Would You Rent a Song For a Dime? 580
An anonymous reader writes "What's worse than a padlocking every song so that they will only play on certain devices? How about selling (renting) you songs that work on no devices? Astonishingly, this is what the music industry thinks we need. Warner Music is spending $20 million to back Lala, a startup devising a service to convince people to 'buy' 'web songs' for 10 cents each; these are then kept for safekeeping only by Lala with no download privileges. Industry insider Michael Robertson leaks the facts on this scheme, along with a seekrit URL so you can try it out."
Would you lick my balls for a quarter? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Would you lick my balls for a quarter? (Score:5, Funny)
Zis is verry funny! (Score:5, Funny)
One Question for Miss Morissette: Slashdotting a music service that is essentially nothing but a denial of service (a.k.a. sham), which effectively puts it out of service for a while, is that
a.) ironic, or
b.) a self-fulfilling prophesy?
Re:Zis is verry funny! (Score:4, Insightful)
One Question for Miss Morissette: Slashdotting a music service that is essentially nothing but a denial of service (a.k.a. sham), which effectively puts it out of service for a while, is that
a.) ironic, or
b.) a self-fulfilling prophesy?
Re:Zis is verry funny! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Zis is verry funny! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Zis is verry funny! (Score:5, Informative)
The only irony here would be if the one nerd who understood the meaning of irony went to correct your use of the word but wasn't allowed to because of an ip ban caused by a flamewar he started over the correct definition of the word "irony". I think the word you were looking for is "reality".
Unless the guy who had posted the misspelling was named "SpellingMasterNerd" in which case it could be ironic.
Re:Would you lick my balls for a quarter? (Score:5, Funny)
Look at the site, ignore Robertson. (Score:5, Informative)
Most of the information here is just plain wrong, I think Robertson is afraid of something. If you mostly listen online then instead of buying a song for 99 cents you can get it for 10 cents. If you really want to buy it you have to pay 79 cents more for a high quality DRM free MP3 copy.
So please, why is this so bad?
From the how it works page:
What does adding a web song to my collection mean?
When you add a web song to your collection, you're able to listen to it as many times as you'd like, from any computer. You can also create playlists with web songs.
How much does adding cost?
It costs 10 cents to add a web song to your collection. Plus, the first 50 web songs you add to your collection are free, so give it a try!
If you later decide that you also want to get the MP3, the 10 cents you paid for the web song will be applied towards that purchase.
What is the bitrate of a web song that I add to my collection?
We strive to maintain a streaming bitrate standard of 128 kbps for web songs added to your collection. As determined by the labels, some web songs you add to your collection may stream at a bitrate of 64 kbps. Songs that you upload will generally stream at the bitrate at which they were ripped.
How do I listen to the web songs I've added to my collection on a portable device?
To listen to web songs you've added to your collection on an iPod or other portable device, you can download the MP3 file for an additional charge. The 10 cents you've already invested toward this purchase will be deducted from the final MP3 price.
Re:Look at the site, ignore Robertson. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Look at the site, ignore Robertson. (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, this is just the kind of marketing that kdawson doesn't want to hear about. Much easier to continue whining about the nasty record companies not giving customers what they want, and forcing people to file share.
Re:Look at the site, ignore Robertson. (Score:4, Informative)
This seems like a legal alternative to paying for online access to music, but who knows if it will last etc. As an aside, the black / yellow on red combo makes me want to stab my eyes out. This is the UI of a supposed brainchild of UI? The only cool UI thing is the menu that pops up when you click, but otherwise the site is fairly ugly. Elegant UI my ass.
Imaginary Property (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Imaginary Property (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Imaginary Property (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Imaginary Property (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Imaginary Property (Score:5, Informative)
Once a song is added it is accessible from your "My Collection" area where it can be listened to an unlimited number of times.
Re:Imaginary Property (Score:5, Funny)
topherhenk said:
"So you can listen to it online as much as you want for $0.10, you just can't take it with you."
Heh, says you. Creative Labs SoundBlaster Audigy ZS2 "What-U-Hear" Recording controls say differently. i gotz mp3's now bitchez!!!!
Re:You need to keep reading (Score:5, Informative)
Re:You need to keep reading (Score:5, Informative)
If you do pay that 10 cents, you can play the song as many times as you want in full.
