Slashdot Mirror


Last.fm To Start Charging International Users

tdobson writes "The popular online radio service Last.fm has announced that users outside of the UK, USA and Germany will need to start paying 3 Euros (about $4.40 USD/£2.80 GBP) per month to continue streaming music on their service. Last.fm doesn't offer much of a reason as to the change, other than writing on their blog that '[t]here will be a 30 track free trial, and we hope this will convince people to subscribe and keep listening to the radio.' Already, there appears to be quite a backlash in responses so far, amongst subscribers and non-subscribers of all nationalities — has this killed Last.fm's appeal, globally?"

329 comments

  1. It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I love Last.fm
    I'm a regular listener and found many new interesting bands. Not only have I bought their albums, but also went to local concerts that I wouldn't have heard about otherwise.
    I will NEVER pay for an internet service.
    Remains the question: Are there any alternatives?

    1. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Rathum · · Score: 4, Funny

      Pandora Radio is a good one.

    2. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Pandora Radio is a good one.

      Yes, it's a great alternative....

      visiting the pandora.com homepage =

      Dear Pandora Visitor,

      We are deeply, deeply sorry to say that due to licensing constraints, we can no longer allow access to Pandora for listeners located outside of the U.S. We will continue to work diligently to realize the vision of a truly global Pandora, but for the time being we are required to restrict its use. We are very sad to have to do this, but there is no other alternative.

      We believe that you are in Australia (your IP address appears to be x.x.x.x). If you believe we have made a mistake, we apologize and ask that you please contact us at pandora-support@pandora.com

    3. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      www.spotify.com
      www.spotylist.com

    4. Re:It was nice while it lasted by luas_dublin · · Score: 1

      Pandora Radio is a good one.

      Nope. it's U.S. only , so as an alternative to a site which is now charging outside the us/uk/de its a bit pointless really.....

    5. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Rathum · · Score: 1

      Pandora Radio is a good one.

      Nope. it's U.S. only , so as an alternative to a site which is now charging outside the us/uk/de its a bit pointless really.....

      Totally slipped my mind that he might have been out of the country.

      I must be more tired than I thought if I forgot what the story was about 5 minutes in...

    6. Re:It was nice while it lasted by RuBLed · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I will NEVER pay for an internet service.

      I'm with you AC except for that line. If you are willing to pay for a tangible thing or a real world service that you love, why not an internet based one? Or you only love it because it was free and nothing else? I find that reasoning very popular with other people too. Any insights why people?

    7. Re:It was nice while it lasted by umghhh · · Score: 4, Interesting
      NEVER is a strong word. It seems there are limits what current business models can do and what you seem to like so much i.e. fee free service may not be feasible in nearest future due to the fact that advertising revenue is not there.

      There has been an article on Economist website about the end of the free lunch. The article itself is rather simplistic but what can you expect from economists - anybody that reads news recently should know that they ain't that smart either. They maybe onto something though - majority of web services will need some other revenue than advertising or it will collapse. Whether this eliminates the whole business model I doubt but we are going to see anyway.

    8. Re:It was nice while it lasted by BRSloth · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, not quite. It seems Spotify is available through Europe, but not much outside it (at least, it says it's not available in Australia.)

    9. Re:It was nice while it lasted by ItsColdOverHere · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Shoutcast to the rescue, yes you have no control over the track selection but it's free, the actual streaming providers are completely decentralised and I've found that recently I'm not really using the next and ban features of Last.fm. Yes Last.fm will be missed but it was by no means indispensible.

    10. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Per+Wigren · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm willing to pay for good enough internet services (like Linux Weekly News for example) though, but this is like a punch in the face. Most of the content in last.fm is fucking user contributed!

      I also used to pay for Spotify but I cancelled my account when they suddenly decided to drop just about all independent and small-label bands that they didn't have formal on-paper contracts with. 90% of my crust-punk and power-noise/industrial playlists went red because of that, and they still haven't re-added a single band that were dropped. At the same time they also implemented region-based limits.

      Back to CDs I guess... or.. err.. what.cd? I dunno...

      --
      My other account has a 3-digit UID.
    11. Re:It was nice while it lasted by headLITE · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I will NEVER pay for an internet service.

      Okay, you're certainly within your rights in chosing to never pay for an internet service. So, in your ideal world, who exactly should be paying? There is a substantial cost involved in offering services on the internet to a large group of users, especially bandwidth-intensive services such as streaming music. On top of that, you have to pay a license or royalties. So who should pay for that, if the beneficiary of these offerings, the end user, is already taken out of the equation? Sure, free lunches are nice, but how do you explain that you should be the only one who should be getting one, and why other people (such as the operators of last.fm) should be paying for your free lunch?

    12. Re:It was nice while it lasted by myforwik · · Score: 1

      Never heard of it. I asked everyone and they had never heard of it either. Pay to stream music! hahah good one. Stream music? hahah stupid.

    13. Re:It was nice while it lasted by JohnBailey · · Score: 2, Informative

      I love Last.fm
      I'm a regular listener and found many new interesting bands. Not only have I bought their albums, but also went to local concerts that I wouldn't have heard about otherwise.
      I will NEVER pay for an internet service.
      Remains the question: Are there any alternatives?

      Last I checked, Deezer seemed ok. Not as many clients, but still fairly good. www.deezer.com

      --
      It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.
    14. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but what can you expect from economists - anybody that reads news recently should know that they ain't that smart either

      Well, they may not be that smart, but, putting this in perspective, there have been thousands of IT people implementing their ideas into software ... and these guys didn't see anything coming as well.

    15. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yes I'm willing to elaborate.,

      When I pay for a product I expect something from it. Tangible things are just that, tangible. I have it now, I have it tomorrow, so the value retains.
      When I pay for a 'real world service', I do so reluctantly. I do this only because:
      a: Law dictates it. For example car insurance.
      b: I can't do it myself in a realistic manner.
      Internet services are even further out of the question, since I
      a: Get nothing out of it,
      b: I can do it myself better.

    16. Re:It was nice while it lasted by macshit · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'd guess that most people have a slightly more nuanced position. Mine is roughly: "sure I'll pay a reasonable fee for your service -- but then you need to not suck."

      Last.fm, of course, fails with flying colors.

      I think that becoming a paid service inevitably results in hugely increased expectations from your customers, even if the fee is relatively small.

      [I sometimes use last.fm -- but mostly because it's free, not because it's any good.]

      --
      We live, as we dream -- alone....
    17. Re:It was nice while it lasted by MrAngryForNoReason · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Internet services are even further out of the question, since I
      a: Get nothing out of it,
      b: I can do it myself better

      What is the problem then? If you get nothing out of Last.FM as an internet service, and can do better yourself then create your own streaming music service.

      The contradiction of saying that you get nothing out of a service while at the same time complaining you don't have access to it is clear. As is the arrogance of saying that internet services have no worth because 'I can do it myself better'. If you can then why don't you?

      Your argument that a service has no value because it doesn't offer something you can keep is rather flawed. Would you not buy a hotdog because you can only eat it once? Would you not go to the theatre or cinema because it is a finite experience?

    18. Re:It was nice while it lasted by umghhh · · Score: 1

      which is available only in US.

    19. Re:It was nice while it lasted by clarkkent09 · · Score: 1

      I will NEVER pay for an internet service.

      And since internet services don't grow in nature and someone has to provide the content, hosting, bandwidth, labor etc, your statement can be translated as: I want somebody else to pay for the internet services I use, waaaaaaaa...

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    20. Re:It was nice while it lasted by teg · · Score: 1

      I'm willing to pay for good enough internet services (like Linux Weekly News for example) though, but this is like a punch in the face. Most of the content in last.fm is fucking user contributed!

      The content they are going to be charging for, streamed music, is not user created - the web sites, scrobbling etc. should continue like now, if I read them right. I've been a subscriber for a while, and I greatly prefer their approach to the Pandora approach (no access outside the US).

    21. Re:It was nice while it lasted by totally+bogus+dude · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Those last responses don't hold up to even a superficial analysis.

      a: Get nothing out of it

      It's already been established that the person in question (possibly you) "loved" the last.fm service and used it regularly, so claiming they "get nothing out of it" is obviously hogwash.

      b: I can do it myself better

      This isn't always the case, and in this particular example doesn't seem to be. The OP stated they'd found new bands via the last.fm service, so at the very least last.fm must have music s/he/you doesn't have. Further, last.fm has access to a large database of listening habits it can use to recommend things to you, which is something which I'm pretty sure even a mighty AC doesn't have. Also, are there any alternatives? implies knowledge that it is providing something they can't provide themself (or they can't provide themself, if you're the same AC).

      I think the "tangible" argument seems reasonable, in a completely unrational kind of way (but we're humans, so we're supposed to be irrational). So, last.fm is a streaming service where you'd be paying for an "experience" rather than an actual product you can keep. What about paying for music or games or videos that you download, rather than coming in a box? Are these intangible as well, even though you can interact with it and keep it forever (I'm assuming no DRM so you can make backups and burn physical copies and so on)? Where does the line between "tangible" and "intangible" get drawn, for you?

      Assuming you pay for your internet connection, what makes that tangible? It is, after all, just a service that will cease to be of any benefit to you if you stop paying the monthly fee. What about electricity bills?

      I guess these fall under the "cannot do myself" reasoning; what I don't understand is why internet services are automatically excluded from this, despite it being quite obvious that there's a lot of things you can't reasonably do yourself that others can. Yes, you could build your own last.fm-like service and somehow get loads of people to use it, but I don't think it meets the "reasonably" criteria; as in, it'd be a fuckload of work. But somehow not having to do all of that work while still enjoying the benefits it'd bring isn't worth a few dollars a month?

    22. Re:It was nice while it lasted by u38cg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think the reason it is simplistic is because the issue is simplistic: run an online service paid for by advertising to your users and you are not likely to be profitable, end of story.

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
    23. Re:It was nice while it lasted by ross.w · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't pay for the radio I listen to over the air. Why would I pay for it just because it comes from a web site?

      --
      If my call is important, why am I talking to a recording?
    24. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Randy+Savage · · Score: 1

      I can make coffee better, but I still buy it at the coffee shop before work because I have better things to do with my time.

    25. Re:It was nice while it lasted by pinkushun · · Score: 2, Informative

      Pandora and spotify.com both don't serve as far abroad as our unknown country of South Africa :p I would gladly pay for this service, if only I could afford the bandwidth to stream the music in the first place, that would be grand...

    26. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, because dropping a coffee pod into the machine and pressing the button takes soooo long...

    27. Re:It was nice while it lasted by daniorerio · · Score: 4, Informative

      He was talking about making *better* coffee, which includes grinding beans on a regular basis to ensure you have fresh coffee...

    28. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Monsieur_F · · Score: 4, Informative

      Is deezer available in Australia ?

      --
      McCartney fans pay bus tickets. [...] Lennon fans too, with discretion.
    29. Re:It was nice while it lasted by xaxa · · Score: 5, Informative

      I don't pay for the radio I listen to over the air. Why would I pay for it just because it comes from a web site?

      Maybe because there aren't any adverts.

      That's the reason Last.fm are giving for charging: they have advertising for British, German and American markets, so they don't need to pay. They don't have advertising for users in other countries, so they need to pay.

    30. Re:It was nice while it lasted by TheP4st · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why would I pay for it just because it comes from a web site?

      Perhaps because it is possible to influence the type of content played to a much wider degree than by changing frequency and it have the ability to give recommendations based on your preferences. Which airwave radio station can provide that service?

      --
      "I have downloaded hundreds and hundreds of records, why would I care if somebody downloads ours?" Robin Pecknold
    31. Re:It was nice while it lasted by johannesg · · Score: 1

      Because there are so many alternatives. If my favorite newssite starts charging money, I can get the exact same news from a dozen other sites. They are only my favorite because of their short, easy to remember URL, not because they add any kind of value to the news they report (and in fact, they don't).

      Same for Slashdot: let's say it starts charging tomorrow for posting or whatever. Will I get my creditcard out for that? Hell no! There are about a million sites where I can waste most of the day reading peoples' inane opinions if I want to, and most of them are free.

      Pr0n then? Haha, there is so much free pr0n to be had that I cannot afford the harddisks to put it on (and I can afford a lot of harddisks!) ;-)

      There is, in fact, precisely one website that I would be willing to pay a subscription fee for: this one. Why? Because it offers a service I really need (it tells me if it is going to rain or not, in enough detail that I can adjust my plans for going out on the bike), and because I _cannot_ get the same information from any other sites.

    32. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Eriky · · Score: 1

      Why wouldn't you pay for a service you enjoy so much? Besides that, I would not pay for last.fm, since I think their service and range of music is still way to limited to justify paying for it. Lucky we still have good old FM radio.

    33. Re:It was nice while it lasted by SteveDob · · Score: 1

      If you're willing to put up with the ads played to non-subscribers, there is always http://www.live365.com/

    34. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I subscribe to Sirius/XM. I listen in my car and at home. $10/mo for commercial-free music is fine with me. I never download/pirate anything anymore.

    35. Re:It was nice while it lasted by wilsonthecat · · Score: 1

      Radio is BROADcasting, the songs are chosen for you.

      Last.fm is an online jukebox, with a nice recommendation system. You pay per play on a jukebox

    36. Re:It was nice while it lasted by BRSloth · · Score: 1

      Apparently, yes. I can play the radio (no warnings, no glitches, perfect playing.)

      Thanks for the tip!

    37. Re:It was nice while it lasted by headLITE · · Score: 1

      If it sucks then you don't need to argue, since you're not using the service. Right?

    38. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Xest · · Score: 1

      "If you are willing to pay for a tangible thing or a real world service that you love, why not an internet based one?"

      Well non-internet radio is free, so that's one reason why I can see people wouldn't be willing to pay internet radio - they could after all just switch back to non-internet radio.

