toggle

AAPL Stock: 502.6 ( + 9.18 )

MacNN News

EFF on DRM, iTunes: "The Customer Is Always Wrong"

updated 05:55 pm EDT, Fri September 2, 2005

EFF on DRM

The Electronic Frontier Foundation has published a report that look at some of the shortcomings of (DRM) schemes, which are used to sell music online by companies such as Apple. According to the advocacy group, online stores like iTunes actually give music buyers less for their money than traditional CDs. For example, if music owners want to make more copies of an album (for personal) use than the DRM allows, they may have to turn to various "hacks." Unfortunately, "breaking the DRM or distributing the tools to break DRM may expose you to liability under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) even if you're not making any illegal uses." The article also points out that Apple reserves the right to change at any time what users can do with the music they purchase at the iTunes Music Store. In April 2004, Apple decided to "modify the DRM so people could burn the same playlist only 7 times, down from 10."

by MacNN Staff

(59)

TAGS :

industry, digital music/video

Share the Article

Facebook Twitter Delious Slash Dot Digg

toggle

Comments

Double_UK
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Mar 2000

0

09/02, 06:14pm | report spam | close Reply |
What I don't get is...

Why would one burn more than 7 copies of an album? When I used to buy CD's (or vinyl LP's) I rarely copied an album. Perhaps an odd mixtape or a CD for a friend. But that's it. Enlighten me: who desperately needs to make more than 7 copies of an album?

no use for a nick
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Feb 2001

0

09/02, 06:31pm | report spam | close Reply |
AND

And if they do need to make more than 7 copies of an album why in the world wouldn't they just copy the first CD they burned in the Finder or in Toast instead of burning it from the playlist 7 times?

evansls
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 2004

0

09/02, 06:48pm | report spam | close Reply |
just you wait...

"...online stores like iTunes actually give music buyers less for their money than traditional CDs... for example, if music owners want to make more copies of an album..."

Well, my response to this would be not for long! The music industry is pushing hard to DRM physical CDs in stores. For example the latest Dave Mathews Band cd "Stand Up" or the Backstreet Boys cd "Never Gone". It's only a matter of time until more albums appear with DRM. So, at least iTunes provides the option to dupilicate even if its limited to 7 "exact" playlists in a row!

Jonathan-Tanya
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 2004

0

09/02, 07:29pm | report spam | close Reply |
thats exactly the problem

@DoubleUK

thats exactly the problem DoubleUK...when you own something, you can do what you need to do.

When you don't, you have to hope someone 'gets' what you are doing...it's a never ending game.

as everyone points out, a pirate wasn't burning 10 playlists then stopping. And now 7 playlists and stopping, ooohhh, that made the difference.

fact is, a pirate will just burn as many copies as they want, and its trivial, these policies, if they harm anyone, they harm the legitimate user.

personally I don't mind iTunes too much though, even if it is a tad absurd at times.

l008com
Addicted to MacNN

Joined: Jan 2000

0

09/02, 08:32pm | report spam | close Reply |
Umm

I agree DRM is S***** but I don't think apple is the bad guy, they are just making the best of a bad situation.

bobolicious
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2002

0

09/02, 10:19pm | report spam | close Reply |
Low quality AAC is my...

...problem - yes you can buy 1 song instead of an album, and more conveniently, but one loses audio quality & control - I will never buy an iTune until an audiophile qualty recording is available - I buy cd's and oddly enough I still prefer live performances (doh!) ;-)

Sebastien
Dedicated MacNNer

Joined: Apr 2000

0

09/02, 11:31pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re:What I don't get is..

But that's it. Enlighten me: who desperately needs to make more than 7 copies of an album?"

No one. But that's really totally irrelevant. The point is that *someone else* has control over what *you* bought.

voznap
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2005

0

09/02, 11:33pm | report spam | close Reply |
1000 iTunes tracks

I have purchased nearly 1000 tracks from iTunes and have not found ANY issues with the way the DRM works. I honestly have no idea what this guy's issue is really. The only time I even burn an album is one time when I want one in the car.

Sebastien
Dedicated MacNNer

Joined: Apr 2000

0

09/03, 12:49am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: 1000 iTunes tracks

"I have purchased nearly 1000 tracks from iTunes and have not found ANY issues with the way the DRM works."

You not having issues with it does not invalidate others' concerns or problems over it.