I'm not sure why you found that so confusing. The article was pretty clear about it.
Not True at all. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Imaginary Property (Score:5, Informative)
The first listen is free.
If you want to download a 256kbps VBR MP3, that's an option too. If you want to buy the CD, that's also available.
Re:Imaginary Property (Score:5, Informative)
Before we dig into the viability of such a service, consider a similar service that already exists. Surely you've heard of jukeboxes. They have them in diners and bars near you, I'm sure. I think most offer a small number of songs for a number of pennies each (three for a quarter, or whatever). You plunk in your change, pick from the limited list, wait for your turn in the queue, listen eventually to your song, and move on. Repeat as desired.
Moving on from whether or not the service may be viable, if YOU read the article, you'll see that you were wrong in your understanding of how it works.
The article at the first link says "For just 10 cents you'll be able to select a song to add to your Music Locker to play whenever you like." (I copied and pasted between the quotes...) Not per listen, as you suggest, but per song. In case you don't want to scour the whole article, it's the second sentence in the first paragraph...
If you follow the seekrit link and look at the "how it works," (link at the bottom) you'll see that in fact you can actually listen to any song for free, once (first question), not dropping the dime to see if you like the song. It also confirms that for your thin dime, you add the song to your list to listen to again any time you want (second question). Additionally, if you want to download the song to another device (iPod, for example), that dime counts towards the purchase of that song.
That all seems better than a diner jukebox to me.
This will work for some, if not many.
OT, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
People try this trick all the time, trying to get something for free. Put a stop to it.
Tell them up front that you work with code for a living and you don't work for free. Then give them a hefty hourly rate. And tell them you don't work partial hours. A five minute call gets billed for the full hour.
One of two things will happen.
1) They'll pull their heads out of their asses, learn to solve their own problems and stop bugging you.
2) You'll have extra beer money.
Win-win.
Re:Imaginary Property (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Or you pay current market value, 0 cents, and download the whole album in a lossless format.
Re:Imaginary Property (Score:5, Insightful)
I never used iTunes, because I found the interface clunky and the DRM crap wasn't worth it. I have started, however, to buy mp3s off Amazon. They've got a pretty deep colection, with a lot of neat obscure stuff that can be had for less than a dollar.
The best part? It's DRM free. So when I buy the mp3, it's mine. I can do with it what I want (burn to a CD for my car, put it on my mp3 player . . . whatever. And I can get this a lot faster than searching through countless p2p and torrent sites to see if they have the particular recording I want (which, many times, they don't).
Re:Imaginary Property (Score:5, Informative)
If they would just break down and sell it all without DRM I might consider it. IF it was cheaper. My feeling is that they've always been too expensive - MP3 files at $0.99 cost almost as much as a CD. CD's are DRM-free, lossless and easily ripped anytime you want to any device at any bitrate. Sell downloads for a dime. At $0.10 it becomes an impulse buy.
I'd download all day and twice on sunday at $0.10/track. They need to adapt to the reality that mp3's are practically free and leverage really cheap downloads with advertising. They might even sell some CD's.
Re:Imaginary Property (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Imaginary Property (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Imaginary Property (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"Fiat [wikipedia.org] S.p.A. (Fiat Group) is an Italian automobile manufacturer, engine manufacturer, financial and industrial group based in Turin, Northern Italy."
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I wonder what the quality of the audio is?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
(cue piano music) (Score:5, Funny)
And paying for is to buy.
No Warner below us,
Above us, metro wi-fi
Imagine all the artists
Getting paid the full amount.
Imagine there's no IP
Nor music tax for you
Nothng to lawsuit over
And no Sony too
Imagine all the people
Owning what they have
You may say I'm unAmerican .torrent
And your lawyer's just begun
I hope someday you'll
And the world will be as one.
Re:(cue piano music) (Score:5, Funny)
I excused myself, went to the bathroom upstairs and laughed uncontrollably into a towel (to muffle the sound) for about five minutes.
*laughs* (Score:5, Funny)
Re:*laughs* (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:(cue piano music) (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Still, that is freakin' funny. A 14 year old watching American Idol.... BWAHAHAHHA! Doesn't she know it's a kids show?