      But I think the bigger reason the AC made this distinction is because online services already make their money - enough to cover costs and still make a profit - through advertising. If they are asking you to pay on top, it is simply because they want to make more money, and at that point it's easy to just see it as greed whether it really is or not. More importantly though, on the internet, the chances are the service almost certainly exists free elsewhere and if it doesn't, the fact that it has been run free succesfully will encourage new people to make a similar service that is free knowing full well people will flock to it over the now pay-for competitor.

      That said, in the context of this article it's interesting that it'll remain free in certain regions so it may not be this clear cut. I assume this is because the regions it'll remain free in are the ones it feels it's getting enough ad revenue from but elsewhere is effectively just being subsidised by advertisers from the region it'll remain free in. If it has 7 users in Finland for example (just a random example, no truth in the figures) then no Finnish company is going to want to pay it to display ads, so effectively that territory would be getting subsidised by maybe the UK where advertisers are willing to pay thousands because there are 1million UK users for example (again just random numbers). I guess maybe they're just now asking users to pay their way because advertisers wont do it for them in other territories.

    39. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they charge advertising while you are listening to it!?

    40. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Ouilsen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you pay you get to listen to the music you want and not the music the ads industry wants you to listen to.

    41. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a difference here, in that over-the-air radio is ad supported, whereas I've never had ads on last.fm. It has to be paid for in some way, though admittedly there are better alternatives to consider, such as paid promotion for artists/labels in streams.

    42. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Waccoon · · Score: 1

      I think the reason it is simplistic is because the issue is simplistic: run an online service paid for by advertising to your users and you are not likely to be profitable, end of story.

      Exactly. It's interesting that the OP is asking if there are alternatives to Last.fm. Why is this? Aren't there enough competitors out there offering streamed music that are halfway decent so they can be easily found through Google?

      Sites that are supported through advertising revenue alone are very few in number, and only the biggest ones tend to survive for long. Obviously, this is not a terribly profitable model for the majority of people trying to establish an online service.

      I've also noticed that the number of companies offering free web hosting has dropped considerably over the last 5 years. Blogs and many CMSes can be hosted on a free shared server, so the disappearance of old-fashioned web sites is not the cause.

    43. Re:It was nice while it lasted by perryizgr8 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I will NEVER pay for an internet service.

      note that ac is expressing his own disinclination to pay for a non-essential internet music service. although he may like listening to radio while he works on his pc but he may simply not believe it worth enough to pay for.
      how can you decide what he pays for and what he doesn't?

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
    44. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would you be willing to pay for a radio station that only plays songs you like or might like without jabbering on and on?

    45. Re:It was nice while it lasted by perryizgr8 · · Score: 1

      Because there are so many alternatives.

      but that is the exact problem. early into the comments, there was a request for alternatives and we discovered that there is no other free streaming as customizable as last.fm.

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
    46. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Man, you are so fucking cheap.

    47. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Skater · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm curious. With the newspapers in major trouble right now, if they can't make money on internet offerings and go out of business, will the quality of media decline? The newspapers usually have better reporting than the television news. I'm not a huge fan of the media, but they do have an important purpose in any elected system. Seeing people say they'll never pay for an internet service makes me worry about that.

    48. Re:It was nice while it lasted by PenisLands · · Score: 0

      Yes. If you're looking for small or independent bands, dmusic.com is very good. They provide free hosting for artists, and most songs are free to download in mp3 form.
      I've been using dmusic.com since October 2005.

    49. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I can make coffee better

      Me to, it's called tea.

    50. Re:It was nice while it lasted by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Except you can't choose your song on last.fm, it choose similar songs to your criteria/taste and play it for you.

      So it's rather like choosing a radio station of your preference.

      Also I contribute my taste to them, and they used to contribute suggestions of other things I may like. I expect the people who make use of their service as advertisement of their songs to let them use their works for free, I do however understand that actual hosting, bandwidth and employees cost money though.

    51. Re:It was nice while it lasted by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Would you be willing to pay for a radio station that only plays songs you like or might like without jabbering on and on?

      No, I'd rather just use last.fm.

      Or, wait ..

    52. Re:It was nice while it lasted by aliquis · · Score: 1

      But if you have to pay Spotify may be better.

    53. Re:It was nice while it lasted by elashish14 · · Score: 1

      Seriously, is there any legitimate cost for streaming radio over the internet? Don't even start by saying you have to pay royalty fees to the Media Nazis, that's just pure corruption. Plus bandwidth keeps doing down in price, there's no reason why they would make you pay now if you didn't have to before. And in any case, since they got bought out by CBS, there's certainly more than enough capital. There's no reason for this at all other than pure greed, either on the part of the owners or the Media Pigs.

      I personally don't see why they can't put ads in instead of making you pay. I foresee that last.fm will take a big hit from this. Hopefully it won't last long.

      --
      I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
    54. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't have ads for one, and is targeted to music that fits your personal profile or whatever tag you choose, for two.

      That said, I don't think it's worth paying for either. But it's not the same as over-the-air radio.

    55. Re:It was nice while it lasted by elashish14 · · Score: 1

      So, in your ideal world, who exactly should be paying? There is a substantial cost involved in offering services on the internet to a large group of users, especially bandwidth-intensive services such as streaming music.

      Oh come on - Youtube has orders of magnitude more bandwidth than last.fm. Do we have to pay to watch youtube videos? (Let's hope not....).

      On top of that, you have to pay a license or royalties. So who should pay for that, if the beneficiary of these offerings, the end user, is already taken out of the equation?

      Who paid for it before? Unless royalty prices have changed, it shouldn't be a problem. Besides, this is why the stupid content industry is ruining business. I foresee that last.fm will lose a lot of business from this. Serves them right to get bitten in the ass.

      Sure, free lunches are nice, but how do you explain that you should be the only one who should be getting one, and why other people (such as the operators of last.fm) should be paying for your free lunch?

      Here's a decent business model to me: advertisers pay last.fm - last.fm offers a service that attracts users - users click ads - advertisers gain and pay for more ads. Why make people pay for streaming? It'll completely kill their traffic lowering their ad revenue, which will probably outweigh any revenue that they receive from subscribers.

      Stupid last.fm

      --
      I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
    56. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Locklin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Last.fm *is* advertising.

      --
      "Knowledge is the only instrument of production that is not subject to diminishing returns" -Journal of Political Econom
    57. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We believe that you are in Australia (your IP address appears to be x.x.x.x)

      Solution: just mail them that you are in the U.S. but you are connected to the internet through a proxy located in Australia. I think they wouldn't mind the extra visitors, as long as they can officially keep up their non-international policy.

    58. Re:It was nice while it lasted by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >>>Tangible things are just that, tangible. I have it now, I have it tomorrow, so the value retains.

      So you never rent VHS or DVD movies??? Or a car? Or a plane or train ride to XX destination? Simply because you can't keep those services in your pocket or on a bookshelf?!?!? That's just weird. Renting last.fm is no different than renting Satellite radio, satellite tv, or cable tv on a monthly basis. I'd happily pay that fee.

      You're just one of those stupid Entitlement Generation persons, who thinks he should be able to steal service from others without payment. "I want it free therefore I should have it!" Reminds me of my 8 year old.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    59. Re:It was nice while it lasted by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>I don't pay for the radio I listen to over the air. Why would I pay for it just because it comes from a web site?

      You don't have to if you don't want to, but some people LIKE commercial free radio. That's why I pay for Sirius XM, why I pay for HBO, and why I would be willing to pay for last.fm

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    60. Re:It was nice while it lasted by icebraining · · Score: 1

      Google is free, yet they aren't paying nothing from they're pockets, it's called a "business model". You pay by doing things other than delivering them money, in this case watching to ads. "Not paying" doesn't mean not giving profit to the content provider, it means not giving his money directly.

    61. Re:It was nice while it lasted by commodore64_love · · Score: 2, Informative

      >>>online services already make their money - enough to cover costs and still make a profit - through advertising

      Not anymore. Since the economy turned to crap, the advertising has dried-up. This is affecting not just websites but also newspapers (going bankrupt all over the place) and television. "They make money off advertising" is no longer a true statement, at least not in this year 2009.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    62. Re:It was nice while it lasted by commodore64_love · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >>>Don't even start by saying you have to pay royalty fees to the Media Nazis, that's just pure corruption.

      Yes but still relevant. I couldn't afford to create a radio station due to those fees. Neither could you. Like it or not, those fees must be factored into your costs - either cover them with subscriptions, or go bankrupt.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    63. Re:It was nice while it lasted by kiddygrinder · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Does that actually count as coffee? If so, then it shouldn't.

      --
      This is a joke. I am joking. Joke joke joke.
    64. Re:It was nice while it lasted by hobbit · · Score: 1

      When I pay for a product I expect something from it. Tangible things are just that, tangible. I have it now, I have it tomorrow, so the value retains.

      Ah, it's a shame you're going to have to have your memory erased to remove all trace of those concerts you went to from bands whose music you discovered through last.fm.

      You're such an idiot that you stand out as one of Slashdot's greatest ever idiots, and that really takes some doing.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    65. Re:It was nice while it lasted by houghi · · Score: 1

      They don't have advertising for users in other countries, so they need to pay.

      Not completely true. There is income and expenditure.
      As long as your income is higher then your expenses, things are OK.

      On one side you have the expenses to your provider.
      On the other side you have the income of advertisement.

      To make the difference bigger in their advantage they can do two things. See that the first is lower or see that the second is higher. They selected to do the first.

      By doing this by country, they also made the possibility to do the second much harder to achieve.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    66. Re:It was nice while it lasted by paulhar · · Score: 1

      In the UK we do via the TV license.

    67. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is vastfm.com, which uses the last.fm api to get related artists, and it lets you stream EVERY song by any artist, for free. And it works in any country.

    68. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Never" is a strong word. But an internet service has to be really impressive to be worth paying for.

      1. I visit lots of websites. If each one started charging a "reasonable" fee, maybe $0.50/month, even, it would probably add up to be double or triple what I pay for internet access.

      2. I don't trust most websites with credit card info.

      3. Way too much work to maintain current billing info across dozens of sites, log in again if cookies get deleted, remembering to log out if I'm using a public computer, etc.

      4. There are lots of "free" services I currently don't use, in preference to "doing it myself" - in part because terms of service seem to change capriciously. (For example, photo hosting online vs. Gallery/Apache.)

      5. It's very hard to try a pay site to see if it would be worth it. Sites that let you try usually make you register so they can limit your free period. But registration is a long and annoying process. I'd just say "it's not worth it" and move on.

      6. Paying money is annoying. Every time I would go to the site, I'd have to ask myself, "is it worth it? Maybe I should just go somewhere else instead." There aren't many sites I'm so attached to that I couldn't replace them with something free if they required payment.

    69. Re:It was nice while it lasted by swilver · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I suspect they may tell you to stop using the proxy. Then again, there's nothing stopping you from using a US based proxy.

    70. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Rigrig · · Score: 1

      I will NEVER pay for an internet service.

      Nice, could I have the name of this free ISP please?
      Or are you just assuming your neighbour will never figure out how to secure his wireless router?

      --
      **TODO** [X] Steal someone elses sig.
    71. Re:It was nice while it lasted by swilver · · Score: 1

      I'm not the OP, however...

      I never rent VHS/DVD or cars. I haven't flown in years, I donot use the train. Any other examples you care to try on me?

      I however also wouldn't pay for just an internet site. Internet sites, even sites like last.fm, are a dime a dozen. If last.fm does not cater to my wishes, I will find another site that does, and does so free. It's like newssites deluding themselves that is worth paying for a subscription, when news is available from thousands of other free outlets.

    72. Re:It was nice while it lasted by vertinox · · Score: 1

      You're just one of those stupid Entitlement Generation persons, who thinks he should be able to steal service from others without payment. "I want it free therefore I should have it!" Reminds me of my 8 year old.

      I hate to say this, but your 8 year old has a better grasp of economic realities than you do.

      Given the choice of equal products and services (and advertising), the market (aka the consumers) will always choose the cheaper product.

      If the product is free, then you simply have an edge over anything that costs anything at all.

      This is possibly human nature and companies who want to stay competitive need to be aware of this fact.

      In the digital age of piracy, anyone who wishes to charge for a service must do something better than the pirate offer:

      Ease of use and quality.

      You may take the moral high ground on this, but morality and ethics often has little to do with reality of macro-economics (if we really had a moral economy we'd outlaw usury and leveraging of the banking system and stock market after all ;)

      Anyways... Its a hard cold fact that last.fm is competing with free services and free is often what the market demands and you can't beat the market.

      So their only recourse is to better well damn offer something better than free. I'm personally fond of Pandora because of its ease of use and compatibility on the iPhone.

      If they started to charge for their service, I'd simply start listening to iCast free internet radio stations simply because market conditions have put limitations on my own money supply and I could always listen to my *gasp* own music which I pay for and own a copy.

      It just happens to be more convenient for me to use Pandora now (iCast has connection issues with 3g somedays). Its not something I'm entitled to, no, but I'm an educated consumer and I can do as I see fit.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    73. Re:It was nice while it lasted by teh+kurisu · · Score: 1

      What if your users don't click on your ads? Worse, what if they don't even see your ads, because they're using Adblock?

      And it's not just a case of clicking on the ads, your users need to buy the products being advertised or your advertisers will not see any return on investment, and will stop buying ads. Advertising to the tight-fisted isn't a business model, and there are a lot more tight-fisted people around these days.

    74. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very well said.

    75. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, in that case you just tell em that you work for an Australia based organization, to which you have a free network connection, and which offers you free internet connection. Or something like that.

      Yeah, well anybody who knows of a good US-based proxy service? Other than getting my own colocated server over there?

    76. Re:It was nice while it lasted by hollywench · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Nope. AFAIK You can't leave Pandora streaming in the background while you work without it nagging you once an hour to ask if you are there.. and if you don't respond, it shuts off. :-p That and their recent US only policy (see comment below.)