MichaelNH
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2002

0

09/03, 12:57am | report spam | close Reply |
don't like.. don't...

Well if someone feels they need to buy a set of tracks more than 7 times..... they don't need to buy the song.... a nice luxury we have.... the freedom of choice.... going out and buying a CD so you can make more than 7 copies with better quality.. sometimes at a higher price.. more power to you.. nothing wrong with that.. just don't complain that a song, or set of songs you buy, are restricted.. you knew about that "issue" before you purchased the songs..

iPodCultist
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2005

0

09/03, 01:04am | report spam | close Reply |
Overlooked by the EFF

One minor fact that's being ignored in this issue of Apple's reduction of the number of CDs that can be burned from a single playlist from 10 to 7, is that it was a tradeoff, and at the same time they raised the number of computers that can be authorized to play your songs from 3 to 5. This was a tradeoff that I personally was extremely happy to make as I've never made more than one copy of a CD, but I do have more than three computers that I'd like to be able to play songs bought from iTunes on.

Sebastien
Dedicated MacNNer

Joined: Apr 2000

0

09/03, 02:00am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: don't like.. don't.

".. you knew about that "issue" before you purchased the songs.."

Do people really know? From TFA (which I bet the Apple apologists here haven't read):

"Unfortunately, in an effort to attract customers, these music services try to obscure the restrictions they impose on you with clever marketing."

MichaelNH
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2002

0

09/03, 12:03pm | report spam | close Reply |
Subscriptions are....

the ones that like to hide the limitations. On the Napster 10,000 for $10,000 commercial.... on my huge plasma tv I could barely read the fine print about losing all the songs on the mp3 player if cancelling the subscription.... they don't want customers to know that the million songs they can download for $15 a month, aren't theirs... should see how many people look shocked when you tell them that.. I have told many about the 7 burn restriction with itunes, and many never even burn the downloaded music on to CD's...

apostrophe
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2005

0

09/03, 12:51pm | report spam | close Reply |
Record Companies

Well, I'm no Apple Apologist, but I must say, this IS the record companies doing. I bet Apple could care less if people burned the songs they bought 50 times.. The problem is that for any music store to work it needs music, and the labels own all the music and will forever try and muscle whatever system works best for them, NOT the consumer. I'm pretty sure the average record exec could give two s@$t's about a consumers rights.

The labels would love for you to purchase your music online AND from stores, And rent you that same music yet again. I'm actually amazed Apple was able to get such a system out to market in the first place.. before the iTMS came along purchasing music anywhere but at a record-store was pretty much impossible.. at least for a Mac user.

James BritPod.com

Sebastien
Dedicated MacNNer

Joined: Apr 2000

0

09/03, 01:09pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re:Record Companies

"I have told many about the 7 burn restriction with itunes, and many never even burn the downloaded music on to CD's..."

Have you also told them Apple (under the RIAA cartel control, at least for the iTMS), can further restrict, however Apple/RIAA chooses, the rights they were given to them, at any time? Remember, they don't actually own what they bought.

LouZer
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2000

0

09/03, 01:49pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Record companies

Have you also told them Apple (under the RIAA cartel control, at least for the iTMS), can further restrict, however Apple/RIAA chooses, the rights they were given to them, at any time? Remember, they don't actually own what they bought.

Well, first, don't know how to tell you this, but you don't own the music you buy on CD either. You've bought the right to use the music under the fair use rights policies. You know, the thing everyone started breaking with the online sharing and all that basically forced the record companies into the DRM thing in the first place (oh, and don't tell me that converting an album to MP3, then posting it up on Napster in the day, was somehow a fair-use right you had).

As for the 7-burn limit, man most of you people (including the author) missed the important point here. Its just a playlist limit. Just create a new playlist, add the music to the new playlist, burn again. You don't need no stupid 'hack'. You can do this with the exact same songs and everything. Its just in there as a stupidity check to appease the RIAA and keep someone from easily burning hundreds of copies of a CD (although who'd do that with iTunes is beyond me).

And I agree with another poster. Upping the limit from 3 to 5 on authorized computers was a great trade-off for the worthless 10-burn limit. And you don't have to accept the changes. This change was made with an update to the iTunes software. If you don't get the later version of the software, you could have kept the previous restrictions.

