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

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Music Media

Buy.Com Debuts Music Download Site 610

Posted by michael from the what-are-you-paying-for,-exactly? dept.
elucidus writes "Buy.com on Tuesday launched a new digital music download service -- the site, BuyMusic.com, offers a catalog of more than 300,000 songs. The site only loads in Internet Explorer and all the files are Windows Media 9 formatted with DRM. No word yet on whether the public announcement of a supposed gaping hole in Windows Media DRM caused any concern before the launch. Compatible players include the Nomad IIc 9 and Creative's Jukebox Zen."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Buy.Com Debuts Music Download Site More

Buy.Com Debuts Music Download Site

Comments Filter:

  • help (Score:5, Funny)

    by flynt ( 248848 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @12:50PM (#6500753)
    Could someone please post the story? I've been around here way to long to even begin thinking of clicking on a link with "gaping hole" in the text!

    • Gaping Hole Text (Score:2, Interesting)

      by thePancreas ( 690504 )
      Update July 19 Score one for security through obscurity. I haven't found a detailed explanation of the exploit, and I'm out of time for looking. The best documentation I have is mails from the wm-talk list, which I have archived here in mbox format -- you'll need to import these into your mailer to make the file readable.

      Worth pointing out: check out the post below titled "Digital becomes Analog."

      Update July 15 The crack turns out to be lossy. It grabs the audio stream at rendering time, so doesn't hav

    • Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:13PM (#6501114)
      Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Lowest pricing on SELECT tracks (Score:5, Informative)

        by Warlock7 ( 531656 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:48PM (#6501554)
        This is such a load. Why has everybody that's reporting on this story giving out so much misinformation?

        The tracks are STARTING at $0.79 with many over $0.99. There a Missy Elliot track that goes for $1.79 for Gods sake!!!

        The albums are STARTING at $7.95 with many over $11.99.

        Are all reporters suffering from the NY Times syndrome or what?!?!?!?!?!?

  • Microsoft centric... (Score:5, Flamebait)

    by _PimpDaddy7_ ( 415866 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @12:51PM (#6500768)
    the site only loads in Internet Explorer and all the files are Windows Media 9 formatted with DRM.

    No thanks, I'll stick with my iMac and iTunes store, thanks...

    • Re:Microsoft centric... (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:01PM (#6500943)
      No thanks, I'll stick with my win2k and kazaa/winmx, thanks...
    • loads in mozilla. just gotta disable javascript. i intend to make full use of the windows version of itunes when it is released (provided the formats play properly in winamp)

    • Re:Microsoft centric... (Score:5, Funny)

      by an_mo ( 175299 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:04PM (#6500986) Journal
      Here is the link to complain. Unfortunately you'll have to load up IE on win to use it.

      http://www.buymusic.com/support/email.aspx [buymusic.com]

      • Re:Microsoft centric... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by drgroove ( 631550 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:24PM (#6501274)
        I just sent this email to Buy.com using your link:
        -------------------
        I've purchased plenty of items from Buy.com in the past, but I have to let you know something.

        I don't *ever* use Internet Explorer to do it.

        In this day and age of web standards and the growing concern that all browsers and all websites comply, don't you think that Buy.com could be in a position to set a clear example in the business community on how to develop & deliver a web-based application that uses those standards?

        Without standards, we *all* run the risk of one company creating a 'tax' on the internet. Seeing as the internet has grown and survived on a spirit of openness, anyone who creates a browser or website that does not follow the W3C standards is not only increasing the risk that one company could own or control the internet, but they develop in the face of the internet's very open nature.

        Beyond losing a potential customer due to Buy.com's browser restrictions - I *never* use Internet Explorer - the example that you're setting in the online community and business community as a whole is a poor one at best... at worst, by playing favorites to a known monopolist company, Buy.com is thereby increasing the risk of a "Microsoft Internet Tax" becoming a reality.

        On behalf of developers everywhere, I strongly encourage your to open your web sites and web services to *all* W3C standards-compliant web browsers, as well as to offer your downloadable music products in formats other than Microsoft's proprietary format.

        In order to be compliant with web browsers, please refer to the free online information provided by the W3C at http://www.w3.org. A good way to test your site for standards compliance is to use a Mozilla/Gecko based browser, such as Mozilla Firebird v0.6, or Mozilla v1.4 - these can be downloaded at http://www.mozilla.org.

        Suggested formats for your music products - in addition to Microsoft's proprietary format - would be MP3, Ogg Vorbis, et al.

        Thank you for your time and attention. I hope you take these points seriously, and bring your site and services into compliance with the rest of the world, rather than isolating yourself in seclusion using only Microsoft techonologies.

        -------------------
        thanks, btw for the link... hopefully they listen!!! (I realize the language isn't perfect... just wrote it out really fast, didn't edit it... anyhow)

      • Re:Microsoft centric... (Score:4, Informative)

        by franimal ( 157291 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:27PM (#6501309) Homepage
        Just turn of JavaScript ... then you can use any browser.

      • Re:Microsoft centric... (Score:5, Informative)

        by an_mo ( 175299 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:42PM (#6501463) Journal
        And here is their reply

        Hello,

        Thank you for writing to us.

        We are responding to your request for information about browser
        compatibility.

        We apologize for any inconvenience, but unfortunately, our music
        downloads are only compatible with Internet Explorer. Your browser must
        be Internet Explorer. If you browse the site with Netscape, or any
        browser other than Internet Explorer, you cannot purchase and download
        music. The reason is that your music files are wrapped in SDMI
        encryption, which is unencrypted by the license that you download when
        you download the music file. The license download requires an Active-X
        control, which is only compatible with Internet Explorer. Without it you
        cannot download your license and your music stays encrypted and
        unusable.

        Again, we apologize for any inconvenience.