    77. Re:It was nice while it lasted by hollywench · · Score: 1

      Pfft. I used to have a coffee machine that would grind the beans and then make the coffee with the freshly ground beans. Loved it. Took less than 2 minutes to clean and set the thing up every night. Maybe he needs that two minutes for getting off? Which still leaves him 58 minutes in the hour for coffee making.

    78. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I use Pandora from Canada practically every day.

      The solution is to use Tor, configured to only use US exit nodes, along with FoxyProxy, configured to run www.pandora.com through Tor. Because the audio servers aren't in www.pandora.com and don't do geolocation, as long as you connect to the website from a US host, you can connect to the audio servers directly, thus getting full speed audio.

    79. Re:It was nice while it lasted by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      Err...

      Last.fm is a business. They exist to profit. Why should they be forced to spend money on a market where they can't possibly make money at the moment?

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    80. Re:It was nice while it lasted by hollywench · · Score: 1

      If you give last.fm a measly $3/month US$, you can create playlists and play only what songs you want to hear. Try that with xm. :-p Whoever said listening over the net was free needs to get a clue. Someone somewhere is paying for that bandwidth you're leeching. It might not be you, but someone is ponying up the bucks for a connection and the electricity and the hardware to keep it going.

    81. Re:It was nice while it lasted by shvytejimas · · Score: 1

      Most of Europe, at least. I'm in Lithuania and it is not available. On the other hand, not even Apple bothers to open the iTunes store here, despite successfully selling localized iPhones. And they wonder why piracy is so rampant here..

      Anyway, I was actually thinking about buying a subscription with Last.fm. Since they don't put a 30 second limit on tracks in playlists I create as a subscriber, I could probably go listening through their whole library. This seems to be close to an 'all you can eat' model - at least for the tracks that have the preview/play icon next to them. Their music library seems decent, and I think the streaming works over HTTP, so it may be even possible to wget some of the tracks.

    82. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sergey Brin and Larry Page might disagree with you ...

    83. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, AC is a bit of a schizo...

    84. Re:It was nice while it lasted by f1vlad · · Score: 1

      There are many alternatives (imeem.com, pandora.com, blip.fm, etc), so I doubt many will pay.

      --
      o_O
    85. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personally, I'm a fan of Iceberg Radio www.icebergradio.com . I'm under the impression that Dave Marsden had something to do with its creation (I think that's how I found it a few years back), which would explain why I like it so much. I makes me think back to the glorious days of CFNY the Spirit of Radio.

    86. Re:It was nice while it lasted by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      Believe it or not, AOL Radio is great.

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    87. Re:It was nice while it lasted by QuoteMstr · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Initially, Pandora's count of the number of songs you skipped was kept on the client, so reloading the page reset the number of songs you were allowed to skip. That seems to have been fixed now, but it was interesting while it lasted. Your workaround for Pandora's geographic limitations is in the same vein --- it'd have been easy for Pandora to make it work differently, but they didn't.

      Considering the otherwise great quality of Pandora, I think their programmers just really don't like these restrictions, and implement them in the most half-assed way possible. Kudos to them.

    88. Re:It was nice while it lasted by TheJamesM · · Score: 1

      My mum has a coffee machine, and she says it makes coffee just as good if not better than that she gets in coffee shops. It does take a fair initial investment, however (buying the machine), and requires some maintenance (it requires cleaning quite frequently and on occasion reaches a such a state that it has to be sorted out by a professional). Or perhaps it's just a matter of getting coffee when you're in a high street. All this said, I don't believe she goes to coffee shops at all any more. But you know, to each their own.

    89. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    90. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Dorkmunder · · Score: 1

      not to mention that Pandora's inventory of music is not nearly what last.fm's is. Even though I am in the US, I seldom can use Pandora since most of the music I like they don't have. I keep hoping they improve their "collection" but no signs of this yet.

    91. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless you like non-mainstream music.

    92. Re:It was nice while it lasted by garett_spencley · · Score: 1

      I don't think the .com bubble really ended in the early 2000's. The Internet makes it very easy to create something of value with very little invested capital, and so you get lots of experimenting. This has created lots of different "micro-bubbles" and experiments, many of them obviously fail. But then, most off-line businesses fail too. There's also tons of followers everywhere. As soon as one idea catches on you get thousands of clones. Only the best ones survive.

      I've been self-employed for over 5 years now. The key to making money online is no different than off-line. You have to offer something that's, you know, valuable. I run ad-supported web-sites and while lots of other sites have gone out of business my sites have actually increased in popularity. I'm not making millions but I passed the 5 year mark and are seeing slow but sustained growth. My biggest, most successful endeavours are ones that were started back in 2004. That's because I think long-term, and aren't in it to make a quick buck. They've only seen sustained growth in daily traffic since their inception. Even in the current "economic crisis", I'm making more than I was the year before. This is because I do my best to out-compete others who offer similar services. I listen to my surfers and respond to their demands. They visit my sites because the alternatives don't provide the same level of satisfaction. I make money entirely through advertising and have only seen business increase by following very simple, elementary business practices. Like don't expect something for nothing; respond to customer feedback; provide something that others find useful. You know. Common sense.

    93. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a pointless thread of conversation. The user has already said he/she does not wish to pay for a service, and now other users are trying to prove that it was an unreasonable decision.

      Saying "I will never YYY for XXX" is an objective, self-referencing statement about a user's decision to not purchase something. Their reasons for making that decision are both personal and irrelevant, because it means LastFM will not get their money, regardless. i.e., the net effect is the same even if their reasoning for deciding not to purchase seems silly to someone else.

      Res ipsa loquitur.

    94. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love Last.fm

      (...)

      I will NEVER pay for an internet service.

      That's some tough love...

      With friends like those who needs enemies.

    95. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Noone pays them for *that* implicit advertising.

      So, there.

    96. Re:It was nice while it lasted by chickenwing · · Score: 1

      One of the advantages of last.fm over Pandora is that last.fm is helps you find other people with similar musical interests and find out about new music through them. One of the features of last.fm is to find 60 "Neighbors" with similar musical tastes. For me, this list has included people from all around the world. Even though I am in the US and am happily paying to be a subscriber, the utility of last.fm would decrease for me if people outside the UK, US and Germany stopped participating.

    97. Re:It was nice while it lasted by ImOnlySleeping · · Score: 1

      wouldn't this work the same for last.fm?

      --
      Everybody seems to think I'm lazy I don't mind, I think they're crazy
    98. Re:It was nice while it lasted by ImOnlySleeping · · Score: 1

      Or have never payed for any legal transaction, food, education, taxes, interest, etc. Your idea of what has value is ridiculous

      --
      Everybody seems to think I'm lazy I don't mind, I think they're crazy
    99. Re:It was nice while it lasted by u38cg · · Score: 1

      Not likely, not impossible. Google works because their service involves people coming to them because they want something. Now, quite often we just want an explanation of the latest meme (WTF is this yo dawg shit?), but other times we want to find, say, a hotel, or a new printer. Intelligently targeted advertising in that situation *is* what the user wants, so no surprise that they are successful.

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
    100. Re:It was nice while it lasted by nonicknameavailable · · Score: 1

      spotify is no no for linux users

      --
      Mendacem Memorem Esse Oportet
    101. Re:It was nice while it lasted by reason · · Score: 1

      Renting last.fm is no different than renting Satellite radio, satellite tv, or cable tv on a monthly basis.

      Yep. I don't do any of those, either. I love last.fm, but when they start charging, I'm back to free-to-air radio. If I used it every day, it'd be different, but for me, it's just something to throw a few new things into the mix so I find new songs to buy to add to my already extensive collection.

    102. Re:It was nice while it lasted by TheSpoom · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Depends if they're smart and do the geolocation on the audio servers as well. Streaming audio through Tor would likely be so high latency as to be unlistenable.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    103. Re:It was nice while it lasted by pilkch · · Score: 1

      Bittorrent works every where.

    104. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      You work here, and even you don't read the ... well, the headline.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    105. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Splintax · · Score: 1

      Fine, but the GP was claiming that they would never pay for an internet-based service because they won't pay for intangible objects.

      You're just saying that last.fm isn't worth 3 euros a month to you, which is completely reasonable.

    106. Re:It was nice while it lasted by soliptic · · Score: 1

      Except you can't choose your song on last.fm

      yes you can

    107. Re:It was nice while it lasted by AP31R0N · · Score: 1

      Every song played on the radio is a commercial. So last.fm wasn't advert(isment) free.

      --
      Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
    108. Re:It was nice while it lasted by DiamondMX · · Score: 1

      Pfft, I used to have a machine that would grind the beans, make the coffee, bring it through and give me it.
      Oh wait, this is slashdot - we can't have girlfriends.

    109. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I tried, it does not work

    110. Re:It was nice while it lasted by Coeurderoy · · Score: 1

      > b: I can do it myself better.
      Ok so you do not need last.fm, you can just sing by yourself...

      Personally I'm quite happy to pay 3 euros per month for last.fm if it gives me the garenty that it'll go on working...

    111. Re:It was nice while it lasted by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      So you're saying he's the perfect representative?

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    112. Re:It was nice while it lasted by PastaLover · · Score: 1

      Oh come on - Youtube has orders of magnitude more bandwidth than last.fm. Do we have to pay to watch youtube videos? (Let's hope not....).

      Youtube is full of videos that you can't play in large parts of Europe though. Perhaps the media companies would like youtube to do something similar for this as well. Google isn't smart enough to have a sensible policy for worldwide music videos, but they are certainly smart enough not to kill youtube outright by suggesting they're going to charge for it. Last.fm, not so much.

    113. Re:It was nice while it lasted by PastaLover · · Score: 1

      Not in Belgium either, unless you pay. All to do with the way copyright law and organizations work. (i.e. some of them probably don't even allow to run an ad supported service, regardless of whether you pay your fees or not)

  2. Depends by Gothic_Walrus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    has this killed Last.fm's appeal, globally?

    Depends on what they're using it for. I might be a minority, but I hardly ever use the radio feature - I use the site as a way to track what I've been listening to, and use the recommendations to find new artists to buy or download from iTunes or Amazon.

    --
    Goo goo g'joob.
    1. Re:Depends by WoLpH · · Score: 1

      Same here, I only use last.fm (as I did with audioscrobbler in the past) as a log of what I listen to so I can find music I like to hear.

      I've never used the streaming feature as I didn't see much use to it.

    2. Re:Depends by NorQue · · Score: 1

      So, we're three now. Same here, I wonder that there even are people who use the streaming service. I always found the quality to be horrible, not to mention that their flash player didn't work for me at all for a very long time. I scrobble with Amarok (which also keeps track of what I have listened to and how often) and just use last.fm for recommendations - which are very useful, IMO. No idea how many bands I found through last.fm through the last year, but I'm pretty sure it's more than a hundred (I scrobbled music of 964 artists, so far).

    3. Re:Depends by Znork · · Score: 1

      Same here, streaming doesn't appeal to me, I barely ever use the feature. I use it in combination with emusic to get suggestions on what to download.

    4. Re:Depends by Kooonsty · · Score: 1

      I do exactly the same thing. I have been on the site for 4 years now, so It is great to look at the stats over time and see how things have changed.

    5. Re:Depends by Threni · · Score: 1

      > So, we're three now. Same here, I wonder that there even are people who use the streaming service.

      Perhaps only 3 people aren't using it?

      I tried using last.fm once, but it was extremely slow - this was just as a website; no streaming or anything funky. I've heard about it a few times since but not bothered to go back. I already know what I listen to, and I don't listen to any music on my PC anyway, and I have no problem finding other stuff to listen to that's similar to what I like, thanks to Google.

    6. Re:Depends by FrozenFOXX · · Score: 1

      Mostly same here, I use it mainly for recommendations. However with my G1 in my car it's actually rather nice to stream recommended music directly into my car for the drive.

      --
      "Just a fox, a whisper."
    7. Re:Depends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chiming in -- another who does exactly that.

    8. Re:Depends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      has this killed Last.fm's appeal, globally?

      Depends on what they're using it for. I might be a minority, but I hardly ever use the radio feature - I use the site as a way to track what I've been listening to, and use the recommendations to find new artists to buy or download from iTunes or Amazon.

      You're certainly not the minority. The radio function is something that my mom and dad use. Some people in some markets might consider the radio service a bargain at 3 euros per month.

      However, if last.fm began to charge a fee for song tracking, recommendation and community functions they'd lose much of their user base in an instant.

    9. Re:Depends by soliptic · · Score: 1

      Same here (well, except not iTunes).

      Been on a couple of years, first and only time I even tried the radio was a couple of weeks ago. That said, I was pleasantly surprised by its selection, so I might use it more in future. (I'm in the UK so this announcement is a non-issue... although it does make me feel a bit guilty, being as I run adblock! I guess if I get in the habit of using the radio, I'll get a subscription.

    10. Re:Depends by chochos · · Score: 1

      Four... I rarely use the radio feature, but the site is very useful for keeping track of what I listen to and also to find new music through my neighbors, and also for finding out about concerts.

  3. Huge database by Extremus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They have a huge database of listening habits and cannot make money on it. It will be a good example of incompetence.

    1. Re:Huge database by umghhh · · Score: 1
      This can be incompetence or maybe the market situation today does not provide money for such DBs? Whether this is the end of certain business model or not is another matter but in their case it seems to be.

      What interests me here however is why single out Germany, UK and US? What is so different there?

    2. Re:Huge database by 1stvamp · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, they just have a policy of not selling on their DB to third parties, that huge DB of listening habits is used for the service alone.

      --
      Wes
    3. Re:Huge database by 1stvamp · · Score: 2, Informative

      Germany, UK and US are where they have their licensing deals, so they make advertising and referral money off streams within those countries.

