end up costing Sony and Universal money, so there's that to be happy about.
Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
Universal is trying to psyche itself up to standing up to Steve Jobs and iTunes by demanding a cut of every iPod, I suspect this was part of the reason MS rolled over for Universal in the first place, 1% of every iPod is a fortune, 1% of every Zune is a pitance. When ever pressed, they stop short of saying they will pull their music from iTunes, I think they are well aware of the bottom line impact NOT being on iTunes would have, the ready to buy iPod owner will happily plunk down $.99 for a non-Universal artist that IS available, then blame the Artist for shunning them; killer recipie for popularity.
Compare that to the risk of not being available to Zune owners, or rather potential Zune owners who check store selection before buying a player. MS didn't do this out of the kindness of their hearts, the did it out of a desperate need to be competitive, the fact that it might hurt the other guy more than it hurt them is a footnote.
You are in a maze of twisted little posts, all alike.
If Microsoft can't make the application work as advertised or disclosed, they should offer a different set of features.
This is the best evidence yet that this whole "squirting" business was invented by an uninformed marketing department, that wasn't aware of the real-world limitations Microsoft's partners were going to place on the system.
For example, I'm sure someone would love to sell a radio that shows album art, but if doing so requires an internet connection for the radio, and regular updates of radio schedules from a web service, and rights negotiations, and on, and on, and on, the someone might want to consider selling something that would actually work, as opposed to something that's got bullet points up the wazoo but doesn't.
It isn't MS's fault the music is restricted, any more than it's Apple's in their case, but Microsoft's implementation within its restrictions is broken, and not going to win it converts in the MP3 market. Given, of course, that they're really serious about taking a share of the MP3 player market, or if all this isn't some twisted "tactical" maneuver to "position" some "platform" for some reason known but to Chair-Man.
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
Pretty much had my jaw drop on that one - in light of MS stating the Zune with its wireless sharing features will 'kill' the iPhone and iPod and such you would have thought the Music Industry would play all nicey-nicey till the Zune had some market share then start doing thier stuff.
"Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
It isn't MS's fault the music is restricted, any more than it's Apple's in their case
I'd argue that it *is* Microsoft's fault to some degree. I can't think of any major technology company that's been going in for DRM as heavily as they have been. Even Sony was happy with a mere root kit for their DRM, and backed off when enough people complained; whereas in Vista MS has added not one but two levels of access *beyond* the formerly root-equivalent Administrator level to support their DRM schemes, and requires specialized hardware support right down to the silicon for HD content's DRM.
Microsoft has tremendous influence in the market, they could have done a lot to keep things relatively sane if they tailored their systems to the needs of their customers rather than the media industry. And, with just a little marketing savvy, they could have made a mint doing it as well, as Apple's phenomenal success with kinder gentler and more consistent DRM schemes has shown.
The media companies may be pushing this bullshit too hard to stop entirely, but the tech companies owe it to their shareholders as much as their customers to push back for solutions that are, if not entirely and ideally free, at least *usable*.
"The worst tyrannies were the ones where a governance required its own logic on every embedded node." - Vernor Vinge
Well, if the marketplace decrees that Zune is doomed, I suppose the next logical step is for Microsoft and dia-RIAA to lobby the Donks in Congress to outlaw all non-crippled portable hardware, maybe titling the bill the Music Players With Disabilities Act.
Maybe the artists in question are only worth listening to a few times.
I think it's convience. It's worth a few cents to have a known-good, high-quality, easily downloadable song picked from a large selection. (Note that I don't use AllOfMP3, mainly because I just never got around to it)...
Um, iTunes tracks are in no way as crippled as Zune tracks.
It is Microsoft's own fault that they, one of the most powerful companies on earth, have bent over double-ass-backwards for the music corps. It's like they don't even TRY to negotiate--they do the most favorable thing the music corps can come up with, and hope that those good graces will somehow propel them forward.
Apple went to the table and hammered out a deal. Initiative wins the day over being a lickspittle. Fault: Microsoft.
Repetition does not transform a lie into the truth. - FDR
Tell me, what kind of leverage does Microsoft have to negotiate terms here? The people providing the content lose nothing if they exclude their music from Microsoft's service.
The options are:
1) put in the stupid DRM features and get a license to sell the specified content
2) don't put in the stupid DRM features, and watch as people continue to buy iPods because of the diverse selection of music available in the iTunes store
3) don't sell a device at all
You know, the stuff that the "legit" music distributors are supposed to provide.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Son, your life - and the people in it - scare the ever loving shit out of me.
Allofmp3 isn't substantially less expensive than eMusic. If eMusic can pay their bills, certainly the RIAA could emulate their model.
It's really much worse than that. For all the complaints, and the long-term rivalry between Sony and Microsoft, they are STILL selling computers only with Windows, and making software for their equipment Windows-only, going out of their way to shut-out Mac and Unix systems.
And with their huge product line-up, and money to invest, they could single-handedly do more harm to Microsoft (by switching to something like Linux on their machines, and making Linux-compatible software for their devices) than the more-often touted small-game players like Dell. Plus, it would probably pay off for them, as they'd have a far better chance of capturing the pro market with Unix workstations and notebooks, preloaded with digital multimedia software, than with the clumsy joke that is Windows' multimedia capabilities.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Tell me, what kind of leverage does Microsoft have to negotiate terms here?
Why on earth should Microsoft even negotiate terms? It's not like all those 80-gig iPods out there are filled with songs purchased through iTMS; most of what they're playing are mp3s, not AACs.
