This is why I will *never* purchase DRM'd music

[FG Lurker]

This is why I will *never* purchase DRM'd music:

MSN Entertainment and Video Services general manager Rob Bennett sent out an e-mail this afternoon to customers, advising them to make any and all authorizations or deauthorizations before August 31. "As of August 31, 2008, we will no longer be able to support the retrieval of license keys for the songs you purchased from MSN Music or the authorization of additional computers," reads the e-mail seen by Ars. "You will need to obtain a license key for each of your songs downloaded from MSN Music on any new computer, and you must do so before August 31, 2008. If you attempt to transfer your songs to additional computers after August 31, 2008, those songs will not successfully play."

Full Article

[Mulboyne]

Same here on DRM. That news is horrendous.

[Neo-Rio]

Behind every great fortune is a great scam.

[Kuang_Grade]

Well, it is not like they are completely screwed

Of course, MSN Music customers do have one other option: burning all of their music to audio CD and then re-ripping them back to the computer as MP3s, sans DRM. But that's a lossy, lousy solution.

Given the originial files sold were only 160 KBPS and were Windows media Audio files, I wouldn't be moaning about lossy MP3 conversions, given that WMAs were already lossy and the files were not super high bit rate to begin with. And anyone with half a brain would have already gone this route with their purchases just to avoid standard day to day DRM BS, let alone the shutdown threat.

[FG Lurker]

Well, it is not like they are completely screwed

The supposed advantage of the proprietary formats is that lower bit rates have better quality. 160kbps WMA files are supposed to be roughly similar to 256kbps MP3s. Some would say even 320kbps but I find that hard to believe.

However if you expand them out to CD Audio format and then re-rip them to MP3 you will have a much worse sounding file. Compressed audio sounds bad enough to begin with, recompressed audio is horrible on anything but the cheapest headphones (where everything sounds equally bad).

People try to save a buck or two by not buying the entire album of music. What they get though is not worth the savings: sounds worse, is less portable, you don't get any physical media, you get no liner notes etc, you can't resell the music later if you don't want it, you run the risk of losing the data when something like what MS is doing happens, and you have to back up the music onto CD anyway or it will be toast the first time you have a computer problem. (None of the major stores will replace files if you lose them, regardless of how you lose them.)

A fool and his money...

[hundefar]

You can encode in V0 MP3 if you want to save space on your MP3-player or hard disc. LAME link

[American Oyaji]

I don't think the problem is DRM, but the way it's implemented.

DRM under a subscription plan can screw customers. The DRM Apple has in play lets me keep my music forever and as long as I'm using iTunes, I'm good. iTunes doesn't phone home or anything. Music is mine forever.

[omae mona]

The DRM Apple has in play lets me keep my music forever and as long as I'm using iTunes

AO, what makes you think you'll be able to use iTunes forever?

For example, I have no ability to run a good chunk of software I owned in the 1980s. Even if I still had my Apple 2 around, parts may have eventually broken and rendered the thing useless.

[ttjereth]

iTunes doesn't phone home or anything.

Wha?!?!


iTunes connects to Apple servers everytime you open it (checking for updates, etc.), connects to Gracenote to retrieve music information and sends info both to apple and Omniture when you double click on songs with the store open.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=75
http://www.downloadsquad.com/2006/01/11/new-version-of-itunes-tells-apple-your-listening-habits/
http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/01/12/new.itunes.reports.tracks/
http://www.boingboing.net/2006/01/11/itunes-update-spies-.html

[Charles]

AO, what makes you think you'll be able to use iTunes forever?

For example, I have no ability to run a good chunk of software I owned in the 1980s. Even if I still had my Apple 2 around, parts may have eventually broken and rendered the thing useless.

Objection overruled. There are Apple ][ emulators for MacOS X and Windows.

[snd]http://www.ceicher.com/apple2forever.mp3[/snd]

When they said "Apple ][ Forever," they meant it.

[omae mona]

Objection overruled. There are Apple ][ emulators for MacOS X and Windows.

[snd]http://www.ceicher.com/apple2forever.mp3[/snd]

When they said "Apple ][ Forever," they meant it.