Finally, to the comment about 'less for your money than CDs', that's true, but you can't buy just one or two songs from an artist (the real beauty of the iTMS and like services). Plus, as also mentioned, more and more CDs are becoming 'audio discs' with DRM built-in as well, from which most users won't be able to copy any music in its pristine condition, but get stuck with DRM and lossy versions of the music. woohoo.

Drakino
Grizzled Veteran

Joined: Apr 2001

0

09/03, 03:47pm | report spam | close Reply |
2 reasons I dislike DRM

1. DRM can be changed. As the article points out, Apple changedthe DRM to go from 10 burns to 7, and 3 computers to 5. What prevents Apple from changing that to 0 and 0? Nothing technicially. Where as a CD I buy at the store will remain the same years from now.

2. Future uses for music. Back when the iTunes store launched, not many people tried to put music on a cell phone as a ring tone. Now I have a bluetooth phone that via my Mac, I can toss on an MP3 and use it for a ringtone. However, I can't use an iTunes store song. Even if the phone did support AAC, it doesn't support Apple Fairplay DRM, so I'd have to break the DMCA to put a song I bought onto my phone.

DRM limits fair use period. While it might look all and good now, I am doing things with my music now that I didn't imagine 10 years ago, but I am able to do the same things with music I bought then and what I buy today. What happens in 10 years from now to people with DRM encumbered files who want to remain law abiding citizens?

climacs
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2001

0

09/03, 04:21pm | report spam | close Reply |
Off topic

I'd just like to say that BUSH SUCKS and he should resign for the shameful way he's (not) handled the Katrina disaster. He has made us look like a banana republic.

Sebastien
Dedicated MacNNer

Joined: Apr 2000

0

09/03, 07:34pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Off topic

If you want to complain about your president go do it somewhere else troll.

windward
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2003

0

09/03, 07:36pm | report spam | close Reply |
To Off topic,

get off this Mac board with your misinformed and disgusting liberal propaganda. To wit: From an AP release on August 28, we discover that President Bush appealed to the mayor of New Orleans and the governor of Louisiana to evacuate the city: Mandatory evacuation ordered for New Orleans. NEW ORLEANS (AP) � In the face of a catastrophic Hurricane Katrina, a mandatory evacuation was ordered Sunday for New Orleans by Mayor Ray Nagin. Acknowledging that large numbers of people, many of them stranded tourists, would be unable to leave, the city set up 10 places of last resort for people to go, including the Superdome. The mayor called the order unprecedented and said anyone who could leave the city should. He exempted hotels from the evacuation order because airlines had already cancelled all flights. Gov. Kathleen Blanco, standing beside the mayor at a news conference, said President Bush called and personally appealed for a mandatory evacuation for the low-lying city, which is prone to flooding.

windward
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2003

0

09/03, 07:37pm | report spam | close Reply |
To Off topic #2,

get off this Mac board with your misinformed and disgusting liberal propaganda. To wit: Also tonight, the Army Corps of Engineers says Funding levels are not to blame for flooding. WASHINGTON � The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said Thursday that a lack of funding for hurricane-protection projects around New Orleans did not contribute to the disastrous flooding that followed Hurricane Katrina. In a telephone interview with reporters, corps officials said that although portions of the flood-protection levees remain incomplete, the levees near Lake Pontchartrain that gave way�inundating much of the city�were completed and in good condition before the hurricane. However, they noted that the levees were designed for a Category 3 hurricane and couldn�t handle the ferocious winds and raging waters from Hurricane Katrina, which was a Category 4 storm when it hit the coastline. The decision to build levees for a Category 3 hurricane was made decades ago based on a cost-benefit analysis. �I don�t see that the level of funding was really a contributing factor in this case,� said Lt. Gen. Carl Strock, chief of engineers for the corps. �Had this project been fully complete, it is my opinion that based on the intensity of this storm that the flooding of the business district and the French Quarter would have still taken place.� Strock also denied that escalating costs from the war in Iraq contributed to reductions in funding for hurricane projects in Louisiana, as some critics have suggested. Records show that corps funding for the Louisiana projects has generally decreased in recent years.

gurman
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2000

0

09/03, 08:02pm | report spam | close Reply |
To Windward

Get off this Mac baord with your loathsome and slimey, right-wing, reactionary, invading countries for no reason agressor propaganda. Any president would order the evacuation, based on the advice his preofessional advisors gave him. most of those who could evacuate did, ninny. Those tens of thousands of poor souls who remained behind and suffered when the levee broke had no transportation --- or they woul dhav eused it when the flooding started.