        If you have further questions, please contact us at
        support@customerservice.buymusic.com.

        We appreciate your business.

        Sincerely,

        BuyMusic.com
        www.BuyMusic.com

        Original Message Follows:

        • Re:Microsoft centric... (Score:4, Insightful)

          by slagdogg ( 549983 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @02:50PM (#6502232)
          The license download requires an Active-X
          control, which is only compatible with Internet Explorer.

          This is garbage -- licenses don't need to be pre-delivered. They can be sent to the player after the download -- there is absolutely NO valid reason to require a particular browser for download. This is just laziness by Buymusic's development staff, who clearly rushed this product.

      • Re:Microsoft centric... (Score:4, Funny)

        by mahdi13 ( 660205 ) <icarus.lnx@gmail.com> on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:52PM (#6501597) Journal
        Thank you for visiting BuyMusic.com.

        In order to take full advantage of BuyMusic.com's offerings you must be on a Windows Operating System using Internet Explorer version 5.0 or higher.

        In other words...if you do not use Windows and Internet Explorer, you are a communist loving, Linux/Mac user that does not deserve our business and we do not want your dirty crack dealing, drug running, terrorist funded money...beeeitch!

  • Linux no access (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Mr. McGibby ( 41471 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @12:52PM (#6500775) Homepage Journal
    WHY OH WHY do these folks have to RESTRICT access to these sites to people ONLY running IE? Yes, I know that I can't really use their site like they want me to, but what I just want to explore it to see what they offer. They just lost a potential customer...
    • This is almost the exact same thought I had. Hopefully, just hopefully, they'll get deluged with non-IE hits in their logs, and do something about it.

      Heh. Or maybe they knew it would get posted here and they didn't want to get slashdotted... ;)

    • Kinda like apple? (Score:5, Funny)

      by mekkab ( 133181 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @12:54PM (#6500814) Homepage Journal
      Don't worry, we'll set up a linux only site featuring RMS' greatest hits! Infact, We'll pay you to download 'em!

    • Re:Linux no access (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Wattsman ( 75726 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @12:57PM (#6500877)
      I just went to the site in IE. A pop-up window states that
      Windows Media Player Version 9 is required to download music on BuyMusic.com.

      They're specifically targetting Windows customers. And all Windows customers have IE. No reason to spend the extra time and money to make sure the site works with Mozilla or Opera (or Lynx or ...).

    • Re:Linux no access (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Sean80 ( 567340 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @12:57PM (#6500878)
      Well, it's a free country after all, and they have every right to target a particular customer base.

      At the end of the day, the Linux customer base is much, much smaller than that of Windows, and a company is free to pursue their largest, most profitable market segment.

      • Re:Linux no access (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Mr. McGibby ( 41471 )
        Well, I run Windows at home, which is where I would probably download the music. But in the world of consumer marketing, the word is impulse buying. I'm interested RIGHT NOW. If I have to wait till I get home, I'll probably have forgotten about the whole thing. Sure it's a free country, but that doesn't mean that they're not going to lose customers by *preventing* anyone using non-windows software from accessing their site. Yes, I understand that I'm not going to be able to access the entirety of their

    • Re:Linux no access (Score:4, Insightful)

      by bigman2003 ( 671309 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @12:58PM (#6500888) Homepage
      They may be restricting their site to IE users (94%+ of the web) and people don't like it.

      Apple restricts their service to 5%~ of all computerdom, and it's a 'cool service'.

      • Re:Linux no access (Score:3, Insightful)

        by bedouin ( 248624 )
        Apple restricts their service to 5%~ of all computerdom, and it's a 'cool service'.

        Well, iTunes for Windows is due out any day now, and without the draconian Microsoft DRM.

        So, yeah . . . it still is a cool service.

      • Re:Linux no access (Score:5, Insightful)

        by American AC in Paris ( 230456 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:12PM (#6501101) Homepage
        They may be restricting their site to IE users (94%+ of the web) and people don't like it.

        Apple restricts their service to 5%~ of all computerdom, and it's a 'cool service'.

        Cute, but trite.

        Lifting Apple's "restriction" requires cranking out and testing several thousand lines of code.

        Lifting BuyMusic's "restriction" requires deleting several lines of browser detection code.

        BuyMusic has clearly put a great deal of thought and effort into their restrictions; Apple is working like gangbusters to eliminate the "restriction" of iTMS being a Mac-only service.

      • test marketing (Score:5, Insightful)

        by mblase ( 200735 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:54PM (#6501631)
        Apple restricts their service to 5%~ of all computerdom, and it's a 'cool service'.

        The iPod, likewise, was Mac-only for the better part of a year before a Windows version came out. Initially it required FireWire as well, not a common interface on Windows machines, but now that the third generation iPod is out it supports Windows *and* USB 2.0 with nothing more than an extra connector. This was all done gradually, and only after Apple knew that (a) the iPod worked as well as they wanted it to, and (b) there was enough demand for PC compatability for Apple to even spend the time on it.

        iTMS is the same way. Apple's got legal issues preventing it from offering songs for sale outside of the USA, but that's being resolved already. Meanwhile, a Windows version of iTunes/iTMS was promised by the end of the year the very same day it was available for the Mac.

        Apple's not being snooty and refusing to make iTMS available to non-Macheads. Some things take more time than others, that's all.

        • Re:test marketing (Score:3, Insightful)

          by stickyc ( 38756 )
          This was all done gradually, and only after Apple knew that (a) the iPod worked as well as they wanted it to, and (b) there was enough demand for PC compatability for Apple to even spend the time on it.

          That just doesn't sound right. My opinion is that Apple delayed the PC version until they felt confident that anyone who would buy a Mac to use this uber-cool gadged did. (b) doesn't really hold water, there's more than enough demand from PC users out there who would buy this gadget to justify immediately d

    • Like it or not, they are the largest player out there, and if places like this don't cater to them, then they are dead in the water.

