Does anyone know if Apple is pushing for an exclusive right to distribute/sell these tunes online or if they're content being one of many distributors? This is the sort of things that worries me when the really big guys start playing in this field, locking up the market.
I'm a huge fan of EMusic, another online service for downloading licensed (and DRM free!) music. Unlimited (with reason) downloads for $10/$15 a month is a better deal for me than $.99 a song. They have a great catalog even if they don't carry the 'major' labels, but I'd hate to see their catalog decrease if labels had to drop them to distribute via iTunes.
The last little while we've seen announcements from a couple of the big guys, Apple and Real, about their new music services, but what about the existing music services that don't suck?
I've been a very happy E-Music (http://www.emusic.com) subscriber for the past 4 months and love the service. I pay a flat rate per month ($9.99 or $15.99) and can download as many songs as I want (within reason of course. I suspect if I tried to hoover the whole site they'd kick me and I wouldn't blame them). The songs they provide are licensed and I get to keep them as they are a legitimate licensed copy. They doesn't expire when I stop using the service and since they're mp3s I don't have to use a special player or worry about DRM.
For anyone who really appreciates music the service is well worth it. Sure they don't really carry new releases or the current hit singles, listen to the radio for that stuff. What they do carry though are up and coming bands from a variety of labels as well as tried and tested albums from very respectable bands.
Some of the stuff I've aquired lately includes most from Bad Religion, The Pixies, The New Pornographers, Camper Van Beethoven, The Distillers, International Noise Conspiracy, TurboNegro and tons more.
That isn't the loophole, the re-broadcasting in general isn't curtailed. The current regulations only apply to re-broadcasting on the Internet, changing the medium of the re-broadcast was the loophole.
From the report: " a) the broadcasting regulatory framework for persons who retransmit, by the Internet, the signals of over-the-air television or radio programming undertakings, "
For anyone who cares, since the article is awful short on facts and information...
The loophole that has been closed was the right for anyone to re-broadcast a radio or television signal (not cable, we're talking from the airwaves) even without the permission of the originators or owners of the copyright of said material. I do believe there were certain guidelines which had to be followed, the re-broadcast couldn't be edited, and I'm not sure about whether it had to be in near real time or not. Basicly I think it was intended such that a given broadcast could be passed along independant repeaters so that it would have a further range into more remote areas of Canada so that more Canadians could take advantage of the programming.
The bright minded start up companies realized that this might mean they could capture the tv signals their antennas pick up and then re-broadcast those on the net. Incidentally, this included broadcasts from cities close to the US/Canadian border.
Slashdot Mirror
Does anyone know if Apple is pushing for an exclusive right to distribute/sell these tunes online or if they're content being one of many distributors? This is the sort of things that worries me when the really big guys start playing in this field, locking up the market.
I'm a huge fan of EMusic, another online service for downloading licensed (and DRM free!) music. Unlimited (with reason) downloads for $10/$15 a month is a better deal for me than $.99 a song. They have a great catalog even if they don't carry the 'major' labels, but I'd hate to see their catalog decrease if labels had to drop them to distribute via iTunes.
The last little while we've seen announcements from a couple of the big guys, Apple and Real, about their new music services, but what about the existing music services that don't suck?
I've been a very happy E-Music (http://www.emusic.com) subscriber for the past 4 months and love the service. I pay a flat rate per month ($9.99 or $15.99) and can download as many songs as I want (within reason of course. I suspect if I tried to hoover the whole site they'd kick me and I wouldn't blame them). The songs they provide are licensed and I get to keep them as they are a legitimate licensed copy. They doesn't expire when I stop using the service and since they're mp3s I don't have to use a special player or worry about DRM.
For anyone who really appreciates music the service is well worth it. Sure they don't really carry new releases or the current hit singles, listen to the radio for that stuff. What they do carry though are up and coming bands from a variety of labels as well as tried and tested albums from very respectable bands.
Some of the stuff I've aquired lately includes most from Bad Religion, The Pixies, The New Pornographers, Camper Van Beethoven, The Distillers, International Noise Conspiracy, TurboNegro and tons more.
That isn't the loophole, the re-broadcasting in general isn't curtailed. The current regulations only apply to re-broadcasting on the Internet, changing the medium of the re-broadcast was the loophole.
From the report:
"
a) the broadcasting regulatory framework for persons who retransmit, by the Internet, the signals of over-the-air television or radio programming undertakings,
"
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Notices/2003/pb2 003-2.htm
Here's the official decision from the CRTC by the way.
For anyone who cares, since the article is awful short on facts and information...
The loophole that has been closed was the right for anyone to re-broadcast a radio or television signal (not cable, we're talking from the airwaves) even without the permission of the originators or owners of the copyright of said material. I do believe there were certain guidelines which had to be followed, the re-broadcast couldn't be edited, and I'm not sure about whether it had to be in near real time or not. Basicly I think it was intended such that a given broadcast could be passed along independant repeaters so that it would have a further range into more remote areas of Canada so that more Canadians could take advantage of the programming.
The bright minded start up companies realized that this might mean they could capture the tv signals their antennas pick up and then re-broadcast those on the net. Incidentally, this included broadcasts from cities close to the US/Canadian border.