      --
      Wes
    4. Re:Huge database by mr.hawk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm located in Sweden but regularly buy CDs from Amazon.co.uk after following links of recommendations on last.fm.

      That's a referral, isn't it?

      Besides, I just can't believe event promoters aren't flocking to the service and then paying last.fm based on the number of "I attended this event" or some such.

      Considering the potential gold mine that last.fm surely must be I can only speculate that this move was intentional to avoid hefty infrastructure investments for markets with only marginal direct contribution to the bottom line.

      Short term - great move.

      Long term - it'll be just another MTV.

    5. Re:Huge database by Locklin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There's nothing stopping them from becoming the Nielsen of music. Theres lot's of ways to sell aggregated analysis of the database without actually selling the database.

      --
      "Knowledge is the only instrument of production that is not subject to diminishing returns" -Journal of Political Econom
    6. Re:Huge database by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the ability to change the policy at any time if it would make them more money.

      For that matter, they could just start finding people that regularly scrobble listening to pre-release music and sell it to the RIAA for some very targeted lawsuits.

      Then again, CBS owns them, it would be in their best interests to do that even without 'selling'.

    7. Re:Huge database by operon · · Score: 1

      I would happily contribute my listening habits for commercial purposes if then they give me the free radio back. Seems pretty fair to me. (If my identity remains anonymous, of course. That additional information would cost more. Maybe a few free tickets for my favorite band gigs.)

      --
      ---- Where is my mind?
  4. Many people care about "free" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... including those who appear to care more aboute "Free".

    Perhaps advertising simply does not support Last.FM's licensing deals, and the outlay that they have- people have had the benefit of a few years of free streamed music, and obviously enjoyed it. Now they are being asked to pay what seems to me to be a reasonable sum, they are complaining that it is no longer free - a destructive approach to something which has a real world cost associated with it.

    1. Re:Many people care about "free" by BRSloth · · Score: 4, Informative

      Perhaps advertising simply does not support Last.FM's licensing deals

      Yes, it does. One of the comments there, by the same author of the post, says that the revenue from ads in USA, UK and Germany are enough to pay for the bandwidth and licensing fees they have to pay. Everywhere else, it's not enough and that's why they are charging other countries.

    2. Re:Many people care about "free" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everywhere else, it's not enough

      And so they need to charge for them, as their ad services do not support the licensing deals.

      There are plenty of complaints on here about treating different countries differently - and charging one territory and not another would seem to be doing just that, hence one overall cahrge.

      (same AC as OP)

    3. Re:Many people care about "free" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am clearly thick. The charges only relate to territories where ad revenue is insufficient, so, yes, there's territorial discrimination, based on usage.

      Where's the problem?

    4. Re:Many people care about "free" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Everywhere else, it's not enough and that's why they are charging other countries.

      And that's why there will be a competitor that will emerge and that will be better adapted to those markets and will dominate there.

      Just like Google is really not that big in Asia (no one uses Google in South Korea [less than 3%, Naver is the way], Chinese use Baidu, Japanese use Yahoo, and so on), or in Russia.

    5. Re:Many people care about "free" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd be heavily suspicious about that statement, unless something *huge* has changed in the last 6 months that I'm unaware of.

      They push multi-gbit/sec.. mainly over level3 transit, have multiple datacenter locations, massive power draw, some fairly messed up licensing agreements with certain labels; an entire staff to pay. Last I checked, they were bleeding money and CBS was pissed that the company wasn't the cash-cow they thought they'd bought. Oh, and then the economy tanked.

      But hey, like I said... I could be wrong.

  5. So long and thanks for all the free music! by barbazoo · · Score: 1, Troll

    Dear last.fm,

    I have deleted my account because of this ethnic discrimination.

    Cheers,

    barbazoo

    1. Re:So long and thanks for all the free music! by Neon+Aardvark · · Score: 2, Informative

      I was sickened when Pandora blocked non-US IPs (used to really enjoy that service).

      Now this. Oh well.

      --
      Azural - instrumentals
    2. Re:So long and thanks for all the free music! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was sickened when Pandora blocked non-US IPs (used to really enjoy that service).

      Likewise. However, while I wouldn't pay for Last.fm, I would pay for Pandora. Its expert-assisted classification of music was truly amazing for finding music of similar style across time, artists, styles, countries.

      Sadly they never gave us this option, and instead just cut us off.

    3. Re:So long and thanks for all the free music! by BRSloth · · Score: 2, Informative

      I was sickened when Pandora blocked non-US IPs (used to really enjoy that service).

      Well, Last.fm will be available outside US, UK and Germany, you just have to pay a fee (or find a nice proxy to stream through it.)

    4. Re:So long and thanks for all the free music! by BlackSabbath · · Score: 1

      Me too.

      Now, where's me bottle o' rum? Aaaarrrrrr!

    5. Re:So long and thanks for all the free music! by teg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Dear last.fm, I have deleted my account because of this ethnic discrimination.

      1. It's not ethnical discrimination - that would be charging e.g. people of Chinese origin living in Germany, but not the rest.
      2. They're doing it because they have ad departments in these three countries, and this is where they get the revenue. Not sure why they couldn't just do google or similar, but I guess they have looked into it.

      I've been a subscriber for a while because I liked the added features at the time (artist and tag radios), and 3 (see if you can pay in GBP, that's a lot cheaper ;) a month is close to nothing if you get any value from the service. I pay even more for spotify, and I'm happy with that too.

    6. Re:So long and thanks for all the free music! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ignorrant cretin.

      They're charging in countries other than the US, UK, and Germany because of licensing issues within those countries.

      Do you think they WANT to charge you? If they did, they'd charge everybody. It just so happens that the advertising revenue covers the cost of streaming content within Germany, the US, and the UK. There is no such deal outside of those countries.

      So, boohoo you can't get your music for free anymore. Grow up. You always have to pay for a service. It's either advert supported and you pay with time listening / reading them, or it's subscription supported and you pay with money.

      The internet is not 'free' as in beer. Hardware costs money. Sorry.

    7. Re:So long and thanks for all the free music! by CowboyBob500 · · Score: 1
      As an artist I have removed my music from there and posted why in the biography section of the page - see here. I also posted in the blog and on the artist/label forums. I am now actively spreading the word around the independent music community as far as I can to encourage other artists to do the same.

      Maybe it's just pissing in the wind and last.fm won't care, but I feel I can't allow them to charge money for people to listen to my music when I'm never going to see any royalties:-

      The Artist Royalty Program gives credit based on your percentage share of revenue generated for Last.fm by the streaming of a track. In some cases, this revenue share does not amount to a monetary unit (penny, cent, or yen), which means no credit can be added to the royalty account.

      If your tracks have not been streamed very much, then your percentage of all streaming on Last.fm will be too small to generate any royalty credit.

      In other words, small independents are going to see none of this money they are going to charge. Disgusting.

    8. Re:So long and thanks for all the free music! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nicely done, moron. Now I'm going there and I don't know where to get your music from. Maybe you should have thought before you made such a stupid move - having your music anywhere popular is publicity, regardless of whether you're getting stackloads of cash from it.

      So, what you've done, in protest at them making money in a visible way rather than in invisible way, is screw over one of your methods of getting yourself out there.

      If you were only in it for the money, which your comment damn sure makes it clear you are, then why the fuck would you go out of your way to stop advertising your fucking music?

    9. Re:So long and thanks for all the free music! by CowboyBob500 · · Score: 1

      I'm not in it for the money - that's the point. Previously last.fm was a place where I could distribute music for free and have people listen to it for free.

      My comment about the royalties was just to demonstrate that the fees that people are going to have to pay now are NOT going to go to the independent artists - which I've noticed is a potential excuse given by some commentators - but straight into the pockets of the majors. This was fine when it was advertisers paying (corporate money being transferred to another corporate), but it's a completely different matter when they are asking the listeners to pay.

      P.S. If you really want to hear my albums you can go here. I don't claim to be particularly good mind you.

    10. Re:So long and thanks for all the free music! by mibus · · Score: 1

      Not sure why they couldn't just do google or similar, but I guess they have looked into it

      Google ads will only pay a fraction of what Last.FM would get by direct ad sales; so their ad income for USA/UK/DE would be several times the income in other countries. The extra money still needs to be made somewhere...

  6. When will these companies learn? by yo303 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Music wants to be free.

    (Also movies, games, software and books. Porn is already free.)

    1. Re:When will these companies learn? by dangitman · · Score: 1

      No, music wants to snort lines of cocaine off your sister's ass. That ain't free.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    2. Re:When will these companies learn? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      So what you're saying is Music, Movies, Games, Software and Books want to join Porn? Be sure to tape this orgy of freedom when it happens.

    3. Re:When will these companies learn? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      The cocaine isn't, your sister is :)

    4. Re:When will these companies learn? by Rakshasa+Taisab · · Score: 2, Funny

      I said the same, porn is already free. She looked at me like I was mentally retarded or something, and replied, pay or get the fuck out of my face, loser.

      --
      - These characters were randomly selected.
    5. Re:When will these companies learn? by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      Well... to an extent. There's a move towards streaming services. I can't imagine buying music now that spotify exists - I'm always in reach of an internet connection and a couple of 30 second adverts an hour is a small price to pay. I can see a future where we have ipod/car stero equivalents that don't have storage and merely stream from the cloud.. and it's not really that far off (get the data charges down on 3G and you're basically there). Bands are going to have to go back to making money off playing live, merchandising, etc. the same way they did originally.

    6. Re:When will these companies learn? by Znork · · Score: 1

      a couple of 30 second adverts an hour is a small price to pay.

      Don't worry, that wont last. As these services start showing any profitability the music industry will raise the prices and you get either services as expensive as buying the music (spotify arguably already costs as much as emusic for various levels of consumption), or you'll get mostly ads.

      See, the fundamental issue is that the music industry is not at all interested in you choosing what music to play. In most places the division of the protection racket money extorted out of resturants, shops, bars, clubs and other venues is decided by radio statistics, and streaming is close to that. With radio, the selection of what to play is largely made by a few companies, through middle-men where legally necessary, and through social and marketing pressure (parties, freebies, etc, the stuff that makes music expensive). IE, the large companies decide who gets that money. Needless to say, it's not the long-tail artists.

      If people suddenly start deciding what music to play on their own, that entire revenue stream would risk falling into the broader independent segments and people not beholden to the RIAA corps might get their fair share. Not a desirable outcome from the RIAA corps side.

      Bands are going to have to go back to making money off playing live

      It's not about the bands. It's never been about the bands. Apart from a few, most have always made any money they get from the live side, the rest gets taken by the label.

      So the main interest of the corporations is how they get to continue taking most of the money, and as one part of that is having control over what gets played, that's one thing they care strongly about. And as they control most of the music interest organizations, that's the line that'll continue being driven.

    7. Re:When will these companies learn? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi I'm your boss, I want you to work for free.

    8. Re:When will these companies learn? by PaganRitual · · Score: 1

      No, the people that want the music, movies, games, software and books want it to be free. The people that produce them out of their own creativity as a means to make a living would like to recieve some compensation for their efforts.

      Except for movies. The entire movie business is filled with overpaid self-absorbed "actors" that do little else than play mild variations on themselves in movies that cost too much to make and aren't worth the time to watch in the vast majority of cases. Fuck movies, pirate the shit out of them.

    9. Re:When will these companies learn? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Music wants to be free.

      Aw, man, are there still people who repeat 10-yr old slogans as if nothing had been going on in between?

      Consumers want everything free. Suppliers introduce artificial scarcity so that consumers depart with their money. Some consumers find a way around the artificial scarcity. BUT, as proven by several rounds already, the "way around" is not sustainable in the long term because it doesn't make money to anyone while the artificial scarcity does.

      So a new equilibrium is found, a new "price point": we move from $20 per CD to $0.99 per track. Is Last.fm worth $3 per month? Only time and the market will tell, but so far what both time and the market have asserted inequivocally is that value_of(music) > $0.00

  7. Note: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    If your business's main appeal is not charging users, then unless you are extremely lucky you are not going to stay in business past when your VC runs out. Free is mostly fantasy, no matter how much cheap-ass users think otherwise.

    Now, whether 3 Euros is too much or too little is up for debate. Even while it's free for me, I've find little appeal to it -- too inconvenient to get music I want, yet the installed app is too intrusive. The playlist stuff was mucked up in my short time as an active user, and that was the catchy thing about it - being able both to track your list, show it to people (e.g., on dating and social sites), and look at other people's lists.

    Frankly, I have better luck just buying CDs and singles from iTunes and Amazon and I'm willing to pay much more for the convenience and quality.

    1. Re:Note: by Yetihehe · · Score: 1

      Why no one ever considers jamendo? It's free, you can make playlists and discover new music by playlists. You can also add a player to your blog/site. I've even donated some money to my favourite bands.

      --
      Extreme Programming - Redundant Array of Inexpensive Developers
  8. Wait a sec.... by NoPantsJim · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Last.fm streams? This is news to me, and I've been using it for about 4 years to "scrobble" music.

  9. Global access = good by Gible · · Score: 2, Interesting

    At least you can still access it globally unlike Hulu etc

    --
    ~/ One man's opinions is a lifetime of pain. /~
  10. Pandora by mischi_amnesiac · · Score: 1

    This sounds exactly like what happened to Pandora in 2007 when it stopped working for users outside of the US because of licensing issues.

    --
    "Die endgueltige Teilung Deutschlands - das ist unser Auftrag." - Chlodwig Poth
  11. From the comments: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "For â3.00 I could set up a VPN in one of those countries and at the same time get around these types of restrictions in other places. So thanks but no thanks, my respect for you dropped quite a lot when you chose to play favorites."

