Slashdot Log In
Wal-Mart Ditches DRM, Keeps Censorship
Posted by
Zonk
on Tue Aug 21, 2007 01:32 PM
from the step-in-the-right-direction dept.
from the step-in-the-right-direction dept.
Smiley Face writes "Wal-Mart has hopped on the DRM-free bandwagon with today's announcement that it will be participating in Universal's DRM-free sales pilot. The quality looks good: 256Kbps MP3 for 94 cents apiece, but customers are likely to be turned off by the retail chain's continued censorship. 'It's a bit hard to believe that all the customers who shop at the world's largest retailer want censored versions of music, though, but that's what they get. Only edited versions of albums with parental advisories are available, just as they are in Wal-Mart's offline stores. This isn't a new policy; Wal-Mart's online music store has carried only edited versions for years, but it's worth pointing out to potential new users tempted by the lower prices and lack of DRM.'"
Related Stories
[+]
Music DRM in Critical Condition? 377 comments
ianare writes "Universal Music Group, the largest music company on the planet, has announced that the company is going to sell DRM-free music. The test will see UMG offering a portion of its catalog — primarily its most popular content — sold without DRM between August 21 and January 31 of next year. The format will be MP3, and songs will sell for 99 each, with the bitrate to be determined by the stores in question. RealNetwork's Rhapsody service will offer 256kbps tracks, the company said in a separate statement. January 31 is likely more of a fire escape than an end date. If UMG doesn't like what they're seeing, they'll pull the plug. UMG says that it wants to watch how DRM-free music affects piracy rates."
Submission: Wal-Mart ditches DRM, keeps censorship by Anonymous Coward
[+]
Wal-Mart Ends DRM Support 231 comments
An anonymous reader writes "So, you thought you did well to support the fledgling music industry by purchasing your tracks legally from the Wal-Mart store? Well, forget about moving these tracks to a new PC! Since they started selling DRM-free tracks last year, there's no money to be made in maintaining the DRM support systems, and in fact, support is being shut down. Make sure you circumvent the restrictions by burning the tracks to an old-fashioned CD before Wal-mart 'will no longer be able to assist with digital rights management issues for protected WMA files purchased from Walmart.com.' Support ends October 9th."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
edited only... (Score:4, Informative)
And worse yet, sometimes they edit out things that aren't offensive at all.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:edited only... (Score:5, Informative)
The mind boggles.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If you're refusing to sell certain products in your market segment for reasons other than purely business reasons (moral objections falls into this), then you're practicing a form of censorship. If you're refusing to sell those games because they're unpopular and you won't make a profit, that's a business decision. But if you're refusing to sell profita
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
This is a pure business decision - it's part of a marketing stratergy to portray themselves as familly friendly. Don't like it? Don't buy it. It's their business and they have the right to make this decision if they want.
Is is disclosed? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Is is disclosed? (Score:5, Insightful)
I do find it a little silly that they worry about "bad" words but sell alcohol, tobacco, and guns.
I find tobacco a lot more offensive and family unfriendly than most bad words.
Parent
Re:Is is disclosed? (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:Is is disclosed? (Score:4, Insightful)
Guns. Well guns to kill lots of people and again if you are going to not sell a product based on it danger factor then guns would be on that list.
Tobacco is just evil. Selling it is evil and the tobacco companies are just evil. I have watched two friends die from lung cancer that was probably caused by tobacco.
So yes I find it as dumb for Wal-Mart to not carry records with parental warnings as I do for a town to outlaw topless bars when their are hookers on the main street.
Yea you probably wouldn't want to shop at a store I ran since I wouldn't carry alcohol, tobacco, or firearms.
Parent
Re:Is is disclosed? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The word you're looking for is "exacerbates."
You're welcome.
Re:Is is disclosed? (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I, um, download most of my music. I've found out lately that I've gotten old and really dislike any versions of songs other than the radio-edit. There were 4-5 songs that I like
Suggested headline: (Score:5, Funny)
From the 'its-crap-anyways' dept.
rights?? censorship?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:rights?? censorship?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:rights?? censorship?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:rights?? censorship?? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's just not unconstitutional censorship, or censorship which impinges on your rights. This is not to say that this manner of censorship is any more or less ethical or moral (although they clearly have less authority over us as individuals comapred to the government) nor that we as the affected group should be any more or less outraged by the censorship. It is simply not illegal for the RIAA to produce such tracks and Wal-mart to sell such albums, and, indeed, they have the right to do so.
Parent
Re:rights?? censorship?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Bullshit. Censorship is censorship. The government doesn't necessarily have to be involved.