      Until we as a community have that much power, we are stuck outside looking in.

      + the DRM aspect.. they don't want the RIAA to come after them for catering to 'pirates'.

      Speaking of, is there a way we could still play them if we used IE under wine or something, and saved them locally? Or does the DRM component corrupt the file as i suspect..
    • My thoughts exactly. Except I suppose I am torn between the two options. I think I'd like the following to happen:

      You go to a website that is <browser> only. It informs you that you may experience problems with other browsers but then lets you proceed. This way the webmaster doesn't have to deal with e-mails from people saying "Your website doesn't work with version 0.236 alpha of this browser I'm writing!".

      I can see where some websites might block access though... for instance in this case you

    • Re: Explained in the FAQ (Score:5, Informative)

      by ip_vjl ( 410654 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:08PM (#6501045) Homepage
      They give this explanation in their help file.

      Why do I need Internet Explorer instead of Netscape or another browser?
      Your browser must be Internet Explorer. (See Minimum System Requirements.) If you browse the site with Netscape you cannot purchase and download music. The reason is that your music files are wrapped in DRM encryption, which is unencrypted by the license that you download when you download the music file. The license download requires and Active-X control which is only compatible with Internet Explorer. Without it you cannot download your license and your music stays encrypted and unusable.


      It's a new service. If they get enough requests, they may (doubtful) spend the time (money) necessary to support other browsers too. Though, with the windows media DRM, it looks like you'd be out of luck with Linux anyway. Though I was ticked that I couldn't use Windows Moz/Firebird, but it's their choice.

    • Talk about double standards... When Apple release their music store, that only works with iTunes, the everyone on Slashdot praised. When someone launches a similar site, but one that demands IE and Windows Media, everybody complains. The truth is: both are proprietary lock-ins, only Apple's has a cute face. If you don't want them to prosper, go buy your music elsewhere.
    • Windows offers a powerful infrastructure for distributing DRM encrypted media. Apple provide a similar infrastructure (but seem to keep it mostly to themselves). Linux has no such thing - even if it had 40% of the market, I doubt they would be targetting it.

  • Flat rate??? (Score:4, Funny)

    by MySpleenHurts ( 575068 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @12:52PM (#6500779)
    What if you download a 50 cents song????

  • story from cnet.com (Score:2, Informative)

    by phatboy22 ( 246112 )
    By Sandeep Junnarkar
    Staff Writer, CNET News.com
    July 22, 2003, 9:51 AM PT

    update NEW YORK--Buy.com on Tuesday launched a new digital music download service, hoping to reprise Apple Computer's early success with its iTunes music store.
    The new site, BuyMusic.com, offers a catalog of more than 300,000 songs from the five major labels, including Warner Music and Universal Music Group, and from independent recording companies.

    Prices for the service start at 79 cents per downloaded song, which is one of the lowes
    • "It needs to be consumer-friendly and protect the interests of the artists as well."

      Har har har. While I'm sure it'll be relatively easy to pay and download, doesn't the fact that the music is in Windows Media format mean that you can't play it in any device that doesn't support Windows Media files?

      On this page: http://www.buymusic.com/support/help.aspx [buymusic.com], it says:
      "Before tracks are copied to your CD, they are inspected and, in some cases, converted to a file type. This process takes several minutes." Sinc

  • IE , WM9, DRM ? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    One strike was enough, but three?
    Gimme Mozilla, XMMS and MP3s or Ogg.
    Boxed in dead ends? No way.

  • Let me see... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by oscast ( 653817 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @12:53PM (#6500798) Homepage
    Different licenses for different songs with varying limits for burning versus uniform licensing for all songs with unlimited burns. It's going to be hell making your own custom music CD using that service. I'm sticking with Apple, and once Apple releases its PC iTunes, I'm sticking that on my PCs as well.

  • i came, i saw, i left. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by lingqi ( 577227 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @12:53PM (#6500802) Journal
    why? quote the page as seen from Moz:

    In order to take full advantage of BuyMusic.com's offerings you must be on a Windows Operating System using Internet Explorer version 5.0 or higher.

    I mean, does it hurt to at least let me know what restrictions / term of use you have on your music? THAT does not take f'kn IE, does it?

    You can count me out, buy.com. I will patiently wait for Apple.

  • not all music is .79cent (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Numeric ( 22250 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @12:54PM (#6500806) Homepage Journal
    Coldplay [buymusic.com] for .99

    My Bloody Valentine [buymusic.com] for .89

    Its funny that they say songs cost .79 cents but I haven't found one artist yet who's songs are that price.

  • won't get slashdotted - IE only (Score:5, Funny)

    by aknodle ( 316355 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @12:54PM (#6500816) Journal
    Guess that's one way to make sure that the site will stay up.

  • Sorry attempt so far. (Score:5, Informative)

    by BWJones ( 18351 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @12:55PM (#6500834) Homepage Journal
    O.K., so I went to the site and started looking around. First thing I noticed is that again, Apple's look and feel have been copied. Badly. Even down to the ads. Oh, well, what about the content? Pretty good, although their jazz selection it pretty weak compared to the iTMS, but here is the other deal: lots of songs are listed as Not Available for Sale.????? What?!?

    Next issue: Their big deal is that they are cheaper than iTMS, but just look at the wording. Songs as low as 70 cents and albums from 7.95. Bogus.

    Also what about the rights management? Aside from the Windows Music format issue, we have no real way to deauthorize a computer that I can find and I have to use IE as my browser due to ActiveX. What about all the other browsers? And here is the biggest thing: No consistency. I have no idea which songs I can burn to CD or put on my iPod (or any other MP3 player that I can think of).