The president wanted to lower Corps of Engineers funding even more than he finally agreed to, but he has kept it at the level it was several years ago. He was playing the odds and lost. A great president would have admitted it up front. A good one would have gone to New Orleans (not the suburbs) and started helping with the evacuation himself. But I guess there are too many of those liberal voters there, and not enoughj reactionaries.

TRRosen
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2002

0

09/03, 08:04pm | report spam | close Reply |
actually you get more

iTunes gives your the right to use the song on up to 5 computers a CD actually only gives you the right to use one copy at a time. (first sale doctrine 101...buying a CD gives you a licensee for ONE COPY of a song)

Also the EFF incorrectly states that you can only back-up to 5 computers. actually there are no limitations on back-ups only the limitation of use on 5 computers AT ONE TIME.

PS Since Apple lets your burn CDs you can play you music on any of hundreds of MIllion of walkmans boomboxes and car stereos that the other services prevent.

and well since we are allowed to burn a CD we're allowed to remove the DRM.

gypsy
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2005

0

09/03, 08:29pm | report spam | close Reply |
The SAME playlist?

"...people could burn the same playlist only 7 times"

If I read this correctly, by slightly changing the playlist or by copying it to make a new one with a different name, you could conceivably continue to copy indefinitely

windward
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2003

0

09/03, 08:44pm | report spam | close Reply |
To Gurman,

That's the problem with you sleazy liberal traitors, anything that doesn't jibe with your twisted worldview is just rightwing reactionary propaganda. But in fact my information is an ASSOCIATED PRESS REPORT and a STATEMENT FROM THE THE ARMY CORPS themselves. 1. From an AP release on August 28: President Bush appealed to the mayor of New Orleans and the governor of Louisiana to evacuate the city. 2. WASHINGTON � The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said Thursday that a lack of funding for hurricane-protection projects around New Orleans did not contribute to the disastrous flooding that followed Hurricane Katrina. So there you have it - you're wrong and your misguided hatred helps nobody. We're contributing several hundred bucks to help Katrina-misplaced schoolkids buy school supplies. Here's hoping you can help somebody too. Anyway, go back to Kos, fool. I'm staying here to read and talk about the Mac platform, and defend the honor of my country and President as needed. In other news, Macs still rule.

gypsy
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2005

0

09/03, 08:47pm | report spam | close Reply |
politics

if you want to argue politics, give each other your emails and go to it...this is about DRM etc....

I'm all for political disagreements and arguements, but only where it is appropriate. I didnt register with MacNN for it

Ralf_Wiggum
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2002

0

09/03, 09:52pm | report spam | close Reply |
To windward

By beginning your argument with "sleazy liberal traitors" you detract from the point you are trying to make. By trying to personally insult those you are trying to argue with your arguments sounds childish. I thought this was funny: "you're wrong and your misguided hatred helps nobody". Are you angry when you are responding to posts here? Perhaps that anger is actually hatred, and it certainly sounds misguided to me. You said that you "defend the honor of [your] country and President". Lashing out at people on the Internet is a strange way to defend a country or a president.

As for the DRM issue: I don't care if the RIAA is forcing apple to carry DRM. It does not excuse it. I have not paid for a RIAA owned song for quites some time now, and I'd rather buy a CD from an independent artists than by a drm laden .m4p file.

windward
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2003

0

09/03, 10:36pm | report spam | close Reply |
To Ralf,

Yes, Ralf, I was angered in that while I was reading interesting comments about iTunes Music Store I came across totally off topic lies about POLITICS and MY PRESIDENT that have no place here and I felt compelled to respond. They started it, I finished it. "By beginning your argument with "sleazy liberal traitors" you detract from the point you are trying to make." I know this, but it was fun and satisfying to write it, due to the nature of what I was at that point responding to. So I will now STOP with this non-Mac-related stuff. My point is made. Thanks you for your time.

monkeyhead
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2005

0

09/03, 11:55pm | report spam | close Reply |
Reality Check On DRM

I think we need to take step back here. Why did DRM come into existence in the first place? While we may want to blame the greed of the RIAA as the penultimate cause for DRM, we really have only ourselves to blame.