Re:(cue piano music) (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:(cue piano music) (Score:4, Funny)
mod parent up (Score:3, Insightful)
apropo of nothing...Sometimes I hate iTunes, other times I love it. The reasons to hate it are obvious, but I always remember what digital music was like before iTunes. Haphazard at best. Labels wouldn't even consider selling songs online, and the quality of what was availabl
It's called a jukebox (Score:5, Insightful)
We so need to organize a protest at this one diner near where I work. They have the audacity to "rent" songs for a whole quarter a song (or 5 for $1), for just one listen! If I'm paying for it, I want the right to my song, dammit!
Look, I'm all for actually owning the digital music you buy, but I think we're jumping on this for the wrong reason. It's not so much that they are ripping us off of our rights (which they aren't), as it is a stupid business model. There are so many other, better legal alternatives out there, I don't see this one flying.
Re:It's called a jukebox (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If you're at a diner, then dragging in your own jukebox and playing from that is not possible, because the owners of the premise will object and throw you out. So you can't fill the airwaves with your own music at a diner, and paying for it on the diner's jukebox is the next best thing. But the crucial point is that the owners of the diner a
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If you can listen, you can save (Score:5, Insightful)
Do it the old school way (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Do it the old school way - Quality may be bad (Score:3, Informative)
You can buy DRM-free MP3s for your iPod or other portable device for just 79 more
Re:Do it the old school way (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
There are these services that are popping up left and right that enable you to download music from youtube (it basically rips the audio out of the FLV files and makes an mp3 that you can download or just creates a playlist of the video files without displaying the video for you to stream from your browser). I hate those things because the quality of youtube (
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Harrumph (Score:5, Funny)
Sorry, no matches for you.
Sorry, no business for you.
A-Hole vulnerability (Score:3, Insightful)
How many people really want music that can only be played from the internet? For some people this would work, sure.
Apparently they don't think many people like iPods and other portable music players.
Doesn't seem so bad... (Score:5, Interesting)
Granted having your entire music collection in fla is annoying, you can probably can convert it to something a little more usable.
Sounds like a great source for large volumes of music.
Re:Doesn't seem so bad... (Score:5, Informative)
Pass URL encoded downloadToken to:
http://next.lala.com/api/Player/getTrackUrls?flash=true&webSrc=lala&widgetId=LalaHeadlessPlayer&T= [lala.com]
url gives you the mp3 url, it's not a full mp3, sounds backwards, but it's a start to downloading from them.
Re:Doesn't seem so bad... (Score:5, Interesting)
#!/usr/bin/perl
use strict;
use LWP::Simple;
use Data::Dumper;
use JSON;
$|=1;
die "$0 <search param>" unless $ARGV[0];
my $root_url = "http://next.lala.com/api/AutoComplete/songAutoComplete";
my $content = get "$root_url?prefix=$ARGV[0]";
my $ref = from_json($content);
my $num = 0;
foreach (@{$ref->{data}->{list}}) {
print "$num : $_->{artist} - $_->{title}\n";
$num++;
}
print "Download which? > ";
my $req = <STDIN>;
die "not valid" if ($req < 0 or $req > $num);
my $download_url = "http://next.lala.com/api/Player/getTrackUrls?flash=true&webSrc=lala&widgetId=LalaHeadlessPlayer&T=" . $ref->{data}->{list}->[$req]->{playToken};
my $play_url = get $download_url;
my $play_ref = from_json($play_url);
my $download_link = $play_ref->{data}->[0]->{url};
print "Getting: $download_link\n";
my $filename = $ref->{data}->{list}->[$req]->{artist}
print "Downloading to $filename\n";
system("wget -O '$filename' $download_link");
It's quick, it's dirty, but it works:
perl download.pl tiesto
0 : Tiesto - Ten Seconds Before Sunrise
1 : Tiësto - Forever Today
Download which? > 0
Getting: http://cfs-listen-52.lala.com/contentfs/content?t=NjU1MzVVNDM2OTE1OQ%3D%3D-vSOzDPPcV8VwbKW6Bwdv%2FQ%3D%3D
Downloading to Tiesto-Ten Seconds Before Sunrise.mp3
--2008-05-27 18:16:09-- http://cfs-listen-52.lala.com/contentfs/content?t=NjU1MzVVNDM2OTE1OQ%3D%3D-vSOzDPPcV8VwbKW6Bwdv%2FQ%3D%3D
Resolving cfs-listen-52.lala.com... 209.237.235.158
Connecting to cfs-listen-52.lala.com|209.237.235.158|:80... connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
Length: 3609494 (3.4M) [audio/x-mpeg]
Saving to: `Tiesto-Ten Seconds Before Sunrise.mp3'
Re:Doesn't seem so bad... (Score:4, Interesting)
This one will do paging, use n/p to go next/previous when prompted.
