Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

MySpace Digital Music Service Is DRM-Free

Posted by kdawson on from the little-music-with-your-gossip dept.

Anti-Globalism sends word that MySpace flipped the switch on its online, ad-supported, DRM-free music service that will "... give its roughly 120 million users free access to hundreds of thousands of songs from the world's largest recording labels. Unlike much of the material at Apple's iTunes store, the music sold through MySpace's new service won't contain the protections that limit how many times a track can be copied. MySpace is hoping to set itself apart from iTunes even further by allowing its users to create an unlimited number of playlists containing up to 100 songs apiece, a sharing concept similar to music services already offered by Imeem and Last.fm."

93 comments

  1. neat by jacquesm · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Now for an easy way to get to a catalogue using XML so we can do machine-to-machine catalogue matching to download whatever we're still missing.

    --
    MP3 Search Engine
    1. Re:neat by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 1

      download whatever we're still missing.

      If MySpace's downloadable music selection is like their present variety of artist pages then there's nothing to see there, move along(unless you like Britney Spears and Ja Rule).

    2. Re:neat by FredFredrickson · · Score: 1

      I'm still a fan of using Rhapsody for $15/month, and syncing unlimited music to my mp3 player, and to my squeezebox duet music system throughout my house.

      I personally don't care that I never own the music- I consume music at a rate that wouldn't be affordable at purchase price.

      --
      Belief? Hope? Preference?The Existential Vortex
    3. Re:neat by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 2, Informative

      Or Iron Maiden, Weird Al, AC/DC, Airbourne....

      While i agree Ja Rule is horrible, painfull shit not even worthy to call noise, let alone music, there's plenty of good bands up there too, including thousands of Indie bands

    4. Re:neat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was saddened when Weird Al announced he had jumped the shark into Myspace infested waters.

      Saddened I say!

  2. DRM... MySpace... DRM... MySpace by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Tough choice.

  3. MySpace? by CSMatt · · Score: 1, Redundant

    I didn't know it still existed.

  4. Free, eh? by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 1

    If it's free, why do we have to watch propaganda?

    --
    -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    1. Re:Free, eh? by Tangent128 · · Score: 1

      Free in the monetary sense. And likely somebody will write a download-the-song utility before long, a la keepvid.

    2. Re:Free, eh? by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 1

      Didn't say it was "Free in the monetary sense", said it was DRM free. DRM doesn't start and end at copying.

      Can I open this music up in Audacity and cut a sample out of it? No.

      Can I convert it to another format for my music player? No.

      Is it DRM free? No.

      Is this a bunch of misleading bullshit? Yes, yes it is.

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    3. Re:Free, eh? by basotl · · Score: 2, Informative

      There are two components to this.

      The portion of the "service" where they link to Amazon music for downloading is the real DRM free music.

      --
      HTC EVO 4G LTE w/ CM 10.2 | NookColor w/ CM 10.2 | Samsung Epic 4G w/ CM 10.1
  5. MySpace.com: We're still relavent! by pecosdave · · Score: 4, Funny

    Don't go to Facebook because it's better and doesn't have nearly as many in your face annoying ads! Come back! See, easy pirate music!

    --
    The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
  6. Slowly becoming the WalMart of the Internet by xpuppykickerx · · Score: 2, Funny

    ranking right under Amazon. I wonder if Myspace will soon have a grocery delivery service.

  7. Bad summary by Jerry+Rivers · · Score: 3, Informative

    Myspace doesn't sell anything. If you want to buy a song you have to purchase it from Amazon through the link provided. Otherwise you use Myspace's music player.

    --
    The pursuit of absolute tolerance leads to the most rigorous and ludicrous intolerance. - REX MURPHY
    1. Re:Bad summary by mattOzan · · Score: 1

      Myspace doesn't sell anything. If you want to buy a song you have to purchase it from Amazon through the link provided. Otherwise you use Myspace's music player.

      That is what makes this a "new music service" from MySpace. It's also what makes this story "news." Good summary. Have a biscuit.

    2. Re:Bad summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or you could use Fire Fox's download helper to rip any song directly from the band's myspace page.

    3. Re:Bad summary by rufus+t+firefly · · Score: 2, Interesting

      or you could use Fire Fox's download helper to rip any song directly from the band's myspace page.