That's right�the fault is ours.

Under Fair use for all of those old LPs, 8-Tracks, cassettes, and CDs the end user is entitled to make one backup copy and that is it. Fair Use does not give you the right to make a mix tape (or CD) and hand them out to a friend or two. (And some would argue that you do not even have the right to make a mix tape for yourself!)

But never let the law (or ignorance thereof) stop Americans from doing whatever they please. Either ignorant of these rules, having an erroneous understanding of these rules, or simply ignoring the rules, we made copies of our albums and we made mix tapes (or CDs) and we shared what we had. We thought doing made it OK, kind of like speeding; if everyone is doing 75MPH, then doing 75MPH in a 55MPH zone must be OK.

The thing that kept the RIAA off our collective backs for so many years was the simple fact this sharing was never organized, never centrally located. Computers, the Internet, and little thing called Napster changed all that. Instead of a highly disperse, highly unorganized trickle of activity, "overnight" the sharing of music became a highly centralized, highly organized, flood of activity that was easy to trace and hunt down.

In many ways, our own ignorance and greed forced the RIAA to take actions that up until a few years ago were either unnecessary or impossible to impose from above.

Perhaps, as time moves on and information plays a greater and greater role in our society, a time may come when our antiquated notions of "Fair Use" will change to match the desires, needs and behavior of citizens. Until that time comes, the RIAA (and Hollywood and any other entertainment media conglomerate) will force us to play by the rules.

monkeyhead
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2005

0

09/04, 12:00am | report spam | close Reply |
The Point

So the point of all the above is this:

1.) With a CD you had/have no more rights than you did/do with the music downloaded from iTunes. The only differences is that up until recently no one could force you to abide by the rules when purchasing a CD.

2.) Apple most likely is not the instigator of the DRM (and any subsequent changes thereof) used in music purchased from the iTMS. Its' probably the RIAA and/or other laws/regulations.

Sebastien
Dedicated MacNNer

Joined: Apr 2000

0

09/04, 12:28am | report spam | close Reply |
The real point

Is that the RIAA cartel is too stupid and incompetent to realize that their business model is (and has always been) out of date; instead of having music and songs be a gateway for people to purchase merchandise and concert tickets, they simply try to milk consumers with mostly c*** music these days they can get from their slaves (the 'artists', if you want to call all of them that), and at the expense of their slaves (read Courtney Love's essay on the subject).

gypsy
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2005

0

09/04, 01:11am | report spam | close Reply |
The Point

Since CD burners became cheaper and computers more powerful, CD 's could be copied to hard drives and burned to CD-R's. This allowing any consumer to cheaply make multiple copies of any CD for whatever purpose.

I.P. Freely
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2003

0

09/04, 01:42am | report spam | close Reply |
DRM... Who gives a

s***...

bigpoppa206
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2003

0

09/04, 04:34am | report spam | close Reply |
well...

Obviously you do if you took the time to respond and read this thread.

As a member of the music industry, I usually watch these threads get reduced into another "It's us against the RIAA" standoff and must admit this is the most intelligent thread to date on the subject with little to no hyperbole being thrown about. The RIAA is indeed responding to the behavior of the the public.

And who cares if the music industry is working from an old business model. Its not your business. Do you have money invested in the company? Then show up at the annual meetings and let yourself be heard loud and clear. Otherwise, it really doesn't matter. Who one chooses to conduct business does not excuse the behavious of the music in regards to sharing music files.

voznap
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2005

0

09/04, 09:19am | report spam | close Reply |
Ummm...

Nothing stops a person from burning a playlist, then making copies of the disk they just burned.

The DRM limits you from burning a single playlist more than 7 times, not a single song. So if you want to use a song in a million different mixes, you can. The writer needs to think a little bit before writing this dribble. Besides, legally, a person is allowed only 1 copy of a CD they buy in the store. Apple isn't limiting what a person can do with they music they buy, the RIAA is.

gurman
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2000

0

09/04, 09:19am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: well...

The real question is, is there any need for a music "industry?" When major labels require the recording artists themsleves to front the costs of recording studio rental, studio engineer salaries, and so on --- why do we need them, or physical recording media at all? I realize downloads till account for only a fraction of all purchased music, but whay not think of a future where there's no need for physical media rather than as backup?

