Audio CD is so established and so ubiquitous that momentum alone will mean that it will be a viable commercial format for some time. Trying to force it out will mean a backlash.
Well, the DVD has been around for 10 years, and where has the videotape gone? Was there a backlash?
There are now lots of people with MP3 players, and there have been for 7 years now. How often to you see discmen compared to iPods? Do you not believe apple's itunes sales figures? The switch from physical media to data streams is well underway, and the under-35 age group in the west is already almost totally converted. Is it so hard to believe that CDs will occupy a similar space as VHS tapes in 5 years?
Edit - sorry about all the rhetorical questions, i don't mean to set a bad tone...
You never will. The iTunes Music Store lets you license the music for a flat rate, but you certainly don't own anything when you buy from it. You still have to comply with the iTunes user agreement or you're breaking the law, and whether your license is transferable is still up to the licensor. That people buying from the iTMS music store feel they own something is a nice myth.
When you buy a CD, you only own the physical plastic and metal substrate, by the way. The pattern of 1's and 0's is still owned by the record labels and licensed to you for home use.
Oh yeah? Well, good luck coming in and taking that music back from me.
Yes, it is, and I find it very offensive that the music industry executives keep asserting that I'm a criminal. I have an actual CD for probably 85% of the music on my iPod and at least 14 of the remaining 15% was purchased through iTS. Have I stripped DRM? Absolutely! So I could pirate it? Not once.
Everything that the music industry execs say makes it ridiculously obvious that they are driven by only one thing... greed. I have to say that EMI has done a really impressive thing. There is no other music company that has even mentioned anything that indicates they are actually interested in providing a mutually beneficial service to consumers. While I will be extremely annoyed by it, I hope that Apple does offer the subscription model, and that it is completely ignored.
Oh yeah? Well, good luck coming in and taking that music back from me.
You missed the point. No one is taking your music away, but having a CD doesn't mean that you can do just anything with it. The legal useage is fairly liberal but not unlimited. For example, it's not legal to sell or give away copies of it, or to play it in a public presentation or use it in a commercial product, because the music isn't licensed for that. It is licensed for personal use only, and you own a license to use the music, you really don't own the music itself.
1) Shut Up the Niche that cares about Subscription Models
2) Negotiate all of them into allowing Apple to sell DRM Free Music, and not just a select few Albums, but their entire catalogs that are on iTunes and beyond including Music Video.
There's no need to hope it makes the Zune look even more like a failure. If Microsoft were to drop off the face of the Earth tomorrow, it couldn't possibly make the Zune look even worst.
Sebastian
They can't do away with DRM on a subscription rental service. If there's no DRM then what is going to bring your usage rights to an end and keep you from burning the tracks to re-rip and remove that DRM when you stop subscribing to the rental service? See that's not going to happen.
You missed the point. No one is taking your music away, but having a CD doesn't mean that you can do just anything with it. The legal useage is fairly liberal but not unlimited. For example, it's not legal to sell or give away copies of it, or to play it in a public presentation or use it in a commercial product, because the music isn't licensed for that. It is licensed for personal use only, and you own a license to use the music, you really don't own the music itself.
No I didn't miss the point. I'm struggling to see any relevance to the comment in the first place. The format makes absolutely no difference. No one is coming to take my music away. Usage agreements/rights? Whatever! Music from both sources ends up in my iTunes library and gets used basically however I want it to be used. No one is going to do anything about that unless I start trying to resell the product in some fashion to make money off of something I didn't create without paying back to the creators and distributors. Not to mention, you have to be pretty freakin' obvious about it for them to even notice. It isn't now, nor has it ever been, my intent to pirate any music. [edit] Yes, I understand that I'm not supposed to copy it and give it away either - that takes away from other potential sales. [/edit]
I'm just saying that you can claim that the medium's materials belong to the consumer, but that the content still belongs to the record company all you want. In practical use and thought, it belongs to the consumer once he/she pays for it. Assuming that the consumer is not abusing copyright law, I'd bet you'll find no precedent for any music company to ever demand that all purchased copies of anything be returned because technically they still own the content and they've decided they don't want it out there anymore. It's just not going to happen. So, again, I struggle to understand what relevance there is to the claim that the consumer doesn't really own it [edit] whether your talking about digital downloads or CDs [/edit].
I'm just saying that you can claim that the medium's materials belong to the consumer, but that the content still belongs to the record company all you want. In practical use and thought, it belongs to the consumer once he/she pays for it. Assuming that the consumer is not abusing copyright law, I'd bet you'll find no precedent for any music company to ever demand that all purchased copies of anything be returned because technically they still own the content and they've decided they don't want it out there anymore. It's just not going to happen. So, again, I struggle to understand what relevance there is to the claim that the consumer doesn't really own it [edit] whether your talking about digital downloads or CDs [/edit].
