Microsoft turns the DRM screw on MSN Music owners
By Thomas Ricker 
posted Apr 23rd 2008 6:46AM
posted Apr 23rd 2008 6:46AM
Ever wonder why we loath DRM around here as much as we do even when companies come along offering free, all you can eat deals? Well, if the Sony ATRAC debacle didn't serve as a warning there's always this: Microsoft just announced that it will no longer supply authorization keys for songs purchased from the defunct MSN Music service. That means that the PlaysForSure music you purchased will only play on your registered computers (up to 5) for as long as they shall live. As Microsoft puts it, "If you attempt to transfer your songs to additional computers after August 31, 2008, those songs will not successfully play." It's worth noting that the move also locks the registered PC into whatever OS it's running -- any major update or switch to Ubuntu for example, would kill all your music, dead. Now imagine what would happen if iTunes shuttered its store -- Steve won't be around forever you know.
I knew this was coming. Just burn off everything to CD before August 31st and you'll survive.
I'm not very familiar with drm's.... what if you burn to a cd and then rip said cd? I'm not making a joke, I just am ignorant on the issue?
This is exactly what you can do to get around it. DRM won't follow the music to a CD, so you can burn it all to CD, re-rip it and you are fine, in fact you could do that now and not deal with the DRM again.
I can't say this is surprising, the service is defunct, and with Zune and Amazon offering DRM free stuff, I think that the large companies are finally "getting" it.
Should you have to do this?, Microsoft should just unlock it for all their users,By doing this they are being outright bastards.
Should they do this? I think so.
Can they do this? That's something else entirely. No, contractually they can't. The recording label owns the music, not you, not Microsoft. They signed agreements on what they would offer, charge, and pay to the music companies. There is a HIGH degree of certainty in the statements that
A) You never write in caveats in business agreements about what you will do if the business fails - that will never get you business partners, but will make them scatter. Failures are a reality, but no one wants to address them or talk about them, especially when a new business is starting.
B) When you think about failures of a company, there is never jargon entered into contracts about how to handle things in the event that the business fails (see point A).
I highly doubt MS want's to piss people off or inconvenience potential future customers, but that said, they also cannot legally give the music away now.
Yes. You can burn to CD. But ripping the music back compressed it again resulting in loss of quality. It's like take a photocopy of a photocopy of a photocopy. So if you are happy with taking your 128kbs file and making it into a 96kbs
@Neal, first comment:
Burning and re-ripping introduces two more format transitions. If you started with 128 kbit (yuck) music, now you're probably at 96 kbit levels (terrible). People give the companies too much slack for the "burning loophole" - it's not a 1:1 conversion, people! It could be, if the original format was lossless, but we haven't had the option to buy lossless music online since AllOfMP3 disappeared. I do not accept that as a valid option or excuse for DRM.
@Neal's second comment:
Let's take this to its logical conclusion. Hypothetically, all media (including books) could become digitally distributed at some time in the future. A modern analogue of Shakespeare comes along, signs a contract and begins writing for a particular company whose products cannot be displayed without a check to a DRM server. He isn't recognized as a literary great immediately, his work doesn't make much money, and the company goes under taking their DRM servers with them. Suddenly, we AS A CULTURE have irretrievably lost part of our history.
That is unacceptable. There should be LAWS on the books that any implementation of DRM can and will be completely removed from every file it infects when:
A) The work in question transitions into the public domain
B) The owner of the work in question ceases to distribute / attempt to profit off of the work (this covers corporate failures & policy changes as in TFA's case)
Anything else is simply unacceptable. Disclaimer: I have never once purchased music online and never will until non-DRM-infected, lossless options become legally available. Until then, it's CDs (not from Sony/BMG) or nothing.
If you want to end up with the mp3 or whatever compressed format you choose, you don't want to do this. Taking a compressed format, expanding it to CD audio, then re-ripping it is going to leave you with terrible sounding files. It's like running jpeg compression on top of a jpeg, you only want to compress once.
fairuse4wm
Look it up
So the funeral for this Music Service is today?
Seriously, not just this but we need to stop supporting DRM everywhere.
Amazon is gonna chew this market if they dare to advertise.