      Or getmsmp3, which has apparently been abandoned.... Notice reads:

      Sorry everyone, but MySpace has its own special music interests now, and this
      program can't play nice with their new business model. It's going to be hard
      enough for them to be profitable without some script out there that can grab
      content without watching ads. So getmsmp3 is officially abandoned. Sorry!

      --
      "He may look like an idiot, and talk like an idiot, but don't let that fool you. He really is an idiot." - Duck Soup
    4. Re:Bad summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're awarding biscuits for good summaries now? Quick, someone inform the slashdot editors!

    5. Re:Bad summary by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

      So the title should say, "Myspace finally integrates their crappy mp3 streamer into the rest of their site by copying imeem" .... After all, the purchasing from Amazon thing isn't new... there was a site called amazon.com where you could do this directly without using myspace at all. Don't know if it still exists though ....

  8. What a confusing article by One+Louder · · Score: 4, Informative
    FTFA:

    ...will give its roughly 120 million users free access to hundreds of thousands of songs ..

    ...and...

    ...the music sold through MySpace's new service...

    Which is it? Again, FTFA:

    ...won't contain the protections that limit how many times a track can be copied.

    ...and...

    ...the music can be played only on personal computers connected to the Internet and listeners have to tolerate advertising splashed across the screen.

    Sound like the track copying limit is "zero", since it appears you can only play it with a custom player in a browser.

    1. Re:What a confusing article by moofrank · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Agreed. I still cannot tell if it is ad-supported, or paid subscription, or pay per song.

      But more importantly, why can this streaming business model work, and yet Pandora is bleeding from legal fees?

    2. Re:What a confusing article by Otter · · Score: 4, Informative

      There are two different services: a free, ad-supported streaming player and a DRM-free purchase option through Amazon.

      --
      What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
    3. Re:What a confusing article by bemo56 · · Score: 0
      FTA:

      The catch: the music can be played only on personal computers connected to the Internet and listeners have to tolerate advertising splashed across the screen. Anyone who wants to transfer a song to a portable device like Apple Inc.'s iPod will have to buy the music through Amazon.com Inc.'s year-old downloading service, which sells songs for as little as 79 cents apiece.

    4. Re:What a confusing article by poetmatt · · Score: 4, Informative

      Pandora doesn't shove advertising down their viewer's throats. Also, pandora has a ton more listeners

      Additionally, Myspace has yet to put this out there, and has yet to put prices out there. Just wait to see how much they charge and then people will start talking. Remember that if it's anything more than apple's 99cents it will be thrown aside as uncompetitive.

      Also, since people are purchasing the songs on the same site they listen on, I suspect myspace some kind of way to weasel out of getting charged for the fees (they're not legal fees btw), that Pandora is being charged.

      Lastly, Pandora doesn't sell the music themselves. They sell it through others.

    5. Re:What a confusing article by residieu · · Score: 1

      So it's not actually DRM free.

    6. Re:What a confusing article by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 1

      So it's not actually DRM free.

      The Amazon store, the only way to buy music from Myspace, is DRM-free, but I don't see how this is worth a headline since Amazon's store is nothing new. The only new component is terrible ad-supported DRM-laden streaming content.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
  9. Wow, so much good news. by polyomninym · · Score: 1

    It's so nice to have read all of the great news yesterday, and then see 3 positive articles in a row, today. :)) Happy Friday, indeed.

  10. yay! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Yay! DRM free! I think half of slashdot would have an orgasm if this were not linked to ads or myspace.

    But again, this is great news to 0.01% of the population that feels boxed in by iTunes DRM ...

  11. Misleading by nine-times · · Score: 5, Informative
    From TFA:

    The catch: the music can be played only on personal computers connected to the Internet and listeners have to tolerate advertising splashed across the screen.

    So it sounds like MySpace has made a listening service that allows you to listen to music, but probably has something resembling DRM to keep you from keeping it, listening to it offline, or putting it on portable players.

    If you actually want to *buy* the music and keep it without DRM, it shuffles you off to Amazon. Amazon, of course, offers a pretty good DRM-free MP3 store.

    Unlike much of the material at Apple's iTunes store, the music sold through MySpace's new service won't contain the protections that limit how many times a track can be copied.

    Which is kind of misunderstanding the issue. iTunes doesn't control how many times a track can be copied, but rather how many devices are authorized to play it. But anyway...

    MySpace appears to be in a better position to take on iTunes because its site has always emphasized music.