If a private organization doesn't want to sell you a particular item, that has nothing to do with the first amendment.
The first amendment is irrelevant here, and nobody even mentioned it, so I don't know why you brought it up. And just because something is legal, doesn't mean I have to approve of it.
It seems particularly ludicrous to complain about this at a time when there are so many real and horrible civil liberties problems in the U.S., e.g., the attorney general declaring that there is no right to habeas corpus in the constitution.
So in other words, until we get an AG that actually respects the Constitution, we can't complain about all the other petty bullshit that goes on around us? That might take a while.
Parent
Re:rights?? censorship?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
"Censorship"? (Score:5, Insightful)
Hurrah for dropping DRM though. Be interesting to see how long this will last and if there is any repercussion. One nice thing about Walmart is that it's big enough to just smile give the bird to the RIAA.
Apples and Oranges (Score:3, Insightful)
Value Add (Score:5, Insightful)
The important distinction is that, in this case, censorship adds value for some consumers, while DRM does not.
I'd buy that for a dollar. (Score:5, Interesting)
I doubt all customers want any particular product or service. The more important question is whether or not enough want this product in order for it to be worth offering.
Speaking for myself, I do want this service. The absence of crude songs is completely irrelevant to me because I wouldn't want them anyway. Your mileage may vary, of course.
Cost for Quality? (Score:4, Insightful)
Very Competitive: Walmart wins 3 of 4 (Score:5, Interesting)
256kbp vs. 256kbp
"censored" vs. "non-censored"
94 cents vs #1.29
For those who care about the "clean" tracks, it's still 3 of 4.
Of course Apple still has the edge with the iPod community, and perhaps ease of use. But no one should be fooled: this is very good for the digital music marketplace.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Most of the rest of them will have no clue what formats their 'MP3 player' plays, but most of them do in fact support AAC. The older el-cheapo devices that didn't will mostly be in a drawer collecting dust. The tiny minority with an MP3-only device are likely to be less interested in (purchased) online music, since they figured out years ago that none of the major online music stores were selling something that woul
Customer's cognizence of DRM is growing... (Score:4, Insightful)
Given no direct benefit but only impediments for customers with WMA or DRM, they will attach negative connotations to DRM systems. As long as this negative connotation is implanted long enough, they will come to expect that things should only get better over time, and that WMA and DRM will eventually go away.
In this manner, the societally expected norm will change, and the anti-DRM side will win the war of minds.
It is bowlderized, not censored. (Score:5, Informative)
That dude thought the Holy Bible has sections too racy for children and young people and so he brought out an edited version.
Censorship is when the Govt uses its power to silence an expression. As others have noted, Walmart is not preventing the record companies from selling profanity laden songs in other places.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
By "the Holy Bible", you mean "The Works of Shakespeare"?
Did you even read your own link?
Wal-Mart Still Requires "Windows" (Score:3, Interesting)
If they're gonna start selling MP3 files, maybe they should first start by allowing web access to their download store to systems other than Windows.
Hey everybody! (Score:5, Insightful)
My local adult bookstore doesn't sell the Bible! That's Censorship! Those Nazis!
My local country radio station refuses to play "Tooling for Anus" by The Meatmen! That's Censorship! Those Nazis!
And on and on...
Can we get over this "Store X sells items that are profitable since they're desirable to their target customer" and stop calling it censorship for once and for all? Because a business uses their legal right to choose what they do and do not sell hardly fits into the definition of censorship. On the most technical level, yes. But the word has long overgrown it's Webster dictionary definition in modern society.
Re:Hey everybody! (Score:5, Insightful)
Once again this is the classic case of people mistaking inconvenience for oppression.
WalMart has the right to pick and choose what they carry. Why is it if they don't choose to carry something that you like because of their own self-imposed moral standards that you feel like you're the one being put off?
Maybe you'd like it if WalMart could dictate what you have to buy from them?
They have the right to choose just as much as you do. It's not censorship in the modernly acceptable term.
I've noticed more and more how much people hate having other people exercise their right to choose if they're not choosing the most outrageous choices. Just another sign of the decline of civilization.
Parent
I got rights! (Score:5, Insightful)
I got rights! On one side of the street is a Rasputin's Music. On the other is the Evil Rapacious Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart doesn't sell CDs with vulgar lyrics, Rasputin's does. This is censorship! My rights are being violated! I am being oppressed because I have to walk across the street to buy an albumn where someone says "fuck"! Think of the children!
I've Never Gotten Wal-Mart's Music Policies (Score:3, Insightful)
Somehow that's okay to Wal-Mart.