In that case, the only middleman would be the subscription services and the iTunes store (and imitators) --- and the rights managment, if any, would be a matter for negotiation between the artists and the online music stores. If you think that would put individual artists in too weak a bargaining position, they could always form associations to bargain for them.

As far as I can see, the only service the industry can provide in the long run is promotion, and the artists can probably negotiate with the online stores to do that, too. And then it might be good-bye to the least loved industry in America.

monkeyhead
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2005

0

09/04, 10:21am | report spam | close Reply |
Gypsy's Wrong

Before CDs and computers there were blanks tapes. The technology does not change what people are legally entitled to do with their music or videos. Under copyright's "Fair Use" guidelines, you are entitled to make ONE back up copy of and that is it.

Technology is important in that it enabled the quality of duplicated content to increase and that it made the sharing of the content easy on a large scale.

monkeyhead
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2005

0

09/04, 10:24am | report spam | close Reply |
FYI...

Technically, under Fair Use, you have to erase all the content on your TiVo within one week of recording it. (Same for any video tapes you've recorded from broadcast or cable TV.)

gypsy
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2005

0

09/04, 10:34am | report spam | close Reply |
monkeyhead

you have to agree that when cheaper CD records came onto the market, (like DVDs now) consumers could and did copy them. They dont read the fine print, cont care about copyrights/Fair Use or other limitations on what they preceive as their pro[erty. They purchased the CD at an inflated price, and the consumer believes he is entitled to put on as many computers as he owns (I have 4 macs), and make as many copies as he thinks is necessary and with the iPods, copy music to it as well. RIAA sees each CD copy as a $20 (approx) sale missed, and now each digital file also as a missed downloaded sale.

gypsy
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2005

0

09/04, 10:35am | report spam | close Reply |
typing

ans yes ny tiping a[nt so good

gypsy
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2005

0

09/04, 10:58am | report spam | close Reply |
Related Article

this article pertains to new HDFV,

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513-5844393.html

but the end of the article mentions similar copy protection for music

The entertainment industry doesn't trucst the consumers anymore so they are taking upon themselves to protect their profits

Sebastien
Dedicated MacNNer

Joined: Apr 2000

0

09/04, 02:30pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: well...

"Otherwise, it really doesn't matter."

Thank you for proving once and for all the music industry really doesn't give a sh*t about its customers.

ff11
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2004

0

09/04, 04:36pm | report spam | close Reply |
Advantages of CDs

"online stores like iTunes actually give music buyers less for their money than traditional CDs."

Of course one advantage of traditional CDs is that to get the one good song per album, you are forced to pay for about 12 pieces of garbage that fill the rest of the album.

Abe49
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2005

0

09/05, 12:20am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: well...

"The real question is, is there any need for a music "industry?" When major labels require the recording artists themsleves to front the costs of recording studio rental, studio engineer salaries, and so on --- why do we need them, or physical recording media at all?"

I'd say that neatly nullifies bigpoppa206's flawed arguments that the RIAA are still relevant or needed these days.

climacs
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2001

0

09/05, 12:45am | report spam | close Reply |
This news just in...

f*** Bush, f*** everyone who voted for Bush, f*** everyone who even remotely looks like Bush, and f*** everyone named Bush.

jhorvatic
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2005

0

09/05, 02:46am | report spam | close Reply |
No Problems with iTunes

I've bought many albums and songs from iTunes and have had no issues with iTunes. iTunes is cheaper than CD's so I disagree with this guy too. It seems rediculous to copy an album or song more than 7 times anyways.

bigpoppa206
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2003

0

09/05, 03:52am | report spam | close Reply |
hehehe

"Thank you for proving once and for all the music industry really doesn't give a sh*t about its customers."

No actually we don't care about you. Every one else is cool though.

bigpoppa206
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2003

0

09/05, 04:32am | report spam | close Reply |
Oh really???? I'd say..

you are confusing the RIAA with the music industry. The music industry foots the bill to enable artists to create their music, the RIAA has absolutely nothing to do with this. I, too, do not agree with a lot of things that the RIAA does, but I do not think the entire music industry should quit doing business because of it.

