Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Music Media

Universities Mull Official Role In Music Distribution 253

An anonymous reader writes "News.com.com is reporting that Universities are considering ways to bring legal Internet jukeboxes to dorm rooms, including entering deals with commercial service providers that would see online music charges included alongside tuition fees or picked up by the schools themselves." Reader ajkst1 adds that "meetings were held between college representatives, music industry reps, and online music services such as Apple's iTunes Music Store, Pressplay, and Listen.com. The discussion wasn't about why they should do it, but about how they should do it. Per-user licenses or a general fee to students were discussed to make it look like the music was free. I'm broke, so free is good. Paying more to go to school is bad."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Universities Mull Official Role In Music Distribution

Comments Filter:
  • by Scalli0n ( 631648 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:23PM (#6596480) Homepage
    Damn the costs for college keep going up....

    Beer, fake id's, drugs, now I have to pay for music? WTF!?

    Most college students are poor anyway, nobody'll subscribe to this crap.
    • No kidding. Speaking as a college student, I don't have money to pay my back balance for summer tuition, let alone pay for music. Especially when I'm paying for other people's bribes. If they don't want to get caught, quit sharing your music, and put up a firewall. Damn script kiddies are trojaning boxes and using them as remote servers all over on campus (here)
    • But if they had such a "jukebox", couldn't college administrators take funds from expanding their network infrastructure's bandwidth pipeline and pour it into this new venture?

      My reasoning is that colleges continually have to spend money for network maintenance and improvements because of KaZaA and its counterparts. If the adminstrators were financially smart, there wouldn't be any added cost at all.

    • by zangdesign ( 462534 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @05:48PM (#6596809) Journal
      Is it just me or have unis forgotton that they're in the business of providing education? This is getting ridiculous, with a capital 'iculous'. I'm not saying this is one of those "in my day we walked uphill to school" kind of things, but this sounds like something that has absolutely zero to do with furthering human knowledge.
      • by hazem ( 472289 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @06:14PM (#6596907) Journal
        Is it just me or have unis forgotton that they're in the business of providing education?

        Don't be so sure. Yes, that's the ideal, but schools are are a business, and that means their ultimate goal is to survive and make money.

        Don't think for a minute that if your school pays the RIAA $10/student that you as a student are also going to pay $10. It will be more like $50 (Entertainment Fee).

        Schools already do this with long distance. They pay about 2.9c/minute and charge students between 10 and 25. I know the school I worked at really hates that so many students are using cellphones with unlimited LD... it's really cut into the bottom line. I'm sure they'd love to find a way to make that back up through some kind of "communications/technology fee" that allows students to download music and gives the schools indemnity from lawsuits.

        Everybody wins, except, of course, the student.
        • Don't think for a minute that if your school pays the RIAA $10/student that you as a student are also going to pay $10. It will be more like $50 (Entertainment Fee).

          Schools already do this with long distance. They pay about 2.9c/minute and charge students between 10 and 25. I know the school I worked at really hates that so many students are using cellphones with unlimited LD... it's really cut into the bottom line.

          They'll just yentz you where they traditionally yentz you...on textbooks. I have gotten

      • but this sounds like something that has absolutely zero to do with furthering human knowledge.

        Unless maybe you are at a music school? Or are taking music classes? Oh wait, knowledge of the arts is worthless knowledge. Actually, it is not knowledge at all, and anyone who says it is is just trying to trick you.

        I know the plan sounds like it is more of an 'entertainment' package, but it could be related to the school's curriculum, if it were open ended enough to be used that way.

        • Ah, you wound me, sir - I was referring to the general sense, not the specific. There are instances where it would be helpful (I honestly didn't think of music schools - who does?) but in the general scope of universities (say, UTexas or A&M), this just sounds like a way to press-gang students into paying a bunch of extra fees for something that will only benefit a few.

          You know, kind of like football teams.
          • ...just sounds like a way to press-gang students into paying a bunch of extra fees for something that will only benefit a few...

            This is nothing new. When I attended U of MD, there was a manadatory fee for tickets to all the home games. Didn't matter if you wanted to attend or not (like me and many of my friends), you paid for the tickets. Now here is what really pissed me off. If you didn't pick up your tickets to the next game by a certain time (yes, you had to go get a new ticket for each game), t

        • If you attend a music school, or are taking music classes, chances are you can check out the music in question from the library.

          If the uni's library doesn't have it, travel to the local public library. They probably do.

      • This is simply protection. College students are notorious for their p2p sharing, especially with the large bandwidth that is provided by the school. The concern here is to:
        • Protect the university from RIAA and BSA from breathing down their necks. At my school we've received several notices from these organizations regarding illegal music and software sharing.
        • Conserve bandwidth. If 3,000 users are on the network sharing mp3s with the rest of the world, we're talking some serious bandwidth issues. It's
      • by StikyPad ( 445176 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @07:53PM (#6597336) Homepage
        College isn't just about furthering knowledge, it's about influencing and molding society as well. From fraternities, to "student" credit cards, to sports, it's all about societal integration, be it business, social, or competitive -- none of which is exclusive of any other.

        Aside from that, there's always been an effort on the part of many universities to make school (appear to be) more affordable. Dorm rooms, meal plans, student IDs which can be swiped in a vending machine, cable, internet access, and healthcare are all examples of services which do not directly provide education or advance human knowledge.