This is probably why companies are scratching their heads, wondering why people are still pirating music.
YARRRRRRRRRRR. SHORE UP THE SAILS, MEN, WE'RE OFF TO THE CYBERSEAS!
Yea, until it becomes easier to purchase music than download it (minus the monetary transaction part).
It's amazing they can get away with this really, when DRM stores withdraw authentication services they should be forced to provide drm free copies of everything you have purchased from them.
I totally agree, however, what is blocking this from happening is the legal agreement with the owners of the music (the recording labels I mean) and what they are allowed to do, which likely is to never allow it non-DRM'd through MSN music.
I have to say I am glad to see the death of PlaysForSure. It was a noble idea to attempt to get everything to a single DRM platform, but then that was before they realized that DRM is the devil.
Microsoft is sitting on a large enough pile of cash that they could offer replacement songs from their Zune music store.
A few million dollars will buy them loyalty. Saying, "sorry but you're SOL" buys Amazon or Apple new customers.
Good thought, but does zero good for someone who doesn't own a Zune. Most of people using MSN do not own Zune, since it would be redundant, and you have to use the Zune application to transfer music anyway.
Unfortuantely this would just be turned into another negative saying "Yea right bait and switch! Now you want me to have to buy your damn ZUNE to play music I already paid for!"
No win situation =\
You know, I've been wondering how I'll describe the internet of my day to my children of the distant future:
It will go one of two ways:
1.) The early days of the internet were wonderful. You could get anything you wanted for free! It was like the Wild West. I had all the music in the world.
or
2.) The early Internet was complete shit compared to what you kids have now. Companies used to sell you music at a ridiculous price, tell you where you could play it... and when they decided they couldn't make a profit anymore -- they make all the music you bought useless!
or maybe 3, now that I think of it:
3.) You almost didn't happen because Daddy was addicted to porn during college.
ha ha ha ha.......who cares??? itunes rocks........vista suxxxx.........
nano3-
He's talking about the internet, not about itunes and vista, you rabid fanboy idiot.
Cheers,
Darius
nano: That's stupid... you look like you're being sarcastic, but I'm just not sure.
tits: That's dumb too... Macs may be pricey, but you get your dollar's worth. (Just so you know, I have a Macbook at home and a Dell Latitude for work. The Dell is newer and has about the same specs, but it cost more.)
@nano3glover
iTunes VS Vista: Battle of the... operating... music...
...the, uh...
...you're a dick.
Hopefully iTunes Plus will keep expanding, and eventually cover all of the music on it, so it won't be as much of an issue.
Personally I would never buy anything else than plus editions on iTunes tho.
It's called Amazon MP3s, they offer everything itunes plus offers and more. Not to mention amazon is less evil then apple
@ Jared
Exactly how is Amazon less evil than Apple? They both are out to get your money. I remember a time when Microsoft was evil because of its sheer size/market share and Apple was just the lil guy that everyone felt sorry for. Apple has some years of success and BAM they're evil.
They have been fighting DRM, and the fact is the real 'evil' companies are the labels that won't grant Apple iTunes DRM-free access like they do for Amazon to promote 'competition.' That to me is pure evil, disallowing people to buy certain music in one place and being forced to go to other websites. Let the people decide where they want to shop, not the companies.
I don't remember the brick & mortar (Sam Goody, FYE, Strawberry's, Tower, etc) record shops being like that, generally I could find the same stuff at all but perhaps they would be out of copies at one.
Just my humble opinion.
Amazon mp3 is US only, and 7digital is better anyway.
With Itunes files I can just makes CD's (Pain in the butt if you have like 3000 songs) and then re rip them back to MP3's and the songs are yours forever.
Price, ease of use and selection is whats gonna win the market. I only buy off Itunes cause things are right there. If Amazon comes with the better price and is more easy to use then they will win. Heck with MS.
Amazon is cheaper on all their top 100 songs @ 89 cents I believe. I also have gotten a few albums at Amazon because Emusic.com did not carry such because they are mostly indie and independent albums. I saved several bucks per album at Amazon vs. Apple. I get a higher quality bitrate at 256kps with the BEST mp3 codec availiable known as LAME. And guess what, I actually own it and can do whatever I want with it...DRM free.