  • Next weeks headline- (Score:5, Funny)

    by Unknown Poltroon ( 31628 ) * <unknown_poltroon1sp@myahoo.com> on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @12:55PM (#6500836)
    "new crappy crippled music site fails due to complete lack of interest from consumers. RIAA blames Joey Smith, age 12, for sharing 9 files with his sister. Joey denies allegation, and says hes only got 12.50, and can't afford the 300,000 lawsuit."

  • Where does the money go? (Score:3, Funny)

    by acehole ( 174372 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @12:56PM (#6500842) Homepage
    Does some of it go towards the "Get Metallica out of the soup line" fund?

  • Limitations (Score:2, Informative)

    by Hittite Creosote ( 535397 )
    For any Euro people who can't even get a look at this IE-only site - this is another US only site as well.

    Any chance of anything like this (preferably one that is capable of running on a more secure browser and computer) coming to Europe any time soon?

  • AT least, it claims it will work with the Nomad Jukebox 3.

    It did put a popup up that it wouldn't work unless you had WMP9, and I was wondering if, since the machine I'm currently on doesn't, it would refuse to load at all.

    It's slow as all hell, though, right now. and I'm not sure I like the way they broke up the selections, but still... It'll be interesting to see how this does, since it seems to be set up as a competitor to iMusic.

  • buy.com are spamming scum (Score:5, Informative)

    by gorbachev ( 512743 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @12:58PM (#6500886) Homepage
    Do not buy anything from spammers.

    They recently started spamming ALL Email addresses in their database, regardless of whether the account is inactive, supposedly deleted (I have 2 of these), opted-out of their junk spam or in any other status. If they have the Email in their db, you will be spammed.

    I'm getting six copies of every spam of theirs after about 2 years of silence from these scum.

    More details at Google Groups [google.com].

    Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spamming scum

  • Full list of what you need (Score:5, Informative)

    by burgburgburg ( 574866 ) <splisken06NO@SPAMemail.com> on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @12:58PM (#6500887)
    From their help page [buymusic.com]
    • Pentium Class PC computer. Our music downloads are not compatible with any Mac OS. Pentium class is required for individualization settings to enable music licenses.
    • Internet browser - Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.01 or newer. Note: If you browse the site with Netscape you cannot purchase and download music.
    • Windows Media Player 9.0 or newer. Note: Windows Media Player version 9.0 or newer is compatible with the DRM encrypted music files BuyMusic.com sells. Other players might not be compatible and might not play, transfer, or burn your music files satisfactorily. Media Player is a free download. (See Manufacturer Contact Information for free download.)
    • Operating System - Microsoft Windows® 98 Second Edition, Windows 2000, Windows Millennium Edition, Windows XP Home Edition, or Windows XP Professional. BuyMusic downloads are not compatible with any Mac OS.
    • Processor - 233 megahertz (MHz) processor, such as an Intel Pentium II or Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) processor
    • RAM - 64 megabytes (MB)
    • Free Hard Disk Space - 100 MB PLUS 1 MB of memory per minute of downloaded music
    • Optical Drive - CD or DVD drive (DVD playback requires compatible DVD decoder software)
    • Sound Card - Required: 16-bit sound card. Recommended: Compatible 5.1 multichannel audio sound card (for example, Creative Sound Blaster Live! 5.1 or Sound Blaster Audigy; Echo Audio Layla24 or Mona; or M-Audio Delta 1010, Delta 1010-LT, or Delta 410).
    • Internet connection - High speed highly recommended but not required.
    • Speakers, or headphones, or connectivity to home stereo.
    • Your digital media player must be SDMI compliant or it will not play music from BuyMusic.com. To verify if your player is SDMI compliant, check the manufacturer's specifications or contact the manufacturer.
      Your digital media player must be Digital Rights Management (DRM) compliant, because your music download files use DRM license encryption technology. Non-DRM compliant digital media players will not decrypt or play your music files.

    There are also primary and secondary licenses (secondary licenses so you can play the song on a second computer but NOT copy it to an SDMI DRM digital music player). Each label decides if and/or how many times you can copy a song.

    So the whole "relatively open, exceedingly easy" part of the iTunes Music Center just completely passed them by. Good to know.

  • Okay, take a look at the ads on that page (assuming you have IE & Windows Media Player). They're blatant rip offs of Apple's iPod ads of yore. Of course, I can't find a link to them on Apple's site.

    This reminds me of various posts I used to see on usenet, like this one [google.com].
    Can you say Me too?
    • You mean these [apple.com] ads? They're current.

      If BuyMusic ever tries to play these on TV, they'll get their asses handed to them by Apple in a heartbeat. (It's only parody if its not being done as direct competition for profit, otherwise it's plagarism.)

      Yeah, I was dumbstruck by the lack of originality. At least the Tommy Lee one was original (even though it didn't really make much sense.) While I use my Windows machine ten times more than my Mac, I only use the Mac for music. (Yes, I've spent more than I shou

  • Variable Licenses (Score:3)

    by druske ( 550305 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @12:59PM (#6500907)
    These songs are licensed case-by-case and can have different limits set by the publisher as to how many times they can be burned to CD, transferred to a portable music player, etc. And if you lose the music on your primary system, you'd better have made backups: "...Once a song is on your computer, it is your responsibility. If your computer is lost or damaged, BuyMusic.com is not obligated to replace your music after it has been downloaded..." (this from their help page [buymusic.com]).

    Overall, pretty restrictive, and (of course) no iPod support. There seems to be little to differentiate this from previous services, except for the lack of a membership fee and a $40 million budget for an advertising campaign...
  • So its compatible with the nomad and rio? What about the ipod, it does have something like 20% marketshare you know. Oh wait, its not DRM enabled. I dont think this will take off, its still too retrictive compared to apples model.