    Weird comments like this are peppered throughout the article. Sounds like someone has beef. The author of the article (like the author of the summary) seem hellbent on painting this as an iTunes killer. However:

    Despite its musical bent, MySpace isn't positioning its service as an iTunes killer. "We see this as more of a complement to what Apple is doing and create even more demand for digital music devices,"

    1. Re:Misleading by Hyppy · · Score: 1

      So it sounds like MySpace has made a listening service that allows you to listen to music, but probably has something resembling DRM to keep you from keeping it, listening to it offline, or putting it on portable players.

      If I can hear it, I can copy it. It may not have the same bitrate or clarity, but it's still able to be copied. No amount of coding wizardry can prevent this.

    2. Re:Misleading by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Well by that logic, there is no such thing as DRM.

    3. Re:Misleading by johny42 · · Score: 1

      There is such thing as DRM, it just doesn't work.

    4. Re:Misleading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you didn't follow his logic very well. Just because media will always be able to be copied (if only via analog), that doesn't mean that DRM doesn't exist.

      Perhaps what you mean is that there is no such thing as 100% bullet-proof DRM. This is true, but it doesn't mean they won't try to manage our rights (read: restrictions) with DRM.

    5. Re:Misleading by Kijori · · Score: 1

      Well yes, but saying that is rather missing the point. Most people don't want to connect the microphone and speaker sockets on their computer, or position a microphone in front of the speakers, or even watch their network traffic to look for the original file. They want a button they can press when they hear a song they like that lets them save it on their computer to play it whenever they want. And they are willing to pay for that - as long as it's cheap and easy. Since amazon is easy for most people (because they've used it before, so they know how it works and have an account) they are a natural partner for this scheme. Myspace's player is just advertising really - they don't care if a few people who wouldn't have bought the song anyway manage to save it for free as long as some people who hear it click the "buy" button.

    6. Re:Misleading by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Well by that logic, there is no such thing as DRM.

      By that logic, there is no such thing as *effective* DRM. And there isn't.

    7. Re:Misleading by ins0m · · Score: 1

      Welcome to reality.

      DRM can always be subverted. The moment you start to stream out, you can _always_ redirect the bitstream from the audio device to a local file.

      In the worst case, you lo-jack it and just redirect your headphone jack to your mic jack. Simple enough if you're willing to take the hit on re-encoding. In the best case, you fake an audio device in software and deposit the unencoded pile wherever you want.

      Even if you aren't a code wizard, DRM is not an obstacle to freedom. All it is, is a PITA and a disingenuous way to lock in people who don't have the code-fu to put the music they've purchased on their MP3 players. You need a different copy and a different license to do that, you know.

      --
      Never attribute to Hanlon that which can be adequately attributed to Heinlein.
    8. Re:Misleading by nine-times · · Score: 1

      I was saying that it sounded like they were using some kind of DRM and Hyppy sounded like he was disagreeing by saying, "That doesn't matter, because I can still get it one way or the other."

      So I was just trying to say that, if that's disagreeing with what I'm saying, then DRM isn't a concern at all (which I don't think is true).

      If you think DRM is a concern at all, than Hyppy's post isn't very relevant.

    9. Re:Misleading by Hyppy · · Score: 1

      My point was more to allude to the fact that DRM is an obnoxious inconvenience for paying customers, but ultimately useless when applied towards the intended target ("pirates").

    10. Re:Misleading by nine-times · · Score: 1

      That assumes that the intended target is "pirates". With all the DRM and "product activation" out there, those things have only ever been successful at 2 things:

      1. Preventing casual sharing
      2. Forcing people to buy multiple copies of the same content

      At this point, I'm running under the assumption that those are the things these companies intend to stop with their DRM.

  12. Existing services by waztub · · Score: 1

    So how will this differ from existing music stream services such as Deezer and Jiwa.fm?

    Both offer free on-demand music streams online for quite a while now. Am I missing something here?

  13. Re:MySpace.com: We're still relavent! by basotl · · Score: 1

    There are ads on the internet?

    --
    HTC EVO 4G LTE w/ CM 10.2 | NookColor w/ CM 10.2 | Samsung Epic 4G w/ CM 10.1
  14. DRM-free? by laughingcoyote · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "You can only play the song in our custom application" seems about as restrictive of DRM as you get. How would this possibly be considered to be DRM-free? I also fail to see how this would eliminate limitations on copying, it seems they're attempting to set that limit at exactly zero. (Like all DRM, that will be circumvented, but that doesn't mean there isn't any.)

