Comments on: iTunes DRM-Free, Legal Purchasers Get Shafted

By: rising phoenix tattoos - the ultimate gallery

rising phoenix tattoos - the ultimate gallery — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:19:29 +0000

rising phoenix tattoos – the ultimate gallery…

abstract imaging for the masses – can the planet ever heal from the financial crises…

By: TechMiso :: Don’t Be a Dumbass - DRM-free Tracks from Apple Should Not Be Shared on P2P Networks

Thu, 15 Jan 2009 22:33:01 +0000

[...] Apple recently announced that it has finally decided to move in to the DRM-free era by shattering the shackles off of all music sold at the iTunes Music Store. No longer will music purchased through iTunes be locked to the previously instituted 5-computer limit nor will there be restrictions on CD burning. One important aspect that has not, and will not, change is the use of watermarking to essentially “tie” the files to a particular consumer. Do not think that because the music files no longer contain DRM that you can up and hop on Limewire and start sharing these tracks with the world. [...]

By: globoboss

globoboss — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 08:05:43 +0000

I am trying to start my own revolution! Some months ago, I had an idea to create a better music download. This new and improved download would come "bundled" with a revenue share agreement, so that every time you bought a song, for instance, you would also be buying a share of the potential future revenue of that song. This share would, of course, be a tradeable commodity in and of itself. The patent for this idea was published by the Patent and Trademark Office on October, 20, 2008, and you can have a look if at all interested here: http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=…
Now we are looking for people, especially code partners, who can help us make this digital revolution a reality, one we are calling MUSIDAQ – Music Dealers Automatic Quotation System. Are there any Techmiso lovers out there up for the challenge?

By: globoboss

globoboss — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 08:04:10 +0000

I am trying to start my own revolution! Some months ago, I had an idea to create a better music download. This new and improved download would come "bundled" with a revenue share agreement, so that every time you bought a song, for instance, you would also be buying a share of the potential future revenue of that song. This share would, of course, be a tradable commondity in and of itself. The patent for this idea was published by the Patent and Trademark Office on October, 20, 2008, and you can have a look if at all interested here: http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=…
Now we are looking for people, especially code partners, who can help us make this digital revolution a reality, one we are calling MUSIDAQ – Music Dealers Automatic Quotation System. Are there any Techmiso lovers out there up for the challenge?

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 12:35:59 +0000

As you mentioned most people are paying for the lack of DRM vice the increase in quality. How hard would it be to omit the DRM checking code in their ever present updates for iTunes…I'm no programmer, but it only seems logical you could write something into the programming to do that. Cost=about 1 hour of programmer's time Benifit=not having all these people saying F-U to Apple for making them pay more for something they should have gotten a long time ago.

By: Scott Jarkoff

Scott Jarkoff — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 11:08:03 +0000

As sad as it is to admit, you're absolutely right. Probably nothing we can do about it except be smart consumers. Unfortunately, the uninformed consumers exponentially outweigh the informed.

We're screwed!

By: Scott Jarkoff

Scott Jarkoff — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 11:07:18 +0000

I tend to agree – it seemed like part of Sony's strategy for a while. It's definitely part of Microsoft's.

However, in this instance, who's to blame? Apple or the record labels?

By: Scott Jarkoff

Scott Jarkoff — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 11:06:31 +0000

I imagine writing a routine to do just that is fairly simple. All that would be required is an update to iTunes.

Better yet, strip all the DRM from the music files and allow consumers to re-download those tracks. For free!

By: Scott Jarkoff

Scott Jarkoff — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 10:13:33 +0000

I'm fairly certain that's what the whole "mp3 revolution" from years ago was supposed to do. Look what it led to – an RIAA lawsuit campaign that never ended and added lobbying pressure to get our congress critters to pass even more asinine laws designed to restrict what we are not allowed to do with our legally purchased *cough* licensed *cough* music.

By: globoboss

globoboss — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 05:30:24 +0000

Planned obsolescence is definately a corporate business strategy that has been used for a long time and why not, it works!

By: Rich Chuckrey

Rich Chuckrey — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 03:56:03 +0000

Start a revolution — like TechMiso. All of us should be empowered to fight the painful pressure felt from 'big label.'

By: Rich Chuckrey

Rich Chuckrey — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 03:43:04 +0000

Not only does this happen in the music industry, it's widespread across a slew of consumer products. Upgrade this and upgrade that — all for cost. I'd bet that companies build this consumer upgrade tax into their product lines as part of their well thought business models.

By: jarkolicious :: iTunes DRM-Free, Legal Purchasers Get Shafted

jarkolicious :: iTunes DRM-Free, Legal Purchasers Get Shafted — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 03:30:15 +0000

[...] Read the full story on TechMiso. [...]

By: Scott Jarkoff

Scott Jarkoff — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 10:04:25 +0000

Good point – the music industry is definitely used to cashing in on new technologies, and this, while not a new technology, is surely a means of "taxing" users to make up for lost manufacturing costs.

I highly doubt it costs Apple much, if anything, to "upgrade" a track to iTunes Plus. Merely re-encode the file at 256k vice 128k and then do not perform the "add DRM" phase. Considering the amount of computing power at Apple's disposal I imagine this is a minimal tax on their resources.

I completely agree – it's definitely pathetic!

By: Xypha

Xypha — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 06:39:30 +0000

I think it's because the music industry may be *too* used to the 'upgrade = more cost = more money'. The last upgrades were on actual physical mediums. Like vinyl to CDs, they want MORE profit to make up for manufacturing costs. But how much actual manpower would it take to make a new set of files, or to receive those files from the source again? I doubt it would cost as much as it did for changing actual physical music mediums, so is an 'upgrade' cost really necessary?

Perhaps Apple has to pay this to the industry for them to feel like they're still doing something like the old model of business. If the change from physical to digital music has proven one thing, it's that the music industry is *still* stubbornly digging its heels in and being dragged micrometre by micrometre into the 'new age'.

Either that, or Apple is just trying to cash in on distributing unbroken files. DRM on music files is like paying for a car you can't take outside of city limits, or that only runs on Mondays. Of course, it makes people upset. So what do they do? Make us pay *more* for a FIXED product, which is what we should have gotten in the first place.

It's pathetic.

By: Scott Jarkoff

Scott Jarkoff — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 03:11:22 +0000

True enough, however that still does not solve the problem for the altruists. If you've paid for iTunes music, you have to pay yet again to "upgrade" your tracks.

Check this math out: 6 billion songs * $0.30 = $1.8 billion in potential revenue for the record labels and/or Apple.

Either way – I've already paid for music. Why do I need to pay again?

By: Rich Chuckrey

Rich Chuckrey — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:37:22 +0000

Not saying I frequent EASYNEWS, but there is more than one way to skin a cat(music labels).