    (Edited for passable spelling) /discussion

  12. Just a bump in pricing? by BRSloth · · Score: 1

    One thing I couldn't get a straight answer:

    Right now, the site subscription is 2.50/month. The blog mentions that the price to keep streaming songs on the radios will be 3.00/month. It seems that, what's happening is that streaming will be available only to subscribers and the subscription price will be bumped 0.50/month.

    But heck, I couldn't get a answer, since they seem to be ignoring the whole discussion after a lot of people started complaining about the geographical subscription requirements.

    1. Re:Just a bump in pricing? by kiwi_jackal · · Score: 1

      One of the forum posts on last.fm said the subscription price would go to a flat three [euros, pounds, dollars] for everyone.

  13. At least it will kill its usage... by fmstasi · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I started using last.fm only a few months ago; I configured amarok to scrobble the music I listen, then once in a while I use last.fm streams to discover new music with my neighbors' radio. I would'nt pay the admittedly low fee of 3$/month only for this, so I will simply stop using it. I guess the vast majority of users will do the same.

    1. Re:At least it will kill its usage... by tadramgo · · Score: 1

      On TFA it notes that scrobbling is still a free service (for the moment). You will still be able to see artists and songs recommended to you; though as you say, the Radio feature (streaming audio) will not work. Obviously they have made the decision that their revenue from non UK, DE, US users is not large enough to cover bandwidth costs. It depends what you want, if you want a free indexing service for your habits (ala Facebook) you got it. If you want a high-ish bandwidth content service, well, that costs money.

    2. Re:At least it will kill its usage... by EvilIdler · · Score: 1

      I use Last.fm to get recommendations, but due to their player not always working well (in the past) on the operating systems I use, I've taken to using eMusic for actually listening (if the artist was there). I have found many cool artists that way.

    3. Re:At least it will kill its usage... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What service or software will you use for tracking your listening habits?

  14. Well, there is this great alternative by damburger · · Score: 2, Informative

    There is a service that delivers you complete albums, for free, whenever you want - and works in any country.

    Its called 'bittorrent'

    --
    If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    1. Re:Well, there is this great alternative by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      Yes, they have to remember against what they compete. And I still have deezer available.
      I am disappointed but hardly surprised. I wonder how long last.fm could sustain itself with close to no source of revenue. It should be something that is sponsored by records not something they make pay for. Thanks to last.fm, there are three new great groups I discover that I am willing to sponsor. How, a perfect "ask slashdot" moment : Will the artists get a bigger share of my money if I buy a tour ticket or a CD ? I'll listen to mp3 anyway but I want to pay them something...

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    2. Re:Well, there is this great alternative by Akral · · Score: 1

      Please, you're not helping the case with posts like these.

      Now you only added to the major misbelief "BitTorrent = pirates"

      --
      Don't worry, be happy!
    3. Re:Well, there is this great alternative by houghi · · Score: 1

      And if you don't know what music is out there, you can go to last.fm to, oh wait ...

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    4. Re:Well, there is this great alternative by swilver · · Score: 1

      You don't miss what you donot know about. Music companies will realize this soon enough. I don't watch MTV (not enough music), I don't listen to Top 40 music (not my taste), and donot ever listen to the radio (precious little stations that play what I like, and even less that don't have DJ's trying to boost their ego's). I couldn't even tell you what "big hits" were released the past 10 years.

      Basically, I'm completely "out of the loop" as far as big music business is concerned. What new music I listen to generally is recommended by friends.
      And you know, it's really better this way.

    5. Re:Well, there is this great alternative by Kozz · · Score: 1

      Please, you're not helping the case with posts like these.

      Now you only added to the major misbelief "BitTorrent = pirates"

      Well, I'd say it's more like "BitTorrent Usage = pirate with 0.82 probability"[1].

      Yeah, yeah... we all know there's legitimate usages for BT. Various software distros, patches, free media distribution, and so on. I've used it for that purpose, too. But like many others, I've also used it to *ahem* sample media.

      [1] totally made up, but it feels right to me.

      --
      I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
  15. The free Internet was fun, its over by martijnd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is simply a realization that free won't pay for their massive bandwidth costs (and no doubt the royalties they need to pay).

    A million websites have been launched, and died, after their operators realized that advertising could never cover their costs.

    If you look around, banners for sites that have 2 million page views p/month go for as low as US$ 45 p/month. Even if you plaster a site with them you can't scrape a living out of this. Sure, some struck it lucky, but most will die.

    Facebook, Twitter, cool toys, but dead men walking ; and they will be replaced after they die. Will you pay a monthly subscription fee to use either one of them?

    Facebook is just a blog, a few hacks can string existing blogs together and create the same functionality. Twitter can be done in P2P fashion.

    The good times were good, now the money men come calling.

    1. Re:The free Internet was fun, its over by smart.id · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what you mean by Facebook and Twitter as "dead man walking." Aren't these two of the fastest growing websites (in terms of members) on the internet? (And if you mean "they'll die eventually" then you too are a dead man walking...)

      Facebook is just a blog? What the fuck are you talking about? Have you used the website?

      How could Twitter be done in "P2P fashion"? Do we all put our tweets in text files and add them to a big torrent?

      --
      blog & fiction: jd87
    2. Re:The free Internet was fun, its over by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what you mean by Facebook and Twitter as "dead man walking." Aren't these two of the fastest growing websites (in terms of members) on the internet?

      And how much money do they make off each of those members? I'm guessing that's what he means.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:The free Internet was fun, its over by Elrond,+Duke+of+URL · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not sure what you mean by Facebook and Twitter as "dead man walking." Aren't these two of the fastest growing websites (in terms of members) on the internet? (And if you mean "they'll die eventually" then you too are a dead man walking...)

      Wild inaccuracies aside, I think the GP meant that, so far, Facebook has yet to turn a profit. It's getting bigger and bigger and becoming ever more full of features, but there business plan seems to be "if we get big enough, we'll eventually make money through scaling".

      I don't know, though... given their vast userbase and the site's general usefulness (*so* much better than Myspace ever was), it really seems like they should be making a good deal of money. But they're not. Even venture capitalists will only throw money at something for so long. :)

      --
      Elrond, Duke of URL
      "This is the most fun I've had without being drenched in the blood of my enemies!"-Sam&Max
    4. Re:The free Internet was fun, its over by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      Do you remember how it all started ? People sharing disk space and bandwidth ? If you don't need to pay royalties, it is not hard to have movies sharing websites. Look at the first bittorrent tracker that's available. Would it be made legal, many open source solutions would appear to maintain the video memory of the 20th century (that is slowly fading, that will never become 'culture' as the XIXth is today)

      The real money behind facebook is not online ads, it is consumers database.

      I agree that facebook and twitter are unnecessary and should not even exist.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    5. Re:The free Internet was fun, its over by hairykrishna · · Score: 1

      If the dot com bubble taught us anything it was that 'having a lot of users' doesn't necessarily translate to 'going to make money.'

      --
      "Physics is to math as sex is to masturbation." -R. Feynman
    6. Re:The free Internet was fun, its over by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to Ad Age this week: "Facebook, whose 2007 valuation of $15 billion has shrunk to about $3.7 billion, had 2008 revenue estimated at $300 million." http://adage.com/article?article_id=135440

      But as the parent says, Facebook is an *extremely* useful site to its users. I have been doing interviews with British teenagers, and many of for them, Facebook *is* the internet - and their pub/ club/ youth centre. Would they pay £1 a month for it? Hell yes. And then suddenly Facebook has an income stream.

      Yes, I'm aware the Facebook group "We Will Not Pay To Use Facebook. We Are Gone If This Happens" has over 2m members" http://www.nma.co.uk/Articles/38482/Subscription+model.html ...but to be honest I'm not sure I believe all 2m members of that group would leave. 1m perhaps. But as for the rest? It's a lot easier to join that group than to leave Facebook - I think they would stay, and suddenly Facebook is making £1m a month from those users. Plus spend less on bandwidth for those who have left.

      We are at home with techonlogy and we are used to saying that *other* groups of people (e.g. musicians) have to adjust to the "new reality" even if they don't like it. Well, I would suggest that the credit crunch may bringing in a new reality which *we* don't like - but have to adjust to. One in which formerly deep-pocketed investors will no longer pay facebook's server and bandwidth fees for ever. And where we actually have to (gasp) pay for the stuff we want.

      Does Facebook want to be free - or do we want it to be free? Well, sometimes you can't get want you want. Even on the internet.

    7. Re:The free Internet was fun, its over by j-beda · · Score: 1

      I'm not so sure that FB would retain the number of users it has if it charged anything - though it might be able to convert some of its users to paying customers for "premium" features. If nothing else, the troubles associated with billing would probably cause a significant fraction of the user base to evaporate - how many of their target audience don't have their own credit card?

      Like every other social networking site I have seen in the past decade (six degrees was kind of fun a decade back - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SixDegrees.com ) for any given group of people, the participation in the site dries up after a few months or at most years. My particular social group seems to have had a peak of FB usage about eight months ago - there are very few new people in this circle to "infect" and those already exposed seem to have little interest in expanding on their participation. I doubt any of my "friends" would pay for continued access. The phenomenon does seem to follow a similar time-line to infectious disease - see http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/02/12/1318237 for some similar data.

    8. Re:The free Internet was fun, its over by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The free Internet was fun, its over"

      Sounds just like when the IT bubble burst. Then web 2.0 happened and brought another wave of free stuff. The cycle will repeat.

    9. Re:The free Internet was fun, its over by AnyoneEB · · Score: 1

      How could Twitter be done in "P2P fashion"? Do we all put our tweets in text files and add them to a big torrent?

      Twitter is pretty similar to IM status messages with a few extensions like being able to see the time the status message was set and seeing previous status messages. It also does not require the user to be online, but I am not certain XMPP requires that anyway. The @ and # and any other features could probably also be done as extensions to XMPP. It would still require special software (web being a fine interface), but it would then be an open standard, and, more importantly, not rely on a centralized system.

      Facebook would be more complicated to decentralize, but it could probably be done without too much trouble.

      The idea is that there is no reason for these services to be centralized. In the extreme case, every user could run their own server, making it p2p, but, more likely, a situation like e-mail or XMPP would evolve where there are many public and private servers that users use and it does matter which one a user is on.

      --
      Centralization breaks the internet.
    10. Re:The free Internet was fun, its over by Curmudgeonlyoldbloke · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what you mean by Facebook and Twitter as "dead man walking."

      Give it five years and it'll look as valuable as Myspace does to News International now (or Friends Reunited to ITV).

    11. Re:The free Internet was fun, its over by martijnd · · Score: 1

      Facebook is just a blog? What the fuck are you talking about? Have you used the website?

      I use it daily, its cool. But posting my thoughts in a way that my friends can read it doesn't have to be centralized. Facebook will need to go a subscription model to stay in business -- and just reading the posts, they'd lose 99% of their "customers". Is it still useful for the remaining 1% ?

      How could Twitter be done in "P2P fashion"? Do we all put our tweets in text files and add them to a big torrent?

      Skype works quite well ; twitters just need to be distributed among your friends / readers / followers and you need to be able to subscribe to them (sounds like a mailing list with some fancy interface) Again Twitter being centralized has huge benefits (ease) and drawbacks (huge bandwidth costs for Twitter, with no ROI). I am sure that with a napkin and some work you can come up with a distribution solution, just don't expect to turn a profit.

    12. Re:The free Internet was fun, its over by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      2008 revenue estimated at $300 million.

      Is that supposed to be a rebuttal of "Facebook has yet to turn a profit", by the GP? Because get this: it isn't.

      We Are Gone If This Happens" has over 2m members" ...but to be honest I'm not sure I believe all 2m members of that group would leave.

      I'm not sure everone who would leave is a member of that group. Pthhhh!

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    13. Re:The free Internet was fun, its over by smart.id · · Score: 1

      I suppose we're dealing with two different things. It seems like you're looking at Facebook/Twitter only in their ability to make money -- not in their unprecedented way of collecting information, or something like that. At least for Twitter, the centralized aspect IS important. News stories have broken out on Twitter before the AP / Reuters could cover them, for obvious reasons (see the Hudson River plane crash).

      Maybe money cannot be made off Twitter itself (which seems just flat out wrong. People still click on banner ads, don't they?) But there is, I feel, a shitload of money to be made off of the trends that Twitter reveals. I'll admit that I'm not so versed in the world of Twitter API and statistics, but it seems like, given the wealth of people currently using the site as well as the mainstream popularity that is current swelling around the site, a lot of good info/stats could be extracted, showing where people gather or how they interact or what types of things they like to talk about. Money can be made off of all these things.

      As for Facebook, again, I believe that you use the site (and I'm sorry to come off so harsh in my original post), but I think that you underestimate its use. It's not just for posting thoughts (and when you say that, you make it seem a lot more like Twitter.) I'm a college student - people use it to make events, gather people around causes, etc. People use it for pre-screening possible dates. They show off their music/videos. They share links with each other. Again, the centralized nature seems important: the news feed means everyone sees your newest video or song or event, so that without your own intervention, someone can display something. Multiple blogs require visits to multiple web pages, and this is something that people are less and less willing to do every day.

      Am I making sense here?

      --
      blog & fiction: jd87
  16. Spotify by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd recommend people in Europe use Spotify. I've been using it instead of Last.fm for a while now.

    1. Re:Spotify by mr.hawk · · Score: 1

      Spotify and last.fm aren't even that similar.

      What sets last.fm apart is the great community effort and recommendation engine. I use it all the time to find and - actually - BUY new music as well as finding out about events that I might otherwise have missed.

      Spotify is great when you already know what you want to listen to but I find the music discovery factor of Spotify to be sorely lacking.

      Can't wait 'til Spotify provides an open API and someone provides a nice mashup to stream my last.fm recommendations through Spotify!

      (I've seen some hacks based on Spotifys Google Docs spreadsheets providing parts of this functionality already.)

      As it stands, EUR 3 for last.fm recommendations and free radio streaming is just "OK". Spotifys EUR 10 for on-demand streaming is also just "OK".

