Microsoft patent application reveals plans for paid Zune sharing

It looks like Microsoft might be considering shaking up its Zune Marketplace a bit, with a recent patent application revealing its plans for "off-line economies for digital media" or, in effect, paid Zune sharing. Basically, users would be paid a sales commission for sharing songs with other Zune users -- only if that user actually ends up purchasing the track after the usual three free plays, that is. What's most interesting, however, is that the system could potentially work with "pirated" music as well, with the application specifically stating that "even resale of pirated media content benefits the copyright holder." Of course, there's no indication as to when or if the system may actually be put in place, though it would certainly seem to go some way towards making the Zune more "social" -- in a bugging your friends to join Columbia House sort of way.

[Via ZuneScene]

[Rick @ Jul 12th 2007 11:05AM]

Lead balloon.

[Comacozi @ Jul 12th 2007 11:06AM]

why doesnt everyone just forget about paying for music and get limewire.... Fucking microsoft....making everyones lives miserable, one OS at a time

[BestSnowman @ Jul 12th 2007 11:16AM]

This might work, lets not pay you for the work you do!

[dewde @ Jul 12th 2007 1:11PM]

Great idea. After all we *deserve* free music, right? Why stop there? Hate sitting at red lights? No problem. Free green lights all around! Everybody gets a green light at all intersections! WeeeEEEEEeeeeee

[john @ Jul 12th 2007 4:12PM]

No, don't think like that! Your friends totally love it when you make them pay to share your mp3s!

[Trace The Hedgehog @ Jul 12th 2007 4:13PM]

Congratulations, you've just proved yourself a complete fool. Jesus Christ, if we all used Limewire there wouldnt be any more music left. Because they wouldnt have the money to pay it. Fucking dumbass releasing albums costs money!

I gotta admit I'm a pirate myself but this guy's a fucking IDIOT.

[js @ Jul 12th 2007 11:09AM]

Wait... that's not the Zune click wheel...

[XO @ Jul 12th 2007 4:57PM]

The thing look like an iPod Nano!

[joe e @ Jul 12th 2007 11:13AM]

Sounds like a great idea to me!

Make a profit off your rich friends - time to share the wealth.

[daedalus @ Jul 12th 2007 11:18AM]

wouldnt this lead to more piracy? Seeing as it will become a legitimate profitable business and all

[Comacozi @ Jul 12th 2007 11:21AM]

umm i dont do work...so no ones paying. Besides im not paying to hear the song on the radio. So why is it any different if someone wants to give me the song via P2P?

[Dragod @ Jul 12th 2007 11:51AM]

On the radio, only certain songs are put on the radio. Only "The best of the best", though I think radio is horrible now, are put on the radio as singles. When someone listens to a whole album and like it, music companies make several times more profit whether it is pirated or not. A pirated song leading to a sale is better than a pirated song leading to more piracy. A pirate probably won't change his ways, but if they can get someone to start buying music from the Zune Marketplace it benefits them.

[Alex @ Jul 12th 2007 11:22AM]

Good idea. This means that if I can find another Zune-owner who rips his tracks at a high bitrate, and who happens to be standing near me, I will be able to legally obtain high-quality audio, even if the source was pirated.

Also, this commission-based sharing plan sounds like a pyramid scheme. Would they try and continue the 3x3 theme into this pyramid scheme, with each sharer getting 1/3 commission of any resale by people who downloaded from them?

[MrE @ Jul 12th 2007 11:23AM]

Sounds like drive by spam in hopes that 1% buy your "squirted" music. Plus, I like how the patent application used the iPod Nano instead of the Zune to represent the MP3 player. Notice the clickwheel and title bar? Ha, good job Microsoft.

[Rob @ Jul 12th 2007 11:23AM]

Is that an iPod nano on their diagram?
Microsoft is always putting their foot in their mouth.

Anyway, back to the subject, it sounds interesting. But, how much commission are we talking about? I'm not going to harass my friends for $0.05.

