Wednesday, July 02, 2008
Go Indie! Or, how the RIAA is like a spouse who attacks you with a kitchen knife
Every now and again, I flip back through the archives here at conradzero.com, and yesterday I came across this easily forgettable post from a year ago. Back in March 2007, Gizmodo announced their position on the RIAA's unethical tactics, and posted an accurate and meaningful manifesto which called the RIAA out on their own bullshit.
If you are a musician, or even a music fan, you owe it to yourself to know the truth, and at least skim through the manifesto. You should understand who the RIAA are, and what they are doing. Once you know what they are doing, you won't need to be told that it's unethical. You'll understand why established bands like Nine Inch Nails are leaving their labels. You'll understand why new bands like Jagged Spiral have no interest in being 'signed'.
The RIAA served their purpose when we had nothing else, but for years they have actively fought against using the internet as a method of music distribution, and when they finally (begrudgingly) put their music up on the internet, they poisoned it with DRM.
This is the point where we don't need the RIAA anymore.
The parting could have been avoided if they simply gave the customers what they wanted (and were more than willing to pay for,) internet distribution of music that we could purchase and play on our own terms. They wouldn't give it to us, and the internet opened another method of music distribution, so this is the point where we say "Goodbye RIAA, it's been great! So long!"
The parting could have remained amicable if the RIAA hadn't decided to become unethical. Unfortunately, the RIAA decided to rewrite and twist the laws of this country to their own ends, and to start unfairly suing their own customers and innocent people.
So this becomes the point where we don't need OR WANT them anymore. This is the point where we say, "Piss off RIAA, you really screwed up that relationship! Fuck you!"
What saddens me most is that all this bullshit gets between the musicians and the consumers. The desperation of consumers to get at music they want is being held up by the greed of the RIAA to restrict access, and control how consumers use the product they sell.
It didn't have to be this way, but the RIAA made their choice. They went to the Dark side. They chose...poorly.
It doesn't have to continue to be this way, but that's for YOU to decide.
What can YOU do about it? Simple. Don't endorse the behavior. Don't fuel the RIAA's efforts. Now that the RIAA's antics are public knowledge, people don't have the right to be ignorant. Anyone purchasing music from the RIAA labels is endorsing, enforcing, and promoting this behavior. Likewise for artists who sign contracts with RIAA labels.
Trust me, there is SO MUCH independent music out there, that the RIAA labels and artists could all die today, and you wouldn't miss them for long. Finding the music you like is half the fun. Check out local bands, and "indie" labels. Look at myspace, pitchfork, Hype Machine and such. If you like music, there's plenty to pick from, lots of it better and lots of it worse than what the RIAA provides, and much of it is in your hometown!
If you want music to thrive, the best thing you can do is to give your money directly to the artists - go to their shows, go to their websites, and buy the art directly from them. The worst thing you can do is give money to the RIAA. Don't fall for I-Tunes. Don't fall for Rhapsody, Zune or Napster. Support websites that support independent artists:
emusic
mp3tunes
Magnatune
Garage Band
CD Baby
Yes, even Amazon.com.
If you know of others, please comment them!
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
If you are a musician, or even a music fan, you owe it to yourself to know the truth, and at least skim through the manifesto. You should understand who the RIAA are, and what they are doing. Once you know what they are doing, you won't need to be told that it's unethical. You'll understand why established bands like Nine Inch Nails are leaving their labels. You'll understand why new bands like Jagged Spiral have no interest in being 'signed'.
The RIAA served their purpose when we had nothing else, but for years they have actively fought against using the internet as a method of music distribution, and when they finally (begrudgingly) put their music up on the internet, they poisoned it with DRM.
This is the point where we don't need the RIAA anymore.
The parting could have been avoided if they simply gave the customers what they wanted (and were more than willing to pay for,) internet distribution of music that we could purchase and play on our own terms. They wouldn't give it to us, and the internet opened another method of music distribution, so this is the point where we say "Goodbye RIAA, it's been great! So long!"
