Slashdot Mirror
Amazon to Open DRM-Free MP3 Music Download Store
mtnlion1 writes "Amazon.com announced it will launch a digital music store later this year offering millions of songs in the DRM-free MP3 format from more than 12,000 record labels. EMI Music's digital catalog is the latest addition to the store. Every song and album in the Amazon.com digital music store will be available exclusively in the MP3 format without digital rights management (DRM) software. Amazon's DRM-free MP3s will free customers to play their music on virtually any of their personal devices and burn songs to CDs for personal use."
I wonder what strings they were able to pull to get this moving faster/better than iTunes has... hurm....
Will it only be music from the EMI catalog?
They have the section of their site where individuals can sell things as "used" , will they expand this so that unsigned bands can sell their MP3's without a recording label behind them?
I'm a fiscal conservative, it's a pity we don't have a political party anymore
You know, I'm about as big of an Apple fanboi as you're likely to meet... But even I am excited about this, and am hopeful that it's the beginning of a change in the industry.
And it could be even bigger: If the music industry can start treating their customers like clients, instead of vermin, then perhaps there's hope for the airlines (motto: we fucking HATE our customers).
A boy can dream.
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by mere idiocy.
I believe 'premium content', as used by the ahem 'content industry', means "content that we need to recoup advertising dollars on"
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
OK seriously, are people going to live in the past forever? While I don't intend on getting rid of the mp3's I do have, it isn't mp3's that people should be making, and especially, buying, now. MP4/AAC has been around for a while now, and there is no excuse for non-WMA stores to not be selling it... the quality at any given bitrate is significantly better... and even if you can't notice it because of poor ears, a poor audio system, or just general lack of caring... it's the future.
As for people saying things like "Goodbye iTunes"... why do you think this is any different than what iTunes is doing? iTunes is adding the EMI catalog plus a ton of independant labels (and of course, the other big ones as long as they sign on. Why do you think the Amazon store is any different? I think you can pretty much rest assured that near-everything Amazon gets will be on iTunes... and I have a hard time imagining that anything Amazon releases could beat the integration and ease of use of iTunes and iTunes Music Store... and from there, the iPod.
-Daniel
No mention of price in the article. While this sounds great, each song could be .50 or $5.00. This will dictate how cool it really is.
It's one of those words like "heritage" that has been soiled by its overuse in certain contexts.
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
Non premium songs are displayed in the form of sheet music, and can be played an unlimited number of times, provided that number is 5. Songs may only be played on RIAA approved Xylophones, which can be leased at $70 a month.
I have nothing compelling to say
Well, eMusic already has MP3 songs available, although most of the music is from independent artists. They only charge about 30 cents a song. This is my biggest problem with iTunes. They charge almost the same price as the physical CD for a file transfered over the internet. Cutting out the entire distribution chain, along with losses due to breakage and theft, and there's no physical materials required, and they are still charging $11 for an album. I imagine that Amazons pricing will be right inline with iTunes, which will be either 99 cents a song, or 1.29 like the iTunes songs that they will be releasing in MP3 format.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
As for people saying things like "Goodbye iTunes"... why do you think this is any different than what iTunes is doing?
Because many of us, myself included, will not, ever, intall iTunes or use the iTMS.
Amazon, OTOH, as evil as we may all consider Bezos' 1-click patent, has the right idea. When you buy digital media from them (or if you buy physical items with a digital manual), it just goes into your account's Media Library. Totally platform (as well as specific-machine) agnostic; If you can run a web browser on any machine anywhere in the world, you can log into your Amazon account and download what you have in your account (and as many times as you want).
I have a hard time imagining that anything Amazon releases could beat the integration and ease of use of iTunes and iTunes Music Store... and from there, the iPod.
Exactly - And I don't want any of the three of those, much less all three.
Not to mention the obvious Slashdot cry of protest, "iTunes on Linux?"