    --
    To fight the war on terror, stop being afraid.
    1. Re:DRM-free? by nschubach · · Score: 1

      The same way Stardock considers their software DRM free. They allow you to install it and copy it as many times as they want... but it still needs their activation software in order to do it. So I'm assuming that DRM software ceases to be called DRM software the moment you can use it as many times as you want (or until the company goes out of business... whichever comes first.)

      I still can't figure out how this music and Stardock's method is still legally called DRM free.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
  15. Once I can ... by Skapare · · Score: 1

    ... buy music, download it to my unencumbered computer system using open source software I compiled myself, play it directly using open source software I compiled myself, or transfer it to my portable player (and have it play there) using open source software I compiled myself ... then it's truly DRM free.

    I don't want the ads. I am willing to pay for music. I'm even willing to pay the greedy fat cat businessmen a part of that for their effort at spewing other junk music all over the TV and radio. But it has to work on my computer if they are considering me to be a part of their market. Otherwise I stick with Magnatune.

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    1. Re:Once I can ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amazon lets you do this as well (they have an mp3 downloading app but its optional)

    2. Re:Once I can ... by basotl · · Score: 1

      Well Amazon is almost there by providing DRM free music. The only issue they have in your scenario is that the down loader they use supports open source OS's but isn't open source itself. Then again it's only MP3 and not ogg.

      So far my favorite distribution arrangement was from NIN for Ghosts. Getting that in flac format was realy nice.

      --
      HTC EVO 4G LTE w/ CM 10.2 | NookColor w/ CM 10.2 | Samsung Epic 4G w/ CM 10.1
    3. Re:Once I can ... by nine-times · · Score: 1

      ... buy music, download it to my unencumbered computer system using open source software I compiled myself, play it directly using open source software I compiled myself, or transfer it to my portable player (and have it play there) using open source software I compiled myself ... then it's truly DRM free.

      Does Amazon's store not count? I guess not, because they have a client for downloading albums, but I thought at least singles could be downloaded using only a web browser. But this "MySpace service" is actually just pointing you to Amazon.

      I don't know. I still use iTunes. The client doesn't have open source, but as long as you stick to their "iTunes Plus" selection, the files themselves are completely DRM-free. I've not yet been in the situation where something I wanted to buy was unavailable in iTunes Plus but available on Amazon. Really just a coincidence, but when that day comes, I'll try Amazon.

    4. Re:Once I can ... by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      ... buy music, download it to my unencumbered computer system using open source software I compiled myself, play it directly using open source software I compiled myself, or transfer it to my portable player (and have it play there) using open source software I compiled myself ... then it's truly DRM free.

      You know, except for downloading it to my portable player (an iPod, actually) using open source software, I can do all of this now. (And, before anyone points out whatever piece of open source would let me do that on my iPod, allow me to say I like iTunes, so I'm not interested.)

      I buy a CD, rip the tracks into MP3 on my FreeBSD box, and import that over a Samba share into my iTunes. Some times I rip it from inside of iTunes, but I'm not required to.

      Once it's in iTunes, it does some nice features which I think are actually adding value for me -- tracking play count, last played on, and some other nice features which I use. However, if you go for a different kind of player, you can get your end-to-end in OSS.

      Yes, they're starting to have some services which will sell you an unencumbered MP3. But, go buy a real, physical CD. You can turn that into unencumbered MP3 all you like.

      Cheers

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    5. Re:Once I can ... by TheDarkener · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the Magnitude link! =) Looks like a promising site that Slashdotter-type-music lovers would appreciate.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    6. Re:Once I can ... by Skapare · · Score: 1

      Yes, they're starting to have some services which will sell you an unencumbered MP3. But, go buy a real, physical CD. You can turn that into unencumbered MP3 all you like.

      Then I'd have to put the CD drive back in my computer. And I'd have to take a hard drive out to do that, or buy a USB CD drive. I don't have to do any of these things with Magnatune, which lets me simply do normal downloads in the browser of the music in raw, flac, ogg, or mp3 formats.

      Oh, in case you are wondering how I might do a system rescue without a CD drive? I have USB ports for USB sticks, and slots for CF and SDHC cards connected via USB, all bootable. 16GB of flash can hold a lot of rescue software. I removed floppy drives from my computers years ago. I removed CD drives last year. They are so 2nd millennium technology.