PS, the artists has ALWAYS paid the costs of their recordings, studio time, promotional materials, etc. The industry in some ways acts like a big bankroll and covers those costs. Once the artist starts making money, the label recoups its investment. Someone needs to do their homework OR check their contracts. I don't know of anyone who would sign a contract and have to put up thier own front money...that's BS. Or stupid. I would ask the person who stated that to provide facts.

bigpoppa206
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2003

0

09/05, 04:33am | report spam | close Reply |
ps...

my previous reply was a JOKE...nothing more.

Abe49
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2005

0

09/05, 08:00am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: ps...

"my previous reply was a JOKE..."

Quite right, you ARE a joke.

michaeljohn63
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2005

0

09/05, 09:15am | report spam | close Reply |
All Music is Digital

There is no such thing as anolog music anymore (okay, the really rare "audiophile" still uses Albums or some kind of analog tape). For all practical purposes, any music you get, comes in digital format, whether CD, iTunes, a "burn" from a friend, or stealing it on the internet. So, Digital Rights Management applies to every source of music, not just online music. My brother just subscribed to Yahoo's music service because he likes the subscription price and model. I asked him what he'll do if they double or triple the price, he said he'll drop the service. Okay, fair enough. I still prefer the iTunes model, where you get to keep what you buy. There is no way Apple can "modify" the terms of iTunes to suddenly say, pay us more money or you won't be able to listen to your songs again. I purchased those songs to use for my lifetime. Even if Apple could point to a hypertechnical interpretation of their contract which allows them to do this, no court would uphold it. The Steve has said too many times, you buy it once, and its yours to keep (in one way or another). Whether I can burn it or not, 1 time, 7 times or infinite times doesn't matter because every song I own is a string of digital information, nothing less, but something more. There is no way the recording industry will EVER be able to practically limit how people use this kind of medium.

jmmejzz
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2005

0

09/05, 09:45am | report spam | close Reply |
I look at this way

For a bit of convenience, I put up with abit of restriction.

brjohn
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2005

0

09/05, 11:14am | report spam | close Reply |
RIAA = ...

RIAA = *RECORD* *INDUSTRY* Association of America = music industry.

DUH!

monkeyhead
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2005

0

09/05, 12:07pm | report spam | close Reply |
Original Point

The original point of the article that started these discussions was that CDs offer consumers more "freedoms" than music purchased and downloaded from an on-line service. That original argument is false, at least from a legal/copyright perspective.

Following the letter of the law sop to speak, you cannot make multiple copies of CDs (just one copy for personal back up), you cannot compile and burn mixes of CDs, etc. And although you can take that CD and pop it into any player and listen to it anywhere, any time, you'd better make sure you are not playing that CD in a public venue because you cannot without paying royalties to the copyright holders.

So as far as the original article is concerned, the author does not know his/her own arse from the proverbial hole in the ground.

What has people's feathers ruffled is that for years we've been able to break the rules and no one has cared (seemingly) and, more importantly, no one has been caught and punished. Now someone is beginning to enforce those rules, people are being caught and punished. We don't think this sudden change is fair and we cry foul.

brjohn
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2005

0

09/05, 01:09pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re:Original Point

Only a zealot Apple apologist would describe the EFF as "not know[ing] his/her own arse from the proverbial hole in the ground."

ibugv4
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2003

0

09/05, 11:16pm | report spam | close Reply |
Drakino

"2. Future uses for music. Back when the iTunes store launched, not many people tried to put music on a cell phone as a ring tone. Now I have a bluetooth phone that via my Mac, I can toss on an MP3 and use it for a ringtone. However, I can't use an iTunes store song. Even if the phone did support AAC, it doesn't support Apple Fairplay DRM, so I'd have to break the DMCA to put a song I bought onto my phone. "

Burn tracks to Audio CD. Reimport burned Audio CD. Problem solved.

(You also technically violate the DCMA by sticking any MP3 on the phone if it's already on an existing portable device such as an iPod)

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

09/06, 11:09am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: This news just in...

Oh, please, we all know the fault completely lies in not only those who voted for Bush (twice!), but those who voted for Kerry, Gore, Clinton (twice!), Dole, Bush the Elder (twice!), Reagan (twice!), Dukakis, Mondale, Carter (twice!), Ford (well, did anyone really vote for ford?), etc, etc, etc.

The world would be a safer and happier place if all you losers out there voted for Lyndon Larouche like you now wish you did. No terrorism. No natural disasters. No nothing.