The parting could have remained amicable if the RIAA hadn't decided to become unethical. Unfortunately, the RIAA decided to rewrite and twist the laws of this country to their own ends, and to start unfairly suing their own customers and innocent people.
So this becomes the point where we don't need OR WANT them anymore. This is the point where we say, "Piss off RIAA, you really screwed up that relationship! Fuck you!"
What saddens me most is that all this bullshit gets between the musicians and the consumers. The desperation of consumers to get at music they want is being held up by the greed of the RIAA to restrict access, and control how consumers use the product they sell.
It didn't have to be this way, but the RIAA made their choice. They went to the Dark side. They chose...poorly.
It doesn't have to continue to be this way, but that's for YOU to decide.
What can YOU do about it? Simple. Don't endorse the behavior. Don't fuel the RIAA's efforts. Now that the RIAA's antics are public knowledge, people don't have the right to be ignorant. Anyone purchasing music from the RIAA labels is endorsing, enforcing, and promoting this behavior. Likewise for artists who sign contracts with RIAA labels.
Trust me, there is SO MUCH independent music out there, that the RIAA labels and artists could all die today, and you wouldn't miss them for long. Finding the music you like is half the fun. Check out local bands, and "indie" labels. Look at myspace, pitchfork, Hype Machine and such. If you like music, there's plenty to pick from, lots of it better and lots of it worse than what the RIAA provides, and much of it is in your hometown!
If you want music to thrive, the best thing you can do is to give your money directly to the artists - go to their shows, go to their websites, and buy the art directly from them. The worst thing you can do is give money to the RIAA. Don't fall for I-Tunes. Don't fall for Rhapsody, Zune or Napster. Support websites that support independent artists:
emusic
mp3tunes
Magnatune
Garage Band
CD Baby
Yes, even Amazon.com.
If you know of others, please comment them!
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: Call To Action, DRM Sucks, Music Industry
Friday, January 18, 2008
Songboom!
The wait is over.
Songboom is a site that reviews other online music delivery sites. None of the sites reviewed have DRM. They even lay out a great comparison matrix of all the sites reviewed.
And FINALLY, download prices are realistic. How's about a DIME per song? Doesn't that sound better than the i-screw? I mean you could go to i-tunes and download Within Temptation's "The Silent Force" for the same price as a hard-copy, un-DRM-infected, artwork-included version, or you can to go mp3fiesta.com and download the entire album for $0.99
Oh, I'm sorry, i-tunes doesn't *have* "The Silent Force". Heh. Hey i-tunes? Blow me.
Or you could pay import prices for Coil's "Music to Play in the Dark 2" album, or you could get download it from mp3fiesta.com for $0.97
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
1 Comments
Permalink
Songboom is a site that reviews other online music delivery sites. None of the sites reviewed have DRM. They even lay out a great comparison matrix of all the sites reviewed.
And FINALLY, download prices are realistic. How's about a DIME per song? Doesn't that sound better than the i-screw? I mean you could go to i-tunes and download Within Temptation's "The Silent Force" for the same price as a hard-copy, un-DRM-infected, artwork-included version, or you can to go mp3fiesta.com and download the entire album for $0.99
Oh, I'm sorry, i-tunes doesn't *have* "The Silent Force". Heh. Hey i-tunes? Blow me.
Or you could pay import prices for Coil's "Music to Play in the Dark 2" album, or you could get download it from mp3fiesta.com for $0.97
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: Cool Website, DRM Sucks, music
Sunday, November 25, 2007
A New System for Soft Products
The Current System does not work.
If you want to purchase the new Nine Inch Nails CD: "Y34RZ3R0R3M1X3D" online, you have two choices: Piracy or DRM-infected files. I do not advocate Piracy. It is not OK to steal the work of others. But, I also do not advocate DRM. But this is the Current System: we have the IPOD for music and video, and we have Kindle for books. We have subscriptions for online newspapers, and paid access to the content of certain websites (you know what I'm talking about...).
But the system is not working: people are still pirating soft products like graphics, music, video, books and software, and the creators of that content are not getting paid for their work.