  • Top 100 Pop/Rock (Score:5, Funny)

    by AgentStarks ( 569112 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:00PM (#6500923)
    Does it scare anyone else that the top 12 songs out of the top 100 in the Pop/Rock category are all off of Cher's "Very Best of Cher" CD?

  • Good (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Dark Paladin ( 116525 ) * <jhummel.johnhummel@net> on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:00PM (#6500929) Homepage
    I say "good". No, I probably won't use it - I can't play the WMV files, and I own an iPod anyway. Yes, I use the Apple iTunes store - and I've spent more money there than I have in years on music (though, if I had to do it over again, I wouldn't have gotten the Steve Martin CD for my long drive).

    But this is good because of competition. I expect it will do fairly well - people will check it out and buy some stuff, some won't check "between the lines" about the CD burning and such. Will it do as well as the iTunes store? Maybe - maybe not.

    But if starts making money at all, it's competition. Apple will be spurred to work faster to get iTunes for Windows out, and to work harder with other MP3 companies to include AAC codecs. Which will spur Buy to change it's licensing (or its negotiations with companies holding the music licenses), and maybe later on, all music will be burnable to your own CD. (I'm not sure how many handhelds you can put it on - my assumption is "infinite", but I haven't seen the small print - I don't run Internet Explorer). Which will perhaps prompt Apple to cut prices, maybe rise the computer amount you can license your songs on from 3 to 5.

    And round and round the competition game goes.

    CDBaby is about to become a front end for independent musicians (where's spell check when I need it) who want to get onto iTunes - $40 to start, then CDBaby takes 9% of the profit, the musicians get the rest.

    Which, if that takes off in any way, may change some of the dynamics of the music business. Oh, hardly a lot - most people still get their music in the stores so big music companies doing the promotion/advertising/distributing will hold most of the cards, but if it changes by as much as 10%, that's huge - and could lead to better contracts for musicians. Which might make the music companies compete for more fair, balanced contracts.

    And around and around goes the wheel of competition.

    It's all about competition. I love that word. "Compete". Makes things better through a struggle. "Compete fairly" are better words, of course, which is why there are governments about to smack things down when they get to monopoly status, because at that point, competition is lost.

    And who knows? In a year, we could have tons of online music. People will discover what contracts work and what don't, and things may change for the better.

    Or - I could be wrong. But I hope not.

  • Who is the ad wizard? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Zeekamotay ( 115667 ) <zeekamotay@hotmail . c om> on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:01PM (#6500954)
    Hmm, let's see, here's a "best of" Judas Priest album. I can do a one-time download of a crippled non-CD-quality set of copy protected files that only work on a subset of machines for $12.69. Or, on the buy.com music page, I can buy the same album, at a higher quality, on physical media, in a universal format with no copy protection, including inserts with pictures, lyrics, etc., for $10.98. Gee, that's a tough choice...

  • Good and Bad (Score:3, Insightful)

    by fugu13 ( 597296 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:02PM (#6500960)
    While it doesn't look to be too shabby a system, I think the rather extreme limits on many of the licenses will be a turn off. Also, I think that a web interface is the wrong way to go. Web browsers are instruments of frustration, not slick customer experience. I think apple's strategy of embedding the interface in another app is superior, and likely to go over better. Also, I don't see one click mentioned on buymusic, and that has been a way to bring in impulse buys for apple. It could be there, but I didn't see it. And while they have a lower minimum price, it seems most of the prices are about the same as or higher than apple's prices. Pros: some low prices, a good selection, and available to more people (unfortunately not including me). Cons: web interface, limiting (and complicated, since it varies from song to song, which may upset people who expect consistency) DRM, not going to be the only kid on the block for long.

  • Padding their song count (Score:3, Informative)

    by oscast ( 653817 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:02PM (#6500962) Homepage
    After hopping on a PC and doing a few quick searches for music, I noticed that there are hundreds if not thousands of songs in their system which are "Not Available for Sale"... They still have a 30-second preview and album info, but you can't buy them. I wonder how many songs in total there are like this... they seemed to be in every search i did.

  • bleh (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Fnkmaster ( 89084 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:03PM (#6500971)
    I think it's been pretty well established in the market that there's a demand for non- or minimally-encumbered music files. Why then release crapware DRM and license-encumbered shit?


    Check the EULA [buymusic.com] for this shit. Pure crap. I don't want an EULA that tells me I'm restricted to legally using my music only on approved players - isn't it bad enough that they use a fucking proprietary format, now they want to legally restrict me from using "unapproved" players? They can go fuck themselves up a tree with that attitude - when I buy a CD, I can play it on any damned player I want, and I expect the same rights when I buy music for download. At least with iTunes, you can transcode, burn to CD-R, etc. If I can't transcode it to MP3 and put it onto my mini-CD/MP3 player, you aren't getting a penny from me. And did I mention, go fuck yourselves buy.com.

  • They still just don't get it do they?

    Hopefully they will learn soon. I know people would like to have a legit collection of music on their computer. But paying $10,000 in cds to get a track here and there isn't feasible. (and even if it is to some people who wants to sit and rip songs all day long. Some people don't mind but I got better stuff to do).

    Apple had it right but they need more support. On a side note, it will be fun to watch this crash and burn. I can't wait to laugh at the people who made thi

  • Question? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jared_hanson ( 514797 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:05PM (#6500993) Homepage Journal
    OK, I went to the site and noticed their restrictions information. Each song comes with a certain limit to how many times it can be downloaded, transfered to a portable, and burned.

    My question is, what exactly does burning mean? Can I burn the tracks to a regular audio CD which I can play in my CD player (and, hence, re-rip to MP3)? Or does the song go to a data CD in WMA9 format, making it pretty much useless?

    If anyone knows, I would really like an answer.

