Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Image

New "MP3 100% Compatible" Logo For DRM-Free Music 263

Sockatume writes "A coalition of seven UK digital music stores have created a logo for DRM-free, MP3 music. The 'MP3: 100% Compatible' logo allows the stores to emphasize the advantages of the format, namely that MP3 files will run on any device and won't keel over and die as DRM-laden files are wont to. The BPI — the UK equivalent of the RIAA — is backing the scheme, emphasizing that it will also allow users to identify legitimate stores."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New "MP3 100% Compatible" Logo For DRM-Free Music

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 04, 2008 @11:42PM (#25636393)

    You are mistaking "compatible" with "open". .ogg is open, but is compatible with significantly fewer devices and computers at the moment. I don't think my computer will play it (though I could download a codec for it if I cared), and I know my phone, portable music player (aka MP3 player), and car stereo can't play it.

  • by Jeff DeMaagd ( 2015 ) on Tuesday November 04, 2008 @11:42PM (#25636395) Homepage Journal

    Proprietary or not, MP3 is THE audio format to play. Give an ogg file to most people, they are almost certainly not going to be able to play it without some hass.e Most audio devices don't play ogg files, while most audio file player devices can play MP3.

  • by syousef ( 465911 ) on Tuesday November 04, 2008 @11:43PM (#25636399) Journal

    How does use of the logo show you're legit? I bet there are plenty of pirate and torrent sites that could stick that logo right on their front page today.

  • by Kamokazi ( 1080091 ) on Tuesday November 04, 2008 @11:52PM (#25636469)
    Because it's hard, if not impossible to find a player that doesn't support MP3. You actually have to look for OGG or FLAC support while buying. This is about making it easy for consumers, not forwarding the agenda of open source/format nazis. Maybe, just maybe, something not completely open is actually...good?
  • by ScrewMaster ( 602015 ) * on Wednesday November 05, 2008 @12:13AM (#25636605)

    The BPI â" the UK equivalent of the RIAA â" is backing the scheme, emphasizing that it will also allow users to identify legitimate stores.

    I'd say their willingness to allow a distinction to be drawn between an open format and their restricted garbage is a temporary phenomenon. Odd in a way, since they (and their ilk elsewhere) have spent a lot of money convincing buyers that DRM-infected files are just as good as unencumbered ones. Makes me think that as soon as they have people aware that MP3 is different than whatever it is they're offering, they'll start spending billions vilifying MP3 files. These guys are sneaky and not to be trusted under any circumstances.

  • by lysergic.acid ( 845423 ) on Wednesday November 05, 2008 @12:20AM (#25636633) Homepage

    well, MP3 is an ISO standard (approved in 1991). however, i agree that the licensing/patent issues are a huge drawback. to quote Wikipedia:

    A large number of different organizations have claimed ownership of patents necessary to implement MP3 (decoding and/or encoding). These different claims have led to a number of legal threats and actions from a variety of sources, resulting in uncertainty about what is necessary to legally create products with MP3 support in countries where those patents are valid.

    The various patents claimed to cover MP3 by different patent-holders have many different expiration dates, ranging from 2007 to 2017 in the U.S. The initial near complete MPEG-1 standard (parts 1,2,3) was publicly available in December 6, 1991 as ISO CD 11172. Since US patents must be filed by no later than a year after publication, some of the later patents are questionable, and MP3 may be patent free in the US by December of 2012.

    sounds like typical patent-trolling to me. this is a prime example of how our IP laws hinder technological progress/innovation rather than encourage it. and a 20-year patent term for software algorithms is just plain insane. by the time the patent expires and finally goes into public domain the algorithm will likely be obsolete. technological progress is the result of open collaboration and collective efforts. these type of patent lawsuits are counter-productive and greatly hamper cultural symbiosis that every field of knowledge/research depends on to move forward.

    so it's too bad that petty patent claims plague the dominant digital music format. maybe Ogg should be made into an ISO standard. perhaps then more hardware manufacturers (and downloadable music retailers) will adopt it alongside of MP3. frankly, MP3 is already a little outdated as it's fallen behind other compression formats over the years.

  • by Jeff DeMaagd ( 2015 ) on Wednesday November 05, 2008 @12:23AM (#25636641) Homepage Journal

    I think that does make a good amount of sense, because computers can easily play just about any file format, given an easy installation of a driver or decoder program. Getting a typical phone, car audio head unit, iPod or ipod-like device to play them generally isn't going to be so easy. If you offer to install the player, I would bet the resistance would be low, but people without that kind of acquaintance would probably just forgo it.