Re:censorship (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Worthless store (Score:5, Insightful)
As a store that is owned by someone(s), managed by someone(s), they have the right to decide what it is that they will and wont sell. Its ashame that our society doesn't care that these are not the true songs that were released, but
1) Walmart has the Marketshare
2) Record Companies want to be in those locations
3) Record Companies bend to walmart.
Its not like they dont have a choice. And obviously its what many people want. If you want to call something worthless, call the Artist that allows their intellectual property (which they have most likely sold to the Label) to be modified from its orig. artistic form, Assuming they arent just out for money as well.
Parent
government, corporation, and individual can do it (Score:5, Informative)
As a store that is owned by someone(s), managed by someone(s), they have the right to decide what it is that they will and wont sell.
censorship [thefreedictionary.com] - deleting parts of publications or correspondence or theatrical performances
censoring
deletion - the act of deleting something written or printed
Bowdlerism - censorship in the form of prudish expurgation
Comstockery - censorship because of perceived obscenity or immorality
Not all censorship is equal [gilc.org], nor does all arise from government or external force.
censorship [answers.com], official prohibition or restriction of any type of expression believed to threaten the political, social, or moral order. It may be imposed by governmental authority, local or national, by a religious body, or occasionally by a powerful private group.
I don't know who taught you to think that it's not censorship when it's done for profit, but you were lied to. Censorship is done by whoever has the power to do it, no matter if the power used to do it is by nature political, capital or personal.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Ex: A telecom company stops a signal from being sent over the wires or air waves, but it is still recorded and distributed elsewise - is it censored?
Ex: A country blocks the distribution of a book within its borders, but it is still published and distributed in other contries - by your definition, it is not censorhip.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Worthless store (Score:5, Insightful)
Their album censorship is nuts. I've known about since I saw a piece on TV about Rob Zombie's "Hellbilly Deluxe" and it played the regular version, and the WalMart version.
Of course what's interesting is they do this with Parental Advisory stuff. The recent Nine Inch Nails album "Year Zero" has no such label on it, despite having quite a few incidences of the F word on it. I wonder if that got past them?
WalMart are considerably evil. But for many, they are an evil necessity.
Parent
Re:Worthless store (Score:5, Insightful)
is this evil (as so many walmart haters like to label)? and dont say that chinese products are shit, there is some very high quality stuff coming out of china (despite the fear campaign the media is pushing)
putting people who barely make enough money to survive out of business:
maybe these people need to do something else to make a living if it is so bad. how about if I move into town and open a tiny store that takes away their customers? does that make me evil, or am i just another guy with a successful small business? how large does my business need to be in order to be classified as 'evil'?
being anti-union:
shutting down a store to curb what could be an epidemic in their organization? you know what unions do, right? they organize workers so that they can pressure the organization for more benefits/money/vacation/whatever, otherwise the workers dont work. whether this is necessary at walmart, i do not know, but i do understand entirely why walmart canned them: because that was the only way to handle it.
im not a regular walmart shopper. hell, there isnt even a walmart IN my town (closest one is 100 miles away), but there are some (not all of them, of course) shitty small businesses either running local rackets or offer little service/products because they can get away with it. a walmart (or any other nationwide store) would force these shops to either improve their service or get shut down. the small store has every advantage when walmart moves in on them. they have an existing client base, a reliable location (and if not, they should have fixed that long ago), prices that arent exorbitant (if its a good business), and hopefully a good reputation in the community. if walmart can pop into any town and knock some barely-functioning businesses out, then where is the real problem?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Socialism would say that the state determines where a business must operate and attaches conditions to that order. The state would force a
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What do you mean? Isn't it an opportunity for the town to have a better store with lower prices due to highly efficient union labor? HAHA!
BTW, that's not what happened according to the article that YOU linked. The store was already unionized. The union played chicken with its members livelihoods and lost. I really can't believe it doesn't happen more often.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, oddly sanitized versions of 'reality' without obscenity are a specialty market.
Thankfully those who get all hot and bothered by an arbitrarily-judged "offensive" word are a dying breed.
Seeing as how the OP said "fuck" in his title... (Score:3, Insightful)
Seeing as how he had the word "fuck" in his title, I don't think he was going on about its offensiveness as a word so much as its over-use. I think his complaint was that a lot of fucking people don't seem to fucking realize that it's possible to have a fucking song without fucking swear words.
That said, I'd agree that you're unfortunately right that it's not a specialty market.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So, yes, what Walmart does is in fact censorship of the things they sell in their stores...
No, even by the definition you provided, it is not censorship. Walmart isn't suppressing, deleting, or, in any way, preventing the record companies from providing their product to the masses. They simply