Like I said before, if the actual album can be bought for the same price as Apple or wherever or a few bucks more, I am buying the ALBUM. But I get most of my current albums at Emusic for around $3, great quality, DRM free, and I can access my downloads from any computer. So take that Apple.
So, that means, PlayForSure music wont play, for sure...
The whole PlaysForSure brand was some kind of ironic joke, given that the entire purpose was to make sure that it didn't.
So... the lesson we learned today is... don't trust Microsoft!
I'm gettin' too ol' for this sh*t
I wonder who builds a music collection from a "lame" digital copy coming from a music service like iTunes or the rest. Not to speak about DRM joining the party of frack the consumer motto all these guy's have. Being the so called "Jobso" the first in line for that.
This industry is seriously ill
For the record,
The word "OWNER" is inaccurate, as it stands today you own nothing, you only have limited rights of usage
So no MSN subscriber is deprived of any right he/she already had.
I’d be willing to bet that there are certain consumer rights and expectations you can’t just sign away away by clicking through some EULA. None of this has been tested in court and something tells me the court will uphold that the word “buy” does not equate to “we-can-turn-you-off-at-the-mothership-anytime-we-feel-like-it”.
When people buy music they have certain expectations about its use. Maybe it will take a high profile class action lawsuit to finally blow the doors open on DRM for purchased media. Google Video did the same thing by deactivating all the video they sold when they shut their doors but at least they refunded their customer’s money.
You are seriously right.. no question about that
But I am too, so:
The music industry and their players are hurting consumers, sure? is it a question about their rights against ours? I am not sure about that...
Are they getting it right?, NO NO NO (frakin' Amy Winehouse)
The thing is that almost everybody new that when you "BUY" a song you get a digital file with a DRM protection to limit usage. They don not tell you that in explicit way?, also true
So my recomendation to all customers really annoyed about these newly discovered usage limitations:
Always buy a CD first, rip it at best quality, and store your CD wherever you like close to that old Hi-Fi equipment of yours
If you are anxious to listen to a song, and can't go to the nearest store to buy the CD, or you don't like to buy the whole album because you always like buying singles on the cheap, go to "standard procedure" iTunes, Napster, or whatever and buy it, download it, burn an audio CD and rip it back. Best place to try first, if you live in the States, AMAZON so you can live without the down-burn-rip process for a while.
If you are a music lover, and like to listen to music anytime without the need of buying it, and from time to time you go to a store to buy some CD's, apart form acting like described above, subscribe to a stream-all-u-can eat service. This will be for you the safest way to enjoy that music you suddenly like and discovering new one without buying a CD or listening to broadcast radio. Best choice Rhapsody, hands down, if you are on a low budget, LAST.FM will do.
If you don't like CD's, you don't like DRMed files, you don't like to pay for things that give you pleasure, you are mostly lazy, but you really like whining, ok then, write a blog about this and tell us how you feel. Still, you will have the option of piracy, hey, you don't pay, you don't have usage restrictions and you now you can't complain about it
Who said things were easy?
DRM must truly be the worst technological idea in history.
but what abt the fact dat itunes sold 4 billion copies last quarter??
*Crickets chirping whilst tumbleweed gracefully rolls on by*
Hear that?
That's the sound of no one giving a shit.
Sorry to be rude, but stuff like this has to be said sometimes.
You'd probably get a better reaction if you used proper spelling nano. This isn't halo multiplayer. You have all the time in the world to type a sentence without fear of getting your head shot.
@Ghen: How do you know he wasn't typing that while driving on the LA freeway?
So I'm going to toss this at the top: Just ignore him. Don't feed him. Any of his comments below, don't even dignify them with a response. Don't attempt to argue logic or reason. It's useless. Maybe it'll go away if we discuss the article.
Thank god for emusic.com!!!
DMR free, good quality, and I get 25 cents a song. I can download from any pc as all my downloads are kept on file. Take that APPLE and everyone else.
I absolutely refuse to pay Apple, etc $9.99 for a downloaded, compressed, DRM album when I can get the actual album at for $9.99 then rip it at a higher quality compression.