  • Re:Sweet (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 05, 2008 @12:24AM (#25636647)

    The tide has turned: A once geek-only outrage will now be slowly taken up by the AOL like masses.

    No kidding.

    A non-geek friend of mine bitched about this last week. He's nearing 40, doing well, and is a big metal fan. He was trolling memory lane on YouTube, and decided to go get some more albums of one of his old favorites. The store had a deal on the band's full boxed set -- sweet! -- then he noticed the DRM tag. He took it to the till and asked the clerks if he'd be able to play the tunes on his iPod. Clerk 1: "I dunno." Clerk 2: "Probably not."

    Downer: no sale. He's such a nice straight-up guy he wrote the Lable about it. Got no reply of course, which pissed him off more. I nodded through this and explained again why DRM sucks - it fucks over the legit customers like him, while not slowing down the pirates.

    This new "100% Compatible" logo is /exactly/ what he (and the store clerks) needs. It's due. Regular customers are fed up with this shit now, not just geeks.

  • Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Wednesday November 05, 2008 @01:16AM (#25636853)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by v1 ( 525388 ) on Wednesday November 05, 2008 @01:40AM (#25636931) Homepage Journal

    Proprietary and compatible do not have to be linked.

    ogg is not closed source/proprietary, but despite this it only works on what, 60% of players? hardly "compatible". Being open source does not maketh compatible.

    But then WMV9 is closed/proprietary, and only works in maybe 1/3 of the players. Probably an intersection of where "proprietary" marries "profit".

    Then there's the third alternative, mp3. Proprietary, yet universally (100% for all practical purposes) supported.

    Can you find an audio player that does NOT support MP3 but DOES support ogg? Maybe you can find one or two. But I bet I can find a heck of a lot more that do MP3 and not ogg.

  • Re:Sweet (Score:5, Insightful)

    by lysergic.acid ( 845423 ) on Wednesday November 05, 2008 @02:05AM (#25637061) Homepage

    having worked in the music industry i'd tend agree with you. i think this initiative, especially the fact that it's backed by a powerful trade group, will send a strong message to record labels and artists.

    while i'm hoping my boss learned his lesson after receiving a bunch of complaints and product returns on music CDs using standards-breaking DRM (i think a rep from Megaforce, our distributor, sold him the idea originally), i suspect the notion of DRMing future releases is still in the back of his mind. and, honestly, even without the product liability issues that come with CD DRM technology, it's still a huge waste of money that alienates customers/fans.

    resources wasted combating "piracy" and on anti-consumer policies/tactics like DRM, or any other means of restricting consumer freedom, would be better used on music promotion. record labels can't dictate to consumers how they can or can't use the music they've purchased. online file sharing, like swapping cassettes or CDs, is an timeless constant. the smart labels will use this to their advantage rather than try to fight human nature.

    record labels spend millions of dollars each year on promotion, whether it's buying spins on the radio, paying for TV/radio commercials, taking out ads in magazines & one-stops, printing fliers, putting your tracks on listening booths, co-op promotions, etc. it's all about getting the music out there, getting the band's name out there. you let people listen to your music for free on the radio, and you grow your fan base. in fact, the more plays you get on the radio, the more albums you sell. the industry understands the value of this kind of _paid_ promotion, but when it comes to free promotion, they just can't seem to wrap their heads around it. so they actually waste money to try to stop it.

    instead of worrying about the music "pirates" who don't pay for music, which is really a relatively small percentage of the population that you're never going to reach anyway, why not exploit the marketing value of the internet. viral marketing the most effective, and simultaneously cheapest, means of increasing your fan base, and subsequently your customer base. so it makes much more sense to distribute DRM-free MP3s that people can share with their friends and let file sharing work for you through viral marketing.

  • Re:Not so (Score:5, Insightful)

    by c_forq ( 924234 ) <forquerc+slash@gmail.com> on Wednesday November 05, 2008 @02:07AM (#25637071)
    As I understand it they don't approve of all decoders, but allow them. As I understand it they will fight arm and leg for encoders though, as they see that as their money maker. I may be talking out of my ass though, so mod me accordingly.
  • by Firehed ( 942385 ) on Wednesday November 05, 2008 @02:27AM (#25637197) Homepage

    Ogg is Open and Free As In Speech, but it's compatible with almost nothing. Yes, devices could be MADE compatible with it with no licensing costs, but good luck convincing Apple, who alone controls over two thirds of the mp3 player market with the iPod. I doubt the Zune supports ogg right now either, though I'm sure many of the less-popular players that are trying to nail as many features as possible in the hopes of taking a couple of Apple's customers support the format.

