Universal and Sony prohibit Zune sharing for certain artists

It's official: record companies don't like you. After all that griping about signing up for the Zune music store -- and keep in mind that these record companies receive monies for selling songs here -- that resulted in Universal Music Group getting some sort of fat royalty check from Microsoft for Zune sales, not to mention whatever negotiations went on behind closed doors to come up with that ridiculously minimal "three days or three plays" sharing scheme, a couple of labels have once again gone out of their way to make life hard on you. It appears Sony Music and Universal Music Group are marking certain artists of theirs as "prohibited" for sharing, meaning that just because you've paid for a song, and even managed to find another Zune user on the planet Earth, doesn't mean you'll necessarily get to beam that JoJo track to another Zune via WiFi magics. In a non-scientific sampling of popular artists by Zunerama and Zune Thoughts, it looks like it's roughly 40-50 percent of artist that fall under this prohibited banner, and the worst news is that there's no warning that a song might be unsharable until you actually try to send it and fail. Oh well, maybe you can just hum a few bars or something -- just make sure the labels don't hear you!

[Via ClicZune]

Read - Zunerama
Read - Zune Thoughts

[Joe V @ Jan 19th 2007 2:05PM]

No one likes a spamlinker. Only relevant URLs, please.

[I, Robot @ Jan 19th 2007 5:01PM]

Calm down “sonyUsh*t”. We all know you can boost music from “other” places. However, the point still reminds the same. Fraud.

Record Labels made back-door deals and profits with MS in order for the ZUNE to perform certain functions. MS then sold the ZUNE on those features to the public. Now 2 months later we come to find out that those features will only work on 50% of the Music Artist and Songs.

Did they inform the consumers about this BEFORE they made the purchase – OR did they just do it, and hope you wouldn’t notice? That’s called FRAUD – There are (at the moment) laws that protect people from companies trying to commit fraud against consumers. THAT is the point.

[AntaBaka @ Jan 19th 2007 11:45AM]

Well, that about kills the biggest reason Microsoft gave for buying the Zune.

[Joe V @ Jan 19th 2007 11:48AM]

The idea that this is somehow a problem is predicated on the belief that more than one person in any 50-mile radius area actually owns a Zune.

[Sam @ Jan 19th 2007 11:51AM]

Its hilarious to me when these big media companies do things like this. Sharing limited-play songs will actually help sell music.

[underwhelm @ Jan 19th 2007 11:53AM]

I'm glad they're forcing some protection on Zune users, what with all the indiscriminate squirting they're likely to do.

[LittleJoe @ Jan 19th 2007 11:53AM]

oh man... i can see it now:

A guy walking down the street with his lonely zune when out of nowhere, "could it be??? another zune??"
He walks up to a beautiful girl rocking her poop brown zune.
"Care to share?"
"Why not?" she says then bites her lips.
They wait 5 minutes for the songs to fly through the air, but alas... its a no go.
"Well it looks like it wasnt meant to be" she says and walks away.
Then the poor little zune boy walks away, and hopes that somewhere out there is another girl, with another poop brown zune, who has artists to share that are not blocked.

[Andrew Jones @ Jan 19th 2007 11:57AM]

I really can't see how they're still in business after all this crap. There are plenty of talented artists out there. Unpublished artists are getting more and more attention, and published artists just keep playing the same junk (Is it just me, or is every song by P-Ditty basically the same?)
Sure - prevent users from hearing your music unless they buy it first! Give them only one choice to learn about an artist - buy the album. That's *sure* to sell more albums, right?

[bernardkroon @ Jan 20th 2007 12:25PM]

P-Ditto?

[DigitalFury @ Jan 19th 2007 11:59AM]

To help destroy this cartel, please stop buying music unless it's DRM-free.

[E @ Jan 19th 2007 12:02PM]

Isn't the Zune music store subscription-based? And if so, why in the hell limit any song sharing if others can simply go to the damn store and download and sync as much as they want anyway. WTF?

Welcome to the Anti-Social!!!

[Emor8t @ Jan 19th 2007 12:05PM]

Que Zune Bashing Apple Fanboy's.

[uNext @ Jan 19th 2007 12:08PM]

That is why i bootleg and support the artist by going to their
live performances or tours.

MIDDLE FINGER TO THE RECORD COMPANYS.

[Brent @ Jan 19th 2007 12:11PM]

Just one more reason I will NEVER buy music online. Maybe I'm old-skool, but there's something warm and fuzzy about owning a physical CD, and knowing that I can rip it to MP3 and play it wherever the hell I want.