I don't understand why you are assuming that calling it a license means that someone is going to take away your music. What you describe is basically the right of first sale. What it means is that a transaction of this type can't be revoked, but that doesn't mean that you own all the rights to the content, you only have rights to private uses of that content. For example, distributing infringing copies, whether or not they are paid, but you can format shift or make as many personal copies as you like so long as you aren't giving copies away.
It's a very subtle difference, but it is there according to copyright law. In short, for many intents, you can pretend that you own it and not really know any different, but that doesn't make it so, though your uses are well within your rights. But that doesn't mean that someone is going to take it away either.
You never will. The iTunes Music Store lets you license the music for a flat rate, but you certainly don't own anything when you buy from it. You still have to comply with the iTunes user agreement or you're breaking the law, and whether your license is transferable is still up to the licensor. That people buying from the iTMS music store feel they own something is a nice myth.
That's like saying I don't own my car cause I can't drive it at maximum speed, or in the wrong direction, that's just crazy talk.
They can't do away with DRM on a subscription rental service. If there's no DRM then what is going to bring your usage rights to an end and keep you from burning the tracks to re-rip and remove that DRM when you stop subscribing to the rental service? See that's not going to happen.
You missed the point. Adding a Subscription service would not take away from the Buy model currently in place. Make THOSE songs DRM free.
Subscription music is a loser and does nothing to enhance the value of the iPod. Can't fathom why this keeps popping up.
It keeps popping up because of the people at CNN who continue to bring it up, and mostly wishful thinking on the part of both Labels who could sit back and watch the money roll in with no real competition and a niche market that actually likes the idea. As long as we see DRM Free music for every song on iTunes, I don't care though.
The other attractive feature of a largely subscription based audience for the labels is that the labels' economic performance becomes less tied to actual performance. If the majority of music listeners are subscribing month to month anyway, having a 6 month period without solid new music doesn't hurt their bottom line as much.
It's also a great monopoly market lock in for them, if any music outside the mainstream is associated with extra cost and effort.
The other attractive feature of a largely subscription based audience for the labels is that the labels' economic performance becomes less tied to actual performance. If the majority of music listeners are subscribing month to month anyway, having a 6 month period without solid new music doesn't hurt their bottom line as much.
It's also a great monopoly market lock in for them, if any music outside the mainstream is associated with extra cost and effort.
That's ridiculous. Cable tv's been a subscription service since it's inception, and it's the exact same week-old toilet of bloody shit it's always been, no better, no worse.
Comments
Audio CD is so established and so ubiquitous that momentum alone will mean that it will be a viable commercial format for some time. Trying to force it out will mean a backlash.
Well, the DVD has been around for 10 years, and where has the videotape gone? Was there a backlash?
There are now lots of people with MP3 players, and there have been for 7 years now. How often to you see discmen compared to iPods? Do you not believe apple's itunes sales figures? The switch from physical media to data streams is well underway, and the under-35 age group in the west is already almost totally converted. Is it so hard to believe that CDs will occupy a similar space as VHS tapes in 5 years?
Edit - sorry about all the rhetorical questions, i don't mean to set a bad tone...
Forrester Research were thought to be a little in accurate with their last set of figures.
where was that said? link?
You never will. The iTunes Music Store lets you license the music for a flat rate, but you certainly don't own anything when you buy from it. You still have to comply with the iTunes user agreement or you're breaking the law, and whether your license is transferable is still up to the licensor. That people buying from the iTMS music store feel they own something is a nice myth.
When you buy a CD, you only own the physical plastic and metal substrate, by the way. The pattern of 1's and 0's is still owned by the record labels and licensed to you for home use.
Oh yeah? Well, good luck coming in and taking that music back from me.
This is incorrect.
Article 1.
Article 2.
Yes, it is, and I find it very offensive that the music industry executives keep asserting that I'm a criminal. I have an actual CD for probably 85% of the music on my iPod and at least 14 of the remaining 15% was purchased through iTS. Have I stripped DRM? Absolutely! So I could pirate it? Not once.
Everything that the music industry execs say makes it ridiculously obvious that they are driven by only one thing... greed. I have to say that EMI has done a really impressive thing. There is no other music company that has even mentioned anything that indicates they are actually interested in providing a mutually beneficial service to consumers. While I will be extremely annoyed by it, I hope that Apple does offer the subscription model, and that it is completely ignored.
Oh yeah? Well, good luck coming in and taking that music back from me.
You missed the point. No one is taking your music away, but having a CD doesn't mean that you can do just anything with it. The legal useage is fairly liberal but not unlimited. For example, it's not legal to sell or give away copies of it, or to play it in a public presentation or use it in a commercial product, because the music isn't licensed for that. It is licensed for personal use only, and you own a license to use the music, you really don't own the music itself.
I'm all for it as long as Apple can
1) Shut Up the Niche that cares about Subscription Models
2) Negotiate all of them into allowing Apple to sell DRM Free Music, and not just a select few Albums, but their entire catalogs that are on iTunes and beyond including Music Video.
There's no need to hope it makes the Zune look even more like a failure. If Microsoft were to drop off the face of the Earth tomorrow, it couldn't possibly make the Zune look even worst.