So you all have no one but yourselves to blame. Now, get the h*** out and leave this board to the "DRM Sucks!" "DRM is OK" arguments.

monkeyhead
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2005

0

09/06, 05:37pm | report spam | close Reply |
Troll?

Thanks brjohn for the troll and insults.

I was not making any attempt to defend Apple or its DRM policy. I was merely pointing out how the original argument, that CDs give you more "rights" or "freedoms" is a flawed argument.

From a purely legal standpoint, CDs do not offer any more "rights" or "freedoms". What CDs do offer is an easier, simpler way to circumvent the law.

If the EFF honestly believes that individuals have more legal rights with CDs, then the EFF is wrong, and, more importantly, they do not understand copyright law.

If I were an Apple zealot and apologist, I would point out the fact that the iTunes DRM as currently implemented actually gives consumers more "rights" or "freedoms" then consumers get with CDs. CDs fall under general copyright which allows only one back up copy and no other duplication. With iTunes, you can make 7 copies of that CD.

What has the EFF concerned is that those "rights" under Apple's (or anyone else's) DRM can be changed without notice or consent of the consumer. The record industry cannot just shut off your CD... yet.

All of this misses the bigger questions, however. Those bigger questions involve us taking a look at our society and laws and deciding if copyright laws (written over 200 years ago and in part established in the Constitution) need to be updated to new realities and technologies. Are our laws archaic and in need of modernization? Or perhaps our laws are adequate, but we need to change the way society's understanding and appreciation of the law.

Those are the serious, challenging, yet fun questions that need to be addressed.

brjohn
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2005

0

09/07, 03:12am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Troll?

"Thanks brjohn for the troll and insults. "

You're welcome, troll. And I'm sure the EFF would also thank you for the insults you sent their way.

Show More Comments

Login Here

toggle

Network Headlines

02/13	Apple looking to 'quadruple' India...
02/13	Apple takes top spot from Google in...
02/13	EU clears Google buyout of Motorola
02/13	VLC 2.0 to get Blu-ray support in OS...
02/13	Sony Music caught inflating price for...

Show All

02/13	Apple takes top spot from Google in...
02/13	EU clears Google buyout of Motorola
02/13	VLC 2.0 to get Blu-ray support in OS...
02/13	Sony Music caught inflating price for...
02/13	ITV denies warning Apple not to try...

Show All

02/13	Sony Music caught inflating price for...
02/09	Apple explores environment-sensitive...
02/08	Paul McCartney to perform live concert...
02/06	Microsoft prepping Dynamics CRM apps...
02/03	iBooks Author update clarifies EULA...

Show All

02/13	Refurb. Flip UltraHD Pocket Digital...
02/10	$380 off refurbished 2.8GHz Mac Pro...
02/09	iHome Dual Alarm Clock for Apple iPod...
02/08	Save 69% on SanDisk Cruzer 32GB USB...
02/07	Refurb. Olympus 14MP Digital Camera...

Show All

toggle

EFF on DRM, iTunes: "The Customer Is Always Wrong"

updated 05:55 pm EDT, Fri September 2, 2005

EFF on DRM

Related Articles

Recent Articles

What I don't get is...

AND

just you wait...

thats exactly the problem

Umm

Low quality AAC is my...

Re:What I don't get is..

1000 iTunes tracks

Re: 1000 iTunes tracks

don't like.. don't...

Overlooked by the EFF

Re: don't like.. don't.

Subscriptions are....

Record Companies

Re:Record Companies

Re: Record companies

2 reasons I dislike DRM

Off topic

Re: Off topic

To Off topic,

To Off topic #2,

To Windward

actually you get more

The SAME playlist?

To Gurman,

politics

To windward

To Ralf,

Reality Check On DRM

The Point

The real point

The Point

DRM... Who gives a

well...

Ummm...

Re: well...

Gypsy's Wrong

FYI...

monkeyhead

typing

Related Article

Re: well...

Advantages of CDs

Re: well...

This news just in...

No Problems with iTunes

hehehe

Oh really???? I'd say..

ps...

Re: ps...

All Music is Digital

I look at this way

RIAA = ...

Original Point

Re:Original Point

Drakino

Re: This news just in...

Troll?

Re: Troll?

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools:

Subscribe

to our RSS

Follow us

on Twitter

10 Most Read

10 Most Discussed

MacNN Marketplace