#!/usr/bin/perl
use strict;
use LWP::Simple;
use Data::Dumper;
use JSON;
$|=1;
die "$0 <search param>" unless $ARGV[0];
my $ref;
my $offset;
my $req;
while(1) {
$req = "";
my $root_url = "http://next.lala.com/api/SearchUtils/search/v19.110.0-24?Q=$ARGV[0]&sortKey=relevance&sortDir=desc&Nb=100&Sk=$offset&webSrc=lala";
my $content = get $root_url;
$content =~ s/new Date\((\d+)\)/$1/g;
$ref = from_json($content);
my $num = 0;
foreach (@{$ref->{data}->{songs}->{list}}) {
print "$num : $_->{artist} - $_->{title}\n";
$num++;
}
print "Download which? > ";
chomp($req = <STDIN>);
if ($req =~
$offset+=100;
next;
}
if ($req =~
$offset-=100;
$offset=0 if $offset<0;
next;
}
if ($req !~
print "Invalid!\n";
next;
}
last;
}
my $download_url = "http://next.lala.com/api/Player/getTrackUrls?flash=true&webSrc=lala&widgetId=LalaHeadlessPlayer&T=" . $ref->{data}->{songs}->{list}->[$req]->{playToken};
my $play_url = get $download_url;
my $play_ref = from_json($play_url);
my $download_link = $play_ref->{data}->[0]->{url};
print "Getting: $download_link\n";
my $filename = $ref->{data}->{list}->[$req]->{artist}
print "Downloading to $filename\n";
system("wget -O '$filename' $download_link");
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
replace the $filename line with
my $filename = $ref->{data}->{songs}->{list}->[$req]->{artist}
Re:Doesn't seem so bad... (Score:5, Informative)
#!/usr/bin/perl
use strict;
use LWP::Simple;
use Data::Dumper;
use JSON;
$|=1;
die "$0 <search param>" unless $ARGV[0];
my $ref;
my $offset;
my $req;
while(1) {
$req = "";
my $root_url = "http://next.lala.com/api/SearchUtils/search/v19.110.0-24?Q=$ARGV[0]&sortKey=relevance&sortDir=desc&Nb=100&Sk=$offset&webSrc=lala";
my $content = get $root_url;
$content =~ s/new Date\((\d+)\)/$1/g;
$ref = from_json($content, {utf8 => 1});
my $num = 0;
foreach (@{$ref->{data}->{songs}->{list}}) {
next if $_->{playType} eq "Sample";
print "$num : $_->{artist} - $_->{title}\n";
$num++;
}
print "Download which? > ";
chomp($req = <STDIN>);
if ($req =~
$offset+=100;
next;
}
if ($req =~
$offset-=100;
$offset=0 if $offset<0;
next;
}
if ($req !~
print "Invalid!\n";
next;
}
last;
}
my $download_url = "http://next.lala.com/api/Player/getTrackUrls?flash=true&webSrc=lala&widgetId=LalaHeadlessPlayer&T=" . $ref->{data}->{songs}->{list}->[$req]->{playToken};
my $play_url = get $download_url;
my $play_ref = from_json($play_url);
my $download_link = $play_ref->{data}->[0]->{url};
print "Getting: $download_link\n";
my $filename = $ref->{data}->{songs}->{list}->[$req]->{artist}
print "Downloading to $filename\n";
system("curl -o '$filename' $download_link");
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
#!/usr/bin/env python
# encoding: utf-8
import urllib
import re
def get(url):
return urllib.urlopen(url).read()
def getMusic(query):
encoded = query.replace(" ", "%20")
feedURL = "http://next.lala.com/api/AutoComplete/songAutoComplete?prefix=%s&webSrc=lala" % encoded
page = get(feedURL)
pattern = re.compile(r"\"playToken\": *\"([^\"]+)\"")
tokens = pattern.findall(page)
print "%i token
What? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:What? (Score:5, Informative)
You can buy DRM-free MP3s for your iPod or other portable device for just 79 [cents] more.