        So, in conclusion, it's just you.
  • by shadwwulf ( 145057 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:25PM (#6596489) Homepage
    This sounds quite a bit like music vs. data CD-R's and the 'tax' to the music industry that we pay.

    The real question is, what if I don't have a computer in my dorm room? Do I still have to get stuck paying this?
    • by GigsVT ( 208848 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:27PM (#6596499) Journal
      I think the real question is, what does this really buy anyway?

      I'm sure the RIAA will continue to happily sue college people running big mp3 servers. I don't see how this would change that.
      • by dirk ( 87083 )
        I think the real question is, what does this really buy anyway?
        I'm sure the RIAA will continue to happily sue college people running big mp3 servers. I don't see how this would change that.


        Yes, they would continue to sue them, because this is a seperate system. They are trying to play off the people who claim "if music was available for a reasonable price online, I would pay for it". Well, if you use the universities system (which may appear to be free to you, but still legal) you can still get your mus
    • by melete ( 640855 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:35PM (#6596528)

      Yeah, you would. Most (or I daresay, ALL) colleges have publicly accessible computers, or at least accessible to all students, and if they were paying for the services, they'd be likely to have the client installed on such computers.

      One possibility, though, would be for students to waive the fee, either because of financial or moral reasons. Such an individual would need to sign a waiver of some sort, but this is the system that the Univ. of Arizona uses to put a lot of small -- but non-mandatory -- fees on all the students' bills. Students have the choice to not fund things like the Rec Center and Student Body, but virtually all of them do. It works pretty well, keeping the naysayers from making a huge issue of the fees, while still providing almost 100% of the funding that a mandatory fee would.
    • The real question is, what if I don't have a computer in my dorm room? Do I still have to get stuck paying this?

      Everyone seems to ask this, as if this is a totally novel concept. Look around, people! This goes on all the time. People who don't have cars, or who only drive locally, pay taxes for interstates. Vegans pay taxes that pay for meat inspections. Creationists pay for research on evolution.

      When things have a small marginal cost, so that individual monitoring and charging is not efficient, an

      • Theres a huge difference between this and your example on paying taxes for interstates. If I don't have a car I still benefit from roads because consumer goods can be easily transported by way of them or I can ride my bike on them.

        Now why the hell should I have to pay for music that I may:
        a) not want
        b) not be able to play on something other than windows (note I said may, who knows what kind of anti-copy protection they'll slap on this)

        This is absolutely idiotic and just a way for RIAA to make money.
      • This proposed system does not even come close when compared to one of your examples. Music is (technically) entertainment, and not a necessity, especially to a cash-strapped college student.

        This is an example of two very large, very powerful groups trying to take advantage of a captive group - college students. If I was still in school, I would protest the living shit out of this, and current students should do the same.

    • This is yet another plot by the RIAA to make the end user pay for listening to music. It doesn't work that way with radio. What a load! File trading is a form of promotion as good or better than radio, and they don't even have to payola [dontbuycds.org] the file trading networks. If students have to pay for this whether they use it or not, that would be theft.
      • This is yet another plot by the RIAA to make the end user pay for listening to music. It doesn't work that way with radio.

        EXACTLY. I think they are going in the wrong direction for free downloadable music.

        What they need to do, is start streaming Internet radio stations for the students. And technology is easy enough to have people choose the playlists, its still streaming radio, and subject to the internet radio costs. Throw some radio ad's in so it can fund itself. No cost to the students.

        Wonder at 10(
      • This is yet another plot by the RIAA to make the end user pay for listening to music. It doesn't work that way with radio.

        Actually, *everyone* pays for music on the radio, so it has the same problem as this scheme.

        Commercial radio: increased price on the products advertised to fund the advertisers' market growth; higher supermarket bill.

        Public radio: mostly tax supported, if there are any that survive purely by subscription or donation then I tip my hat to them... it's not easy to pay for transmitter ti
        • Certainly beats me funding some 12-year-old's Britney Spears addiction through my shopping trolley or tax bill.

          What...you think the RIAA will stop receiving their CD-R tax? Hell no! This will be an additional revenue stream, and once it's enacted, it will be viewed by the industry as a right, and will be extremely difficult to retract.

    • The real question is, what if I don't have a computer in my dorm room? Do I still have to get stuck paying this?

      There is still a university with dorms that doesn't require incoming students to own a computer?

      Most every school I have been to or visited (about a dozen) already requires or is considering the requirement as a condission of admission that the student own a computer that meets certain specs.

      I don't particularly like it, especially when it comes to public schools where a good chunk of the

    • There are a lot of things universities pay for and pass the bill on to you that you may never use. You may never go to the library, it's still there and it got paid for and it draws funds. You may never go to a football game, chances are the school has a team and the facilities for them and you pay for a chunk of that. The list goes on, deal.
      • 1. This will be in addition to the expenses you list.

        2. Music (in this case) is entertainment, and not mandatory. You could argue the same for sports, except the athletes are getting some value from that.

        3. The schools aren't looking to do this out of the goodness of their hearts. Their trying to keep the RIAA off their backs. What they should be doing is addressing the issue legally, either by challenging the RIAA or locking down their own networks so P2Ps don't present a problem. Cop out.