But then again, I don't own, nor plan to get a Zune. I'm happy with my iPod, and PSP.

[Ken @ Jul 12th 2007 11:35AM]

"This might work, lets not pay you for the work you do!"

HAHAHA singing songs = work HAHAHAHAHA!
I'm sure it's difficult and consumes time, but I would never call it work. Entertaining needs to be relinquished to its former medieval status. It's not worth anything if it can be copied infinitely for free.

[Matt @ Jul 12th 2007 11:49AM]

So software engineers shouldn't be paid becuase the product they produce can be copied infinitley?

Just becuase the medium isn't physical doesn't make it any less real.

Out of curiosity, what kind of work do you do, Ken?

[2ASquared @ Jul 12th 2007 12:30PM]

Oh sure, making music isn't work, ignoring the fact that most musicians practiced their whole lives to be as good as they are, and that they also had to have the theory lessons to be able to compose the pieces they play. And yes, regardless of how simple a song may sound to you, composing it took a lot more work than you obviously think. Some pop artists may not fall into this category, but I think the majority of musicians do.

[RBH54 @ Jul 12th 2007 11:49AM]

So....

The Zune is now a Pyramid Sales Scam??

[Scott @ Jul 12th 2007 11:50AM]

Ahhhahahahahahahahahahahahaha

[Ken @ Jul 12th 2007 11:57AM]

"Out of curiosity, what kind of work do you do, Ken?"

Mechanical Design

Yes, if someone copies my designs, I don't care. Intellectual property is a restraint on progress. Software developement communities can perform the same function as private/corporate institutions. The main problems we are seeing now with IP is how to make money on ideas. The problem is, once the idea is communicated, it has infinite supply. According to true capitalism, infinite supply merits no value.

[roundabout @ Jul 12th 2007 12:22PM]

As a recording artist I'll quite happily comment on this. Making music is about A LOT more than simply singing songs. Remember, these things need to be written (that takes time) recorded (that takes time and money) released (takes money) and promoted (more money) before you've even heard them. It is a business and it always has been, even in medieval times they paid entertainers.

songwriting is no different from scriptwriting, painting, mechanical design - whatever. If someone stole one of your deisigns and got paid for it instead of you, you'd be pretty upset. As an artist, you only get paid if someone buys the song/album - and they have to buy A LOT of them before you can recoup what you've already spent.

But, if you believe it should all be free, then by all means listen to what ever you can find on myspace or wherever. Or better yet why don't you write your own damn songs? While your at it you can trade in your TV/Blockbuster card and watch Youtube instead.

[Ken @ Jul 12th 2007 1:15PM]

The advantage for income that an performing artist (notice I refrained from using the term "recording artist") is that they can perform in front of a captive audience. Most of the hard working musicians and actors are on the road doing gigs, not in a studio. I am still adamant in my stance, recorded and reproduced music has NO VALUE.

[Chicksta @ Jul 12th 2007 2:20PM]

Ken, your logic has (at least) one major flaw. If you create your work out of enjoyment on your own, then you can certainly decide to share that however you wish. However, if you are employed by someone and they are paying you to create those works, they own them, you do not, based on whatever contracts or employer/employee arrangement there is. You do not have the right to distribute work for hire projects that someone is paying you to develop. Your analogy is more akin to creating work that your employer decides not to pay you for, because once you have created it, -you- have no value. So, if you really feel that artists don't deserve the right to decide how their works are distributed (as the creators) and that they shouldn't get paid, then walk the walk and start ripping up your paychecks and give away your work. By your logic, you don't deserve them.

[Ken @ Jul 12th 2007 3:21PM]

Your basing your arguement on law. Law is certainly not infallible.

My concern is not with my employers IP conflicting with my banana nut cookie recipe. I'm saying that placing a monetary value and ownership on intangibles is wrong. I don't care if the law says that some company owns the color blue and has "solitary rights" to it. It's not going to change the fact that the information can be reproduced at no cost. It is still wrong.