Also, my CAPTCHA is "patents". How apropos.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
To me, this seems like a damn good idea. The more be become connected, the more there isn't much difference between online a
Re:What? (Score:5, Insightful)
Slashdot fell for it and is now giving a never heard of site massive traffic which will appear positive to investors.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Another kind of slashdot effect (Score:5, Informative)
Eh? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Although, I think the idea is not bad at all, I believe is way ahead of its time for one reason:
I could use my cellphone (smartphone, iphone like) and listen music over internet, but I'd need an Internet plan. That's not a problem for people using iPhones, but they will certainly prefer to use iTunes. I don't know about the rest.
If I'm not able to listen to my
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What you want is last.fm [www.last.fm] -- you can listen to any song up to 3 times a day for free. Any more than that and you have to subscribe. Not great for heavy listening, but perfect for when you get a sudden jones.
(Note: not all songs are available for free listening on last.fm yet. They're in the process of moving their whole library to the free-play model, but it'll take some time to
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
"too bad it's not a dime to rent it for say, a month or something like that. Or to just have unlimited access to it."
The writeup states that the dime allows you to listen to it for an unlimited amount of times.
I did a quick bit of analysis. I presently subscribe to Rhapsody for $14 a month. I have about 200 tracks in my Rhapsody library. To rent these tracks via lala for a year (or any arbitrary time) would cost $20 for the year, vs. the $14 per month for Rhapsody.
Rhapsody and lala do not compare di
Every permutation... (Score:4, Interesting)
I imagine the schemes will become more and more elaborate, more and more draconian, and more and more amusing for those of us who've had a new thought since the compact disc was invented.
I'm very happy with mindawn.com and emusic.com, and physical CD purchases for those other things I "just gotta have". Everyone else can take a flying leap.
I will just sit back and enjoy watching the churn.
Sshhh don't tell anybody about this (Score:5, Informative)
Unlimited free music with links to purchase it if you want. 100% legal. 100% major labels. Tons of obscure stuff too.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
btw this is my last.fm page: Blhack [last.fm]
and this is my imeem.com page: Blhack [imeem.com]
Point being that I've been around last for quite some time....its not just a pointless slashvertisement for imeem.
i like Rhapsody (Score:3, Interesting)
That being said- I would like to point out that it's already a losing model with something like Rhapsody in existance, which, btw, I absolutely could not live without! (Thanks to my new Squeezebox Duet, per recommendation of the slashdot crowd. thanks guys!)
Anyway, my point is this: They're late to catch on. Nobody will pay 10 cents to listen to a computer. Listening on the comp should be free, people want to and will pay to take it with them. That being said, 89 cent mp3s are a good idea, this might gain ground.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
What if lala were to magically appear on your Duet's screen? That would equalize the playing field a little more. Depending on how bit your Rhapsody library is, it might save you money in the long run to use lala. You're already paying a rental fee to listen to Rhapsody on your Duet; the key difference is that Rhapsody is $14 a month for all you can eat, while lala is a la carte rental.
Much of my music listening is ephemeral. I recently added the new Donna Summer album to my Rhapsody library (it's actuall
It's not that people won't pay for music (Score:3, Informative)
Re:It's not that people won't pay for music (Score:5, Insightful)
1998 called, it wants its rant back.
Want high quality DRM free music? Here you go [amazon.com]. Non-DRMed MP3 files, VBR-encoded with LAME (average bit rate 256kpbs), for $0.89 each. They even fill out the ID3 tags for you (including album art, for pete's sake) so you can just drop it into your music player of choice and go.
I agree Lala sucks, but the days when you could claim some moral legitimacy for leeching music torrents are over. There's really no justification for "getting it for free" anymore when there are completely legal, easy, and geek-friendly ways to get the music that also puts some money in the artist's pocket.
Lala sounded familiar... (Score:3, Informative)
I thought I had heard of Lala before.
Sure enough, Lala [wikipedia.org] started as a physical CD trading website. I remember reading about this and wondered what I was missing about their business model.
Judging from this, I don't think they knew either.
Re:Lala sounded familiar... (Score:4, Funny)
Me too. And if TimeWarner is listening, I have a startup that needs funding. We're calling it Tinky Winky.