  • Finally! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by cybermace5 ( 446439 ) <g.ryan@macetech.com> on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:27PM (#6596498) Homepage Journal
    They're getting the idea now. The market has established exactly what it wants: easy access to media. Not free access, because many people pay for high-bandwidth connections for this purpose.

    Examine what your target market is doing, then change the business model to match. It makes perfect sense and they're finally catching on.

    It reminds me of George Washington Carver's solution to a problem. The university students were walking on the grass instead of the paved walks, and wearing muddy trails. Carver simply noted where the students walked, and put sidewalks there. Problem solved.
    • Re:Finally! (Score:2, Insightful)

      by innosent ( 618233 )
      Exactly, except I think the colleges should be a little more agressive in their negotiations. Students should not have to pay for the music, if a) Not all students will use the service, (so not all should pay) and b) if it is in a streaming-only format. The record companies should provide high-quality streaming services for free, since most students will want to listen to the music in their cars, walkmans, etc, and at that point they will (hopefully) pay for it. But high-quality, free, streaming audio on
    • Re:Finally! (Score:2, Insightful)

      by papa248 ( 85646 ) *

      They're getting the idea now. The market has established exactly what it wants:

      easy access to media. Not free access, because many people pay for high-bandwidth connections for this purpose.

      Here here!! You hit the nail on the head with this one. I am not a lazy person. I chose to be an efficient person. In my industry (automotive) efficiency is our livelihood. I don't want to spend a minute more of my free time at work than I do want to spend it perusing the shelves at my local RIAA store. If I find some



    • I hate te RIAA and I want to boycott them for life, I dont mind paying for music, but what about indie artists? Forget about the RIAA, how can we allow ARTISTS to get paid?


    • Is it fair to do this? What about indie artists who want people to buy their music? Why should the RIAA get to sell music but no one else?

      I think this is the RIAA bullying people into paying the tax. Read my journal entry.
  • by acceleriter ( 231439 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:27PM (#6596503)
    How about we tax our students $25-$30 apiece per term, send you the money, and you don't send us all those C&D letters and subpoenas?
  • Not a good idea. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Erick the Red ( 684990 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:29PM (#6596509)
    This is just another example of "all students pirate music, so let's charge them for it".

    It's not the university's responsibility to take all the students' money and then provide all kinds of services. The university should charge for and provide essential services (these days that could include internet) and let the students' spend their remaining money as they see fit. Universities should not dictate the entertainment of their students.
    • by carpe_noctem ( 457178 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @05:44PM (#6596780) Homepage Journal
      Although I don't attend college there, I come from Colorado. The University of Colorado a few years ago decided to launch a rather risky proposal which is kind of along the lines which you are discussing here. Basically, they had a problem, which was that following football games, makeshift armies of liquored-up frat boys would tear through the city, celebrating the victory of their said sports team with a wave of destruction.

      The city of Boulder was not pleased, and they passed the so-called "couch law", which forbade residents from keeping couches and other indoor furniture outdoors (during the riots, couches were a very frequent and ready source of burning material). However, most of the couches didn't come from student housing, and the city residents got pissed. The school, in turn, reacted by raising tuitions for a so-called "riot tax", which would help to reimburse the city for the cost of riot-cleanup.

      Naturally, students were now pissed. But since the school had no foolproof way of singling out specific individuals responsible for the crimes, they had no choice but to bill everyone. Given that most rioters were students (but most students were not rioters, mind you), this seemed pretty fair, imho.

      Now, the only difference I see between this, and the present situation is that a riot has a fairly undisputable price tag. You can find out exactly how much damage was caused, and there's really no arguing the numbers. However, with "stealing" music, the damage isn't so concrete. It's a matter of potentially-lost-income, which is a debate I dare not redrudge up on slashdot.

      So as a student, I would be willing to pay a bill to my school in the event that my school were actually sued in court for damages caused. But, I have no intention for paying a yearly bill which essentially boils down to the music industry shaking the good old money tree and seeing what falls out.
      • Additionally, if the school's IT dept is doing their job, they should be able to track down any P2P offenders and punish them individually, if need be.

        In your example, the rioters remained anonymous...hence the blanket charge (which doesn't really sound right, either, IMHO).

  • Bad thing... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by djcapelis ( 587616 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:29PM (#6596511) Homepage
    As much as I'd like to see legal distribution of music... a situation where my college tutition is going to something I don't want to use. (Maybe I support indies for example) Then by merely going to college I am supporting and giving money to the RIAA whether or not I will use their product.

    This program should include an opt-out option, at the very least.

    Furthermore... it will be interesting to see if the files they feed the students (which they will have paid for) will be useless due to DRM. There is an increasing number of college students running linux. If they have to pay for something they can't use... they are not going to be happy. And neither will I... and my tax money helps fund the public universities and I would prefer to not have my tax money going to the RIAA, seeing as they may not pay for it all with tutition increases. Even if my tax money doesn't go to the RIAA, a government sanctioned organization should not be forcing it's students to pay (in their tutition) for a monopilies product... although there are plenty of examples of them already doing that...
    • Well, let me start out by saying that I agree with you. I think this is a dumb idea, because not all college students pirate music. Hell, not all college students even have computers. I would say that most of the students at my college pirated only a few songs - most of them were sufficiently computer-illiterate that they preferred to keep their music on CDs. So yeah, they're still breaking the law, but any fee greater than $1 a month is going to penalize those students unfairly.