      --
      now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    7. Re:Once I can ... by Skapare · · Score: 1

      I don't understand why they need a special downloader? Firefox, Konqueror, Lynx, Opera, should all be just fine for downloading.

      --
      now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
  16. Do what you want with "commercial" music by TheDarkener · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...but leave indie artists alone please. Myspace, IMHO anyway, is much more important to the music community because of its ability to allow non-commercial, non-signed artists to put their music and group information out there for everyone to see. The big labels have their own mechanism, and Myspace catering to this with DRM-free music is awesome - but please, don't let it affect the indie artists. Keep it where it is, because it works!

    --
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    1. Re:Do what you want with "commercial" music by vought · · Score: 1

      Myspace, IMHO anyway, is much more important to the music community because of its ability to allow non-commercial, non-signed artists to put their music and group information out there for everyone to see.

      Too bad MySpace is so poorly designed and that so many of the pages are horrific messes.

      But hey - if indie artists want to use a social network equivalent of a state university dorm to promote themselves, that's fine. They'll probably stay indie artists for quite a while with that tactic.

    2. Re:Do what you want with "commercial" music by TheDarkener · · Score: 1

      "...if indie artists want to use a social network equivalent of a state university dorm to promote themselves, that's fine. They'll probably stay indie artists for quite a while with that tactic."
      ---

      Who ever said signing with a major label is the goal of every non-signed artist? I would *prefer* to be unsigned/on a small label instead of under some rapist-like major label contract.

      Not every musician is in it for the money, friend. The crap artists you hear on major playlists are, but I wouldn't call 80% of those artists "musicians", anyway.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    3. Re:Do what you want with "commercial" music by ins0m · · Score: 1

      Most indie artists can get on boutique sites for their specific genre and get promoted just fine.

      Hell, there were even artists that got discovered on Soulseek and they actually put a label together just for them.

      MySpace + SNOCAP has always been a joke (I've personally dealt with SNOCAP in the past, and actually had to drop them because they were so unbelievably bass ackwards). MySpace + Amazon = a really bad joke.

      Me? I'd rather put up my user profile and put the Beatport player on there instead of the SNOCAP player. Links right to the same store, and I get 60% of $2.49 per track on a new track, $1.99 on back catalog tracks. That's a dance-specific example, but there are boutique sites out there for any genre you're into.

      From my experience, sites like Beatport do over $5 million gross, so there's certainly money to be made from DRM-free music. It's just a matter of doing your research or hooking up with an indie distributor who can get you into a few hundred of these stores. Big-banking on your MySpace profile or iTunes is truly detrimental for most people and is an all-out gambit.

      Or, better put: Better to have 60% of something than 0% of a goose egg.

      --
      Never attribute to Hanlon that which can be adequately attributed to Heinlein.
  17. With Rhapsody it's not about one or the other... by f0dder · · Score: 1

    no one says you can't do both. It's like paying for cable, you watch the shows. But for the ones you really like you go out and buy the dvd, rip it, download it whatever floats your boat.

  18. Royalties? by jav1231 · · Score: 1

    Seems like the recent royalty changes might come into play here. Is MySpace going to pay royalties to the industry based on who listens to what? How does listening on MySpace really differ from Pandora? I hope Pandora is paying attention. They may have a case here.

    1. Re:Royalties? by nschubach · · Score: 1

      To be fair, Pandora has been doing an awful job of pairing music by sound. I put in Type O Negative in the artists search and they start playing the Beatles? Or Pantera matching with Green Day? It doesn't make sense. I was so excited by the idea of putting in my favorite music and hearing new similar sound...and then I used it.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
  19. At least get it right... by cyber-dragon.net · · Score: 2, Funny

    This person obviously never used iTunes. Not that I think it is perfect but they are making it out like Apple chose to enforce copy protection. Why does everyone forget the label's forced it?

    Even so they got the tech side wrong. If you are going to bash something at least learn how it really works and what the real limitations and problems are, and include a few other services for comparison.

    1. Re:At least get it right... by wwahammy · · Score: 1

      They did choose to enforce copy protection. They don't have to make a music store with copy protection, the trade off though is that the big record companies might not sell their music on it.

      Additionally, if Amazon can sell so much music without copy protection, why can't Apple do so now?

    2. Re:At least get it right... by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Apple might have initially only provided copy protection because the labels demanded it, but Apple loved copy protection. It meant iTunes users were locked into iPods, and iPod users were locked into iTunes. iTunes even required people who were happy not to have DRM to have it.