[gb @ Jan 19th 2007 12:58PM]

Just a question- Can one get around this problem? I know that songs I download from iTunes, all i have to do is burn them to a CD, then rip that CD, and all the protections are gone. It's a pain, but worth it. Not that i have or will ever own a Zune, but does this technique work for all protected music files?

[disciple83 @ Jan 19th 2007 2:32PM]

I concur, I keep a hard copy around so I can rip at higher than 128Kbps. To me it seems anything between 128 and 192Kbps truncates overtones higher than 15Khz into static, and that gives me a headache. I only rip my CDs at 320Kbps and tweak them on my ZVM. I don't consider myself an audiophile by any means, it's just the static might as well be a hammer banging around in my head.

@gb,

It is true, burning files to a CD and re-ripping them will remove the protection content, but it comes at a heavy quality cost. Burning a protected file stretches the file size out from a heavily compressed mp3 or similar format to a decompressed WAV or AAC format readable by cd players. To take that file and re-rip it means you are taking an already truncated file and shaving it down even more to compress the file size. Doing stuff like that, while a valid solution to your problem, will ultimately sound like it came from a low-powered FM station, meaning you can hear it, but it won't really be worth listening to after a while.

[tf @ Jan 19th 2007 12:15PM]

How can the blame not rest squarely on Microsoft? Different DRM restrictions have been applied across other stores, but they are indicated as only-streaming or what not.

The issue here is Microsoft isn't telling their customers. There is no indicator at the store. There is no indicator once it is bought and on your PC/device. You only now when it fails.

We already knew that certain artists and studios want to control their content as much as possible. But it is Microsoft that is advertising this feature and proclaiming it the reason to buy their device.

(Also, it's Microsoft's weak negotiating position and willingness to cave to get any access at all which allows this.)

But the primary problem is Microsoft's. They advertise a capability that only works 60% of the time.

Although they do warn about this in fine print (it's hilarious that the Zune lovers are only catching on two months later), I think it is a serious issue that they aren't telling users which songs are and are NOT sharable.

[MacBookOwner @ Jan 19th 2007 12:15PM]

WTF? Does Microsoft have a disclaimer on the Zune Store, saying "some songs not shareable due to DRM restrictions"? Welcome to the social*, indeed.

[Yaya @ Jan 19th 2007 12:19PM]

This doesn't really matter. To say that some crappy and frankly offensive feature has gotten even crappier and even more offensive is not saying much. The Zune's success is solely dependent on whether or not it can be hacked. If some magical genius can find a way to unleash the wifi to it's full potential, allowing users to freely distribute any kind of file between themselves and also allow casual web browsing, then I think the Zune's sales will really take off. And can I just say shame on you, Microsoft, for forcing people to pay for all the components for wifi and not be able to use it freely. That would be like buying a corvette but then finding out that 4 of the 8 cylinders are filled with clay.

[MasterJediDan @ Jan 19th 2007 11:45PM]

@ Yaya -- Agreed, although another thing that would really make the Zune a hot seller would be if you could play XBox games on it.

[andy @ Jan 19th 2007 12:32PM]

That's a big slap in the face to customers and to MS. I'd be doing two things if I were MS right now:

1. suing Universal for royalties they paid under contract (breach and fraud).

2. leaking the zune firmware for the free hacking (If you're being sold out, return the favor)

[Javaflash @ Jan 19th 2007 12:33PM]

Record companies are practically law firms, and such group don't understand what "enough is enough" means. Not only do they refuse to improve their own efficiency, they make sure others will be disrupted to innovate.

Besides this Zune incident, Apple and numerous MP3 manufacturers long have the technology to purchase songs wirelessly via wifi. They can't enable such technology for consumers solely due to RIAA's demand of different contracts seeking more money + more restrictions. If RIAA can't represent the definition of GREED, I don't know what can.

[Chris @ Jan 19th 2007 12:34PM]

"But the primary problem is Microsoft's. They advertise a capability that only works 60% of the time."

Sounds like a juicy lawsuit is in the works.

[Seamus D Dog @ Jan 19th 2007 12:38PM]

It took them this long to find another Zune owner to share music with . . .

[Mike @ Jan 19th 2007 1:11PM]

bruthhhhhh, my ipod is thooooo thexyyyyyy

[Me @ Jan 19th 2007 7:51PM]

I will NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER buy a Zune. Ever.

[Tracy Hamilton @ Feb 2nd 2007 6:46PM]

"It took them this long to find another Zune owner to share music with . . ."

Maybe they find each other through Zuneharmony.com

[crescentdavid @ Jan 19th 2007 12:42PM]

Why play by the DRM rules when companies like Sony and UMG go out of their way to be as draconian and restrictive as they can? Why support ANY DRM'ed music given the contempt music companies and their enablers have consistently treated customers to?