If Microsoft wants to sell a *music player*, they don't need to negotiate terms at all. They don't even need to fucking *talk* to the likes of Sony. This is *Microsoft*. If they want to capture a significant percentage of the music player market, and maybe even take some of that market away from Apple, then they shouldn't negotiate terms. They should worry about making a music player that people are going to *want to buy*. Like, maybe something that plays every damned format of audio you can stick on it, including Vorbis. Maybe something that features improvements over the iPod interface (and there are quite a few interface improvements that should be readily apparent to anyone who has used one).
You know, give the customer something he's willing to buy, at a price he's willing to pay for it. Why should MS talk to Sony and BMG and Universal? Shouldn't they be talking to their target customers, instead?
Sounds to me EXACTLY like everything else Microsoft has ever done...
Sure, they'll advertise the millions of things Windows CE can do, but just fail to mention it's ridiculously crippled, and just BARELY fits the most basic definition... "Word Processing" means a crappy equivalent of notepad, with no options and horrible input methods that make it impossible to use even for trivial, one-word notes. "Video player" fails to mention the limited formats, the horrible performance, the awful interface, the lack of any features above bare-bones file playback, etc.
Meanwhile, Microsoft's competitors have infinitely better products, but Microsoft manages to fit more buzzwords into the product release to trick people into believing it's anything but the complete piece of crap it is.
Sorry about the rant... But I see blatantly obviously dishonest crap like this from them just about every day.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Yeah pretty much your whole post is bullshit.
The reason Microsoft have to have restrictions on wireless (or indeed any) transfers is because if they didn't, Sony, Universal and everyone else would not license their music to be sold on the Zune market place and the Zune would be dead in the water.
Do you think that Microsoft enjoy all this bad press and confusion the crippled wifi functionality is bringing them? What exactly is in it for them asides from the teeny tiny percentage of the few sales they might see after a users' trial runs out and they buy the track in question? They'd make more money by not bothering with restrictions in the first place because they'd shift more units.
The reason Apple haven't put out a wireless mp3 player isn't because Microsoft simply 'beat them to it', it is because if Apple did, they'd be subject to the same restrictions. They decided that it'd be better than to leave it out entirely than to risk leaving users with a negative experience after dealing with all the record industries' draconian bullshit.
Anyone who thinks the iPhone is going to allow them to transfer music around freely like Mircrosoft 'should' have done with the Zune is in for a rude awakening. The way things are looking with the iPhone, you'll be lucky if you can set one of your mp3s as a fucking ringtone.
The fact that you think they haven't carefully thought about ALL of this simply stuns me.
Wow. That's incredibly pathetic. Is "Three plays or three days" not good enough for them?
The day the label companies start actually doing good for their customers and artists is the day hell freezes over.
Insert Sig Here
When has Microsoft ever made a product that sells on its own merit? Windows only owns the OS market because it's pre-installed on almost every PC on the market (thanks to the infamous IBM contract from the DOS days). MS Office won the office-suite wars because it fit the best with Windows. Their server and software development suites followed basically the same formula. Do I even need to mention Internet Explorer?
The XBox 360 is a possible exception. I believe it can compete in features, quality, and (most importantly) game selection with any other console on the market. On the other hand, it had a year-long head start on the competition, which the Zune certainly did not.
So it looks like Microsoft products have two ways to become successful: either integrate with an existing product in ways that the competition can't, or hit the market first with a must-have feature. The Zune did neither, and that's why it's failing.
In fact, I'd say that by now it's impossible for Microsoft to beat the iPod. As a portable device, there's hardly any room for OS integration (besides syncing, which iTunes handles well enough already). And there are very few features left for Apple to add to the iPod, especially now that they rolled a Wi-Fi-enabled smart phone into it.
What makes you think that the music labels would allow this feature any more than the Zune squirting? Additionally you portray it to be more permissive than the Zune version. So: is it more restricted, or will it be blocked by the RIAA?
if there is a hacked firmware upgrade that disables all the nastiness, would you buy it?
If you want to buy something you have to hack anyway - aren't there then a lot of other, better, devices to look at rather than a Zune? Like for instance the PSP which has a much higher resolution screen, or other devices that have keyboards. Realistically how useful is even a hacked Zune, when you can get other devices with even better raw features for around the same price?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Here's what happened at Apple:
Apple: Okay, it's $.99 or nothing.
MusicExec: But...
Apple: No.
MusicExec: We need...
Apple: No.
MusicExec: It's not enough...
Apple: No.
MusicExec: Okay fine.
Apple came up with FairPlay to give the Music people some peace of mind. As far as DRM goes, it's about as consumer friendly as I've ever seen. They've also limited iTunes sharing to the local subnet only. However, Apple also recognized that in order to grow the market they have to provide value to the consumer. Argue against that all day if you want. Millions of iPods and billions of tracks sold at the iTunes Music Store prove that they are providing value.
Here's what happened at Microsoft:
MusicExec: We need...
Microsoft: You got it.
MusicExec: We want...
Microsoft: Whatever makes you happy.
MusicExec: Jump.
Microsoft: How high?
Microsoft is not about creating value for consumers. It never has been. It's about dominating markets and doing whatever it takes to reach that end. Don't fool yourselves. Any value created for the consumer is an afterthought. This "limitation" was built into the Zune from the beginning. Microsoft is going to do whatever they can to get the labels to sign on so they have content to sell. This includes crippling the touted abilities of the Zune and paying the labels a percentage of each Zune sold. It has nothing to do with providing value to the customer.
Oh and one last thing. Do you really think the artists see anything of that $1 from each Zune sold?
For once in Apple's existance, they are competing in a market space with Microsoft where they are equal. They both sell music players, they both have music stores. May the best one win.
(and yes I'm voting for Apple)
"The avalanch has already started, it is too late for the pebbles to vote." -Kosh