      I'd pay last.fm EUR 10 a month in a heartbeat if they'd combine their recommendation with Spotifys ad free on-demand streaming.

      A partnership brewing, perhaps?

  17. Proxies by amazeofdeath · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't mind a small charge for the service, if it was collected from every user, regardless of where they live. As an "international" Last.fm user, this seems quite unfair practice, so either I'll stop using the service, or use a proxy in one of the three countries mentioned.

    --
    U+F8FF
    1. Re:Proxies by Trahloc · · Score: 1

      So the fact that the US/UK/Germany users actually buy things off last.fm providing enough non subscription based revenue to cover bandwidth and licensing should be overlooked? Or do you think that these countries revenue should be spread out to the international community like last.fm was some sort of red cross of music?

      --
      The Goal: A long simple life filled with many complex toys.
    2. Re:Proxies by amazeofdeath · · Score: 1

      How does that justify the non-subscribers in those countries not paying the mandatory fee for international users?

      --
      U+F8FF
    3. Re:Proxies by xaxa · · Score: 1

      Because the non-subscribers in UK/DE/US look at the adverts. The ad companies will pay to advertise to users in these countries, they won't pay to advertise to anyone else because the market is too small.

    4. Re:Proxies by amazeofdeath · · Score: 1

      That's not exactly what they say:

      "These are the countries in which we have the most resources to support an ad sales organization, which is how we earn money to pay artists and labels for their music. We are focused on the US, UK, and Germany as key markets, with the help of the CBS Interactive salesforce and our own sales team here in London. Our headquarters are in the UK and we've always had a strong presence in DE.

      And so we've made the decision to focus on these markets for free streaming radio. We are still available worldwide and while listening is subscription, all the other rich content on the site is still free."

      So they made a decision to discriminate against other countries. That's their privilege. I'm not complaining about a small fee really, the point is that I don't like being a target of discrimination because of my geographical location.

      --
      U+F8FF
  18. charge 1 Euro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder of a 1 Euro price tag would have worked. At that rate it sounds kinda trivial but would add up to at least 3 or 4 Euros a month when it's adopted by the masses.

    (sorry not good with maths)

  19. What about Spotify? by Biotech9 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I haven't touched last.fm since I got spotify. I've heard it's not available world-wide, but seeingas it's free and legal, surely this is the future of public music?

    It has an iTunes-ish inerface, but has access to millions of artists, and the normal selection of radio-stations. As Well as the great features of being able to make and share play-lists with friends or create an open playlist for a party.

    Do many people here use it? IS it a known service? And does anyone want an invite?

    1. Re:What about Spotify? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      + 100... in Europe Last.fm has been totally sideswiped by Spotify.

    2. Re:What about Spotify? by rudlavibizon · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I'd like an invite please :). My email is my user name at gmail.com. Thanks. Maybe we should send invites to all our last.fm friends? This subscription just seems wrong, instead of offering more features, like listening to whole albums, they discriminate people by their IP address. I know nothing is free but since we contributed by scrobbling I think we deserve more. Not to mention developers who contributed to their client. I happily subscribe to flickr because I get MORE for a pro account. I actually stopped pirating because of last.fm and now I have to go back to soulseek and torrent. I feel like a fool because I recommended last.fm to so many people. Come march 30th, i'm deleting the account.

    3. Re:What about Spotify? by De+Lemming · · Score: 1

      Free access isn't available here in Belgium, and premium accounts are 9,99 euro/month...

      From the Spotify FAQ:
      What countries is Spotify available in?
      We've released our free advertising supported version in Sweden, Norway, Finland, the UK, France and Spain. In most other countries Spotify Premium is available for purchase.
      When will Spotify Free be available in my country?
      At this time we don't know when we may launch in more countries.

    4. Re:What about Spotify? by Narls · · Score: 1

      I'd love an invite please! My email address is lastone379 at yahoo dot com. Once I'm in I'll be passing it on to all my (soon to be former) last.fm friends.

    5. Re:What about Spotify? by mr.hawk · · Score: 1

      In a mailbox near you.

    6. Re:What about Spotify? by Archon-X · · Score: 1

      Try deezer.com then :)

    7. Re:What about Spotify? by rudlavibizon · · Score: 1

      Heh, it's not available in my country as well. I'm doomed to p2p, I guess. ;-)

    8. Re:What about Spotify? by mr.hawk · · Score: 1

      Check your mail.

    9. Re:What about Spotify? by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think they dropped the invites - at least I signed up without one.. just went to their page and selected sign up.

    10. Re:What about Spotify? by tadramgo · · Score: 1

      Spotify has Last.fm integration.

      Every track you listen to is automatically "scrobbled", you can see your weekly/monthly/yearly top-10 and so on.

      To be honest this is the attraction of Last.fm for many people, it records your listening habits on any music client (Amarok, WMP, iTunes, whatever) with simple plugins. It even records listens on iPods whilst on the underground when you connect them up. It's pretty much one of the best cases of rich database collection with a good open API by all accounts.

      The Radio feature they are now charging for draws on this information, but the difference is it is now distributing content based upon it. Which when it comes to music, as we all know, is expensive to do legally for many technical and non-technical reasons.

      3 Euro is the price of The Times, The NYT or Die Zeit in Athens.

    11. Re:What about Spotify? by Narls · · Score: 1

      Thank you very much! This is great!

    12. Re:What about Spotify? by Locklin · · Score: 1

      Not available in Canada. I sure hope this is not the future of music on the Internet.

      --
      "Knowledge is the only instrument of production that is not subject to diminishing returns" -Journal of Political Econom
    13. Re:What about Spotify? by icebraining · · Score: 1

      You know, people have been using that notation for emails since the beginning of Spam, it's hard to believe bots can't understand that kind of patterns...

    14. Re:What about Spotify? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's only available in Western/Northern Europe.

      And it is public now so a beta invite is not necessary.

    15. Re:What about Spotify? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know people who love Spotify. One problem:
      Spotify is not available on linux. Last.fm is very available on linux (open source, multiple clients etc.)

      Oh, and I heard spotify has adverts too. Screw that.

    16. Re:What about Spotify? by chenjeru · · Score: 1

      Hi,
      I would love an invite!!
      Thx...

      --
      Even if you're on the right track, you'll get run over if you just sit there. - Will Rogers
    17. Re:What about Spotify? by fczw · · Score: 1

      I would love an invite ! If possible, please send to frederik dot clement at gmail dot com.

      Thanks a lot !

  20. Economics, not discrimination by guyminuslife · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The big thing is international licensing. Pandora doesn't limit its services because it's xenophobic or because it thinks foreigners shouldn't be able to listen to online music---they do it because the copyright holders are nutty about controlling the markets abroad. I recall reading somewhere that the licensing costs generally don't justify the expenses for international audiences. (Something like this.) So you can either block access to international traffic, or you can try to make it profitable. Last.fm probably isn't losing much (relatively speaking) by losing its international audience, but apparently they still want to keep their service available overseas.

    So, to the posters above, please stop complaining about discrimination. This policy is most likely just the trickle-down piss from the record companies.

    --
    I don't believe in time. It's a grand conspiracy designed to sell watches.
    1. Re:Economics, not discrimination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So they are rolling over for the music industry. Does this make the dicrimination OK?

    2. Re:Economics, not discrimination by Trahloc · · Score: 1

      They are rolling over because the license holders can take them to court and destroy their entire business if they don't pay. Unlike the average /. user who can hide within the crowd of millions of other bittorrent users, when your a corporation you need a physical presence somewhere. That means its easy to be served.

      So you might call it discrimination, I call it self preservation.

      --
      The Goal: A long simple life filled with many complex toys.
    3. Re:Economics, not discrimination by not+a+serious+person · · Score: 1

      It is discrimination. It is even racial discrimination by the UN definition (distinction based on national origin). Whether it's done for xenophobic or economic reasons doesn't really matter for the victims; economic aspects have often played a role in discrimination and racism in history. Of course, it is not Pandora or last.fm that are to blame here, but (as always) the evil music industry.

    4. Re:Economics, not discrimination by clarkkent09 · · Score: 1

      They don't mention anything about licensing in the blog linked in the summary though. The only explanation they give is that only in those three countries there is enough advertising money to be made to pay for the subscribers in those countries.

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    5. Re:Economics, not discrimination by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      So, you're saying that manufacturers charge different amounts for their products in different markets (regions) because of racial prejudice, and not because local economy / legislation / licensing restrictions or quirks?

      Kindly remove your face from your back passage.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    6. Re:Economics, not discrimination by mr.hawk · · Score: 1

      I'm inclined to agree with you here.

      It just boggles the mind how incredibly narrow minded and short sighted the music industry is.

      Here's a service that has the potential to increase paid streaming, sales through downloads and physical goods as well as promoting events to an international audience. All with the help and contribution of the actual consumers.

      What do they do? Rigidly try to enforce rules to adhere to some artificial market they created fifty years ago!

      Sad, really.

    7. Re:Economics, not discrimination by violet16 · · Score: 1

      Except it's not. Posts from Last.fm staff in the comments make it clear that this is about revenue maximization, not licensing problems:

      [The US, UK, and Germany] are the countries in which we have the most resources to support an ad sales organization, which is how we earn money to pay artists and labels for their music. We are focused on the US, UK, and Germany as key markets, with the help of the CBS Interactive salesforce and our own sales team here in London. ... And so we've made the decision to focus on these markets for free streaming radio.

    8. Re:Economics, not discrimination by guyminuslife · · Score: 1

      That also makes sense. I don't know what licenses cost or how much revenue can be made from ad sales in Country X. All the same, the point is that they simply can't make enough money doing it. And I'm curious about other posters shouting "BITTORRENT" at them, as if they didn't realize they were going to drive consumers off their website.

      --
      I don't believe in time. It's a grand conspiracy designed to sell watches.
  21. Discrimination?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is this IP-based discrimination okay? We should have a (global, of course) law against it...you should neither be discriminated against because of skin, color, race, nor IP :)

    Honestly, I *don't* like geographical borders re-emerging in the _global_ Internet world...this is not a good direction. Resist the beginnings!

    1. Re:Discrimination?! by Trahloc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How about just fixing IP law so that after a few reasonable years it goes into the public domain. Then we don't need to add another law on top of all these broken laws. Fix the original problem, don't bandaid it with something that just makes it worse.

      --
      The Goal: A long simple life filled with many complex toys.
    2. Re:Discrimination?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too bad the ip was designed in a way which allows geographic information to be extracted...

    3. Re:Discrimination?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This isn't the beginning by a long shot. The borders were always there, they were just hard to see.

    4. Re:Discrimination?! by Aladrin · · Score: 1

      Then work on getting your governments to agree on global laws for everything from basic human rights to intellectual property rights. Once you've unified the entire world under a single government, then you can stop seeing companies treat different countries differently.

      You seem to have forgotten that every country has its own laws and its own market.

      Last.fm CANNOT MAKE MONEY in those countries as it is. Their choices were -charge- or -ban-. At least this way they can still access the service somehow.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
  22. has this killed Last.fm's appeal, globally? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes.

    Melbourne, Australia

  23. Is this unfair restraint of trade? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    If they are based in the EU can they stop people from other EU countries using their service?

    Also, will i still be able to listen while i'm stuck in some god awful business hotel in france or spain?

    1. Re:Is this unfair restraint of trade? by Trahloc · · Score: 1

      I hope not, that would be horrible precedence. This isn't like they aren't allowing their service to be used in another country. They simply refuse to *pay* to transport their good to other countries. They have to pay for the bandwidth, it isn't free, so they choose not to pay to deliver it to you. If you want it then you just have to pay the delivery charge for a measly $3/mo. They aren't restraining trade, they simply aren't making it free. Yes licensing works into it as well but the bandwidth costs are the main defense against your argument.

      --
      The Goal: A long simple life filled with many complex toys.
    2. Re:Is this unfair restraint of trade? by Archon-X · · Score: 1

      Simple.
      www.deezer.com

      It's French, free. Has a vast amount of music. Works globally, too.

    3. Re:Is this unfair restraint of trade? by MrMr · · Score: 1

      Apple did that with the itunes store. It is probably illegal, but that never stopped the music industry from trying new 'business' models in the past.

    4. Re:Is this unfair restraint of trade? by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      They got rapped on the knuckles by the EU and forced to equalise prices on all the EU stores.

    5. Re:Is this unfair restraint of trade? by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      deezer seems to be just a link to youtube videos.. it's not got a lot of music on it compared to a dedicated site like spotify. OTOH if you've not got any other choice, it's worth it.

    6. Re:Is this unfair restraint of trade? by Archon-X · · Score: 1

      It's not at all about youtube videos, not sure where you searched.
      It's got fathoms of music, popular and unknown also.

  24. Any alternatives? by Sait-kun · · Score: 1

    Just wondering are there any alternatives for last.fm one where it doesn't matter where your from to listen to the radio? and @damburger, Bittorrent is not even close to an alternative if I want to download music I don't go to last.fm but if I want to keep track of what I listen and find new bands similar to the ones I listen to then I use last.fm and that is not something BT can provide.

  25. Bittorrent ftw by Idiomatick · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Pandora, spotify, last.fm, Hulu. None of which are available in canada or most places outside the US. Bittorrent however is still free in both senses. That they couldn't roll these out internationally is bull. Maybe a few months lag time max to fix the deals internationally. Plus last.fm clearly has SOMETHING in place since they used to stream to everyone. It is somewhat amazing that i've been able to illegitimately listen to streaming music for 10 years now and business STILL hasn't got it right. I guess I should expect a good legit streaming show/movie site in about 2030.

    1. Re:Bittorrent ftw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I guess I should expect a good legit streaming show/movie site in about 2030.

      Last.fm is good and legit, so that can't be a problem. Maybe the problem is that you're cheap ?