Well, as far as devices goes, here's the reasoning. Because it's currently very expensive (or impossible?) to get chip decoders for OGG Vorbis, because of lack of demand. So, the other option for decoding OGG Vorbis is a generic processor, which if you want one with enough power also costs extra dollars, and requires a lot of extra electricity. In the small-is-good, and our-player-plays-for-54-hours world of portable music players, supporting tons of formats isn't the best idea. Supporting the one format that everybody uses is the best idea.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
It's probably a bit premature for that declaration.
/. post :). I've since found a great deal of music I never knew I liked (or loved). Now, I have $14.11 credit at ITMS that has been there for about 6 months and will proabably never be used. Oh well.
Quality notwithstanding, people are trying to buy music they like, not music they can play anywhere or in whatever format they want, or even the best possible quantity. Naturally those things are important, but if someone wants a single song off an album, they'll buy the DRM version at iTunes if they can't get it anywhere else. They are not going to buy some track they don't know or care about just because it's available at high quality with no drm in their favorite format. Content is of the first importance.
I have to admit, I was pretty taken up with ITMS until a good while back, but then I found eMusic (Thanks to a
Another thing: I've actually replaced a pretty good deal of the music I already paid for at ITMS. Some single songs I purchased there were from albums I initially didn't want to purchase whole, but when you cruise the used disc section at Newbury Comics or (in a pinch, since they're more expensive) Strawberries, you find some surprising stuff.
One day, maybe I'll use my ITMS credit for something, but over the last year, I've spent more on hard copies and on eMusic than I've spent on ITMS, and my ITMS spending still adds up to a LOT more than I spent in the 10 years prior to getting an iPod.
Bottom line though, while I'm still more interested in buying music I like than buying formats, I have changed my method of buying that music. That's what's eventually going to put a damper on the ITMS juggernaut. It is certainly not going to happen because a single (or even a few) of the big companies made special deals that allow customers to spend an arm and a leg to get a moderate quality, DRM free copy of the music they steal from the artists. Besides, as mentioned by a previous poster, Jobs is trying to get rid of DRM, he's just dragging his feet about it and seems to be willing to increase the price, rather than dropping it.
There doesn't have to be a trick. Amazon is late to the party, so they are trying to play this up as much as possible. I like to call it "Viral Marketing". They are playing the DRM-FREE card, but, so is everyone else now. Meh. Is this really news? Amazon has always been about expanding what if offers. This is simply another product.
What might make this special, though, is if charge less than 99 cents or less. That iTunes is charging 30 cents more for DRM-free is a crock. "Look, it is DRM-free, surely that is worth 30 cents more?!" Um, no, it isn't.
I am not the tarket market here, though. I only buy used CDs and have never purchased an MP3. The pricing of new CDs is still too high for my tastes and 99 cents for one song is far too expensive.
Maybe if my money was going to a charitable cause, I might pay 99 cents. I am curious, though, with MP3 over the net distro being the future, what is holding more artists back from being indie and reaping more profit on their own hard work?
Bearded Dragon
Seems like Cowon (aka iAudio) has figured these problems out. Many of their players support Ogg and FLAC. I nag them from time to time to add Matroska to the list of formats their video players support.
He's wrong. The big difference?
"One Moment Please.
Connecting to the iTunes Store.
Loading
We are unable to find iTunes on your computer. "
You apparantly cannot buy MP3 (or anything else) without the iTunes application installed. I cannot do that on my workplace machine (well I could, but I won't). I cannot do that on my home machines because they're linux. Well, if I could, I would not. But if I can access a huge library of MP3 for a reasonable price and use just my web browser...well pretty much a given, isn't it?!
MP3s became very popular because the files were relatively small and hence, easier to download. There was a huge boom in downloaded and shared MP3s. But that was then (some 5-8 years ago), and this is now. We gots bandwidth. Why not offer the tracks in a lossless compressed formal, like FLAC? Or heck, uncompressed PCM? If I'm going to pay for the actual song, I want it in the best quality possible.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
Excuse #1: Cannot play MP4's on an MP3 player
Explaining to the average music consumer that they need to upgrade their MP3 player to an MP4 player is like explaining to a person with cataracts that they need to upgrade from regular TV to HD. Sure, it's the future, but don't expect them to run to the store any time soon. Without a groundswell of new consumers flocking to MP4, retailers are hard pressed to justify moving to MP4. Again, think HD.