Why is the Current System not working? I suggest three reasons. Not surprisingly, they are the same three reasons consumers need to purchase a product of any kind - Want, Cost and Convenience.
I suggest a New System be devised, which takes these things into account, in order to reduce piracy, and increase the potential for artists to be fairly compensated for their soft products.
1) Want - The consumer must want or need the product.
Why would consumers want DRM-infected files? Why should they pay for files that come with a list of restrictions on how they are used? Would you buy a car that came with rules for when and where and under what conditions it can be driven? Or a shirt that came with rules for what days of the week it can be worn, and what accessories need to be worn with it? Of course not.
People use DRM-infected content from I-tunes because they don't know any better, or don't care. People who do know and care pass on the DRM-infected files and opt for the non-DRM ones available through piracy. Neither of these solutions is acceptable.
Also, why should consumers tolerate products like Kindle that will only work with one supplier? I wouldn't buy a CD player that only played CDs from a particular Record Label, but that's exactly how the new Kindle from Amazon works. This is not an acceptable solution either.
The New System will have to let consumers use soft products the same way they can use the hard products: WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS.
2) Cost - Consumers must believe the product is worth the price.
There is an underlying rule which never changes: PRODUCTS ARE WORTH WHAT PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO PAY FOR THEM. Get your mind around that. Accept it. It is an infallible truth: it doesn't really matter how much it cost to make the product; it never did. The consumer ultimately sets the price. You can set your price point anywhere along the bell curve, but the consumers ARE the bell curve.
Hard goods aren't a problem. People are willing to pay $30 for a Jagged Spiral hoodie. They know $30 is 'less expensive' than the effort and materials it would take them to make it themselves. But for soft products like music and books, the internet has created a system where the product is an endlessly renewable and instantly duplicatable resource, available anywhere, at any time. Remember the laws of Supply and Demand? Worldwide, instant availability with negligible distribution cost has created a significant shift in what people are willing to pay. It truly has devalued soft products, and the existing system has not taken this into account.
For example, you can draw a picture of your stupid kid with his tongue stuck to a flagpole in a Minnesota Deep Freeze, and hang it on the wall of the local coffee shop with a $200 price tag. But scan and post that same picture on the internet. How much is that worth?
What is the cost of your picture done in Charcoal on Canvas, versus the cost of your JPG? I already told you: They are worth whatever people are willing to pay for them. The questions you *meant* to ask are: What are people willing to pay for Charcoal on Canvas, and what are people willing to pay for digital bits on the internet? OK, how much would it cost them to exactly duplicate your Charcoal on Canvas? Let's see...Art Supplies, Art Lessons, then the time required to duplicate your every stroke, or possibly contract an artist willing to duplicate your work for a lesser price... OK, now how much would it cost them to exactly duplicate your jpg?
And song downloads from I-Tunes are a dollar each? So a 12-song CD that used to cost $12 is still...$12???? Why should people pay the same price for downloaded, mp3-compressed, DRM-infected files that they pay for the higher quality and unlimited use of the physical CD? Wrong, wrong, wrong. Some people buy the DRM-infected files because they want the song badly enough, but they shouldn't have to. The cost is too high.
The New System will have to take this into account. The more the prices line up with what the consumer is willing to pay, the less attractive the piracy options becomes. That is why bands like Radiohead are jumping onto the model that Jagged Spiral devised: post the media online for free, and let the customer pay what they want. This might be the New System. It might not. But it holds to the rule that the product is worth what the customer is willing to pay. I'm well aware that it could turn out that artists are not able to make a living on this system.
3) Convenience - The customer can't get the product more conveniently anywhere else.
Which do you think is easier; downloading/installing BitTorrent and downloading an album, or opening an account on Amazon with a unique username and memorable but secure password, entering your personal info and shipping address, agreeing to the No-Privacy Statement (without reading it, natch), entering your credit card info, verifying your e-mail address, going through the checkout line with your purchase...