      It was only after public opinion started to turn against DRM that Apple insisted it had never been in favour.

    3. Re:At least get it right... by One+Louder · · Score: 1

      Additionally, if Amazon can sell so much music without copy protection, why can't Apple do so now?

      By requiring DRM, the music companies basically handed Apple a monopoly on music, because the iPod was an overwhelmingly popular device and the store and the devices began reinforcing each other in the market.

      When the music folks subsequently tried to get Apple to create a differential pricing scheme, they suddenly found out that Apple had all of the power. Apple called the bluff when the companies threatened to pull their music, and won.

      The only way to weaken Apple's power is to create "better" alternatives, and since the music is that same across all of the stores, they only way to do that is by making it more flexible, hence the removal of DRM and lower prices at Amazon and others. Of course, this behavior, if successful, would destroy any illusion that the music companies operate as anything other than an illegal cartel - Apple is biding its time and is probably ready to pounce once this becomes so obvious a court can't ignore it. If Apple is the *only* DRM-encumbered store (and it looks like that's the trend), then the music folks will have some explaining to do.

    4. Re:At least get it right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because Apple is the number one music seller out there, and the record companies don't like this. It puts too much power in Apple's hands. To reduce Apple's market share, the record companies have been giving more favorable contracts to other music distributors. The hope is that they can weaken Apple enough to be able to foist more restrictive terms on them - for example, forcing Apple to charge more than .99 cents per song so that the record companies can get a bigger buck out of each sale.

    5. Re:At least get it right... by wwahammy · · Score: 1

      Oh I totally agree. I think Apple is violating antitrust laws by using a monopoly in a market (iPods) to influence a separate market (iTunes software and store.

      My comments were solely in regards to the parent comment.

  20. iTunes doesn't "limit how many times" you can copy by vought · · Score: 3, Informative

    MySpace's new service won't contain the protections that limit how many times a track can be copied.

    iTunes doesn't do this. You can burn to CD or copy any iTunes track unlimited times.

    iTunes does restrict playlists to ten CD burns, but copying the contents to another playlist resets the counter. The summary is poorly informed.

  21. iTunes Info Wrong by DougF · · Score: 1

    MySpace is hoping to set itself apart from iTunes even further by allowing its users to create an unlimited number of playlists containing up to 100 songs apiece

    I have iTunes and I've got a number of playlists with over 100 songs, though I've not tried the "unlimited number of playlists" feature just yet...

    --
    Impetuous! Homeric!
    1. Re:iTunes Info Wrong by gstoddart · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have iTunes and I've got a number of playlists with over 100 songs, though I've not tried the "unlimited number of playlists" feature just yet...

      Every time I see one of these articles I think "iTunes, or the iTunes Music Store".

      They're very different animals, and ultimately do very different things. The music store has some restrictions (because there's no way in hell the labels would have allowed it), but the actual iTunes software imposes no such limitations.

      Cheers

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  22. OT: Submitter links to Nazi website by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I'll just leave this here

    http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=955999&cid=24911097

  23. Re:MySpace.com: We're still relavent! by nschubach · · Score: 1

    For the average Myspace user... yes.

    --
    Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
  24. Only 96kbit Audio by szyzyg · · Score: 2, Informative

    Myspace's on demand audio is encoded at a somewhat crap quality of 96kbit/sec

    imeem is 33% better with 128kbit audio

  25. MySpace: *MY* creative work by fishbowl · · Score: 1

    If it's *my* music (I composed, arranged, performed and recorded it, and reserve all rights to it), I consider the placement of "DRM" or any other restrictions on distribution to be an infringement of my copyright.

    I am anxiously awaiting a RIAA suit that names as its property, someone's property who is not represented by the RIAA. (To make that clear, I would like for this to be the error that ends the establishment of the RIAA, sending its members into bankruptcy and dissolution due to the fines that follow :-)

    --
    -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  26. No Radiohead or any Independent artists, though by digitaldc · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sorry, but MySpace will leave you High and Dry when it comes to indy music

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
    1. Re:No Radiohead or any Independent artists, though by cliffski · · Score: 1

      agreed. this even made it into the national papers here in the Uk somehow.
      As usual, big companies make pacts to keep the indies crushed in the sidelines.

      --
      DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
  27. Nobody's called them on it? by argent · · Score: 1

    The same way Stardock considers their software DRM free.