    2. Re:Bittorrent ftw by lattyware · · Score: 1

      Actually, as far as I'm aware, Spotify isn't open in the USA yet, or at least, it was open here in the UK far, far earlier than in the USA.

      --
      -- Lattyware (www.lattyware.co.uk)
    3. Re:Bittorrent ftw by Eythian · · Score: 1

      What I'd like to see last.fm do is team up with sites like Jamendo, and small, independent labels. Those that don't feel the need to put large fees and geographical restrictions onto their music. Push them harder where they can.

      Ideally, this would serve two purposes: 1) more people listen to independent labels, 2) the bigger money-grubbing ones realise that they're being stupid and are losing market share to the small bands.

    4. Re:Bittorrent ftw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have the same problem. I have heaps of disposable income, yet I cannot get any of the US-only content, even though I'm willing to pay for it.

      Their loss, BitTorrent provides. They deserve to die if they can't see there is money lying on the table.

    5. Re:Bittorrent ftw by f1vlad · · Score: 1

      hm, I didn't know that, do they (pandora, hulu) ban you by IP address?

      --
      o_O
    6. Re:Bittorrent ftw by Idiomatick · · Score: 1

      Yeah and going through a US IP is not helpful. If it were information or something fine. But streaming a video through will either suck horribly OR I'll be paying through the nose for the privilege. That's not the point anyways. A much easier workaround is bittorrent or one of the many crappy streaming sites out there.

    7. Re:Bittorrent ftw by sopssa · · Score: 1

      Spotify? You know spotify is from "bittorrent haven" sweden? And that its mostly available to scandinavia, uk and europe countries? Its still not available in USA.

      Which I think is a great twist, finally something this way. Americans can have their shitty stuff, we enjoy this great service.

  26. I'm a paying user... by EddyPearson · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm actually a Last.fm subscriber, and am more than happy to pay the meagre 3 euros, but being forced into it? Personally I don't use the paid features much at all, it's as much wanting to support the (excellent) service as it is trying to get value for money.

    I wonder if they'll lose that sort of support when they move their business toward a more corporate stance.

    --
    You feel sleepy. Close your eyes. The opinions stated above are yours. You cannot imagine why you ever felt otherwise.
  27. Accounts can be closed by s1lverl0rd · · Score: 0

    I just deleted my last.fm account. You can do too. Go to Settings, then Data, then hit 'Delete account'. Don't forget to enter your password.

    1. Re:Accounts can be closed by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      Last.fm say thanks.

      If you live outside of the US, UK, or Germany, you've stopped costing them money by consuming their bandwidth and server cycles. You weren't making them anything because their advertising partners don't pay for advert traffic outside of those three countries. In essence, you've done them a favour, and you've helped ensure that thanks to reduced costs, the UK, Germany, and US can stay advert supported and not be subsidised with subscriptions.

      Thanks again!

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    2. Re:Accounts can be closed by trezor · · Score: 1

      You've also taken away one source for the recommendations-engine, the only thing making the site worthwhile.

      Also how many indie labels will be willing to give their music for free to a service demanding payment from pretty much the entire world to listen to this music? I expect lots of indie-labels to withdraw their music based on this.

      Finally when only people in the US, UK and Germany is feeding the system new input, except the recommendations to go stale, users to stop caring and the site to quietly die a slow death.

      --
      Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
  28. People will complain.... by bdptcob · · Score: 2, Insightful

    About anything. Seriously, it's three dollars a month! I've had a subscription for some time now because I've found TONS of music I would have never found otherwise. Their streaming is great. If my ten cents a day helps keep them afloat and allows me to keep discovering new artists, it's completely worth it. And if you're that cheap anyway, hit up a proxy or do without. There are always shoutcasts and icecasts out there. They suck, but it's an alternative for the financially challenged.

    1. Re:People will complain.... by rudlavibizon · · Score: 1

      Yeah but it feels stupid to pay for something you had for free for so long and not have any bonuses for that while people who live in richer countries don't have to pay anything. In my country a lot of people don't even have credit cards so they most likely won't pay even if they can afford it. And there are a lot more poorer countries then mine.

    2. Re:People will complain.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People pay out of the ass for the inefficiencies of advertising, it is just invisible in the purchase price of all of the goods they buy. Of course some gluttons may free ride, but most people just end up trading subsidies for each other's entertainment.

    3. Re:People will complain.... by cffrost · · Score: 1

      There are always shoutcasts and icecasts out there. They suck, but it's an alternative for the financially challenged.

      There's also this site, though it doesn't meet your "suck" criteria.

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
  29. Quid pro quo... by jasquigl · · Score: 1

    Okay, so Last.fm's whole business is based on the listening habits data which we users provide.

    So, let's make a deal, I'll let you keep using my data to keep your business working, and you don't charge me for listening to the streaming stations which, in effect, generate sales for the record companies.

    Or, Last.fm can pay me â3 a month for the use of my data.

    1. Re:Quid pro quo... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that your last.fm data doesn't belong to you.

    2. Re:Quid pro quo... by xaxa · · Score: 1

      So, let's make a deal, I'll let you keep using my data to keep your business working, and you don't charge me for listening to the streaming stations which, in effect, generate sales for the record companies.

      I'm sure Last.fm would be happy with that deal -- but do you think the record companies would? They want to be paid for songs to appear in Guitar Hero (for example), when every song that does gets much increased sales. They want to be paid for videos on YouTube.

      (PS £ or € is easiest for £ and €.)

  30. So long... by Yvanhoe · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...and thanks for all the tuna !

    --
    The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    1. Re:So long... by Cl1mh4224rd · · Score: 1

      ...and thanks for all the Phish?

      --
      People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
  31. Quality? by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I recently was in the market for a new soundcard. Not just a soundcard but one that does 5.1 and EAX support for the games I play.

    This is harder then it sounds because Creative is shooting straight for the bottom. Their new X-fi chip is so bad they had to allow a third party to use it to get a decent soundcard out. Oh well, luckily I am dutch and I could test the X-fi myself, simply by buying it, running it over the weekend, then returning it on monday when it didn't work out. Full money back. Tried another sound card, returned that too, money back.

    Free internet services can pull all kind of crap but the moment I pay for something I am protected by dutch law. Not american "companies own your ass" laws, not british "we want to be american" laws, but dutch laws. The only country in the world where Sony was FORCED to replace ALL PSP's with any defective pixels and this policy has affected all LCD's for years. Pixel warranty? Only for those silly enough not to know the law.

    Can Last.FM stand up to this? Can they provide a service with which I will be satisfied 100% or money back, no questions asked? Of course not.

    That for me is the difference between paying for something and something being free. I expect and demand and have the law on my side to get my money worth. Even if it is "only" three euro. Frankly I have tried last.fm several times and their service is pretty bad. Spotty loading, slow, lack of pre-buffering and their recommendation system is hazy. It can't even tell bands apart so it will happily mix completely opposite music styles just because one band that is in the style you look for has the same name.

    3 euro's? No thanks.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Quality? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is an escape clause for paid services. For example, Valve can screw you over any way they want and Dutch law won't help you with it at all. That's because Valve does hold any offices in any EU country. Buying stuff from Steam is pretty much equal to importing.
      Last.fm is UK based (right?). So, through EU guidelines they have to abide to Dutch consumer laws when the purchase is made in the Netherlands. Or they have to stop selling stuff to the Dutch.

    2. Re:Quality? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > . Not american "companies own your ass" laws, not british "we want to be american" laws, but dutch laws.

      That wouldn't be the winds of ignorance I hear blowing, would it?

    3. Re:Quality? by aliquis · · Score: 1

      I recently was in the market for a new soundcard. Not just a soundcard but one that does 5.1 and EAX support for the games I play.

      This is harder then it sounds because Creative is shooting straight for the bottom. Their new X-fi chip is so bad they had to allow a third party to use it to get a decent soundcard out. Oh well, luckily I am dutch and I could test the X-fi myself, simply by buying it, running it over the weekend, then returning it on monday when it didn't work out. Full money back. Tried another sound card, returned that too, money back.

      Yeah, everything Creative suck, don't Vista use it's own sound stuff though and disable audio acceleration or something such?

      Anyway, just get an ASUS Xonar card.

    4. Re:Quality? by Blue+Stone · · Score: 1

      So ... did you find a good sound card? I'm looking for one and although I know to avoid Creative, otherwise I don't have a clue.

      --
      Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
    5. Re:Quality? by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Depends on what you're looking to use it for really (Gaming vs general audio vs movies, etc)

      I have a Xonar DX from Asus, while its EAX emulation was initially spotty, they're making great strides towards improving that aspect of it, and hardware-wise it's superior to the Creative cards.

      Onboard optical out was a big plus for me personally, as was the on-the-fly conversion to a Dolby signal (DTS, iirc, which last i checked the creative cards can't do, they just pass through dolby sound from DVDs and the like)

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    6. Re:Quality? by russotto · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not american "companies own your ass" laws, not british "we want to be american" laws, but dutch laws.

      As an American, I want to point out that actually, Britain is currently in the lead in oppressive laws among nominally free nations. We're still in second place, but Australia is coming on strong.

    7. Re:Quality? by slyguy135 · · Score: 1

      So... what exactly is your point? If you think that Last.fm radio is not worth 3 a month, then don't sign up to it. All the other stuff on their site is still free...

      Would you have preferred the Pandora solution of just cutting you off? That is the choice here.

      You're angry at the wrong people. Last.fm don't want this; the record labels do.

    8. Re:Quality? by Keeper+Of+Keys · · Score: 1

      through EU guidelines they have to abide to Dutch consumer laws when the purchase is made in the Netherlands. Or they have to stop selling stuff to the Dutch.

      Seems they chose option b)

    9. Re:Quality? by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 2, Funny

      Not for one thing or another, but being 1st 2nd or 3rd for most opressive western regime IS NOT a race you want to be in. Mind you, we are beating all of you in slowest response to the credit crisis! YEAH! Go dutchies!

      --

      MMO Quests are like orgasms:

      You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    10. Re:Quality? by Blue+Stone · · Score: 1

      I was looking for a general do-it-all-pretty-reasonably sound card. 5.1, used for a few games, movies, and playing music. EAX not really a piority, but nice to have.

      I'll be sure to check out Asus's offerings.

      Thanks! :)

      --
      Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
    11. Re:Quality? by randyleepublic · · Score: 0

      What does being Dutch have to do with buying something and returning it? Fry's is more like a free rental w/ deposit store than a retail store as much stuff as I buy and then return there. Now if you had talked about your new Spyker, THEN I would have been impressed. But buying, trying, and returning? Go put your finger in a Dyke.

      --
      Social Credit would solve everything...
    12. Re:Quality? by PastaLover · · Score: 1

      Pff Belgium's got the dutchies beat on the financial crisis. We haven't even formulated a proper plan yet. Take that holland!

  32. Hmm by travbrad · · Score: 1

    I absolutely love the last.fm service, but I have to say I've barely even used the radio part of the site. As long as I can still find people with similar tastes and music recommendations I'll be happy. Still, it sucks that "international" users have to pay for a service that is free for Americans (for how long?).

    I guess it makes sense that the radio is the only thing they are charging for though. That has to be where the vast majority of their bandwidth is used.

  33. This doesn't surprise me..Last .fm is owned by CBS by Newer+Guy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Last.fm is owned by CBS, a company that's so desperate for ca$h right now (due to Sumner Redstone's poor investment choices) that they would remove the gold fillings from dead people and melt them down if they could.

  34. Discrimination? Rasism? ARE YOU NUTS? by jw3 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I have seen this line of reasoning a few times, and I think it is important to get it straight.

    It is perfectly normal that the pricing for services and products is different in different countries. I mean, how retarded do you have to be to think that an item X should cost exactly the same in, say, the country it was produced and the country it has been shipped to after paying tolls?

    And especially especially when we are talking about copyrights and international licensing, the matters are complex. Say, I had enough money *and* the juristic possibility to get a special kind of contract in two countries which allows me to play the music for free in these countries... am I obliged to pay -- possibly much more money -- to get the same type of agreement in all other countries in the world?

    Nope. Look, I am living in Germany, but I'm not a German citizen. Last.fm is not free in the country of my origin. Discrimination / rascism would have been if they refused to provide me with the same service as German citizens. Or if the Germans living in my country of origin were allowed to listen to last.fm for free, whereas other people would have to pay. That would have been discrimination.

    There was a similar discussion in regard to iTunes. iTunes music store is always national -- works only in one country. There are plenty of countries where you cannot buy music from iTunes (even within EU). Are they rascist? Nope. Neither is Walmart, even though there is not a single Walmart in Burkina Faso. Or an online pharmacy shop in London even though it does not ship certain drugs to the U.S. -- legal in London, illegal or not allowed for import in the U.S-

    The fact that Internet brings different countries together, and allows you to communicate over juristic and national boundaries doesn't mean that these boundaries do not exist. Don't you forget this.

    j.

    1. Re:Discrimination? Rasism? ARE YOU NUTS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *Toll was not paid on this post*

    2. Re:Discrimination? Rasism? ARE YOU NUTS? by cffrost · · Score: 1

      I [...] think that an item X should cost exactly the same in, say, the country it was produced and the country it has been shipped to after paying tolls [...]

      Sure, I agree with the quoted* statement. However, I don't believe that there are actually tollbooths on the Information Superhighway, insofar as neither I nor anyone I'm aware of has paid at any such tollbooth(s).

      * Quotation modified for brevity and content.

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
  35. free ad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I signed up after reading this. thanks guys - I never really knew what this service was until today and it is just what I've been looking for.
    Yes I will subscribe. (live in the uk) although I can't help thinking I can access this for free through a US proxy.