Renting isn't so bad (Score:5, Insightful)
If I am renting the music in the first place, DRM doesn't bother me so much. Exhibit A is the Rhapsody online music service, which is essentially a flat-rate music rental service. I have discovered that I like Rhapsody very much. I am finding new bands that I like, bands I had never heard of before, much faster than before I had Rhapsody.
Depending on what you get, Rhapsody is $12 to $15 per month. If this plan really is a dime per track, that's a cheaper rental than Rhapsody. The big question is coverage. If the new plan only lets me rent the latest pop acts, I'm just not interested. (Rhapsody has over 4 million tracks, including all sorts of cool things: Herbie Mann flute albums, Bill Cosby comedy albums, progressive rock, etc.)
When Rhapsody helps me music I really like, I then go and buy the music on CD, so that I will really own it. I'd be happy to do the same thing with this new service.
Will the service succeed? I'd say that depends very much on the specifics. How do you pay them that dime per track? If they have a convenient way to add dimes to your account, such as selling gift cards in Best Buy, it might become wildly popular; if you have to jump through a bunch of hoops (agree to a 20-page EULA, pre-register, enter a valid credit card number, pre-pay in $30 chunks, etc.) most people will just say no.
Assuming it's convenient, would I "rent" a song for ten cents? Sure. Why not?
steveha
Disclaimer: I work for the company that owns Rhapsody, but it's not my job to sell it to you or anyone else.
No men without hats (Score:3, Funny)
Potential for Problems (Score:3, Insightful)
Cracking the "DRM" (Score:3, Interesting)
http://cfs-listen-80.lala.com/contentfs/content?t=long-list-of-random-chars [lala.com]
Unfortunately, the song seems to not getting stored anywhere on the local hard disk. And when one tries to start downloading the url a second time, a "not found" message is given. Anybody interested of analyzing it some more?
Re:Cracking the "DRM" (Score:5, Informative)
Only a dime? (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, I know it's not the same, I'm just saying that the idea of charging per play is hardly a new, untested, unworkable one.
Actually... (Score:3, Interesting)
But it'd have to be BUYING the music, not renting. I want a high quality VBR MP3 or AAC file, at the minimum.
The math of a mediocre band is hideous (Score:3, Informative)
Desired income per band member: $20,000 (starving artistry rocks!)
Band members: 4
Required income for band: $80k
Expenses (band promotional/community website, equipment, etc): $20k
Split with service: 50-50 (and that is H
If the first time is free, so is every other time (Score:3, Interesting)
this might works for many people (Score:5, Insightful)
Honestly, any music one buys online is going to have a limited lifetime. The best one can hope for is that you can make a copy to CD and not lose much in the transcoding. But how many people burn to CD? For most people the just put on their computer or another device.
While I think this service is maybe inferior to something like Amazon, it is superior in many ways to ITMS. If I can pay a dime to put something in a jukebox, then play it from anywhere I can log on, what is the problem? I might make even more sense to use this service that labouriously moving all my music from on device to another.
That is if I hadn't already bought half of the music I will likely buy in my lifetime. I have many gigabytes of music that I have bought over my life. If I was a kid with a computer, a smart phone, and internet access at school, this would be a wonderful deal. An album for a dollar. I can play on anything I normally play on? Sign me up! You may think of the expense, but how much are kids paying for ringtones, SMS, and the like.
I know we have a kneejerk reaction around here to paying for things, and we believe that music wants to be free, but perhaps the objection here is more based on what we consider the norm, not rational thought. Perhaps music is not about listening to the same album a hundred times because we can only afford that one album, or listening to whatever is free on yahoo. Perhaps there is some value in having a collection of songs, that one chooses our of personal taste, and then having access to those songs over many devices located in disparate geographical area. As I said, i would not do this. I would just buy the CD or download the album. But I can imagine such a thing maybe finding a small market. It would suck to have all the music go away, though.
It's a goofy concept, but they do have DRM-free. (Score:3, Informative)
Mr Robertson is himself a huge problem (Score:3, Informative)
First, I KEEP trying to get off his spam list for Michael's Minutes, and Linspire. Do they ever remove my name? NOOO
What can I do to get these unrepentant spammers off my back? Does anyone have any ideas?
(second, he sold out to MS, a whole other problem)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)