Charles, I was 100% certain you would be the one to reply and call me on this

[Charles]

Charles, I was 100% certain you would be the one to reply and call me on this

I'm actually working on this exact problem at the moment. I just found several boxes of Apple ][ disks from my ancient archives. But you can't emulate a 5" floppy disk drive, you need real hardware.. just long enough to transfer a disk image.

BTW, I really love that song. I remember it from the Apple //c rollout in 1984. I recently found it, and the first time I heard it in over 20 years, it brought tears to my eyes.

[FG Lurker]

DRM under a subscription plan can screw customers. The DRM Apple has in play lets me keep my music forever and as long as I'm using iTunes, I'm good. iTunes doesn't phone home or anything. Music is mine forever.

With iTunes you can authorize up to 5 computers. If Apple takes the authorization servers off line (just like Microsoft is doing) you're as fucked as these Microsoft customers are. As long as at least one of your 5 computers is running (and you never reinstall the OS or make enough hardware changes to it that iTunes thinks it is a new computer) you can play your music. This is exactly what Microsoft has said.

AO, don't spend money on DRM'd music. You're setting yourself up to get assraped in the future.

[FG Lurker]

You can encode in V0 MP3 if you want to save space on your MP3-player or hard disc. LAME link

They will still sound poor compared to a direct-from-CD rip. Each algorithm compresses in different ways. The results of lossy recompression of music that has already been through a different type of lossy compression are generally very poor.

There are lots of reasons for this and I am sure it is well described all over the web. In short though each algorithm compresses differently. Each algorithm throws away different areas of the music and does different things to trick our ears into thinking we are hearing the original CD-Audio track. When you run a song through multiple algorithms (in this case WMA and then MP3) much more is lost than by running it through just one of them. Not only that, but because much of the music was thrown away by the first algorithm the second one is often unable to properly compensate for what it is throwing away. The result is generally a very poor sounding track.

It gets even worse though. What happens when we eventually have something much better than MP3 that actually catches on? Or when we all have 1TB or larger drives in our iPods and no longer need to compress music at all? Then everyone who has bought heavily compressed and/or DRM'd music is fucked.

I think I'll stick to buying CDs, thanks.

[FG Lurker]

For example, I have no ability to run a good chunk of software I owned in the 1980s. Even if I still had my Apple 2 around, parts may have eventually broken and rendered the thing useless.

Emulation is possible as mentioned by Charles. I think one big difference though is that apart from nostalgia most people don't have too much need for 30yo software. (There are exceptions of course and James here on FG is very well acquainted with one such problem!)

Music doesn't age quite the way that software does so retaining the ability to play music you purchased 30 years ago is important, IMO.

[omae mona]

Emulation is possible as mentioned by Charles. I think one big difference though is that apart from nostalgia most people don't have too much need for 30yo software. (There are exceptions of course and James here on FG is very well acquainted with one such problem!)

Music doesn't age quite the way that software does so retaining the ability to play music you purchased 30 years ago is important, IMO.

Agreed wholly. I wasn't trying to make the point that I yearn for my old software (I don't). I was trying to point out that AO shouldn't be so confident he will be able to use iTunes forever. So his music files are at risk down the road.

[Charles]

Agreed wholly. I wasn't trying to make the point that I yearn for my old software (I don't). I was trying to point out that AO shouldn't be so confident he will be able to use iTunes forever. So his music files are at risk down the road.

I just went through a lengthy debate about this topic. Under current software, you can always emulate not just the software that uses authorization, but the authorization server too (not that this would necessarily be easy, but it is possible). But there are "Turing incomputable" methods of DRM that are unbreakable. None are in current use. Furthermore, just because you lose access to your DRM files doesn't mean the file is irretrievably lost. You could just go buy a new copy (yeah, I know what you'll say).