Songs should run about 30 cents a pop or $3 per album considering we lose about 15 times of it via compression.
Yea, songs on an album are around 45MB each, not 3MB.
The only thing that I have against iTunes is that most of the music continues to be in encrypted with FairPlay. The iTunes Store is pretty great when used in combination with an iPod, both in terms of navigation and getting the music onto your device, the price is fine for me, and I'm damned if I can tell the difference in sound quality between music bought from there or ripped from a CD. The announcement from Microsoft does, however, illustrate just what DRM really means, and in this case it's the equivalent of someone locking up your CD collection so you can't access it anymore. If that were to happen to my iTunes music collection (about 300 tracks these days, less those that are iTunes Plus) then I'd be really annoyed and this is evidence that it could happen, although no doubt there would be a much stronger backlash given the current iTunes market (did they pass 3 billion tracks yet?).
DRM seriously needs to go away, although that really is pointing out the obvious. I can only hope that once the studios think Amazon is doing well enough that they'll finally get on-board with the iTunes Plus tracks and I can upgrade the rest of my collection to dump the DRM. I can also hope that Amazon will get an international service out there sometime.
Except that about 15 percent of the stuff I have bought from eMusic has been yanked at a later date for “licensing reasons” (read: we decided we could get more money through amazon and iTunes now and don’t need you people anymore). The entire Vice Records catalog was yanked . As was the entire Anti catalog.. two of the best known independent labels. Which means the stuff you buy on eMusic is not infinitely downloadable. It’s still a great service. I am just not trusting them to be my sole backup.
Talk about customer support! Seriously, it would have been nicer if they had contacted all their MSN customers and asked them to come to Redmond and bend over.
I know why this sort of sh*t is happening. Because they are forcing DRM down out necks, people will eventually get jack of it, and go back to buying CD's or (insert favorite meduium here) and be done with all the bullshit.
There is no f*cking way that Microschrott or any other company is going to dictate when my music will still be valid, what OS to use, and how times I can play it.
The other brilliant stroke of genius, is that after August 30 I have to commit to an MS OS and 5 machines. Like that is really well thought out. What happen when Win7, Win8 or whatever f*cking OS comes out, and I have upgrade my machine because it wont work on anything else other that a 5GHz 20GB RAM, and I am still plodding in with XP? Bunch of a$$holes...
Phew!...(gets off box and troddles of back to the cubicle)
burn to CD. rip. repeat. kinda sucks, but does the trick.
Wow, this will really screw all five of the people who bought music off the MSN store!
Seriously, who pays for DRMed music, and doesn't tear out the DRM first thing? Are there really people out there with huge music collections from MSN, or for that matter iTunes, or any of the other DRM services, that haven't ripped the whole collection to CD? If so, people are a lot dumber than I thought. It is bad enough to get suckered into paying a dollar for a highly compressed song, but it is just staggering stupidity to then rely on the goodwill of the provider of said rip-off compressed song for your continued ownership. What do you people do when you have exceeded the device limit, even if the service doesn't shut down? Do you buy the songs all over again every few years?
I don't exactly buy a lot of music, and I can tell you when I do buy it I would never ever buy it with DRM end of storey. I'll go back to taping it off the radio if I have to, lol
iTunes protected songs? umm Hymm? duh.
err Hymn. yah.
can we please please stop with the 'steve is apple' analogies?
This is why the only DRMed music I accept is subscription music. When the service goes down, you simply find another. You didn't lose anything you permanently paid for.
This is basically the "rent vs. buy" argument. Financially, you're better off buying anything you want to have access to long-term. Personally, I like to think that I'll have access to the music I like for as long as I want without having to go find a new service or look for an Internet connection.
I did the math, under a $15 monthly plan, it would take 10 years to make up for a 2000 song collection, plus, you have the freedom to add or switch out as much as you want. It's true that some music deserves to be owned, but I would rather have the ability to update my collection as needed within that 10 years, rather than be stuck with whatever I bought.
As much as I dislike the idea of a subscription model for listening to music, that's actually a significant plus-point for the model while DRM still exists.