Admittedly, the online purchasing experience has gotten better. It would be better still if someone could devise a system where the consumer's online 'wallet' was usable at all online locations. Consumers should not have to provide any personal information for a downloadable soft product purchase, and they certainly should NOT have to provide their personal info for each-and-every-website they do business at. You don't have to go through all that bullshit when you go to a Burger King you've never been to before! You shouldn't need a username and password to make a purchase at amazon.com, or any website! ID and Credit Card, that's all!
Google, PayPal and Microsoft are working on this, but it just isn't there yet. This is a major holdup to a New System that would reduce piracy, and there is no reason for it, other than businesses that are not willing to cooperate. They want that user info, they want those e-mail addresses. They want it to be difficult for you to purchase from somewhere else.
The New System should let you make your purchase quickly, securely, and conveniently, without setting up an account on the seller's website.
Conclusion
When we look at the Current System from the perspectives of Want, Cost and Convenience, Piracy makes more sense; it offers better product for less, and it's easier to access. I'm not advocating piracy, I'm saying the existing system is fucked up, and here is why, so let's get it fixed so I can buy music online at a fair price and without DRM restrictions.
No System is going to eliminate piracy, there are people who will pirate works simply for the fun of it. But a New System that takes Want, Cost and Convenience into account could significantly reduce piracy by filling consumers needs, and help artists make a living selling their works online.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
If you want to purchase the new Nine Inch Nails CD: "Y34RZ3R0R3M1X3D" online, you have two choices: Piracy or DRM-infected files. I do not advocate Piracy. It is not OK to steal the work of others. But, I also do not advocate DRM. But this is the Current System: we have the IPOD for music and video, and we have Kindle for books. We have subscriptions for online newspapers, and paid access to the content of certain websites (you know what I'm talking about...).
But the system is not working: people are still pirating soft products like graphics, music, video, books and software, and the creators of that content are not getting paid for their work.
Why is the Current System not working? I suggest three reasons. Not surprisingly, they are the same three reasons consumers need to purchase a product of any kind - Want, Cost and Convenience.
I suggest a New System be devised, which takes these things into account, in order to reduce piracy, and increase the potential for artists to be fairly compensated for their soft products.
1) Want - The consumer must want or need the product.
Why would consumers want DRM-infected files? Why should they pay for files that come with a list of restrictions on how they are used? Would you buy a car that came with rules for when and where and under what conditions it can be driven? Or a shirt that came with rules for what days of the week it can be worn, and what accessories need to be worn with it? Of course not.
People use DRM-infected content from I-tunes because they don't know any better, or don't care. People who do know and care pass on the DRM-infected files and opt for the non-DRM ones available through piracy. Neither of these solutions is acceptable.
Also, why should consumers tolerate products like Kindle that will only work with one supplier? I wouldn't buy a CD player that only played CDs from a particular Record Label, but that's exactly how the new Kindle from Amazon works. This is not an acceptable solution either.
The New System will have to let consumers use soft products the same way they can use the hard products: WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS.
2) Cost - Consumers must believe the product is worth the price.
There is an underlying rule which never changes: PRODUCTS ARE WORTH WHAT PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO PAY FOR THEM. Get your mind around that. Accept it. It is an infallible truth: it doesn't really matter how much it cost to make the product; it never did. The consumer ultimately sets the price. You can set your price point anywhere along the bell curve, but the consumers ARE the bell curve.
Hard goods aren't a problem. People are willing to pay $30 for a Jagged Spiral hoodie. They know $30 is 'less expensive' than the effort and materials it would take them to make it themselves. But for soft products like music and books, the internet has created a system where the product is an endlessly renewable and instantly duplicatable resource, available anywhere, at any time. Remember the laws of Supply and Demand? Worldwide, instant availability with negligible distribution cost has created a significant shift in what people are willing to pay. It truly has devalued soft products, and the existing system has not taken this into account.
For example, you can draw a picture of your stupid kid with his tongue stuck to a flagpole in a Minnesota Deep Freeze, and hang it on the wall of the local coffee shop with a $200 price tag. But scan and post that same picture on the internet. How much is that worth?