    • Re:Question? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by djohnsto ( 133220 )
      It get's uncompressed and burned to a real live audio cd, which you can then re-rip if you want. However, since you're starting with 128K audio, expanding it and then re-ripping it, you won't get the best quality. That's probably the reason they (or Apple) offer anything higher than 128K downloads (along with bandwidth costs).
  • I hope their download file quality is higher than their sample quality, which is:

    Windows Media Audio 9
    20 kbps, 22 kHz, mono 1-pass CBR

    20 kbps? Are you joking? That might make it onto my wife's 5-year-old Rio (well it won't considering it's not a "supported" device) but why bother burning a 20 kbps file onto a CD?

    Also, I can somewhat understand limiting the number of times you can burn a CD with the track (although once on CD, it can be ripped and copied as much as you want so it's a moot point as alw

  • Why not just buy the CD and do what you want? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ShatteredDream ( 636520 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:06PM (#6501006) Homepage
    Granted I usually buy stuff that is not RIAA affiliated thanks to the RIAA Radar, but I prefer the CD because it looks nice and it's a great way to ensure that my investment is safe. I just rip the CD as some oggs and add them to my playlist.

    There's no DRM, no media player lockin, nothing of the kind. Get off your asses and search for the album online if you think it's too expensive in the stores in your area. I've found albums on cduniverse.com for $10.75 that go for $18 at tower records and sam goody.

    With the CD it really is "CD quality." You won't get that with a 128k AAC or WMA download. You also won't get the ability to mix and match your stuff on a mix CD at the same quality as the original, the ability to use whatever format you choose and use any mp3 player you want. I plan to buy an iPod eventually, when I get one I won't have to worry about the format my music collection is in and how to make mp3s from it for my iPod because I have the CDs.

    • Because... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Eric_Cartman_South_P ( 594330 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:25PM (#6501282)
      Why not just buy the CD and do what you want?

      1) I do not want to drive to a store and browse their horrific layout, surrounded with Nelly-wanna-be's and teeny-boppers.

      2) I do not want to obtain an OBSOLETE medium for my music. CD's are out. Why should I be restricted to one artist, one albumn, per medium? CD = 8-track-tape in my mind. I want all my music in one place (think iPod).

      3) I do not want to pay $16-$20 when all I want is one song from the Artist I would be willing to buy (yeah, that's what CD's go for around here. Here = New York City/Long Island). And many times the one song I want is not the "single" which is released at close to $8 regardless!

      4) I do not want to be unable to backup my music. New CD's are starting to disallow reading in a computers CD drive. Pathetic.

      5) I do not want to listen to one artist at a time! I only listen to my music via the playlists I have made. "Party Mix", "Smooth Mix", "Drunk Mix", "Stoned Mix", "Desert Combat Mod v0.38 Mix", etc.

      ...so that's why!

  • Um.....no thanks. (Score:5, Informative)

    by GreenCrackBaby ( 203293 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:07PM (#6501024) Homepage
    From their FAQ:

    Content Use Rules. All downloaded Content is sublicensed to End Users and not sold, notwithstanding use of the terms "sell," "purchase," "order," or "buy" on the Site or this Agreement. Your Digital Download sublicense is non-exclusive, nontransferable, non-sublicenseable, limited and for personal entertainment use only within the United States. End Users who buy Digital Downloads may play the Digital Downloads an unlimited number of times on the same registered personal computer to which the Digital Download is originally downloaded.



    So, I'm not actually buying the songs, just licensing them. Unless I'm using the exact same computer, my use of the songs are limited.


    Different Record Label Companies Permit Different Added Uses Of Their Digital Downloads. Information on the Site will state all of the following permitted additional uses, if any, of the Digital Downloads pertaining to a particular music song, partial album or album ("the Works"): (i) the number of allowable transfers to other computers owned by you and registered with the Site, (ii) the number of transfers of each Digital Download to approved electronic Portable Devices, (iii) the number of Compact Discs that may be "burned" in making permanent copies in an uncompressed form conforming to the industry "Red Book" technical specifications to either "write once" blank recordable CD-R compact discs conforming to the industry standard "Orange Book Part II" technical specifications and/or blank "re-writable" CD-RW compact discs (collectively, "Metadata Information"). No other uses of Digital Downloads are permitted.


    End User may only use, copy, transfer and display the Digital Downloads as stated in the particular music song or album's Metadata Information. Metadata Information is displayed next to each song, partial album or album offered. To determine how many copies, or "CD-burns," are permitted, click on the icon representing a CD-ROM. To learn how many transfers to registered personal computers or Approved Electronic Devices are permitted, click on the computer or headset icons. As a condition of purchasing a Digital Download, you represent to BuyMusic that you understand a particular song or album's Metadata Information, which is hereby incorporated by reference. All other rights are reserved.

    Each song offered will have different "rules" associated with it. Oops...sorry, you've transferred that song too many times to your iPod, you can't do that anymore.

    The FAQ is worth a read. If you lose your songs (hard drive crash) you have to pay for them again. You agree to be spammed by them (purchasing a song apparently constitutes acceptance of email solicitation). Bah...could go on and on.

    I also have to wonder what happens when you buy a new computer...

  • Terms (Score:2)

    by jpatters ( 883 )
    From the site:

    Content Use Rules. All downloaded Content is sublicensed to End Users and not sold, notwithstanding use of the terms "sell," "purchase," "order," or "buy" on the Site or this Agreement. Your Digital Download sublicense is non-exclusive, nontransferable, non-sublicenseable, limited and for personal entertainment use only within the United States. End Users who buy Digital Downloads may play the Digital Downloads an unlimited number of times on the same registered personal computer to which th

  • How to fool the system, part 1. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by NetDanzr ( 619387 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:10PM (#6501072)
    According to the FAQ, people need to use MSIE 5 or higher for a certain ActiveX control that handles the DRM information of the song. I noticed that the page code does a simple browser check when you click on the download link. When I didn't use MSIE 5 or higher, I kept timing out.