It's so much more fun going to the store and buying the actual CD. Getting the album art with it and the booklet with added info.
Then just rip the CD and put it on your MP3 player/iPod.
No such thing as DRM in that world!
That's exactly what we've done some 1600 times, now. All our music is ripped from CDs we own, so (a) we have completely portable, unencumbered digital files, (b) we have (fairly) permanent physical archives, (c) we have all the album art and lyrics and other shit nobody really cares that much about, and (d) we don't support DRM -- that's gotta count for some karma points somewhere.
You and I must have very different definitions of the word "fun". The problem with the shop method is twofold. Firstly, it's not convenient, and that's the killer problem. Humans are inherently lazy, and while there are those who like the extra effort, most don't and when a solution comes along that makes things easier (even if the results are worse) then that will win. Secondly, you have to buy the entire CD in a shop, which definitely sucks if you only want to buy 1 or 2 tracks. Artists complain that this destroys an album, which is true, but then I'm the customer who is always right and they should have made an album where I wanted to buy all the tracks.
Thats kinda what their doing, dropping the DRM-store in favor for the mostly DRM-less Zune Store. There are also programs out there to strip the DRM from the songs.
Unbelieveable. Microsoft makes this stupid move and yet most of the comments here are directed against Steve Jobs and iTunes, as if Steve Jobs was personally responsible for Microsoft being a bunch of retards. I personally neither like or dislike Steve Jobs, but what's the point of blaming him for every evil in the world? So what if iTunes offers bad compressed albums for 9,99$? Do they make you buy it? Do they steal you every other opportunity to buy it somewhere else and force you to spend your hard-earned cash in their iTunes store? Not, as far as I know. If you find it's a bad practice to buy music there, then just ignore it and go for alternatives. But writing tons of unrelated comments against El Jobso and iTunes under an article about Microsoft and DRM - I really see no point in this. Yes, El Jobso is probably guilty for all the problems in your life.
Kinda sad - nobody really cares about this story as it stands, so Engadget has to say, "YEAH!!!! And what if ITUNES did this!!!!"
Sure, I'm a Mac zealot, but it's just so predictable anymore. I guess it's tough being on top, you're the target of wanna-be journalists everywhere.
You're right, it is hard being on top. You're doing all the work and eventually your legs start to cramp up or something. All the while thinking roll over or fake it already...
@ Frank Furter
Yeah, I can always spot the 'tease' in nearly every MS / Apple article - a slight jab at one company or the other which I guess is intended to draw the ire of us 'zealots'. I know I can't stop myself from clicking the link.
One interesting thing about this thread is there's an odd third factor, the PC folks and Mac folks are coming together to agree that DRM is teh suxx0r.
Kinda, but this does make you think about what would happen to an iTunes Store music collection if something were to happen to Apple. Sure, some stories definitely seem to be just trying to stoke one side or the other of very partisan people, but I think this story is genuinely thought provoking. I'm not taking it as being anti-Apple, that's for sure.
It is stupid how people will blindly follow a company (Apple) and how other people will blindly hate a company (most of engadget's readers). It amazes me because if Apple pulled a stunt like this there would be such an outcry on here that AOL would have to pull the plug. However, since it's Microsoft everyone sort of rolls over and asks for another.
Where are the torches and pitchforks? Why does nobody care that m$ is proving again they don't care about customers - they already have the money for the sold tracks, in their minds they don't have to do anything else.... Oh wait, that's right, DRM.
Thanks a lot Microsoft - may your end come swiftly and painfully.
Anyone who is stupid enough to buy music online knowing it comes with any kind of DRM has only themselves to blame. This is exactly why the music industry loves the whole Ipod and Itunes B*****s. If you want music for your MP3 player buy the CD and rip it.
Nice to see a silver disc invented in the 80s still kicking around (and still offering lossless audio), along with its new friend for modern archival, a certain Mister FLAC. http://flac.sourceforge.net
Roll on DRM. Give lossy audio with restrictions a worse name than it already has.
I agree wholeheartedly, of course, if you wanted a CD you'd actually have to PAY for it, which is also much of the problem.