What is the cost of your picture done in Charcoal on Canvas, versus the cost of your JPG? I already told you: They are worth whatever people are willing to pay for them. The questions you *meant* to ask are: What are people willing to pay for Charcoal on Canvas, and what are people willing to pay for digital bits on the internet? OK, how much would it cost them to exactly duplicate your Charcoal on Canvas? Let's see...Art Supplies, Art Lessons, then the time required to duplicate your every stroke, or possibly contract an artist willing to duplicate your work for a lesser price... OK, now how much would it cost them to exactly duplicate your jpg?
And song downloads from I-Tunes are a dollar each? So a 12-song CD that used to cost $12 is still...$12???? Why should people pay the same price for downloaded, mp3-compressed, DRM-infected files that they pay for the higher quality and unlimited use of the physical CD? Wrong, wrong, wrong. Some people buy the DRM-infected files because they want the song badly enough, but they shouldn't have to. The cost is too high.
The New System will have to take this into account. The more the prices line up with what the consumer is willing to pay, the less attractive the piracy options becomes. That is why bands like Radiohead are jumping onto the model that Jagged Spiral devised: post the media online for free, and let the customer pay what they want. This might be the New System. It might not. But it holds to the rule that the product is worth what the customer is willing to pay. I'm well aware that it could turn out that artists are not able to make a living on this system.
3) Convenience - The customer can't get the product more conveniently anywhere else.
Which do you think is easier; downloading/installing BitTorrent and downloading an album, or opening an account on Amazon with a unique username and memorable but secure password, entering your personal info and shipping address, agreeing to the No-Privacy Statement (without reading it, natch), entering your credit card info, verifying your e-mail address, going through the checkout line with your purchase...
Admittedly, the online purchasing experience has gotten better. It would be better still if someone could devise a system where the consumer's online 'wallet' was usable at all online locations. Consumers should not have to provide any personal information for a downloadable soft product purchase, and they certainly should NOT have to provide their personal info for each-and-every-website they do business at. You don't have to go through all that bullshit when you go to a Burger King you've never been to before! You shouldn't need a username and password to make a purchase at amazon.com, or any website! ID and Credit Card, that's all!
Google, PayPal and Microsoft are working on this, but it just isn't there yet. This is a major holdup to a New System that would reduce piracy, and there is no reason for it, other than businesses that are not willing to cooperate. They want that user info, they want those e-mail addresses. They want it to be difficult for you to purchase from somewhere else.
The New System should let you make your purchase quickly, securely, and conveniently, without setting up an account on the seller's website.
Conclusion
When we look at the Current System from the perspectives of Want, Cost and Convenience, Piracy makes more sense; it offers better product for less, and it's easier to access. I'm not advocating piracy, I'm saying the existing system is fucked up, and here is why, so let's get it fixed so I can buy music online at a fair price and without DRM restrictions.
No System is going to eliminate piracy, there are people who will pirate works simply for the fun of it. But a New System that takes Want, Cost and Convenience into account could significantly reduce piracy by filling consumers needs, and help artists make a living selling their works online.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: Business Phenomena, consumerism, DRM Sucks, Music Industry
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
How I learned to learned to stop worrying and love the (non-DRM infected) mp3
Some old, fat, white industry exec must have realized that mp3s aren't really a fad after all, and it might be a good idea to shift marketing over to the New format. So the floodgates are open, and businesses are clamoring over themselves to get mp3s into your ears, and some $$ out of your account.
The revelation came too late for Sony, though. According to the latest garageband.com newsletter, Sony Connect has folded, and good riddance. Sony can take their proprietary-my-way-or-the-highway crap and, well, hit the highway with it. Take your fucking 'memory stick' technology with you.
MTV's Urge service is merging with Real Networks Rhapsody. While I wish they would both die a quick death with Sony's Connect, it turns out they are working on a merger with Verizon Wireless, which sounds like a really great way to fuck up my phone service. "Can you hear me now?" No. I can't fucking hear you now, because all the satellite bandwidth is used up by people downloading the latest Jagged Spiral release.