      But the problem is tha

  • RIAA tuition fee? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by teutonic_leech ( 596265 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:30PM (#6596513)
    I can't believe these schools are seriously considering making a deal with the music industry. What if I simply don't care about all that commercial crap they throw on the market year in and out? Who's next? Drug dealers? It's bad enough that students get bombarded with credit card offers the day they start college. Nothing like getting into dept and starting off the 'American way of life' - now the music pushers want their cut too? Not to overreact here, but does anyone else feel less and less like a citizen and increasinly just like a f....ing consumer? There is someting terribly wrong with this picture - commercial entities should stay out of academic organizations as much as possible - basta! Just my 2 cents - things are really getting out of hand out there...
  • Captive audience (Score:3, Interesting)

    by I don't want to spen ( 638810 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:32PM (#6596518) Journal
    Surely they could make it 'free' by including advertising eg. five free plays for an advert. I guess the music biz could also use the students as guinea pigs to find out what they like to listen to. To which the answer is almost certainly 'free stuff' ...
  • This is lame. (Score:2, Insightful)

    I thought the reason to go to college was supposedly to learn things. Silly me. Now everyone who goes to college will be paying extra so they can have access to music they probably don't give a damn about.

    This reminds me of the Internet tax, by which everyone would have to pay extra money for their Internet connections so a few dolts could get free music legally.

    I already get free music legally: I compose it. Necessitating that I pay more for something unrelated so I can have the opportunity to get someth
  • by CommanderTaco ( 85921 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:35PM (#6596531)
    ok, i confess i didn't read the article, but a recent mit project seems related: LAMP FAQ [mit.edu] (scroll down a bit). offering cds over cable with an internet based request system. still in beta right now.
  • by Nucleon500 ( 628631 ) <tcfelker@example.com> on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:35PM (#6596532) Homepage
    I probably would subscribe to something, iff it gave me MP3s or Oggs. But I'm not that optimistic, I'm sure it'll be some unusable DRM format. And I absolutely refuse to pay for that, directly or indirectly. I don't want it to be like commercial software, where students are led to believe it's cheap because everyone pays for it in tuition.

    Of course, if a college offered "free" DRM'd music, and people continued to share unencumbered music, maybe they'd get a clue. I can guarentee free music in open formats would kill P2P at a college.

  • by f13nd ( 555737 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:36PM (#6596536) Homepage
    so what happens if you don't like the crap they wanna force-feed everyone?

    what if your style is industrial, ambient, techno, folk, noise - whatever... stuff that isn't top-40 is most likely going to be ignored completely; and these students will still be forced to pick up the tab

    There's a 'field house' here at the university [www.mun.ca]; a nice recreation facility, but there was a HUGE uproar from students who didn't want to foot the 40$ per semester fee to use it whether they'd actually use it or not - i forsee similar outcries about any service which likely would suck for all but the lowest common denominator - pop music is all you'll see, and it's what we're all force-fed right from the start
  • Whatever they do (Score:2, Insightful)

    the students should not be forced into a subscription via tuition. I just finished my first year of college and I did not once download music from a peer to peer network. Assuming that all students do is a blunder. I would be very upset if I was locked into a plan to purchase music "legally" when I'm not breaking the law in the first place.
  • by toddestan ( 632714 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:38PM (#6596545)

    Perhaps they should consider setting up some shoutcast/icecast style stations to stream music over the college LAN? Assuming it can be done cheaply and legally, this would be pretty neat. If people like the radio stations enough, they will spend less time messing with MP3's.

    It would sure beat a DRM'ed library of music that I have to pay for, that would lack the convience,variety, and quality of what is already on my harddrive.
  • by SuperBanana ( 662181 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:39PM (#6596546)
    I'm broke, so free is good. Paying more to go to school is bad.

    "There is no such thing as a free lunch."

    Maybe this is just my gut reaction, but maybe colleges should be spending their time working on EDUCATION and not SELLING MUSIC. Leave that to the music companies, stores, etc.

    Stuff like this is symptomatic of a (youth) obsession with music. Personally, I'm completely sick of hearing about music[companies,sharing,piracy], and I think that both the music companies and media(inc. slashdot) continuously overstate the significance/importance of music. You can rape 'em at the voting booth(if they even show up), you can make it nearly impossible for 'em to travel without the government massively invading their privacy(on the assumption hijackers will use real names, birthdays, etc)...and they won't even lift an eyebrow. Tell 'em they can't "share" their music, and they get absolutely RIPSHIT.

    God forbid we should worry about the important things, like who is going to pay for our parent's medical care, our environment, our rights as individual citizens, our massively corrupt politicians, overpopulation, corporate greed...

