Slashdot Mirror
Puretracks Music Store Drops DRM
khendron writes "The Canadian online music store Puretracks (a store I have generally avoided because of their Microsoft-specific solutions) has announced that it will immediately start selling part of its catalog as DRM-free MP3 files. The site's unprotected catalog, which includes artists such as The Barenaked Ladies and Sarah McLachlan, will initially feature only 50,000 of its 1.3 million tracks, but their number will grow weekly. The Globe and Mail says the move will likely profit Puretracks because its DRM-free-music will be playable on iPods. It quotes one industry watcher saying 'We're seeing the death of DRM.'" Essentially Puretracks is relaxing the major-label mandated DRM rules that it had initially applied to all labels, even the indies that wanted no part of DRM.
...as the from the apple-could-do-this dept. statement opines, but only for the artists and/or labels with direct legal standing to make such a request with Apple. Hint: it's not anywhere near the number people think it is. Even some artists who sell or provide DRM-free music via other channels may not actually have such a (legal) capability with Apple, for example, because their label's contract with Apple (or other stipulations) doesn't currently allow it.
And while we're at it, let's fix the title of this submission:
Puretracks drops DRM from less than 4% of its tracks; even less when you consider well known commercial artists on major labels; changes format and delivery mechanism for such songs
Let's face it: like it or not, that's important.
I do agree that Apple should aggressively work toward this, and they should absolutely drop the "all-or-nothing" mentality with DRM on the iTunes store, because dropping all DRM at once won't work. They definitely need to start somewhere, even if it's with relatively unknown artists and/or labels. Consider, too, that some of Apple's existing contracts may have stipulations that all other music sold on the same store or via the same mechanisms have the same protections.
The article notes:
Essentially Puretracks is relaxing the major-label mandated DRM rules that it had initially applied to all labels, even the indies that wanted no part of DRM.
What if Apple isn't currently in a legal, technical, business, and/or support position to do that? What if it is, in fact, planning to do just that, but can't move quite as quickly as people seem to think it should be able to. This isn't a "2-3 day" operation as some people think it should be. It may be months before any fruits of this are seen on the iTunes Store.
Consider further that Apple may not want to sell, e.g., MP3 format specifically, for a variety of reasons. If a label (like EMI, which is talking to everyone BUT Apple about its possible no-DRM experiment - perhaps some ulterior motives of their own?), specifically wants "unprotected MP3", what if Apple's format of choice is "unprotected AAC"? Should Apple start selling multiple formats as well as multiple protection levels? How much of the years-proven consistency of operation and ease of use should Apple sacrifice on the iTunes Store?
There are a lot of unknowns here that don't automatically mean that Apple "doesn't really want to drop DRM."[1] Yes, actions speak louder than words, but Jobs' landmark statement on DRM, concisely shredding any arguments in favor of DRM, is, in fact, a pretty big action in itself. But Apple has a lot invested in the iTunes Store ecosystem, and they're not going to make rash decisions, screw things up, break support models, confuse customers, or do anything that would cause them to lose one or more large commercial content providers.
So while other fringe and marginally known stores may be able to make moves in this direction, it's a delicate situation for Apple. Hopefully Jobs' strong words, which have already caused a firestorm of circling wagons among some pro-DRM entities, and other stores with the luxury of being able to move more quickly into experimental areas, will push the balance toward "no-DRM". Regardless of what the bloggers and pundits think, who instantly came out with all of these "Apple doesn't really want to get rid of DRM" arguments believing this was a carefully crafted PR play, Jobs' DRM statement is the strongest stance from anyone at such a high level in music and media, and that's exactly what it will take to move the industry forward.
[1] Also, Apple doesn't use "DRM" or trusted computing/TPM on Mac OS X, in any way. The restriction is a manifestly a licensing one, and any technical difficulties of running Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware are incidental (even if intended to make it non-trivial).
I wonder if this is just a variation on a theme we've seen before:
1. Drop DRM on a bunch of music that nobody cares about
2. Collect sales figures for 6 months
3. Issue a report saying that sales did not increase for non-DRM'd music - "See, removing DRM doesn't make people want to buy more music!"
Insisting on "correct" English is like saying that there is only one, definitive recipe for chili.
I was a very early adopter of MP3s. I converted much of my collection in the mid to late 90s when conversion took place at 0.5x real time on standard home PC. That said, I have never bought one track online. Why? DRM. Funny thing is, I hardly buy CDs anymore either.