[Mez Jr @ Jul 12th 2007 4:06PM]

Essentially you should be able to own what you create and the issue is that the nature of audio recordings especially now is that they can be reproduced quickly and easily.

Though I do disagree with "stealing" music, I think copyrights should be much shorter, I think now its what, the life of the artist plus 50yrs or something. It should be 20 yrs total, tops.

[redfish @ Jul 13th 2007 2:39AM]

One thing people don't stop to think about is if money can still be made off intellectual property even if non-commercial distribution is free, and I think it can be. So the issue is less about how we won't have music anymore (don't kill music, man!) but how the market is structured and supported.

[Ken @ Jul 13th 2007 9:47AM]

As far as I'm concerned, free distribution of recorded art is like viral advertising. Most musicians make thier money from live performances which can be advertized by freely distributed songs.

[Mez Jr @ Jul 12th 2007 12:04PM]

Ken and Comacozi

While you may not qualify singing as work, being able to do it at a certain level is definitely valuable. It is very much unfair to the singers and all the other people who work to make an album.

I know you guys probably have a Robin Hood complex about it but wether or not you think its wrong or cool to steal music... it is.

[gibber9583 @ Jul 12th 2007 12:16PM]

So you're telling me I can profit from the 60GB of pirated music I have?

[Joel @ Jul 12th 2007 12:21PM]

If you look at the patent it has little to do with the Zune. It specifically lists iPods and cell phones as ways to do these "offline" transactions. Also notice the patent was filled in 2005.

[Dave95 @ Jul 13th 2007 10:21AM]

I was wondering why the drawing of the DAP looks like an iPod!

[craig @ Jul 12th 2007 12:38PM]

Patent applications never reveal "plans". Engadget authors are becoming increasingly ignorant with their editorial comments.

[Ken @ Jul 12th 2007 1:18PM]

See my comment above. It was posted shortly after yours.

[Ken @ Jul 12th 2007 1:20PM]

I practiced my whole life to be a master thumb wrestler. Does that make it worth anything?

[kaybee @ Jul 12th 2007 1:20PM]

Very clever idea. Frankly, I'm hoping that it works and catches on in a big way, but only in the interest of possibly reducing the RIAA's incentive to take folk to court.

[ShoKill @ Jul 12th 2007 1:57PM]

Gettin' paid to be a pirate, would be pretty rad. =)

[Steve S @ Jul 12th 2007 2:58PM]

The whole paying for sharing type thing looks a lot like Grooveshark, except with the Zune instead of just P2P... Curious. I wonder if Microsoft is trying to co-opt patents again.

[willyboy @ Jul 12th 2007 5:55PM]

Naw. That looks like the two 80 dollar iPods that I bought on Ebay. Which, by the way, came with a great little mini cd (drivers) that would not fit in my Goddam macbook.....Chinese hacks could have sent a full sized CD..... Pretty funny though.....At least they will add an interesting esthetic to my collection.....By the way, Pyramid schemes are not good. Does anyone know of where I can buy some Amway.?...Oh, and as a designer, I love to make money on my designs, but I'd have to go with Picasso on this one. "Good artists copy, Great artists steal"

[Josh @ Jul 12th 2007 9:08PM]

Ken convinced me, give me back my tip.

[Pete the Wheat @ Jul 12th 2007 9:15PM]

Well at least M$ tell it how it is - social networking is potentially a way to embed marketing into 'normal' social interactions. Gone is the need to run polls, or do market research. Instead, these sites already have info on your demographics, your friends, your music, movies and book tastes (etc. etc.). They've obviously seen a gap in the market where friends and family upsell songs to each other. How brilliant is that? Humming to yourself is actually a malicious form of advertising designed to sell you DRM'd windows media files!

Actually I've been charging my father hourly rates to administrate his Windows PC because it breaks so much...

So M$ you guys aren't spooky at all. Please continue this wonderful product eco-system. A thing of beauty to be proud of for sure.