  36. pay lastfm vs pay proxy provider by Minupla · · Score: 4, Insightful

    OK the case for me purchasing an account on one of the US vpn providers keeps getting stronger. 4.40*12=52.80. Witopia provides VPN at USD 36/yr, and allows me to use it for the general case of any US service that geolocks (Hulu, Pandora, and the list keeps getting longer)

    Why would I give Last more money for effectively less service?

    Min

    --
    On the whole, I find that I prefer Slashdot posts to twitter ones because I don't get limited to 140 chars before
    1. Re:pay lastfm vs pay proxy provider by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      If you want to stream the likes of hulu you're going to end up paying more than that - in terms of raw bandwidth cost there's no way they can supply VPN at that price for very long.

    2. Re:pay lastfm vs pay proxy provider by RyoShin · · Score: 1

      If they really wanted to crack down, Last.fm (and related websites) could easily block IPs from proxies. It might be a race between blocking IPs and new ones coming online, but one where the proxy users lose out most of the time. I don't know that proxy users would have any single remedy, either.

      I doubt they will do this, but it's still something to consider.

    3. Re:pay lastfm vs pay proxy provider by Trojan35 · · Score: 1

      To avoid the risk of Last blocking streams to services like Witopia, and then having to pay Last anyways?

  37. bye bye! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course it has killed the appeal of Last.fm for this European listener. Particularly since there is a large amount of Internet radios that are genre specific enough to reasonably replace Last.fm, more so in areas like classical music.

    I am uninstalling it right now.

  38. And slowly but surely... by knarf · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...the world wide web gets chopped into bite-sized chunks, to be gobbled up by overweight bonus-grabbers, their quivering jowls dripping slime while they stuff their gassy wobbling guts. Just like with the whole globalisation thing really... borders which are broken down for the grabbers are reinstated for the 'consumers' using licensing and technology. Vote with your wallets, people! It is the only vote which counts in a capitalist world.

    --
    --frank[at]unternet.org
    1. Re:And slowly but surely... by nicc777 · · Score: 1

      +1

      I couldn't have said it better :-)

      --
      Need an ISP in South Africa?
  39. Let them stay cocks by falbert1990 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    We Europeans already have Spotify and plenty of other sources. I'd be MORE inclined to pay if everyone had to pay, not only we. I'm tired of being treated as "less worthy" just because I'm from mainland Europe. I say let them stay cocks, see how many customers they make. What laws prohibit them from making money here? Advertisements are allowed and as far as I know our laws are generally quite lax.

  40. Pay $3, get worse service by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    What makes it really sad is that even if you pay $3 you still don't get the on demand service that US, UK and Germany have.

    Great thinking by the copyright holders.

  41. I am a subcriber. by O'Nazareth · · Score: 1

    But I will stop paying if it is so. The reason is that Last.fm is interesting mostly for the social networking (and specially the system of events). If people of my country stop using it, then it will uninteresting.

  42. API changes, no mobile phones by toolz · · Score: 2, Informative

    Seems to get worse - they are about the change the API, and streaming to mobile phones will not be allowed.

    2.You won't be allowed to use our API to stream to mobile phones. This is unfortunately a limitation of some of our licensing agreements.

    I wonder what the rationale for that is.

    --
    You aren't remembered for doing what is expected of you
    1. Re:API changes, no mobile phones by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      The rationale? The RIAA wants their piece.

  43. P2P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't be the first to bring this up, but can't they help their bandwidth costs with a p2p solution in their radio software? I wouldn't mind streaming the music to 1 or 2 persons listening to the same track. Sure, it won't be simple, but it can't be not worth considering.

    I'm not sure why they're only going to charge international users though, do they pay for packets according to where they go?

  44. Some lessons learned... by nicc777 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    One lesson I have learned the hard way is simply that once you offer a service for free you can not charge for it in the future. You loose too many clients that way.

    In this case, however, it appears to me that this is a good way for them to get rid of unwanted users. They are not loosing their main base. It would be interesting for me to see what the user base looks like geographically - I suspect the bulk of their users are from the "free" countries.

    Whatever the actual reason - there are still plenty of options. No love lost here...

    --
    Need an ISP in South Africa?
  45. plenty of ways to monetize site by gsn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Seems like there are plenty of ways to make money from last.fm users without charging them directly.

    - a craigslist/ebay style setup to buy/sell/trade music/show tickets/whatever - take a cut from the ads/transaction fee - there are forums but these are token and there isn't a Buy/Sell section anywhere AFAIK.

    - use music recommendations to sell people music directly rather than linking to amazon/itunes whatever. Particularly for smaller bands that can't get recording contracts - work to hook them up with gigs and sell merchandise through the site and take a cut - essentially cut out the record labels as middle men and still provide a service that makes it easy to find smaller bands.

    - they have recommendations for events in the local area but I never see them handle ticket sales at all - well why the heck not - local shows are much smaller scale than giant stadium shows and they could get a larger turnout and

    Of course setting up this kind of infrastructure costs money, particularly to do it globally, but use your user base to add events in the region and use them to review and categorize bands and just make it easy for bands to offer goods through the site. Charging users directly is a good way to lose them because there are plenty of free alternatives and we've all gotten used to not paying for radio. Music fans are among the most passionate - give them services they can actually use and take a reasonable cut and they'll probably embrace it in droves.

    They just do not get social networking at all.

    --
    Reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.
  46. Autofail by aliquis · · Score: 1

    has this killed Last.fm's appeal, globally?

    Yes, totally useless now.

    Way of autofail.

    Pandora Radio is a good one.

    No, pandora sucks way more.

  47. BS.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    As an artist that uploaded my music with the intent that it can be listened to for free, I don't remember being asked about this.

    Furthermore, it seems I have to pay to listen to music on a website where I contributed some fo the content.

    Thank you last.fm.

  48. not racism, but alienation by Meltir · · Score: 2, Interesting

    while i understand the premise behind this move (its always about money, aint it ? ;) ), it will have serious consequences:
    less users from countries that do not get the service for free.
    this leads to less of an incentive for bands from those countries to sign up, publish their music for free (or for money - doesn't really matter).
    and that means that the sole reason for which i love last.fm - the amazing variety of music from every corner of the globe available on it - will be gone.
    it will become just like any bog standard radio station, pushing britney spears, pussycat dolls and just5 (no disrespect - the mentioned are just not my thing ;) ).
    im sure that others will agree that the amazing variety of music in the system is an enormous advantage of last.fm, and loosing it will lead to a slow decay of the service.

    having said that - im in the UK, and will be receiving the service for free.
    and having said _THAT_ i wouldn't mind at all if the service became a globally paid service, and everyone was required to pitch in to keep/raise the quality - i would pay for it myself.

  49. I don't think i care by kiddygrinder · · Score: 1

    They had a mediocre service so i'm not too worried. type in something you like and you get a bunch of bands that sound kinda like them but suck, every 15 min or so you'd get a good one, but it wasn't worth the effort. Not really something i want to pay for.

    --
    This is a joke. I am joking. Joke joke joke.
  50. so long last.fm and thanks for the fish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll never pay either if they implement something like this for US users.
    I have close to a terabyte of music at my disposal and another TB I can rifle through. I really don't need last.fm but it was nice to listen to bands I probably wouldn't of ever heard before.

  51. It will close by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Service will be closed or heavily resized, I don't want to pay for listening music, It's a pity because service is good and nice but a lot of folks like me will switch to something else, for free.

    Ben

    1. Re:It will close by phimpshiex · · Score: 1

      yep, i've just deleted my account =)

    2. Re:It will close by nonicknameavailable · · Score: 1

      same here

      --
      Mendacem Memorem Esse Oportet
    3. Re:It will close by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh no, please don't stop wasting their resources. Anything but that. Get a job.

  52. iRate Radio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Well folks, there is always the open source iRate Radio:

    http://irate.sourceforge.net/

    I've gotten tons of good music from iRate.

  53. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not available in Canada. I sure hope this is not the future of music on the Internet.

    I know. Isn't the internet supposed to be world wide and agnostic of where you're located?

  54. Mod parent up by acid06 · · Score: 1

    This is actually worse than the original announcement because not only they're restricting international users, they're also crippling the service for everyone else.

    Using Mobbler is awesome. Being an international user and not being able to use it anymore will *definitely* kill last.fm for me.

  55. Kind of like NPR by xrayspx · · Score: 1

    Everything Last.fm does generates lots of hate from the community. I've honestly let my subscription lapse for two reasons. First, they were bought out by Huge Record Conglomerate and I decided they don't need my money anymore, but more importantly, it got to the point where the only somewhat useful feature that was subscription-only was being able to see who visited my profile.

    It seems this relates only to listening to Last.fm radio streaming, which I don't care about, and I'm in the US, which makes me care even less. But if you consider the amount of bandwidth that goes into streaming that content, if you listen to it for 8 hours a day I would consider it no different than an NPR subscription. Except that the money is going to Big Record Conglomerate, instead of, you know, NPR.

  56. Inquiry by ratboy666 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Will residents of Micronesia have to pay as well?

    --
    Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
  57. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  58. Not Suprised. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I saw this coming when I was in Sweden over the holidays and Pandora didn't work due to "licensing issues" (they straight-up said "Oh BTW you're not in the states, fuck off), but LastFM was fine.

  59. Spotify by BrookHarty · · Score: 1

    I love spotify, but I only was able to use for 2 weeks before they disconnected me for using it in the USA.

    I'd take spotify over last.fm anyday, soon as spotify opens up to the USA, I'll pay a subscription to it.

    I wish someone would compare all of them and write a nice article on benefits. Last.fm has a horrible website and user interface, too annoying to take seriously.

  60. I'm through by sepelester · · Score: 1

    That put the nail in the coffin. I'm switching to Spotify, their free service is ad funded, that's good enough.

  61. And what about the EU single market? by separation100 · · Score: 1

    Does this not violate the European Union single market rules, when the service charges a fee from the users from 25 EU countries, and does let users from 2 other EU countries to get free service? I'm in a EU25 country, not UK or Germany - and to me this feels like a a clear case of discrimination because of nationality/geographic location. Case for the European Commission to investigate? Last.fm, you will not get away with this!

  62. Redundant? WTF? by ratboy666 · · Score: 1

    So, here I make a joke. "last.fm" uses the country TLD of Micronesia, which is, of course, not one of the countries in the summary...

    It's a play on "international".

    Nobody else has brought this up, and I get modded "Redundant"?

    Thanks, mod.

    --
    Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
  63. Removed from my favourites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As soon as this commences, I'm removing last.fm from my favourites and removing my firefox extension. That's it end of story.

  64. Group bring back the free last.fm by entervazda · · Score: 1

    If you're a last.fm please consider joining our group: http://www.last.fm/group/Bring+back+the+free+last.fm . I apologize beforehand for the link if someone thinks of it as spam but is not. We're trying to find alternatives as well. Thanks for your time guys.

    1. Re:Group bring back the free last.fm by entervazda · · Score: 1

      I meant last.fm user of course :)

  65. resoning behind paying for internet radio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Two main problems with streaming radio are that the costs are now becoming expensive as you not only have to pay your normal terestrial broadcasting fees but also you need secondary licensing fees and copyright royalties for onlinie streaming (these are in the thousands of dollars range (in Australia anyway)) On top of this yu need to pay either by the number of listeners or by amount on traffic (number of hours listened to) This also amounts to thousands of dollars per year

    These two reasons are somwhat prohibitive for broadcasters as a large number of Internet radio content comes from either non-commercaial or semi-commercial (community/public) radio for whom money is a very big issue.

  66. The common thread by AnalPerfume · · Score: 1

    As the recession forces people to tighten their belts and be more cautious about where they spend their money, the effects are not limited to consumers. When revenue streams start to dry up, companies are gonna look at stuff they previously offered free as a place to now charge for the same service. They are gonna look at agreements not to sue as potential shredder food. They are gonna look at how they can exploit the politicians and media they have in their pockets to ensure lock in. They need to find ways to keep their profit levels up, as they are judged by the performances of their predecessors.

    Look at how many companies are now turning on the lawsuits since their profit levels are plummeting. They want to force people to pay license fees for stuff they turned a blind eye to for years; whether there's a case or not. At this time, even the threat of a lawsuit can force capitulation as defending it will likely make them bankrupt.

    Like anything, some things the public will pay for even if it was previously free of charge, while others they wont. The mobile phone industry has had their heads in the sand over features, with the "build it and they will come" mentality, dreaming of lots of users signing up for subscriptions to all sorts of shit, while the reality is that while some users would use them if free....they won't pay for them. Most people use their phones for calls and SMS messages, even if their phone is stacked with features.

    Everyone is fighting for a share of an ever decreasing pot of money. Some have no thoughts beyond their own greed of the lifestyle they've been accustomed to.

  67. The Fark Headline of This by AP31R0N · · Score: 1

    Last.fm To Start Charging International Users, Lasers

    --
    Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
  68. So, does this Last.fm have any content? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

    Just in the spirit of lunacy, I went to look at this "Last.fm" thing that people have been talking about for a few weeks now.

    It claims to be some sort of internet radio service - am I correct in this understanding?

    But it doesn't appear to have any content apart from music. Again - am I correct in this, or have I failed in finding content using the site's search facilities?

    So, no content other than music, and now they're charging for it's lack of content. I think that's not a business model I can see any reason to support.

    Well, off to download this morning's In Our Time, and this afternoon's Material World. Couldn't listen to them live because I was working on some DVDs which required audio attention.

    Last.FM? Unless it has some content, it's not going to get any money from me. Crash and burn, baby.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  69. Umm... April's fools day ahead? by Jantastic · · Score: 1

    I don't know when this policy change is planned by Last.fm, but personally, before deleting my account there, polishing my tinfoil hat and start qq-ing about how they is suckz0rs, I wait till April 1 has passed.
    I invested quite some time there, Last.fm "learned" pretty well by now what music to select for me (more importantly, what not to select). I'd hate to go through that process all again.

    --
    ...a fact which for the sake of a quiet life most people tend to ignore ~H2G2