I'd like to this was all my fault for posting things like this, but industry execs don't read my blog. That probably also explains why I haven't been offered a job by them (or been assassinated by their smokin' hot female ninja hit squad).
But the best news hit me from the most unlikely of allies. Wal Mart's online store is offering non-DRM infected mp3s, and undercutting the prices on itunes...
...you read that right. Wal Mart, (whom I've been less than kind to in the past) turns it's Consumerism-Tractor-Beam-Of-DOOM on the customers of I Tunes.
HA! It's like watching two people I hate get into a fist fight. Either way, I win!
Even better news (I know, it's hard to believe it could get better) is that Amazon.com has been threatening to get in on the non-DRM frenzy since Feb 2007, but the rumor is that they may start having non-DRM mp3s available online as soon as mid September, probably in an attempt to
(Um, hello Amazon? Mid-September would be Right Now, Ahem.)
HEY I-TUNES! I DOUBLE-DOG-DARE YOU TO CONTINUE RELEASING YOUR MUSIC WITH DRM! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAaaaaa.....
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
The revelation came too late for Sony, though. According to the latest garageband.com newsletter, Sony Connect has folded, and good riddance. Sony can take their proprietary-my-way-or-the-highway crap and, well, hit the highway with it. Take your fucking 'memory stick' technology with you.
MTV's Urge service is merging with Real Networks Rhapsody. While I wish they would both die a quick death with Sony's Connect, it turns out they are working on a merger with Verizon Wireless, which sounds like a really great way to fuck up my phone service. "Can you hear me now?" No. I can't fucking hear you now, because all the satellite bandwidth is used up by people downloading the latest Jagged Spiral release.
I'd like to this was all my fault for posting things like this, but industry execs don't read my blog. That probably also explains why I haven't been offered a job by them (or been assassinated by their smokin' hot female ninja hit squad).
But the best news hit me from the most unlikely of allies. Wal Mart's online store is offering non-DRM infected mp3s, and undercutting the prices on itunes...
...you read that right. Wal Mart, (whom I've been less than kind to in the past) turns it's Consumerism-Tractor-Beam-Of-DOOM on the customers of I Tunes.
HA! It's like watching two people I hate get into a fist fight. Either way, I win!
Even better news (I know, it's hard to believe it could get better) is that Amazon.com has been threatening to get in on the non-DRM frenzy since Feb 2007, but the rumor is that they may start having non-DRM mp3s available online as soon as mid September, probably in an attempt to
(Um, hello Amazon? Mid-September would be Right Now, Ahem.)
HEY I-TUNES! I DOUBLE-DOG-DARE YOU TO CONTINUE RELEASING YOUR MUSIC WITH DRM! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAaaaaa.....
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: Business Phenomena, DRM Sucks, Music Industry
Thursday, May 31, 2007
I-Tunes Goes DRM Free...kind of
Bestill my beating heart.
I-tunes sees the error of their ways. Kind of. It isn't the entire I-Tunes library; just EMI at the moment, but from what I hear, EMI is not doing so well, and this could be their last-ditch effort to save their sinking ship. I hope it works for them.
While the DRM-Free tracks (.m4a) are encoded at 256-bit instead of 128, they list at $1.29 each instead of the $.99 for the DRM-infected (.m4p) tracks. Strange, it should be the other way around, I mean, it took a lot of engineering and tech to infect those files with DRM!
Also, keep in mind that the .m4a files have your account name embedded in them, so don't be too quick to drop them on bittorrent. This really is just a different type of DRM, but at least it allows the user to playback their music on any device or player, and make unlimited copies (for themselves, natch...)
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
I-tunes sees the error of their ways. Kind of. It isn't the entire I-Tunes library; just EMI at the moment, but from what I hear, EMI is not doing so well, and this could be their last-ditch effort to save their sinking ship. I hope it works for them.
While the DRM-Free tracks (.m4a) are encoded at 256-bit instead of 128, they list at $1.29 each instead of the $.99 for the DRM-infected (.m4p) tracks. Strange, it should be the other way around, I mean, it took a lot of engineering and tech to infect those files with DRM!