    I set my Opera 7.11 to identify itself as MSIE 6.0, and behold: got through to pay and download the song with no problems. I'm curious now: if I downloaded the song, would I be able to play it even without the ActiveX control? And if so, will I have gotten it without any DRM protection?

    • if I downloaded the song, would I be able to play it even without the ActiveX control? And if so, will I have gotten it without any DRM protection?

      Windows Media DRM wrapped files have a license URL stored in the header. So if you downloaded and played the file, it would not find a license stored locally and your player would visit the license URL in search of one. Now, whether or not Buy.com has implemented the license post-delivery is yet to be seen. But it would probably involve putting in your Buy.com

  • Won't sell out of US (Score:2, Informative)

    by CyberBry ( 196935 )
    Just like the iTMS, this thing isn't available for shoppers from outside the US. At least the iTMS lets you buy them with a US credit card - these guys restrict by IP:

    BuyMusic.com Available to Domestic Residents Only

    We're sorry, but due to license restrictions, BuyMusic.com content is available only to residents of the United States. Your internet protocol (IP) address shows that you are attempting to access this web site from outside the US. Thank you for your interest in BuyMusic.com. We apologize for a
  • Dang, even the google cashe [216.239.53.104] of buymusic.com took forever on my Mozilla. It popped right up with Opera though.

    I couldn't find an email to complain about the mandatory IE though. But there's this page: http://www.buymusic.com/support/email.aspx

    Maybe sending something to their privacy guys at privacy@buymusic.com could do something though.

    For free low-fi songs of a Star Trek band, you should follow the link in my sig.

  • Yawn. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by poiu ( 106484 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:13PM (#6501127)
    For the low low low price of $7.95 you can buy .... not much. Teasers. Click around, you'll find that almost all of the songs are the same or *higher* prices as the ones on Apple's music store. I just checked Audioslave from their list of top 5 album downloads. At Buymusic.com its $12.69. At Apple its $11.99.

    Also, Apple's store is 100% integrated into iTunes. That makes getting, downloading, & adding music to your library that much easier.

    Luckily, MS DRM has (allegedly) been cracked. The DRM is a PITA, take a look:

    Make sure you mean to buy your music from your primary computer (for example: your home computer) so that it contains your primary license. The licenses are non-transferable. Example: You cannot buy your music on your home machine and then transfer your primary license to your work machine. The computer you buy from becomes the primary computer with the primary license for that song. You can only copy music from your primary machine via your primary license. See below for details.

    Each record label has control over these license restrictions including the number of times you may:

    transfer your songs to another computer(s)
    transfer your songs to an approved portable digital media player.
    burn your songs to CD

    BuyMusic.com complies with each record label and adjusts the SDMI license on each of your music downloads accordingly.

    Thanks though, I think I'll stick with Apple's music store.

  • I'm waiting for better quality (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pstreck ( 558593 ) * on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:14PM (#6501131)
    I'm not going to be using any digitial music service until they offer my a lossless version of the song. On any high-end audio system the loss through any compression is noticeable. Don't get me wrong, I use mp3s on my laptop and my palm, but on my stereo... that's another story. Audiophiles unite, we need a lossless digital music service!

  • Canuck Un-Friendly (Score:5, Funny)

    by Malicious ( 567158 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:18PM (#6501201)
    So when I tried to buy something I got this....
    BuyMusic.com Available to Domestic Residents Only
    We're sorry, but due to license restrictions, BuyMusic.com content is available only to residents of the United States. Your internet protocol (IP) address shows that you are attempting to access this web site from outside the US. Thank you for your interest in BuyMusic.com. We apologize for any inconvenience this might have caused.

    Hey, no problem, I'll just go download it on Kazaa or some other P2P. Thanks anyway!

  • Confusing and Ripoff? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by danlor ( 309557 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:19PM (#6501222) Homepage
    While browsing around the site, I was stunned to see how much the "rights" varied from song to song. Even on the same album. It really sucks that they went with WM9/SDMI. Good luck backing these puppies up!

    What was also surprising is that the selection is not any better than iTunes. Lots of partial albums. Why would a record company restrict onlines sales of albums/singles that are over 15 years old?

    I was also turned off at how much the site layout is a blatant ripoff from Apple. Even the ads. Please. One good thing though... We can write reviews! I always felt that was a hole in Apple's site.

    Now Apple legal has something to chew on!

  • Wow... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by GarfBond ( 565331 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:23PM (#6501261)
    Go look at the buymusic.com website (sorry, you'll have to have IE and WMV to laugh at this) and scroll down to "BuyMusic Commercials." You know, the kind that look eerily similar to the ones from apple [apple.com] (http://www.apple.com/music/ads/), right down to the people standing in front of a white background, holding a jukebox (creative zen in this case), and singing along to the song? Even the last screen where they both display their logos are similar (applemusic.com vs. BuyMusic.com).

    Oh well. I suppose that imitation is the finest form of flattery.

  • emusic (Score:3, Informative)

    by sbot5000 ( 562763 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:38PM (#6501430)
    emusic [emusic.com]

    Why is this site overlooked?

    -mp3 format

    -no DRM

    -unlimited downloads for $10-$15/month

    -large catalog

    -first 50 mp3's are free

    Pretty cool. I just downloaded the entire Pavement and Pixies catalogs plus some Noam Chomsky "spoken word". I signed up for 3 months @ $45.