  • Pushing Pop Music? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by aSiTiC ( 519647 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:39PM (#6596548) Homepage
    As a student that dislikes the common pop music (i.e. Top40, Top200, TopAnything) I don't want to pay for the RIAA POP music agenda. If this program however would introduce indie bands and struggling musicians on the Jukebox I'd be all for it. I think that all the general student population needs is a little exposure to some alternate choices. However I maybe to generous to the tendencies of undergrad students.
    • I have to agree with this, if Universities are only going to provide certain genres of music, the I will not pay for that service. It follows the same lines that if I buy a computer, I will not pay for a preinstall OS. To many people are trying to make decisions for the rest of the world. It just does not work that way.
  • by program21 ( 469995 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:43PM (#6596560) Homepage Journal
    Anyone have any idea which colleges/universities are involved with this? The article doesn't mnetion any, and I'd like to know if mine (or any of my friends') schools are involved so that I can get something together to express my opinion on (against) this.
  • Gosh, what an ground breaking, original idea. Schools could have like a library...but for multimedia type stuff. It might be called something like maybe a "Multimedia Library."

    This is like ground breaking in the original idea department!!!!!

    The main challenge in this article is how to make licenses that allow a member library to distribute copies of works among their members.

    The libraries could probably go a long way if they simply had a kiosk system that allowed only one copy of a song to play at a g
  • Sigh (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jeffkjo1 ( 663413 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:46PM (#6596570) Homepage
    The music services, along with a representative from Universal Music Group, explained that difficulties in licensing would make a Kazaa-style service impossible, however.

    And thus, it will fail. College Students tend to have the most diverse of music tastes, and from what I have read about the various music services, most of what is available is the more popular current music. Beatles and Rolling Stones tunes are next to impossible to come by.
    We all want the best, not some half assed attempt at pretending this is better. If I can't get my music from their legitimate service, I'm going to get it elseware.
    Also, from my understanding of state laws, State owned (and funded) schools would likely have a difficult time getting something like this started, "A mandatory fee for a commercial service not provided by a university" wouldn't look very good on a budget itinerary for a cash strapped (all) state.
  • by John3 ( 85454 ) <john3NO@SPAMcornells.com> on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:49PM (#6596573) Homepage Journal
    The article mentions that initially the universities wanted a "Kazaa-like" system where students could get any file they wanted. This idea was shot down, so that means the music selection will be limited to whatever is included in the agreement. So students will have to pony up money for a service that has limited selection.

    The article doesn't talk about DRM controls, but I would assume that the system would prohibit burning CD's and limit copying to portable devices. Excuse me, but isn't this already available to students (iTunes, Rhapsody, etc.) who want to pay for this service?

    The music industry will get lots of revenue through these contracts, and the universities will get some legal coverage to avoid being dragged into court. The universities will probably even take on a service charge to whatever the music industry charges.
  • by Knife_Edge ( 582068 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:50PM (#6596576)

    Most universities are terrified, repeat, terrified, of being legally liable for anything. They are doubtless motivated in this case not by the desire to provide music to students, but to provide assurance that they are not going to be sued, no matter how unlikely it may be.

    Does anybody remember how the RIAA quietly went around and threatened to sue universities that did not block Napster? Right after this happened, mine announced they were blocking Napster because of 'bandwidth' reasons. This is the same kind of situation, the universities are just dying to pay protection money. They will do anything to avoid the high costs and bad publicity that could come with a lawsuit.

  • by MichaelCrawford ( 610140 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:53PM (#6596588) Homepage Journal
    You can enjoy free music downloads without getting in trouble by listening to the music that many artists make available on their own websites in hopes of attracting fans. And you can tell the RIAA to kiss your ass.

    But there is the problem of finding the music, and weeding out the bad stuff without actually having to download and play it all.

    This problem is solved with iRATE radio's [sourceforge.net] collaborative filtering:

    iRATE radio is a collaborative filtering client/server mp3 player/downloader. The iRATE server has a large database of music. You rate the tracks and it uses your ratings and other peoples to guess what you'll like. The tracks are downloaded from Web sites which allow free downloads of their music.

    iRATE radio's server has 46,000 tracks registered in its database - so if you use iRATE, you don't need to go hunting for music anymore. All of these are legal downloads from websites like mine [geometricvisions.com]. (I compose for the piano.)

    The way iRATE works is that it downloads a few tracks at random at first. It downloads them directly from the artists' Web sites after finding them in its database. (The author of iRATE is careful to register only legal downloads.) After you listen to and rate the tracks, your ratings are sent back to the server where it uses statistical analysis to correllate your ratings with the ratings given by other users. If you like the same kind of music I do, then iRATE will send you all the same music I like. Conversely, if you hate my music, iRATE won't send you the music I like.

    iRATE is a java program, known to work on Windows, Linux and Mac OS X. The client and server are both Free Software, licensed with the GPL.

    Here's some screen shots [sourceforge.net].

    While iRATE works on Mac OS X, it could stand some improvement. Apple provides a package which can give java programs a native Mac OS look and feel. The project is actively seeking Mac OS X java programmers

    • Cool name, and a cool concept! However, it didn't work for me: It started up, began downloading some songs, but even after 3 songs had been downloaded, I still couldn't command the first song to start playing: Doubleclicking doesn't work, as well as clicking the ">>" button.

      Actually, I think that this app suffers quite a bit from a bad interface. I'm not sure if the ">>" button starts playing or fast forwards to the next song. The ">>" is normally used to indicate fast forwarding, but in
      • Thanks for the feedback. I'm sorry iRATE didn't work out for you. It does work for most people who try it, but iRATE is still in its infancy, and a lot of work is required before it becomes the leading application that I'm confident it is destined to be.