DRM-free music may actually motivate me to get excited about buying music again. It may also, however, hasten the death of CD-based commercial music sales. Ability to rip from a CD and yield DRM-free content seems to be one of the few remaining advantages of this format. Why the heck would I drop $14.99 for a CD now if I can just grab the one or two tracks that I like for a fraction of that price? Sure, I may not discover deep tracks that do not enjoy radio play, but this still does sound like a major advantage to me. How many of us have CDs that seem like a collection of marginal tracks surrounding the one or two that we actually like?
Boing Boing debunks this story. In brief: stay the hell away.
sulli
RTFJ.
When I bought my wife her Sony Network Walkman she decided to try Puretracks so that she could get digital music legally. After a week and the realization that "we won't let you copy the songs *you bought* off your computer", she dropped them like a hot rock.
"I'd rather get my music illegally, and have them work on my MP3 player," she said.
"No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
If you go to the Canadian site and you're not in Canada it moves you on to the US site.
So we need someone in Canada to verify the story.
Otherwise you will be condsidered a hypocrit and ignored.
EMusic has been around for years. Everything on the site is MP3.
They don't seem to be having any business difficulties. And for the record, I've been a subscriber for years.
Wrong. Click the "MP3" link (4th item on the menu bar at the top of the page). Although I suppose I have to take into consideration that you may not be aware that MP3s contain no DRM.
Or, if that's too much work, click here: http://www.puretracks.com/content/viewer.aspx?cid
Why on earth should I buy from Puretracks when I already buy from other sites that offer DRM-free downloads (emusic and dgmlive mostly) and physical CD's for things not available DRM-free.
That makes me a hypocrite because I am not buying from one specific store? Do I have to buy milk at every store in town to prove I believe in a free market?
They are not the first: Emusic was first to sell (mostly) indy music in a large-scale DRM-free way.
there are a lot of other online stores that not only sell non-drm, music they also provide oggs, flacs, ability to re-download...
:)
actually, one of them - magnatune - was recently integrated in amarok.
after that, there have been several interested parties in such integration, all of them providing unencumbered tracks in free formats.
an amarok developer is working on a generic music store interface, so it should be even easier to purchase such music and increase music available.
of course, this unified interface is still some time away, but until that everybody can go to magnatune or any other shop that is not only selling non-drm stuff, but also providing it in open an high-quality formats
Rich
The RIAA specifically does not exist in Canada. That's a U.S.-only cartel for American-based record labels. In Canada, there's the CRIA, which is made up of the Canadian branches of those major labels, plus whatever Canadian-based indies have decided to join. So it's basically the same thing, but specific to each country.
This poo is cold.
The easiest way to become a leader is to find out which way the crowd is going and jump in front.
All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
Two clicks is too much to expect from the average Slashdot bandwagoner, I guess.
I followed your link, and got this error page.
I suppose it might be the case that this system for auto-redirecting all Mac users to an error page dates from the time when all their songs were DRMed, and hasn't been updated. But it certainly doesn't convey the impression that they've changed anything.
I am in Canada, btw.
Judge: Son, why did you steal this Ferrari?
Me: I think Ferraris are too expensive.
Judge: Ah, case dismissed.
Ah, another enlightened analogy between real property and intellectual property.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
...and not only that, available only to canucs? Seems to limit who can claim to be honoring a promise to support non-DRM'ed content. Yep, this is really going to make a splash in the music world.
What's the point, other than some site smaller than Balmer's nuts trying to gain more exposure...?
The Canadian one, available only to people in Canada, sells WMAs and the new MP3s. The US one (which everyone else outside Canada gets, because I'm in Spain) sells only WMAs.
If you see a Mac error page it makes sense because you're not in Canada and can only download WMAs.
If you checked the links to MP3s that posters have given and you get told you're being sent to the US shop, now you know why.
Finally, it might be useful to bear in mind that the world doesn't revolve around the US. Not completely, anyway.
As said earlier by myself and a few others, you can only buy DRM-free tracks if you live in Canada, or at the very least if you are not coming from a US IP address.
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, though I'm not yet sure about the universe. - A Einstein
After reading a lot of people from the USA claiming this was bullshit and making a big fuss about it (something you do a lot of) I went to the site myself, and sure enough, there's PLENTY of albums available in MP3 format.
