Slashdot Mirror
Sony's Idea of DRM-Free Music
edmicman writes "Leave it to Sony to mess up DRM-free music downloads. What is the point of DRM-free tracks if you still have to go to a retail store to buy them? From the Infoworld article: 'The tracks will be offered in MP3 format, without DRM, from Jan. 15 in the U.S. and from late January in Canada... The move is far from the all-digital service offered by its rivals, though. To obtain the Sony-BMG tracks, would-be listeners will first have to go to a retail store to buy a Platinum MusicPass, a card containing a secret code, for a suggested retail price of $12.99. Once they have scratched off the card's covering to expose the code, they will be able to download one of just 37 albums available through the service, including Britney Spears' "Blackout" and Barry Manilow's "The Greatest Songs of the Seventies."'"
What a load of bollocks, so I go in-store, and instead of purchasing the CD and ripping them myself, I get a lower quality version already ripped.. wait a minute... this is going to be cheaper right?
Some other shops have got it right, like my local Virgin Megastore who let you pick any cd or 7/12", scan the barcode at a listening station and listen to it before I buy the physical cd... if I can't even do this in their stores, then they've got the completely wrong idea and are so disconnected from their own customers that I really feel quite sorry for them.
bad form to reply to my own post, for those who can't wait to get their hands on the amazing content listed in TFA and that are currently not in a position to get their card from the local store (due to financial, weather or ethical constraints) here you go:
http://torrents.thepiratebay.org/3823582/Barry_Manilow_-_The_Greatest_Songs_Of_The_Seventies.3823582.TPB.torrent
http://torrents.thepiratebay.org/3958971/Britney_Spears_-_Blackout_(2007)_Dance_%5BBYANOUS%5D.3958971.TPB.torrent
Seriously though, when Sony decided it was ok to include a rootkit with their music I think they did not realize just how much damage they were doing to their brand.
MP3 Search Engine
It means kids can buy them rather than having to rely on a credit card. They take up no shelf space so a lot of convenience stores can offer them rather than just record stores.
If you are in the US, you get the pleasure of also buying a ticket for the SUE me for all I got lottery. I am glad that I am not in the US... ;) in some places of the world it is legal to download anything..
Sony is, at the end of the day, a Japanese company, and Japanese companies seem notably inflexible when it comes to opening things up. It is entirely consistent with behavior I've seen from other Japanese vendors: they've never met a closed system they didn't like.
Sony is trying to prop up the existing music distribution chain. Instead of going into Wal-Mart to buy a CD, you instead go there to buy a card. Either way, you still had to go to Wal-Mart to get your music. Obviously Wal-Mart will receive some sort of profit off of that sale, in lieu of profit off of an actual CD.
I don't know if this is good or bad. On one hand, it may keep a music section in retailers a bit longer, providing a place to walk in and lay hands on a physical album set. On the other hand, that extra middle-man keeps the cost of music slightly higher. I think this is a fairly responsible thing for Sony to do, because it will help prevent a drastic change which could be detrimental in the short term.
Dan East
Better known as 318230.
Even in a number of Berne Convention signatory countries it is de facto legal because police do not prosecute piracy (and, in some cases, actually facilitate it). Sure, most nations on Earth might have been muscled into signing copyright laws, but add up the populations of countries where piracy flourishes, and it seems that the vast majority of the world doesn't recognize this odd concept of "intellectual property".
I swear I will never ever buy a Sony product again. No discs, no games, no console, no TV. Ok, I've bought more Yamaha, Sharp, Samsung, Bose, equipment but Sony are just trying to hard to have a place in my brain between the waffen ss and mike huckabee's son, so I'll gladly let them there and consider their products accordingly.
Not every country has the ridiculous fine/damage levels as the US. This means that in some countries, you could get caught without being indebted for the rest of your life.
No. But there is a major economic difference: If a car stereo costs $200 at retail, chances are that divides up as something like $125 for parts and assembly cost, $25 transportation costs, and $50 profit divided among manufacturer, middle-men, and retail outlet. For a digital download, "parts and assembly" costs (payment for studio time, session musicians, etc.) are a few thousand dollars ONCE, then never needs to be paid again, transport is dirt-cheap (on the order of pennies per track, even lower in volume), and once the initial costs are recouped, close to 100% of the consumer's cost is profit to the record company. (iTunes has a lower profit margin for the record companies as Apple gets a cut as well.) You will NEVER find that with a physical product.
And I would happily buy a car stereo (or GPS device) that retails new for $200 for $50 at a pawn shop - assuming that I'm fairly certain the owner of the pawn shop was not knowingly in receipt of stolen goods.
Loose things are easy to lose. You're getting your hair cut. They're going there to see their aunt.
You're right. Nobody I know in meatspace knew about it, and when I mentioned a "rootkit" the answer was "huh?" I had to explain what a rootkit was. I finally gave up.
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
I'd pay 12.99 just to NOT hear him ever again...Sony must really really WANT this to fail. Perhaps they're trying to generate some ammo for political talking points.
Pavlov wouldn't be so famous if he'd used a can opener instead of a bell.
"Copying and stealing are completely different. As much as I do not want to explain this yet again, I will. When you steal my car stereo, you have deprived me of it."
How many times must I see this inane argument? You are one of many complete morons who argue this day after day after day. The fact is you are lying when you say you do not want to explain it again. Spouting this nonsense probably releases endorphins in your brain and everytime you post this argument your little penis gets hard.
First, stealing does not have to deprive one of a physical object. You can steal many things which do not even have a physical object form. Second, there is an indirect deprivation when copying music without permission from the copyright owner. As much as you want to define the word "steal" for yourself, its English meaning is not under your personal control. Neither is its legal definition. In order to support your definition you would need to declare that 99.99999% of the population uses the word "steal" incorrectly.
For example:
"She stole my idea!" -- Certainly I can still have the same idea. I have not been deprived of the idea. Rather the meaning is that she deprived me of exclusive use of the idea. I have heard this phrase thousands of times in my life. All of the people who used it are obviously of inferior linguistic capability compared to you.
"To steal ones' thunder" "Steal a march on someone/something" "Steal a glance"
Obviously the word steal can involve the deprivation of a physical object, but only when the direct object is a physical object. When the word steal is used with a direct object that is not of finite physical form, deprivation may be indirect or non-existent. In addition, you can deprive one of something without stealing it.
When music is stolen, it can be stolen in many ways. For example, you could break into an artists studio and copy pre-release tapes, then release the songs as if they were your own. Would you call that stealing? You could also erase those tapes after they were copied. Would that be less ethical than the former? You could wait until they are released and copy them from a store bought CD. Is that more ethical?
The fact is that you do not have any "right" to listen to a musicians product without them being compensated. You do not have any right to copy that music for your friends. You do have a right to make a backup copy to preserve an ability to listen to the music that you have procured from the owner buy just compensation. If you do not believe that they deserve to make so much money, then don't listen to them.