        I'll post the URL of your comment on the irate-devel mailing list.

        I'd just like to ask that you check iRATE's website [sourceforge.net] from time to time and give version 0.3 a try once it's released. We have several developers now, most of them devoting significant ti

        • Hello Michael, I've already found out what the bug was and entered my problems in iRates bug list:

          The problem was with running iRate directly off the supplied read-only disk image. Once I moved it, everything worked fine.

          I also added a few additional bug reports, which I won't repeat here. Keep this great program up, it has a lot of potential! :-)

          One last note - or more of a which, actually: iRate eats CPU cycles like whales eat krill. A non-Java version would be muc

  • by kramer2718 ( 598033 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @04:58PM (#6596605) Homepage
    I don't want the RIAA to see any more revenue from this or any other source. I hope those bloodsuckers go out of business.

    Have a nice day.
  • Great but... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by DisKurzion ( 662299 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @05:08PM (#6596637)
    Legality means nothing to me. I'm not going to switch to a pay service unless it can provide things that Kazaa can't. High quality, full albums, with no DRM. If I can't send copies of songs to my friends over IM, it's worthless in my book.

    Also, if it became a 'fee', all hell would break loose. Colleges already charge a crapload for extra stuff lots of people never use, just on the assumption that you "might" use it.

    Examples: (per semester at Virginia Tech)
    Student activity fee: $113 (most student activities suck)
    Athletic fee: $116 (gym crowded, and don't have to attend gym to excercise)
    Rec Sports Fee: $71 (the funny thing is most people who actually do rec sports have to buy their own gear as well)
    Bus fee: $30 (I use it, but many others don't)

    Pay each of those twice a year and that's $660. I don't even want to think about what the "music fee" would be.
    • Those fees induce you do to something that arguably "Part of the College Experience". Where I would have to say I started listening to LESS recorded music once I got to college.
      • If people wanted to do these things they'd pay for them willingly. What good is the college experience if it's forced on you by the big wigs? Experiences are better if they are spontaneous and voluntary. Things should happen out of genuine spirit.
  • by Schlemphfer ( 556732 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @05:11PM (#6596647) Homepage
    This idea is so incredibly backwards and wrong I don't know where to begin. Predictably, the article provides absolutely no level of detail about how such a service would work. But it sounds as if this will amount to giving students limited access to some half-broken and incomplete service whereby DRM-crippled files would be downloaded.

    It also sounds as though colleges will pay a set fee per student, so they can use the service, thus supposedly freeing up the college of legal liability.

    But wait, what happens if the college-affiliated jukebox doesn't carry, say, Rush's CD catalog? As a broke college student who already indirectly paid my $30 extra in tuition to subsidize this program, what am I likely to do? That's right, go onto a Kazaa and pirate those Rush CD's. And then we're right back where we started. And at that point, you can be sure that both my college and I are back on the hook, as far as the record companies are concerned.

    More to the point, I think the most pressing concern is how much money from these college jukeboxes would be passed to the artist. The article makes no mention of this. And I'm inclined to think that when I download my DRM-crippled music, at this cut-rate University special fee, the artist is going to get shafted even more than if I had purchased a CD. And to me, the whole point of buying music is to support the artist. If a big chunk of my dollar doesn't support the artist, then piracy seems a moral option. I can always go to the artist's concert later, paying for tickets and t-shirts.

    So to sum up, there's plenty of reason to be distrustful of this. It looks like a way for record companies to take $30 or whatever for each college student, and then to continue going after these same students, when they resort to piracy after realizing the college jukebox sucks.

  • ...will never go for this. Gimme a break.
  • I cannot believe that any campus would want to get involved in enforcing RIAA licensing requirements. It would be a nightmare just attempting to distinquish between music that was to be restricted and that which was free to copy; never mind deciding exactly who on campus was covered and who wasn't.

    A paranoid person would think that the RIAA was just attempting to set up one large, rich target rather than suing each and every moneyless student independently.
  • by Angry Pixie ( 673895 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @05:16PM (#6596665) Journal
    How about this... universities instead focus on improving their curriculum or improving the general state of student life on campus. How about investing more in improving general quality of living in dorm rooms, open up campus bookstores to the free market instead of monopolizing vendors like Follets. There are many worthwhile things universities SHOULD be doing for students instead of getting into the music business! Students WILL find a way to get their MP3s without the help of the school.

    There are a lot major universities in dire straits financially, and of the ones I've observed, their problems are owed to very poor decision making by presidents and boards that don't know how to run universities as a business. If universities want to increase profits, they should reengineer their existing business processes
    • If universities want to increase profits, they should reengineer their existing business processes

      Universities? For profit? Very few are run this way, in America at least. Public unis are not supposed to be run like businesses. What businesses have tenured employees and fund open-ended research? If everything in the world were run purely for the immediate monetary gains, civilization would not move forward.

      Some universities think that research is inefficient, and tenured faculty are lazy. So they

      • There is a difference between running a university like a business and actually running a university as a business. I agree to that. It's like hospital administration. The fact remains, that is is solid business and management principles that when followed lead to fiscal and administrative responsility, keeping budgets intact, preventing universities from making disasterous mistakes.