= GlobalNav_MP3.
I live in Canada and we're seeing the links. I suspect that since the RIAA rules your dominion, you guys are stuck living in a DRM world for Puretracks but for Canadians, we're finally seeing some MP3's on this site.
You guys gotta stop flaming other people and claiming the story is bullshit until you do a little research. Just because you live in the US doesn't mean that you can get to it. It's the same thing that pisses me off about American websites that advertise the ability to stream TV shows but the moment I try it, no luck because I live in Canada.
BTW, since I have bought stuff from Puretracks in the past, I received an email from them just prior to reading the post on Slashdot. Here's a copy of the letter.
----
Thank you for being a Puretracks customer. We are very excited to announce that as of today Puretracks will be offering MP3 files for sale on our site at Puretracks.com: http://www.puretracks.com/content/viewer.aspx?cid
And as the first North American digital service provider to launch 'a la carte' MP3 music downloads, we're happy to offer you a free MP3 track from the popular Canadian band The Barenaked Ladies.
The track, called 'The Sound of Your Voice,' will be delivered along with the February 27th Puretracks newsletter. You will need to be a registered newsletter subscriber to be eligible to download this track.
If you don't currently receive our newsletter (filled with weekly free tracks and exclusive content), click here to register.
MP3s at Puretracks
MP3 tracks are easy to download (no licenses required) and can be played on all digital audio devices. Puretracks currently offers over 50,000 tracks in French and English from popular artists such as: Sarah McLachlan, Broken Social Scene, Feist, The Barenaked Ladies, Jean Leloup and Richard Seguin. Track prices starting at $ 0.79 each.
Be sure to register now for the Puretracks newsletter to get your free MP3 track from The Barenaked Ladies! Click here to register. If you are already registered, watch for your February 27th Puretracks newsletter to get your free track.
Regards,
Alistair Mitchell,
CEO
No matter how fast computers get, you'll always be waiting - Matt Klem
No no no. You mean "Warner Executive".
WE: Son why did you copy all these songs we didn't buy?
Son: I wanted them dad.
WE: Well son, you need to apologize and get rid of them and we'll call things square even tho we are suing dead people, people that don't own computers, and computer novices every day. It's an important lesson son- the rules don't apply to you because your in a "better" class of people.
Son: Ah dad, I get it! (Goes off to secretly download songs but now nows to do it more discretely).
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
What "charges"? Theft? Nothing was stolen. Trademark? If the guy made it himself and didn't sell it, no. So what?
Just say no to car analogies.
First of all, the CEO of eMusic during the Napster Hearings was Gene Hoffman, and yes, he did agree with the court ordered injuction against Napster. Before he made that statement, he asked Napster to remove eMusic files from their index. He also asked that users who shared the songs be unbanned from Napster. Frankly, if I were selling unprotected music, I wouldn't call it "short-sighted" to ask another company not to let people give it away.
But eMusic wasn't just his company. Hoffman cofounded the company with Bob Kohn. Before that, both of them served on the board for Pretty Good Privacy. I know. Total "asshats".
Either way, the current CEO is David Pakman who has been speaking out against DRM since long before Steve Jobs did.
While I agree with boycotting companies for their beliefs and behavior (I don't buy major label music or anything Sony), I have to call bullshit in this case. eMusic provides distribution for many small record labels in a way that lets their users play the music whenever, and on whatever digital music player they want. They are priced fairly (I pay ~ $.18 a song). They have a good business model, and they're legal.
I'm sure it is possible to rationalize not paying for music no matter how it is provided to you. And if the option to obtain it for free exists, you certainly can take advantage of it. But criticizing a good company in a public forum based on outdated information to justify your refusal to pay for music only makes you look like an asshat.
While I agree with most of your post, I have to nitpick on one point :
"The point of copyright is that the creators of intellectual property should be the ones who decide how their work is distributed."
This statement actually hurt me to read. The point of copyright is not to control the distribution of media, the point of copyright is to compensate the producer for their work - thus giving a monetary reason for them to continue producing something we as a society find beneficial. The arts aren't required for human life like food and water is, however, as a society we have created things like copyright to help promote something that we find valuable.
This debate should not be about if copying for free is right or wrong, it should be about compensating the artist for their hard work. Piracy doesn't do that, but honestly the majority of labels don't much either... it's obviously time we rethought our strategy altogether.