Yahoo! Music Store taking DRM servers offline, freezing out customers
By Joshua Topolsky 
posted Jul 25th 2008 10:04AM
posted Jul 25th 2008 10:04AM
In a move which at best could be described as unsurprising, Yahoo! has announced that it's taking its Music Store DRM license key servers offline come September 30th... and freezing customers from ever registering their music with another computer. Ever. Like a twin-sister rehash of Microsoft's PlaysForSure / MSN Music DRM debacle, this moves ensures that the only way you can take your tracks with you will be the (suggested!) technique of burning the songs to CD then ripping them back to your PC -- thus ensuring the absolute worst possible quality. Normally, we'd expect to see a massive backlash over a move like this, but given the near-insignificant nature of the Yahoo! Music Store, it may not be the firestorm Microsoft got itself into. Regardless of the outcry, this is a terrific reminder of the failure of DRM in general, and a slap in the face to the people who actually went to the trouble of buying their music in the first place.[Via Techdirt]
And now you wonder why people illegaly copy music, you need a degree from Oxford to bypass the copy protection measures in CDs, and those Legal MP3 downloads are infested with the DRM that needs a bit more than Oxford degree to bypass.
Not even mentioning the possibility, that in the future, the DRM servers might get dow-
Wait a minute.
It has become apparent time and again that the only people who lose when companies adopt these "protection" measures are the legitimate customers.
It's been happening with video game manufacturers for years now. They add all of this protection that infects your machine with crapware like Starforce or locks out a user after he or she farts a little too loudly (Mass Effect) which only serves to annoy the people that actually purchased the product. The people these tactics are aimed against just crack the software, remove the offending features, and play the game with more freedom than the legits.
1) What...?
2) ...WHAT?
Pochi, I think that he means just what he wrote, Piracy is much easier than buying the media legimately (That word means by not stealing)
"you need a degree from Oxford to bypass the copy protection measures in CDs"
I put the cd in my disc drive and push the "rip" button in my media player of choice. Even a monkey can push a button....
@avester
I was talking to you, not him. I don't get all the Oxford shit.
"...you need a degree from Oxford to bypass the copy protection measures in CDs..."
A degree, or, maybe http://cdexos.sourceforge.net/ ?
I mean those CDs with copy protection measures, but thank you for mentioning that most CDs don't have them.
@avester
Uuhhh, I don't know what CDs you have been listening to but I've never had a problem ripping any CD from any label ever. I am an Oxford grad, though, so it comes to me easily.
By the way, "legimately" doesn't mean anything.
And it's really not that diffiult to remove WMDRM either. Do a quick Google search for FairUse4WM / FairUseCommander. FairUseCommander is a batch utility which finds and removes your DRM files in two clicks.
What are you talking about, needing a degree? The Redbook CD spec has NO COPY PROTECTION whatsoever. Here's how I rip CDs:
1) Insert Cd
2) Launch CDex
3) Click Rip
Maybe I should go to college, this crap is easy.
The US has been pretty DRM free on it's CDs. (Go USA!) But I do have quite a few Australian imports that have an atrocious form of DRM on them. You can still rip them but it ain't just push a button. And of course since the DRM screwed up my car stereo I HAD to rip them just in order to listen to them.
@Rick
I entirely agree. Although I am not a big gamer, I have indeed heard horror stories about titles like Mass Effect. Many games apparently make you CONNECT TO THE INTERNET JUST TO PLAY! So if you are on an airplane or anywhere else without WiFi, you actually can't even play a game in single-player mode! That's outrageous.
On a related note, does anyone remember the old-school "DRM" way back in the day where upon launch a game would ask you a question that you would have to look up in the printed manual to be able to start the game:
"Please enter the word: Page 52, Paragraph 7, Line 3, Word 11"
Anyone remember this?
Or what about an included circular-shaped multi-layered paper thing binded in the center. The front circle would have little boxes cut out of it with numbers next to them and you would rotate the sub-layers to expose words through the the little cutout boxes. Similar to above, the game would tell you to rotate the different layers in such a way, and tell you which box to look at. Then you would have to enter the correct word/number to start the game.
remember?