Anyway, I do yearn for my old software. Whenever I talk to old Apple ][ owners, I just have to mention "Choplifter" and their eyes light up. Ooh I'd just kill to play Choplifter with a vintage joystick, just like the olden days. There's a modern version, but it is just not the same, somehow it doesn't work with high rez graphics and a mouse.
But I could live without commercial apps. What I want is the old software I wrote. Like my Apple Pascal 3D program, the first hidden-line removal algorithm to run on an Apple ][. But the one treasure I'm hunting for is a file I saved back around 1980, it is the first Desktop Publishing document ever. I accidentally invented DTP in 1980, it had all the requirements: microcomputer, WYSIWYG, graphic input (no mouse, a graphics tablet), interchangeable fonts, and even color graphics printing. And I gave it away to Apple, I just wanted to show off my killer demo and they totally stole it. Nothing I can do about it now, I just want proof that I invented a multibillion dollar industry and gave it away.

[FG Lurker]

You could just go buy a new copy (yeah, I know what you'll say).

The recording labels love you Charles.

I'd sooner just have the CD which I can then move to whatever digital format I wish, as often as I wish, whenever I wish.

[Kuang_Grade]

Without getting into an argument of who's got the most mad l33t eardrums or how all music just sounds like crap unless your amp uses special vacuum tubes that were initially designed for V1 buzz bombs, I'd point out that all every musical media storage medium is at some form of technological risk....How many new cassette decks have you seen in a your local electronics stores?...How many new LP players?. What was the last record player you saw that could play at 78RPM?

While I know what you are saying about digital to cd to digital conversion process, Lurk, you make it out as if it is like converting them on to wax cylinders and then back. There may be some impact, but I've yet to notice it. And even if it is, given that probably a third of my MP3s were sourced from my own LPs and cassettes, even if there was marketed degradation of converted digital file, it would still sound a hell of a lot better than most of my analogue to digital files due to the purity of the initial source.

Add in the amazing ease of finding and purchasing online music, as well as the ability to only purchase the tracks you want vs. having to buy a whole CD filled with crap you don't want, even moderately DRMed tracks (such as itunes) are a bargain in my mind. 9 times out of 10 I'm buying stuff I'd never find on CD in a local store, either new or used, although some of this is due to the significant decline in both the size and quality of the used CD market, which has also suppressed the trade in value of CDs as well, negating one of the previous benefits of physical media...its liquidation value. And given I can convert itunes files into a non DRMed form, I don't have any undue concerns about the future...and given that I can make multiple backups and store some of them off site, I figure I'm even more protected than before given that my house could burn down and I'd still have my tunes.

And don't forget about CD rot either.....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/music/3940669.stm

If it makes you feel any better, Amazon in the US is now selling non-DRMed MP3s at 256KBPS...they do have a watermark on the file tagging it to you, but is it as far as control...no need for them to phone home to amazon for authorization after the purchase.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070925-amazon-launches-public-beta-of-mp3-music-store.html

[FG Lurker]

I use MP3s for convenience. I keep my iPod in the car and it is my main source of music on the road. However there is a noticeable difference, even on the car system, between good quality MP3s and an original CD. My car system is good but it is not insane audiophile nutter level. I have tried converting WMA to MP3 for playback on the iPod and was disappointed with the quality.

To each their own. I have no desire to go backwards in audio quality. I have even less desire to spend money on something that is restricted or quality-limited below CD level. I don't really care about the cost savings of being able to pick-and choose tracks. I don't buy 100s of tracks per month and the few thousand yen I might save is negligible to me compared with the benefits of having the original CD.

[Charles]

Without getting into an argument of who's got the most mad l33t eardrums or how all music just sounds like crap unless your amp uses special vacuum tubes that were initially designed for V1 buzz bombs, I'd point out that all every musical media storage medium is at some form of technological risk....How many new cassette decks have you seen in a your local electronics stores?...How many new LP players?. What was the last record player you saw that could play at 78RPM?

I bet you didn't know the American Federation for the Blind still distributes "Talking Books" on 16 2/3 and 8 1/3 RPM phonograph records.

[American Oyaji]

My point with the calling home is that even if the iTunes DRM server died, I'd still have my music. Even if I never connected my system to the internet, my music would still run.

And if I want to break the DRM, I'd just burn to CD and reimport. But the DRM Apple uses is benign enough that it's a nonissue.

But my music is ripped from CDs mostly anyway so that's a nonissue too.

[FG Lurker]

My point with the calling home is that even if the iTunes DRM server died, I'd still have my music. Even if I never connected my system to the internet, my music would still run.