I've got around 1,100 CD's in my collection, all ripped to AIFF and also 256Kbps MP3. Wouldn't have it any other way. I think I can count the number of iTunes purchases I've made on one hand. I get a kick out of hearing all these 'sneaky' users, burning an audio CD out of already crap MP3's, then converting it BACK to MP3. Heh. Hey, if they're happy with that, why not.
Personally, the problem is not DRM, or iTunes+, or whatever - it's that most artists can't produce more than one hit song in the span of 2 or 3 full-length albums. iTunes would excel even more if they offered AIFF's, I know I'd buy a ton of stuff. But I rarely buy anything new anymore for one obvious reason - it all SUCKS. I'm a rock/hard-rock fan, though, and can't buy in to every clone that comes out on FM or MTV.
In other words, record companies have created their own demise. It's greed, coupled with lack of passion. Release top-notch stuff, they will come. Sure, some will steal, but most of us will buy. Stick DRM on everything, combine that with vanilla songs, and, well, here we are.
i dont know what i would do without DRM... I love DRM... all you people are thieves... VIVA DRM!!!
suck it trebek
I hate being Lawful Good. I just hate it.
When iTunes dies, as it eventually will, I will be the laughing stock of all my friends.
I just new that being chaotic evil would one day be considered 'good'! XD
I have altered the deal . . . pray I do not alter it further
That's what you get for buying DRM. Reasons like this are why I still buy physical copies and rip them myself. That way I know it's high quality and I can play it on any mp3 capable device I want.
Nothing new there. They've already said you can't back up your music or throw it out, so is it so shocking they're saying you can't play it either?
http://impatientsufferance.com/2008/04/23/more-things-you-cant-do-with-your-music-185/
Engadget guys, don't be such hypocrites. You are not 'anti DRM'. Why else do you promote or display without any warning words whatsoever things like Vista and HDMI display? Both are defective by design (aka include DRM tech), yet no mention of that.
Maybe this bit of news will clue you in to the badness that is DRM, but you never did seem to care when the latest 30"DRM laden HDMI screen or HMDI carying videocard came out.
If I remember correctly, Apple has stated that if the iTunes store were to go away, they would do what it takes to allow you to continue to use the music, because according to their terms,you own it. It's not rented, like Microsoft just proved their music is.
Watch out Zuunnies. You're next!
Well considering that Zune Marketplace utilizes a rental system (DRM free, but not yours to keep forever) and offers high-quality DRM-free tracks, obviously MS is not limiting Zune users as they did with MSN Music users.
Plus MSN Music shut down a year or 2 ago. And did anybody you personally know ever use it?
At least it's possible to burn them on a CD, and rip them DRM free.
MS sure could have done a better job at this, but people should be looking at DRM as the bad guy, not just MS.
Burning your own CDs to a lossless codec ftw.
That's why I switched to Amazon.com and still buy CDs.
Then again, that's also the reason a LOT of people use torrents.
iTunes Plus is a nice idea, but I can't justify paying a premium when Amazon offers the same quality for less.
Pathetic. Please try not to redirect the issue with DRM. The issue here is that you trusted MS. The monopoly thats is allowed to continue their monopolistic ways. User and MS partners were "playedfersure". What an embarrassment for their users.
The issue at hand is DRM. Microsoft screwing MSN Music users (were there even any?) by dropping support is a clear EXAMPLE of the implications that DRM can have on a user.
I also like how you claim MS is still a monopoly, despite competition growing everywhere in the world of technology. Tell me something an area that MS has a complete panhandle on, and where all these users are being oppressed. Because I bet anything you can point out, will have an alternative of some kind. Nobody forces you to use MS-tech.
Thanks for turning this story into MS-hate. It's about how DRM can hurt users, and MS is just one such example. I felt the same way when I tried switching from iPod to Zune, and discovered that many of my iTunes tracks were locked for iPod only. It took quite awhile burning/ripping those CD's.