I still hope that DRM itself sticks around for one reason: subscription music. Even if the store goes under, you're safe, just go sign up with another store offering the same thing.
I agree. This is one reason why I am happy with my zune. $15 a month for as many cd's or individual tracks as I want. Can't beat it! Although, If Apple were to adopt a similiar subsccription, I would consider the move back to Apple as the iPod still has the best accessories and car integration.
Exactly. If it enables consumers to have the choice to have subscription music, then DRM is fantastic. DRM for purchased music is just dumb. I'm all for consumer choice.
In other news, Tunebite sales increased 40%...
Ha ha ha interesting comment!
I hate to become a mouthpiece for Tunebite, but it gets the job done without wasting a blank CD-R.
It takes any DRM-protected file and converts them without much loss to a much more open format like .mp3 or .avi.
I have proof, my collection of mp3's that I got from my monthly Napster subscription.
Of course I don't give my mp3's to anyone, I just use them on my crappy mp3 player that doesn't support DRM protected music.
Stupid Meizu M6!
That's also against the DMCA, and you are therefore a criminal for using it!
It would be nice if Yahoo could at least release a DRM stripping tool so people can easily reclaim their music. They're telling people how to do it the long winded and low quality way, so why not make some proper software for it?
Because they would get sued by have a dozen recording companies.
Just like Alfred says in the recent The Dark Knight movie, "I Told You So" has not ever been more appropriate here. But I do feel sorry for the people who bought the music. I say cut your losses, get away from yahoo, download a 320Kbp/s rip of the same and call it a day.
well said.
I like to see the RIAA sue someone for stealing music that the 'thief' previously legally purchased, that would crack this whole $#!%fest wide open.
God bless Tunebite.
Ever heard of lossless?
Buy disc. Rip. Enjoy.
Looks like people deserve a refund or replacement in another format.
soo you want my music to sound bad, yahoo? how can you actually suggest transcoding the files to/from CD?!
Isn't that the same argument that iTunes fanboys use to claim that Apple use hardly any DRM?
Unfortunately, this is exactly whey music labels love DRM. Because they think they can force you to buy your music all over again. And this is why they hate iTunes. It's so much bigger, and popular, than anything else that it's going to last the long haul.
And even IF Apple were to shut down the ITMS, they have already stated that they would come up with a way for people to keep their music already purchased.
Microsoft won't do that. Yahoo isn't. What makes anyone think any other music service can compare?
"Uhh... yeah, sure, you'll be able to keep your music if we ever shut down ITMS! NOOOO problem! Trust us!"
If ITMS ever does close, you will not be able to keep your music unless the practice of allowing DRM to be converted to non-DRM (without further loss) becomes generally accepted (i.e. Hell has frozen and or RIAA is out of business)
Umm...just using Emusic and not bothering with DRM in the first place?
Really, I would never buy anything from iTunes. But that's probably because a GNU/Linux-using non-iPod-owner isn't very well supported.
So, when are people going to start suing these companies over this crap? I know I would if I had purchased a bunch of songs.
I am sure int he purchase agreement there is a clause saying they dont guarantee the servers will be up forever.
yeah, the only plus side is that downloading songs did was save me from buying an album from all the one-hit wonders. fortunately I only downloaded 2 songs from iTunes, and they were both free. I knew this day would come when DRM failed....
I was always hoping that the fidelity of music was going to increase and with more channels!
DRM is lunacy for bought music, the world is a different places now then when all we had were record players, anything can play optical disc and even more things can play digital music why should we be restricted for paying, the only thing DRM does is restrict legitimate customers.
As consumers the only power we have with these companies, is our wallets: if you don't want DRM, then don't buy it.
If I were a customer of Yahoo! Music Store, I would demand my money back.
Is this article accurate? Yahoo moved me to Rhapsody (which is a pile of crap) but it moved all my DRM music at the same time, and thus far it seems to work with no issue.