        I did a visit of one major internatioal university in Chicago a few years ago that was (and still is) going through a finan
  • by BrookHarty ( 9119 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @05:21PM (#6596681) Journal
    Don't know if anyone has been paying attention, but in California, but they raised tuition 10% in the first quarter of 03, and now another 30% recently. And had to cut many programs due to the states 700 million dollar education cut because of the 38 billion state budget overrun. Its not just california that has these budget problems, its happening all over the country.

    So while I like the idea of them trying provide free music for the students (or seem free), its more of a value added feature when you have to pay 40%+ more in tuition.

    It must be a tough to attract kids to colleges with these budget costs, cutting fund for additional programs, and the harsh job market for software/computer related jobs. Anything they can do to make the life a little easier on the students is almost a business decision, a very smart one.

    Gotta see the trees through the forest, Free music for colleges is more about avoiding lawsuits, tuition prices and attracting students.

  • DRM test bed (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Fibonacci Ceres ( 544226 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @05:35PM (#6596737)
    Oh great! This will be the social and technical test bed for the roll out of the RIAA's favored version of Digital Rights Management. While Johnny is off at University being taught what passes for critical thinking he can be indoctrinated into the RIAA's future music licensing paradigm. After all, why sell physical copies of licensed work just ONCE when you can continuously charge per student/per month for the same content?

    *** This Month Only!: The Metallica add on pack is
    only one penny more for the first three months*

    *One year contract at standard pricing required.

    After providing this "service" to the nation's colleges for a time the RIAA will have trained the next generation of music consumers to accept usurious licensing fees in exchange for digitally managed content without batting an eye.

    *** Note: Beginning next month all Britney Spears
    content will be disabled pending the release of her new masterwork - - "Ooops, I made Millions again"!

    yeesh,

    Fibonacci Ceres
  • If schools choose to go this route, the only acceptable method is via per-user charge, tacked on to _BOARDING_ fee. As an off-campus student, I will see no benefit personally of _any_ dorm-related services. As such, I should NOT be charges for said services. My university [kutztown.edu] is already increasing tuition this coming semester, and having worked for the school since I transferred, I can say that they have no business doing so (raising tuition); the campus wastes money like a bitch and I'd hate to have yet-anothe
  • is if they had a small montly fee and allowed unlimited downloads. Paying for each song ends up being just as expensive as buying the CD, plus the stores that offer that now all have some type of DRM. I think that something like emusic.com but with the major record labels would be the best way to go, and it would be the only method I would consider using.
  • I envision that every university could build a giant information repository in the center of their campuses. These massive edifices could act as a storehouse for books, magaizines, music cds and other forms of data. To gain entry the supplicant would need a badge of identification.

    I shall call my creations LIBRARIES and students will flock to them.

    Seriously folks, Universities have the infrastructure already. Have the library buy the CD. Load the CD on a server and seal the origional in a vault. Stream the cds to the users (athenticated via library card). Set the server to one stream per purchased copy and it is all fair use. How alout them apples RIAA!

    SD
  • by stanwirth ( 621074 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @05:59PM (#6596846)

    One thing that's been left out of the debate thus far is the role of University communities in the production of music. And of course they are free to freely distribute on their own internal networks music which they have written and produced.

    Universities have music programmes --everything from aspiring rock and roll bands to amateur chorale groups and semi-professional jazz ensembles, to chamber orchestras and full-blown symphony orchestras. Has the RIAA taken so much control over the terms of the debate that the role of University communities in providing cheap or free innovative cultural events is pushed so far over to one side as to be completely missing? Personally, I think the Universities have a duty to their students to discourage the RIAA crap music and provide a superior product themselves -- in the name of education.

    As an example, a coffeehouse at Cornell, we had a folk concert series called "Bound for Glory" that usually featured one local or not-so-local artist and an opening act by a student or student group. And it was broadcast free-to-air on the campus radio station. What better way is there for students to learn about music performance, production and distribution than for them to DO IT THEMSELVES? The Talking Heads started out at RISD, and the music scene surrounding the university community in Athens, Georgia is legendary for producing such bands as REM and The Indigo Girls. Carnegie Mellon University would be the ideal place to start producing its own MP3s for distribution on campus, because it has both one of the best Computer Science departments in the country and one of the best music schools in the country. In cities like Boston and New York, you could have consoria, between, say, MIT nad the Boston Conservatory of Music; between Columbia and Julliard. I can see NYU publishing its own film productions on internal broadband, UCLA and USC as well. Certainly, they're already doing things like this, but why not promote it to students as a much better thing to do than downloading some crap 80's music that you can hear on the radio anyway?

    Quite frankly, I'm really disappointed with both the musical taste and leadership of college students that are such passive consumers and apparently incapable of producing anything better than what the RIAA would sell them. Pathetic! Is it that they're so technically incompetent that they cannot find music on campus to record and distribute via mp3's-- or is it that their leadership and creative abilities are so underdeveloped that they can't even recognise what a fantastic opportunity it is to be at university, where there are already all of the facilities and pool of highly developed talent available to put on -- and electronically distribute -- creative productions?