Perhaps someone should find a legislator to sponsor a bill to require music retailers to move to MP4 by 2010 so we can be forced to pay for high-definition music along with our high-definition video.
Error:
Exactly - And I don't want any of the three of those, much less all three.
Especially ease of use. I hate that.
-Ted
-=-=- Quantum physics - the dreams stuff are made of.
As with the MP3 format [3] , no licenses or payments are required to be able to stream or distribute content in AAC format. [4] This reason alone makes AAC a much more attractive format for distributing content, particularly streaming content (such as Internet radio).
However, a patent license is required for all manufacturers or developers of AAC codecs. [5] It is for this reason FOSS implementations such as FAAC and FAAD are distributed in source form only, in order to avoid patent infringement.
AAC requires a patent license, and thus uses proprietary technology. But contrary to popular belief, it is not the property of a single company, having been developed in a standards-making organization.
"It ain't a war against drugs.it's a war against personal freedom" --Bill Hicks
Because it's currently very expensive (or impossible?) to get chip decoders for OGG Vorbis, because of lack of demand.
That may have been true a few years ago, but most of the current Portable Media Players are more than capable of handling the decoding of OGG files and would be pretty trivial to add support to their players. I really think their is a more of a "politcal" reason for not supporting OGG files anymore (not sure what it is, but for some reason companies don't want OGG files catching on).
BTW: I just purchased a Sandisk Sansa e260 series player to be used with my entire collection of OGG Vorbis files - the trick is to simply install Rockbox on it to use instead of the crap firmware it comes with.
"Amazon's DRM-free MP3s will free customers to play their music on virtually any of their personal devices and burn songs to CDs for personal use." I love how we as a society now have to specify that our MP3s are "DRM-free" just like we do with food products. Steroid-free, DDT-free, pesticide-free... And then they go on to specify all the wonderful capabilities of DRM-free MP3s.
50 cents in bandwidth??? Even at S3 prices ($0.13/GB in bulk), which are surely more than they are paying, a whole album in WAV format would cost about $0.09. MP3 format will be a fraction of that. Their only real cost of distribution is the cost to run the store. Most of the money must be going directly to the record companies.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
The reason is that MP3s play in every player without conversion. Most players can't convert on the fly. Media Monkey can, though not to MP4 yet, and even with a fast machine its slower than a straight copy,
I would prefer FLAC (or even APE, since I just transcode to FLAC), but to be popular you have to be simple. MP3 is simple. You also need to appear to be "compact", so they'll proabably send them out at 128 or - if we're luckly 192kb. That may sound silly, but imagine the iTMS commercial that touts "If you download from iTMS, your player will hold twice as many songs as the leading competitor." Stupid but true.
Now, if they were to offer a FLAC option, that would be awesome - but I'm not holding my breath. Somebody needs to swipe the AllOfMP3 engine, if you want to know my opinion. Now that the DRM beast is retreating, you may as well let people download whatever bit rate they want.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
I cringe when I read phases like "our consumers".
Consumers - mindless drones, who have a singular purpose (to consume)
Customers - that's a little better.
"our consumers" - the people (yes, people) who are put here to consume our products (and this time they will pay a premium to do so!)
I know, hard to believe that allofmp3 can't be trusted, right?
I've learned that they're worthless, so I don't read AC comments anymore.
Yes, and although there are a lot of people who will pay $.99 for a digital music file, I am not one of them. I think that as people start to have a larger variety of things to spend their money on, they'll see that the $11 they are spending on an album of digital files isn't worth it anymore. They are already complaining that teenagers aren't spending as much on music as they used to. And thats because they have other stuff that they'd rather buy, like video games, designer clothes, cell phones, and a whole bunch of other stuff that kids didn't spend their money on 30 years ago.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.