Pirate vs. Legal Customer
1. Pirated MP3 is FREE, Legal MP3 is not.
2. Pirated MP3 can be downloaded in 320kbps, VBR, lossless etc. DRM Music is stuck in a crappy 128kbps
3. Pirated MP3 is portable to other computer, DRM music is limited.
4. You can keep your pirated MP3 as long as you like, depending on your backup, you can keep your DRM music as long as the store supports it and the lifespan of your computer (better start installing multiple anti virus, or your music will go down with your corrupted OS).
**I know all of you are aware of this difference between the 2, but what im trying to point is, of the 4 items i wrote, #1 should be the only disadvantage legal customers should have, if companies are trying to kill piracy, then stop screwing your legal customers, your just pushing them to start piracy.
It's a f*cked up world when the Pirates offer a better product than the Studios.
Trouble is, with all the internet monitoring going on, I have to source my DRM free gear from street dealers. So now I AM funding terrorism, war and plague, where I wasn't before. Nice job Studios.
It's also easier to make a living dealing drugs than to get a job. That doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.
@NewJohnny: You are actually not right: According to Freaconomics (who looked into the data behind drug dealing) it is not that great a job.
Amen brother, go Dubner and Venkatesh!
Thats why I buy from iTunes. I have confidence that Apple won't just suddenly stop its service.
That's why I love you apple fan-boys. I have confidence that you guys won't just suddenly start making sense.
You can strip the DRM from Yahoo Music Unlimited It still works to this day. You need to have a current subscription with Yahoo Music Unlimited, an older copy of Windows media player, and FU4WMver13
Start stripping before you are toast.... On another note JerkyChew has a point. It has been statd in the pas that Yahoo would be moving to Rhapsody. Yahoo still uses their same Musicbox interface so I am not sure where this is at.
I buy all my music on CD or AmazonMP3. I hate DRM. I want to be able to stream my music collection to any device I have, regardless of who happened to make it.
DRM hugely inconveniences me and I have never illegally shared my music collection. When will the realize that pirates are the only people who AREN'T negatively affected by DRM?
And as long as you have fewer than five computers (all with iTunes bloatware installed), an iPod, an AppleTV, and absolutely no non-apple devices in your house at all, then you'll be perfectly happy with that forever.
bah, this was a reply to bliks:
"Thats why I buy from iTunes. I have confidence that Apple won't just suddenly stop its service."
Ripping and burning is indeed a lossless process, as far as the interactions with the disc medium. Here's where the problem comes in.
Start with an audio file that has been encoded with lossy compression; this means that data has been selectively discarded in such a way that, most of the time, you won't hear it. But unlike a lossless compression such as WMA Lossless, FLAC, ZIP, DriveSpace (haha) etc., the compression cannot be undone; you cannot get back the full data that was once there.
Now, burn this to a CD. In order to burn it to a Redbook audio CD, it has to be decoded to straight PCM audio data (the same data that's fed to your sound card and turned into analog audio that you can hear). The PCM audio data, though, is missing some of the original data due to the aforementioned lossy compression.
Once again, you rip this CD into the computer. The ripping process itself is lossless; however, you're likely to also be compressing this into an MP3 or other lossy format. In which case, you're taking your already reduced-quality audio, and reducing its quality further.
"But if it was already lossy-compressed, why does it need to be re-compressed?" Because it was decoded and converted into PCM audio data... Where each audio sample is represented by all 16 bits, 44,100 samples per second. The compression and data that was thrown out cannot be derived, and so it is recompressed as though it were any other CD audio.
I have been laughed at by my friends for still buying CD's instead of buying music online. Yes, they take up shelf space, but I'll never have to worry about this crap. At least I know that no matter what they do, I can still play my CD's or rip them to whatever format I want without DRM.
And as for those crazy DRM's on CD's, I've bought CD's from overseas where DRM is not used.
Isn't burning/ripping a lossless process? I mean, you're burning lower quality stuff to begin with, but you don't lose quality doing it.
Not defending DRM here, just wondering about the article.
I think you mean lossy.