    I think the Universities should seize the high ground they have such easy access to. In 5 years the RIAA will be begging the Universities for access to the Universities' MP3 archives for wider distribution. You know, those early recordings of the frat party gigs of the student band that went platinum after graduation. That remarkable performance of early church music on the University's collection of medeival instruments. Stephen Speilberg started his career with a student film at USC, and Spike Lee started his career with student films at NYU. Why not have a media server plus a critical forum for viewing and commenting on student films, student music, student plays? The HECK with the *crap* the RIAA is laying claim to. They can KEEP it. Sheesh!

    People deliberately go to University in order to be exposed to the good stuff, and to hone their critical thinking via discourse with the best -- i.e. why Mahler trumps Britney Spears and why Melville is better than Mills and Boon. The Universities are doing the students a disservice in protecting the students from RIAA legal moves -- not that they should be offering legal protection when they steal other artists' copyrighted (a

  • meetings were held between college representatives, music industry reps, and online music services

    I guess the student representative had a class or something, right? How is it that we, the students, have no say in something that will inevitably effect the cost of tuition, which is already sky high at most places? Not all college students infringe copyrights. Some of us actually respect them, even if we don't like them. All that means is that our music selection is much more limited than the guy in th

  • by frovingslosh ( 582462 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @06:01PM (#6596856)
    Paying more to go to school is bad.

    Paying more and having it go to the RIAA, or to some RAP artist who you would never support or listen to is even worse. Making all students pay for this, directly or indirectly, on the assumption that some will illegally copy music, is crazy.

  • by Phoenix666 ( 184391 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @06:07PM (#6596876)
    What on earth makes anyone think they deserve our money? The great music they promote? The way they gently nurture budding artists? How about how they promote honesty in our government? Bah!

    Pay them nothing. Let them starve the way they let their artists starve. How on earth did we ever get to a place where a company can claim to own our culture, and even worse, have a lot of average joes believe that's the way it has always been?

    Folks, we the people own our culture collectively. Yes, artists create, but without people watching/listening/enjoying the creation, it don't count for diddly squat. It's a conversation, you see, and twisting it into a monologue is just nuts.

    So get up from the keyboard and do something about it. I personally am working hard on the Howard Dean presidential campaign, but take whatever approach you like. Just do something.
  • This can be used as an excuse to unplug off-campus P2P network access, and perhaps even Internet Radio at the port level as part of the deal, since "students would be getting all the music they could possibly want" in the deal.

    What are the chances that independent artists will have access to getting into these jukeboxes, even if they're willing to donate content?

    Needless to say, I'm hoping this project fails utterly, I'm working with an indie artist.

    Of course, given the timeframe and the rate of change w

  • Why should States/Feds collect taxes ofr RIAA? .......... ......

    --sounds of silence of US congresss--

    I for one do not want my f**king taxes goign to the f**king RIAA!

  • Interesting. If this works for universities, it could also work for broadband subscribers as an ISP-level service.
  • Very Bad Idea (Score:3, Insightful)

    by DarkVein ( 5418 ) on Saturday August 02, 2003 @06:54PM (#6597082) Journal

    This sounds like one of the best ideas I've heard to take market dynamics out of music distribution.

    Let me put it another way: Do any of you remember banalty tax from History of Western Civ 1?

    Simply put, these are royalties due to an entity in exchange for a service, even if you don't use it. How do you "vote with your dollars" when you can't choose what your dollars go towards, or if your dollars can go at all?

    On the flip side, this is a great deal for the music industry: They get a garunteed revenue stream for doing nothing. Hell, they can completely quit producing new or interesting works and continue getting paid for 95 years, with that back-library of theirs.

    This also sets a great example for the economics students. Who needs all those complicated supply/demand and market dynamics theories? All you have to do to get rich is convince someone you deserve a tax revenue. This can be a private institution (Universities, in this case) or the Federal government (place a media tax on something and funnel the money back to you). Why work for hard-core capitalism when you can have the much simpler capitalistic socialism?

    Cue the banalty song.

  • ...will the music be playable under any O/S, or will this just be a way to trap students into make Bill Gates richer ?
  • This idea has merit in several areas that deserve more than the condemnation so far in this discussion.

    First, this opens up the door of digital music distribution and licensing wider than it has ever been opened up before. It drags the record companies and the RIAA into the 21st century. That alone is a positive step.

    Even if this includes DRM, this is a positive step. Remember how copy protection was part of many early PC software programs. It was dropped as the industry matured and they determined

  • by eric76 ( 679787 )
    I'd like to see something for ISPs where subscribers could subscribe to a music service if they wished, but the requests for downloads would be handled locally instead of over the Internet.

    The savings in bandwidth costs for ISPs not located in areas where bandwidth is relatively cheap could easily pay for a machine with plenty of disk space to install the software and files on.

    Around here, it's about $1,000 a month for a T-1 line. It wouldn't take that many users to use the service to free up one or more
  • by Anonymous Coward
    So let's see if I got this straight,

    I have never purchased a music cd, all my music consisting of albums and cassettes. Yet if I decide to go back to college, I'm going to be paying shakedown money straight out of my tuition, with nothing to say about it?

    Sort of like the student fees you are forced to pay for the communist public interest research groups, along with their wacko activism you are forced to support.

    So do the students and colleges get protection from p2p lawsuits, or do the media/entertainm

"Here's something to think about: How come you never see a headline like `Psychic Wins Lottery.'" -- Comedian Jay Leno

Working...