I was an early adopter of downloaded music (iTunes) and then subscription music (Yahoo, Napster). Given the increasing fracturing and proliferation of DRM schemes and restrictions, what's in it for me? I'm beginning to think P2P is actually a consumer rights movement, given the lack of meaningful customer participation in the schemes of the music companies.

They continue to deny the reality of streaming/downloadable music, slashed production costs and the death of the "album" as the primary product. Why should anybody support these over-reaching, greedy dinosaurs?

[DannyMac @ Jan 19th 2007 12:45PM]

The Zune just gets better day by day! :D

[Boynamedsue @ Jan 19th 2007 12:48PM]

why are record companies so afraid that someone will hear a song without paying 3 times?

do these people not realize that people listen to the radio, walk through malls, Listen to cd's in their friends cars?

are they going to make us get eardrum implants that only allows the purchaser of the song to hear it? Do they want anyone to know that their songs exist?

[h0mi @ Jan 19th 2007 1:20PM]

They want to be compensated every single time their song is performed. Thats what the "broadcast flag" is all about. They don't want us to ever "own" any song; they want to retain full control over it so whenever it's "performed", they get paid.

Replace "song" with "movie" or "video" and you get the idea with the MPAA.

[glacia @ Jan 19th 2007 12:53PM]

In the comments of every article about music download one thing is an absolute. The public loves DRM just the way it is and they have no desire to see it change.

I never cease to be amazed at how people can take stories about how the recording industry squeezes the consumer and spin it into something they're happy about. As long as consumers snipe at each other and cheer when one company or another is screwed by the recording industry it guarantees that DRM is here to stay. As long as you happily give your money to a music DL service that has the name you're enamored with you give the recording industry all of the ammunition they need to say "The public loves DRM just the way it is." and frankly they're right.

[Colin @ Jan 19th 2007 12:54PM]

From the Zune.net site:

By joining the Zune community, you can:

* Share your life in music and pictures. Got a song your friends just have to hear? Beam them a sample track, Zune to Zune.[1]

[1] The Zune to Zune sharing feature may not be available for all audio files on your device, and works only between Zune devices within wireless range of each other. This feature allows recipients to play full-length sample tracks up to 3 times in 3 days. Recipients cannot re-send music that they have received via the sharing feature.


I STILL think MS has been less than truthful about the social aspect but they DO cover their ass with the above no?

A lot of companies stretch the truth of the capabilities of their products right?

No..I don't have a Zune or iPod.

[Colin @ Jan 19th 2007 1:06PM]

http://www.zune.net/en-us/support/howto/play/mediausagerights.htm

[macona @ Jan 19th 2007 1:02PM]

>>why are record companies so afraid that someone will hear a >>song without paying 3 times?

Because they know in those little black holes that they have for hearts that if someone actually listened to any of their artist's songs 3 times they are not worth buying.

[Goodman @ Jan 19th 2007 1:04PM]

"I pulled down the top 50 songs downloaded from Zune Marketplace, using my Zune Pass subscription. I then created a playlist of those 50 songs, and attempted to wirelessly send the whole playlist to my wife's Zune.

When the transfer completed, a message appeared on my player: 'Can't send some songs because of rights restrictions. 29 of 50 songs sent to Carrie's Zune'."

Wow. The labels are insane.

One more reason to get a Sansa Connect.

[Christian Martin @ Jan 19th 2007 1:04PM]

Okay, I don't own one or plan to own one, and I know the Zune isn't the most popular device by a long shot, but this is ridiculous. At least give the damn thing a fighting chance among the small concentrations of users who already own one. This is one of the most ridiculous and outlandish slap-in-the-face measures ever concocted. "What?! They're not selling well? Let's cripple them BECAUSE WE CAN!"

Someone hack the bloody thing already.

Dear music industry: Your wallet is making your collective ass look fat again.

[Jake @ Jan 19th 2007 1:15PM]

The zune is a joke.

[nigel @ Jan 19th 2007 1:29PM]

Damnit people!! when will you lern?
STOP BUYING DRM!! say FU to the record companys!

[treeboy @ Jan 19th 2007 1:32PM]

buy a cd. rip it then give it to a friend. much easier.

[Kevin @ Jan 19th 2007 1:39PM]

Sucks. But you can still share music than you can with an iPod. The iPhone has wi-fi... but no sharing! Can't even stream content to an AppleTV.

Looks like musicgremlin had it right.

[Adrian @ Jan 19th 2007 1:56PM]

Three points:

1 - how could MS have not checked with Sony (such a big player in the music business!) first ... that's like so arrogant.