  • same problems as Apple (Score:3, Insightful)

    by asv108 ( 141455 ) <asv@nOspam.ivoss.com> on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:46PM (#6501517) Homepage Journal
    You think a newer service would learn from some of Apple's mistakes, instead this service made some worse choices than Apple. Where to start, 128 kpbs WMA files with DRM are not going to get people rushing to your site. What are the problems with such a file?
    • Its WMA, which is proprietary and certainly not widely used by Choice although MS has managed to get quite a few devices to support it and wm9 encodes to it by default.
    • 128 Kpbs is even worse than what Apple is offering. A 128 kpbs AAC file will sound better than that, which is pretty said because a 128kpbs AAC file sounds like crap on a decent stereo system but still is perfectly capable for ipod and computer speaker listening. If I am going to pay for music in 2003, I expect it to be of the same quality as the CD's I purchased in 1987. I know I will get a bunch of "Apple's itunes files are good enough for me replies" but the fact is that the CD I bought in 1987 will sound better on my stereo system today than the AAC file I downloaded from Apple's service.
    • DRM? I'm sorry but if the music industry plans on having a successful transition to online distribution, it might as well forget about DRM. DRM is not stopping online distribution, remeber all it takes is one source for a P2P distributed file to spread like wildfire.

    I know there are plenty of people complaining about the IE and WM9 requirement but the fact is it is not nearly as limiting as having to buy a computer from Apple and use a service that is only compatible with an Apple portable. The fact is both services are at fault for using DRM, picking a non-standard file format and restricting service to a particular platform. There is simply no reason a music service needs to restrict itself to one particular platform. I know Apple apologists will talk about "tight integration" till the cows go home but the fact is that the itunes music store basically amounts to a web page that is restricted to one browser.

    Here is a partial list of requirements for a decent music service:

    • Huge and diverse catalog with no incomplete albums, etc. Also there is no reason to use masters, CD rips will be fine. The concept of taking a master and converting it to a 128kpbs AAC file is self-defeating. If you want to offer FLAC files then maybe using masters would be worthwhile
    • Varying bitrates for people who take quality or portability seriously. There are very few barriers to offering multiple levels of file quality (scripting anyone?). Higher bitrate and lossless files should be priced higher, while 128/64kbps OGG and MP3 files could be really cheap.
    • No DRM period. No matter what you might think, in the longrun DRM based music services are doomed to fail even if it takes the collapse of the recording industry to realize that..
    • No platform specificity, there is simply no reason for it when DRM is taken out of the equation. Standard file formats so files can play on a variety of devices.

  • Threats? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Spazholio ( 314843 ) <[slashdot] [at] [lexal.net]> on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:46PM (#6501523) Homepage
    Ok, so I go the site, and it has an option that says: Loaded Audio: On. I'm at work, so I didn't want that. I chose to permanently disable them, and I get this:

    Your preferences have been updated Thank you. You will never hear sounds again.

    I think BuyMusic.com just threatened to deafen me. Hrmph. I guess it's their sounds or no sounds.

  • Why people won't flock to it (Score:4, Informative)

    by chia_monkey ( 593501 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @01:54PM (#6501630) Journal
    Although online retailer BuyMusic.com will offer a catalog of more than 300,000 songs from the five major record labels, users of the service will not necessarily have the freedom afforded customers of Apple Inc.'s iTunes service to transfer the music purchased to multiple computers and portable devices, or to burn it to compact discs.

    Ok...so they state right there that "pay for it and use it only here". And they compare directly with iTunes Music Service. Anyone who reads this will go "umm...it's a no-brainer".

    Jobs secured uniform licensing deals from all the record companies that allow all iTunes songs to be burned onto CD an unlimited amount of times, save for a restriction for making multiple CDs with the exact song lists. All songs on iTunes can also be transferred to up to three different computers and to the iPod, a portable digital music player.

    Oh look...just eight paragraphs down and they mention it again. Do they REALLY expect people to jump up and down with this?

    Don't get me wrong...competition is good. But this really isn't competition in my eyes.

  • And you must also allow tracking of yourself... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Kaa ( 21510 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @02:32PM (#6501998) Homepage
    From the buymusic.com site:

    Also, make sure your 'individualization' is 'on'. Some 'spyware' programs advise you to turn it off, but it is a critical component to your DRM licensing decryption protocols.

    "Individualization" is just double-speak for allowing Windows Media Player to assign you a GUID (Global Unique ID) and send information to third parties (MS and such) about what you've been doing with your Media Player.

    So not only this works on just Windows. Not only you get just DRM-encumbered files. Not only you have to deal with multiple different licenses for different songs. But you also have to agree to them tracking the music you listen to...

    Thanks, I think I'll pass.

    Actually, I'll put it in more clear term. I'll stay the hell away from this.

  • 300 000 songs? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by tRr ( 691527 ) on Tuesday July 22, 2003 @04:41PM (#6503923)
    Where is the supposed 300 000 tracks? I just went through all of the major categories listed on the main page of buymusic.com. Then I clicked on the List All option for each category. This is what I got:

    Titles Within Alternative (11565 matching titles)
    Titles Within Blues (3927 matching titles)
    Titles Within Country (10597 matching titles)
    Titles Within Jazz (22074 matching titles)
    Titles Within Metal (4835 matching titles)
    Titles Within New Age (1649 matching titles)
    Titles Within Oldies (2151 matching titles)
    Titles Within Pop/Rock (11557 matching titles)
    Titles Within R&B/Soul (15457 matching titles)
    Titles Within Rap/Hip Hop (12408 matching titles)
    Titles Within Reggae (2138 matching titles)
    Titles Within Soundtracks (333 matching titles)
    Titles Within World (12794 matching titles)

    Equals=111485

    Those matching titles are referring to the actually track titles and not the albums since if you take the number of songs listed on the first page times the number of pages you can get the number of "matching titles". The only thing I can think of is that they have music just floating around without a category yet.

    Anyone have any light to shed on this?

Slashdot Top Deals

The rule on staying alive as a program manager is to give 'em a number or give 'em a date, but never give 'em both at once.

Close