Sebastian
They can't do away with DRM on a subscription rental service. If there's no DRM then what is going to bring your usage rights to an end and keep you from burning the tracks to re-rip and remove that DRM when you stop subscribing to the rental service? See that's not going to happen.
You missed the point. No one is taking your music away, but having a CD doesn't mean that you can do just anything with it. The legal useage is fairly liberal but not unlimited. For example, it's not legal to sell or give away copies of it, or to play it in a public presentation or use it in a commercial product, because the music isn't licensed for that. It is licensed for personal use only, and you own a license to use the music, you really don't own the music itself.
No I didn't miss the point. I'm struggling to see any relevance to the comment in the first place. The format makes absolutely no difference. No one is coming to take my music away. Usage agreements/rights? Whatever! Music from both sources ends up in my iTunes library and gets used basically however I want it to be used. No one is going to do anything about that unless I start trying to resell the product in some fashion to make money off of something I didn't create without paying back to the creators and distributors. Not to mention, you have to be pretty freakin' obvious about it for them to even notice. It isn't now, nor has it ever been, my intent to pirate any music. [edit] Yes, I understand that I'm not supposed to copy it and give it away either - that takes away from other potential sales. [/edit]
I'm just saying that you can claim that the medium's materials belong to the consumer, but that the content still belongs to the record company all you want. In practical use and thought, it belongs to the consumer once he/she pays for it. Assuming that the consumer is not abusing copyright law, I'd bet you'll find no precedent for any music company to ever demand that all purchased copies of anything be returned because technically they still own the content and they've decided they don't want it out there anymore. It's just not going to happen. So, again, I struggle to understand what relevance there is to the claim that the consumer doesn't really own it [edit] whether your talking about digital downloads or CDs [/edit].
I'm just saying that you can claim that the medium's materials belong to the consumer, but that the content still belongs to the record company all you want. In practical use and thought, it belongs to the consumer once he/she pays for it. Assuming that the consumer is not abusing copyright law, I'd bet you'll find no precedent for any music company to ever demand that all purchased copies of anything be returned because technically they still own the content and they've decided they don't want it out there anymore. It's just not going to happen. So, again, I struggle to understand what relevance there is to the claim that the consumer doesn't really own it [edit] whether your talking about digital downloads or CDs [/edit].
I don't understand why you are assuming that calling it a license means that someone is going to take away your music. What you describe is basically the right of first sale. What it means is that a transaction of this type can't be revoked, but that doesn't mean that you own all the rights to the content, you only have rights to private uses of that content. For example, distributing infringing copies, whether or not they are paid, but you can format shift or make as many personal copies as you like so long as you aren't giving copies away.
It's a very subtle difference, but it is there according to copyright law. In short, for many intents, you can pretend that you own it and not really know any different, but that doesn't make it so, though your uses are well within your rights. But that doesn't mean that someone is going to take it away either.
You never will. The iTunes Music Store lets you license the music for a flat rate, but you certainly don't own anything when you buy from it. You still have to comply with the iTunes user agreement or you're breaking the law, and whether your license is transferable is still up to the licensor. That people buying from the iTMS music store feel they own something is a nice myth.
That's like saying I don't own my car cause I can't drive it at maximum speed, or in the wrong direction, that's just crazy talk.
That's like saying I don't own my car cause I can't drive it at maximum speed, or in the wrong direction, that's just crazy talk.
That's not comparable, but then, if you get caught doing that enough, you probably won't be owning that car for long.
They can't do away with DRM on a subscription rental service. If there's no DRM then what is going to bring your usage rights to an end and keep you from burning the tracks to re-rip and remove that DRM when you stop subscribing to the rental service? See that's not going to happen.
You missed the point. Adding a Subscription service would not take away from the Buy model currently in place. Make THOSE songs DRM free.
Sebastian
Now that is music to MY ears. Who wouldn't love to release an album on the Apple label?
There are a number of amateurs (trying to go pro) on iCompositions.com that now sell their music through iTunes.
Subscription music is a loser and does nothing to enhance the value of the iPod. Can't fathom why this keeps popping up.
It keeps popping up because of the people at CNN who continue to bring it up, and mostly wishful thinking on the part of both Labels who could sit back and watch the money roll in with no real competition and a niche market that actually likes the idea. As long as we see DRM Free music for every song on iTunes, I don't care though.
Sebastian
It's also a great monopoly market lock in for them, if any music outside the mainstream is associated with extra cost and effort.
The other attractive feature of a largely subscription based audience for the labels is that the labels' economic performance becomes less tied to actual performance. If the majority of music listeners are subscribing month to month anyway, having a 6 month period without solid new music doesn't hurt their bottom line as much.
It's also a great monopoly market lock in for them, if any music outside the mainstream is associated with extra cost and effort.
That's ridiculous. Cable tv's been a subscription service since it's inception, and it's the exact same week-old toilet of bloody shit it's always been, no better, no worse.