2 - Record companies own the copyright on their artists music, who are we to tell them what to do with their property?

3 - Why should Sony peomote Microsoft hardware? Microsoft ruthlessly screw their competition.

[Eddie @ Jan 20th 2007 11:47AM]

we are the people that give them the money to listen, watch and view their materials. If i give you money to buy (not to rent) a shirt you can't tell me when to where it, how to wear it, and who else can wear it. That's what music company's /drm does. It believes that music is something different. I don't believe in home owners associations or drm

[Lorrenn @ May 21st 2008 5:43PM]

I completely agree with Adrian. While the things that the record labels have done all these years do suck, fact is we've supported the crap with our dollars...all these years. And folks were never really sufficiently outraged or "up in arms" enough to hold their cash and vote "no" the way smart people do.

Well, when we see that we can just take the music for free, and the labels try to curtail that, NOW is when people get all consumer-rights and self-righteous about what the labels are doing. In other words, "why won't you let me steal what you just spent millions to create/distribute/market"? And the labels are the ones out of touch with reality? Ok.

It sucks paying $20 for a crappy CD from some cookie-cutter recording act. But it sucks even worse to steal your favorite artist's music online, then wrap yourself in some fake consumer rights BS. You aren't hurting the Machine, you're hurting the artist. The fewer records the good artists sell, the fewer that will even get the chance to shine. Basic math.

And please spare us that transparent crap about how folks still pony up cold cash for "good music". Once you're used to getting it for free, that's what you're gonna do. So artists go from being raped by the labels to being raped by their so-called fans. I guess that's progress, huh?

[heavygums @ Jan 19th 2007 2:15PM]

Please stop being naive, a business is setup to make money, they don't hate or love us, they really don't care, but making money is the priority.

[heavygums @ Jan 19th 2007 2:19PM]

"It's official: record companies don't like you."
Please stop being naive, a business is setup to make money. They don't hate us or love us, they realy don't care. Making money is the priority.

[Tim @ Jan 19th 2007 2:26PM]

Amazing... so many people are quick to blame the Zune when this is in fact a DRM issue. You want to get around this??? Don't buy music from an online store! Buy a CD, rip it, and like magic, No DRM!!! No Restrictions!!! No hassles!!! Imagine that, suddenly you are free to share music. *sigh*

[dave smith @ Jan 19th 2007 2:26PM]

Bill Gates, Howard Stringer and Doug Morris are twits if they think moves like this do anything positive for any of their companies, or do anything except give music and digital content downloaders even more reasons to not stop. DRM is not the answer you dummies!

[disciple83 @ Jan 19th 2007 2:50PM]

I think what a lot people who post on blogs and comment on blogs about the notorious and evil nature of organizations like the RIAA don't realize is that the reason why the RIAA still exists is because there are way more consumers who don't know or care or read engadget. The only thing that matters to little Suzie and her dad is that little Suzie can take her music she gets from iTunes and puts it on her iPod and is happy. Her dad is happy cuz Suzie is quiet and content and all the parts like iTunes and iPod, or ZVM and WMP11 just work and there is no bitching. We who so desparately wish the RIAA would fall off a cliff and hit every damned pebble before plummeting straight to hell are a very rare breed in the face of the entire market.

Yes, more people blog by the day, and eventually, the general public will wake up and realize the ass-raping they've been getting over the years from the industry. But as it stands, at this moment, there are very few alternatives we have, some are illegal, which most of us clearly brush off as simply sticking it to the man. Some are legal, but come at a very heavy cost, like burning and re-ripping the protection off of our files. And then there are legal ways that just work, but are somewhat cumbersome and inconvenient, like buying the cd's, especially in the case of just requesting one or two tracks. All we can do is continue our own game, let the industry play theirs, and in due time it will be us, the consumer, who bends the industry over and gives it right back to them.

I feel sorry for those being suckered into the HD market. The guy at Best Buy tells John or Jim that this Brand new plasma will last them for years and with the introduction of HD movies, their home theater will be complete. What they fail to mention is that in two years, one of the machines will become obsolete due to market restrictions like HDCP, (either the TV without HDMI like mine, or the player), where in some cases, could potentially scale back a Blu-Ray movie from 1080p, which would look sweet on that new plasma, all the way back to 480i, standard-def tv, which most of us know, is a bitch on a big screen digital tv.

[Steven C @ Jan 19th 2007 2:50PM]

I didn't like thier comment about "finding another zune owner on the earth" I purchased a zune the day ti came out, and after the holidays , I found out atleast a dozen people I knew had a zune too.


One thing Engadget left out was , this only applies to tracks bought from the zune store.