    I guess nobody has taken them to court over false advertising yet.

  28. Too bad that... by isBandGeek() · · Score: 1

    .. Myspace only tracks everything you do on their site and use it to target advertisements.

  29. Another tough choice: Do we want to link to him? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't that Anti-Globalism/'corrupt' guy the same one linking to neo-Nazi sites? I swear someone posted a big comment about that a while back.

  30. Wrong on every point. by argent · · Score: 1

    It meant iTunes users were locked into iPods

    Funny, I was using iTunes with my flash-based music player three years before the iPod Shuffle came out.

    What makes it hard to use iTunes with non-iPods is that most non-iPods don't support AAC, the MP4 audio codec that was supposed to replace MP3. Instead they support WMA, because Microsoft has been pushing their proprietary format over the open one that Apple adopted.

    and iPod users were locked into iTunes

    Most of my tracks aren't from the iTunes [Music] Store.

    It was only after public opinion started to turn against DRM that Apple insisted it had never been in favour.

    Actually, it's you who are rewriting history here.

    Steve Jobs, in an interview with Rolling Stone when the iTunes Store opened, said that they had tried to talk the labels out of DRM. He said that they did not believe it was possible to protect digital content, but the labels required DRM before they would sign a contract with Apple.

    And the DRM in iTunes has never been as strong as Windows Media Player. iTunes doesn't even TRY and close the "digital hole", which Windows Media player has done (or tried to do) since WMP 9.1. (the version shipped with XP) added kernel drivers to prevent intercepting the audio stream before the A/D converter. A good many of the driver problems in Vista are due to the new driver model that it uses that keeps protected audio streams encrypted inside the kernel to keep people from being able to bypass this protection.

  31. Whatever you call it, it's still not DRM free... by argent · · Score: 1

    DRM is not an obstacle to freedom. All it is, is a PITA and a disingenuous way to lock in people who don't have the code-fu to put the music

    Whether that's true or not, that's got nothing to do with the fact that this allegedly DRM-free service is not actually DRM-free. It doesn't matter whether you consider DRM an obstacle, an annoyance, a fad, or a communist plot. Their service includes a technical mechanism to control the playback of the music by the consumer, and that is what "digital rights management" is all about.

  32. Read For Content by argent · · Score: 1

    Yay! DRM free! I think half of slashdot would have an orgasm if this were not linked to ads or myspace.

    Well, maybe, but only if it was actually DRM-free, because it isn't.

  33. The marketer's dilemma by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

    Customers hate, loathe and despise DRM. The customer knows there's a DRM and they're not bloody happy. What's a marketer to do? Lie.

    I look forward to them trying this one in the UK - there's Trading Standards to contend with if they do.

    --
    http://rocknerd.co.uk
  34. Not for me by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 1

    I'm a last.fm user personally, and i ain't gonna switch that now, last.fm just frecking rocks

  35. MyPirateBay by hachete · · Score: 3, Funny

    How does this affect MyPirateBay again?

    --
    Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious
  36. More choices is good, but... by AmigaHeretic · · Score: 1

    There's already sweet music here free! ;-)

  37. Re:MySpace.com: We're still relavent! by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 1

    What they should do right now is make MySpace like the old Facebook because the new Facebook is less enjoyable. I think taking what Facebook got right, at the same time that Facebook is abandoning it, is their only chance.

  38. Re:iTunes doesn't "limit how many times" you can c by evilviper · · Score: 1

    iTunes does restrict playlists to ten CD burns, but copying the contents to another playlist resets the counter. The summary is poorly informed.

    Just because there's a (trivial) workaround, doesn't mean there isn't a limit.

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  39. Are you kidding? by patio11 · · Score: 1

    I'm not poor -- $.99 to download DRM-encrusted whatever to my iPod is easy. MySpace could, quite possibly, kill me. This is not a tough choice.

    --
    Help poke pirates in the eyepatch, arr.
  40. Label Artists - New Niggers by bandmassa · · Score: 1

    Oh great, more crap chosen by boardroom suits, foist upon the first ever generation to not create their own genre. The label model is exploitation, and the only good thing about MySpace was it broke the label model. Now Murdoch owns it, they're working at undermining the whole idea. MySpace was a way for fans to find new bands without A&R men ripping off both artist and audience.

    --
    "I hope you like Guinness, Sir. I find it a refreshing substitute for, er... food." Col. Jack O'Neil, SG-1