And if I want to break the DRM, I'd just burn to CD and reimport. But the DRM Apple uses is benign enough that it's a nonissue.

This is exactly the issue the Microsoft users are now facing.

But my music is ripped from CDs mostly anyway so that's a nonissue too.

100% of my music is.

[Mulboyne]

WaPo: Yahoo Not Only Shutting Music Store, But Orphaning DRM Buyers

We knew Yahoo Music was shutting down but not that it was planning to take down its DRM servers at the same time. Ars Technica reports that Yahoo has notified customers the license servers will shut down Sept. 30. Yahoo had already said its music subscribers would be migrated to Rhapsody. Microsoft eventually took another approach when it stopped MSN Music, promising after a fuss that the DRM-protected music will work through 2011.

What does this mean? Unlike subscription music users, who are leasing music and have no reason to expect it will be available after a service closes, buyers of DRM-protected music think they have acquired the rights in perpetuity. In reality, that only works as long as the DRM works unless the user takes other steps. In this case, the music will keep working on its current computer but can't be transferred or re-licensed after operating system change like upgrading from XP to Vista or downgrading from Vista to XP. Yahoo's suggested workaround includes burning the songs to CDs and ripping the CD back to the computer. Or, as Ars Technica puts it: "Sure, you'll lose a bunch of blank CDs, sound quality, and all the metadata, but that's a small price to pay for the privilege of being able to listen to that music you lawfully acquired. Good thing you didn't download it illegally or just buy it on CD!"

The gist from the anti-DRM set: if you were dumb enough to buy into DRM, that's your fault. It was a bad strategy and we should all be thrilled that music finally is being sold DRM-free. (Just curious, does this all mean that all the people who used DRM's existence as a rationale for virtual shoplifting are now paying for it?) Count me in the thrilled group but I'm also one of those who owns a mix of DRM and unprotected media and one who believes that my rights to use the DRM-reliant media don't end with a change in strategy. Yahoo tells Information Week it will reimburse users on a case-by-case basis, possibly with reimbursements or MP3 versions. The FAQ is here.

Rhapsody migration: Yahoo Music Unlimited was a cheaper service, $8.99 a month compared to Rhapsody's $12.99. Subscribers will get to keep that rate "for a limited time." Those who bought music and transfer to Rhapsody can play it there but Yahoo recommends burning it to CD. User ratings don't transfer to Rhapsody but will still be available on Yahoo for "use with other music features."

Reminder: no discussion of illegal file-sharing allowed on FG.

[Mulboyne]

Boston Globe: ITunes strips songs' copy protection

Apple Inc., the most popular source of music in the United States, stripped copy protection from all the songs in its iTunes music store and disclosed plans to charge as little as 69 cents a track...Starting yesterday, about 8 million songs were being offered without copy-protection software as part of the iTunes Plus service, Apple said. By the end of March, the other 2 million songs in its catalog will be available without such software.

[wuchan]

Apple Inc., the most popular source of music in the United States, stripped copy protection from all the songs in its iTunes music store and disclosed plans to charge as little as 69 cents a track...Starting yesterday, about 8 million songs were being offered without copy-protection software as part of the iTunes Plus service, Apple said. By the end of March, the other 2 million songs in its catalog will be available without such software.

Apple really doesn't need to have protection. Have you ever tried to get music out of an iPod? It's a annoying process where half the tracks loose their titles.

[Kuang_Grade]

Apple really doesn't need to have protection. Have you ever tried to get music out of an iPod? It's a annoying process where half the tracks loose their titles.

The ipod was designed to only input files, not to export them, although there are unapproved tools that can export files off an ipod...and this is true of any music file, itunes purchased or not. The DRM on itunes music was more to prevent users from sharing files via computers or burning tons of CD-Rs....although even this is fairly easily circumvented.

The really funny thing is that apple is charging 30 cents a file if you want to convert your previously purchased DRM'ed itunes tracks into DRM free tracks...granted they are also doubling the bit rate on the recordings, but its pretty sleazy in my opinion....I just checked one itunes album I bought on sale that has 114 tracks and the upgrade fee is approximately 300% higher than the my original purchase price.