    That's not knocking ogg - it's hardly the format's fault. But I don't think there's a portable player in existence that doesn't support mp3, and that's what consumers care about. And from that standpoint, mp3 is as close to 100% compatible as any format ever will be.

    Ogg is fantastic for some things (game audio comes to mind, with zero licensing costs), but portable media player compatibility is unfortunately not one of them. Likewise for FLAC.

  • by Firehed ( 942385 ) on Wednesday November 05, 2008 @02:34AM (#25637247) Homepage

    Well, if you use the logo and don't provide MP3 files to your customer, I'm pretty sure you've just gone and opened yourself up to a false advertising lawsuit.

    Doesn't address piracy issues, but then again I don't tend to associate piracy issues with retail stores or well-known online sellers like Amazon.

  • by TubeSteak ( 669689 ) on Wednesday November 05, 2008 @03:02AM (#25637351) Journal

    I'd say their willingness to allow a distinction to be drawn between an open format and their restricted garbage is a temporary phenomenon. Odd in a way, since they (and their ilk elsewhere) have spent a lot of money convincing buyers that DRM-infected files are just as good as unencumbered ones.

    I disagree. It is not odd at all.
    They are trying to break the back of iTunes and preventing anything like it from ever arising again.

    It drives them insane that a 3rd party has the kind of market power that lets it set pricing on their product.

  • by jabithew ( 1340853 ) on Wednesday November 05, 2008 @04:47AM (#25637791)

    It's also fully lossless. I'm not sure people need or want that, considering the ballooning size of digital music libraries even with lossy compression.

  • by meringuoid ( 568297 ) on Wednesday November 05, 2008 @05:03AM (#25637851)
    It's also fully lossless. I'm not sure people need or want that, considering the ballooning size of digital music libraries even with lossy compression.

    Hard disks are up to 1.5TB. That's maybe a hundred times what they were when Napster first became popular. FLAC is typically, what, ten times the size of an MP3? Seems to me the time for lossless compression is here.

  • Re:Jews did 9/11. (Score:0, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 05, 2008 @05:28AM (#25637959)
    Finally a first post parent and thread that's logical and related to the article. Oh wait.
  • by FourthAge ( 1377519 ) on Wednesday November 05, 2008 @06:27AM (#25638187) Journal

    And iTunes is the monster they created. "Hey, let's insist on DRM for all online music stores! Whatcouldpossiblygowrong?" The irony makes me feel all warm inside.

  • by RockWolf ( 806901 ) on Wednesday November 05, 2008 @06:36AM (#25638245)

    *Number pulled out of ass, just so y'know.

    This is slashdot. We know.

  • Re:Sweet (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 05, 2008 @06:40AM (#25638261)

    Why? Do you feel that just because something is not for sale the way you like it, you are entitled to copyright infringement?

  • by DrYak ( 748999 ) on Wednesday November 05, 2008 @07:28AM (#25638469) Homepage

    Are there even any unhacked non-PC devices that play FLAC? Nothing against FLAC

    FLAC is currently the most popular Lossless compressed format for hardware players.

    High end living-room digital players usually support it. Some offer services where you send your CDs and when you receive your player it's pre-loaded with FLACs of your music (like Olive [olive.us] for example)

    Several Jukebox also exist with support for FLAC, like in car systems from PhatNoise [phatnoise.com]'s.

    Logitech's latest Squeezbox supports it too, for a more recent example.

    For more detailed and longer list see FLAC's own list [sourceforge.net].

    In addition to all these branded software, don't forget also about all the countless of no-name "multimedia-harddisk-case" (small box usually centered around some miniITX board running a small embed linux-based mediaplayer. Sold pre assembled in store and buy-your-own-harddisk in computer shops). Granted most of them DO use Linux and PC-like hardware. But they are sold as ready-to-use appliance, like your DSL/Cable modem and Wifi router (which is most likely to run Linux, too).

    In short the fact the iPod doesn't play it, and Microsoft's "Play-for-Sure" logo forbids it in the USA, doesn't mean that the rest of the world isn't already using it.

  • Re:Not so (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Minwee ( 522556 ) <dcr@neverwhen.org> on Wednesday November 05, 2008 @07:45AM (#25638537) Homepage
    It's called "Insightful". Just look around for some examples of its proper usage.
  • Re:Sweet (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Mateo_LeFou ( 859634 ) on Wednesday November 05, 2008 @12:06PM (#25643231) Homepage

    "Cool. So everybody... "

    Right at the word 'everybody' is where you indicate that you missed the point entirely.

Nothing is finished until the paperwork is done.

Working...