Impossible. Simply impossible to get you to understand what monopoly means. You actually refuse to believe that? How incredulous of you to do so. Still your pathetic antics to try and redirect the issue is useless. You support MS, companies supported MS and they were royally screwed. Based on your response, you support that also. Pathetic. I hope the Zune and its marketplace has some marginal success in the long run. I would hate to have more consumers screwed over again. But that would not be a problem with you. You wholeheartedly support this behavior. Your just a notch below mszunefan. Keep up the good work and you may equal him soon. :-)
The problem I have with Microsoft for this story is that they don't appear to be offering any compensation for the loss incurred by customer despite the fact that they paid to "own" the music downloaded. If they can't offer a solution that enables their customers to continue using their music as normal (e.g. arranging that they can download the tracks from a still operational service), then they should offer financial compensation, particularly if the number of users is small. From a PR perspective this is another mess that would have been cheap to resolve.
There is some sort of abandonment issues going on over there at Microsoft. Everything they do seems to end up as a Bob or a work in progress. C'mon!
They are absolutely correct to ask about iTunes given the fact that it is the largest purveyor of digital music (and apparently music in any form) in the world. What would happen if . . . well. . . something happened and the iTunes store shuddered its doors. I am sure folks buying MS Music (or whatever it is called) did not really think through the long-term "what ifs". They just thought that MS is a large company and so their investment in this new digital music thing is safe. Now look. . .
With iTunes, even if it is a DRM tune, I can still burn a CD from it.
If you're NOT making playable CD or DVD backups of your music, then you're an idiot who deserves to lose all your purchases. The function is built right in. All you need to do is select a playlist, put in blank media, and click "burn."
I have all my iTunes music backed up as CDs, and a few compilation DVDs as well. Why wouldn't you do it? It's part of the functionality of iTunes. It's Apple's way of getting around their DRM woes, and the tracks sound good when converted for CD (that's because Apple uses AAC, which is twice the quality of a comparable-sized MP3).
I assume the MSN Music can be burnt, too. So DO it.
AAC twice the quality of a comparable MP3? That is certainly debatable.
What does that mean for services like Rhapsody? Don't they still use play it for sure?
Lamer than rootkits
"Plays For Sure" reveals once again the extraordinary irony of its name.
Once upon a time, a woman was picking up firewood. She came upon a poisonous snake frozen in the snow. She took the snake home and nursed it back to health. One day the snake bit her on the cheek. As she lay dying, she asked the snake, "Why have you done this to me?" And the snake answered, "Look, bitch, you knew I was a snake." - Natural Born Killers
I have no empathy for those who wish to perceive Microsoft's intentions as customer-oriented.
/
When music services with DRM first came out, I raised this issue. Since then several have failed with precisely the same problem. Years ago, I started buying only DRM free music or music for which there was a program to strip the DRM (the only exception was when Rhapsody had a 49 cent a song sale--in that case, I just burned CDs and re-ripped them--despite claims by self-proclaimed audiophiles, I doubt they could hear the difference on most.) Now, I buy only from Amazon.com (which still doesn't have The Who.)
The thing is this: I used to be afraid of DRM because if the store that I bought it from went out of business, then I was out of my music.
I'm really scared of DRM now because Microsoft didn't go out of business... they just changed their minds and business model. Not even as dramatic as going out of business, and I'm still out of being able to enjoy the music.
*sigh*
Several more years until this is straightened out and then we'll have this issue with video files....
bondsbw, if you have your Windows pc built by a local shop, then it will be much cheaper than an Apple or Dell. And it will have better specs with the same high quality parts. I never buy "big guy/pre-built" pc's anymore because they are such a rip-off. I had a gaming pc built two years ago for over $1600. A Dell XPS with a much smaller hard drive and lesser video card cost nearly $2500. So, yes Macs (and Dells) are over-priced. Now if Apple allowed small shops to legally build Mac clones, then the story might be different.
Seriously, if I wanna backup my music collection I wanna do it to another HD or a flash drive, not to a whole bunch of CDs. Keeping ripped CDs around is annoying.
Without mentioning the loss of quality.
No DRM for me, in any circumstance.
I am streaming my music collection of new and established artist. The new artis are required to sign a release form which covers Soundexchange, BMI, SESAC, ASCAP. The audience can only down load or purchase the new and orginial stuff from our site. However, we stream old established artis to compare the new and up and coming. How would the DRM change effect our streaming?