Also, keep in mind that the .m4a files have your account name embedded in them, so don't be too quick to drop them on bittorrent. This really is just a different type of DRM, but at least it allows the user to playback their music on any device or player, and make unlimited copies (for themselves, natch...)
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: DRM Sucks, Music Industry
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Stand Aside, I-Suck! Amazon comes through!
In my neighborhood, the first person to mow their lawn in the spring is a jerk, because then the rest of the lawns look like ass, and we have to mow them. Here is a typical spring conversation in my neighborhood:
"Hey Bill, I see you finally caved in and mowed your lawn, huh?"
"Yeah, it was up to my knees, and I figured..."
"Thanks A Lot, Asshole!"
I imagine it was the same with DRM-Free music, nobody wanted to be the first to sell it, and be hated by the RIAA. Smaller sites like magnatune and mp3tunes were too small to be a threat, so they were like weeding the garden, and didn't really count. But we knew the end was near when we heard Steve Jobs half-hearted anti-DRM speech.
But now, like Fish says, "The game is over!". Amazon has announced that they will have DRM-free music available later this year.
So the rest of the music outlets can hate Amazon for forcing their hand, and i-tunes and microsoft will be forced with a decision. They are big enough that they could try to keep their DRM-infected collections in place, perhaps offering them at reduced rates compared to DRM-free tracks. (Or, if you see the glass as half-empty, consider that the DRM-free tracks would come with an "I buy DRM-Free Music, and therefore, I am a criminal, and must pay extra" fee). Oldsters might remember the fee that was added to blank cassette tapes and blank CDs marked as blank "AUDIO" CDs. This is how the industry dealt with their fear that anyone with a tape deck and a CD player was 'ripping them off', and I see no reason for them to be original now.
Perhaps Microsoft, i-Tunes and such could contract big-name acts to come over and release only DRM-infected tracks EXCLUSIVELY through their websites. That would be a clever way to get people to succumb to their DRM-Protection; even if people knew about it, understood it, and didn't like it, they would still Buy it if they wanted the product badly enough.
It would also make them the New Record Labels.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
"Hey Bill, I see you finally caved in and mowed your lawn, huh?"
"Yeah, it was up to my knees, and I figured..."
"Thanks A Lot, Asshole!"
I imagine it was the same with DRM-Free music, nobody wanted to be the first to sell it, and be hated by the RIAA. Smaller sites like magnatune and mp3tunes were too small to be a threat, so they were like weeding the garden, and didn't really count. But we knew the end was near when we heard Steve Jobs half-hearted anti-DRM speech.
But now, like Fish says, "The game is over!". Amazon has announced that they will have DRM-free music available later this year.
So the rest of the music outlets can hate Amazon for forcing their hand, and i-tunes and microsoft will be forced with a decision. They are big enough that they could try to keep their DRM-infected collections in place, perhaps offering them at reduced rates compared to DRM-free tracks. (Or, if you see the glass as half-empty, consider that the DRM-free tracks would come with an "I buy DRM-Free Music, and therefore, I am a criminal, and must pay extra" fee). Oldsters might remember the fee that was added to blank cassette tapes and blank CDs marked as blank "AUDIO" CDs. This is how the industry dealt with their fear that anyone with a tape deck and a CD player was 'ripping them off', and I see no reason for them to be original now.
Perhaps Microsoft, i-Tunes and such could contract big-name acts to come over and release only DRM-infected tracks EXCLUSIVELY through their websites. That would be a clever way to get people to succumb to their DRM-Protection; even if people knew about it, understood it, and didn't like it, they would still Buy it if they wanted the product badly enough.
It would also make them the New Record Labels.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: DRM Sucks, Million Dollar Idea, Music Industry
Thursday, May 03, 2007
The Internet Revolution
BBC is reporting on the latest (and largest) flare-up of THE CODE, a magical 32-digit Hexadecimal number which can be used to defeat the encoding on every DVD manufactured to date. I won't reprint the number here, but check out
this myspace page for a clue
OF course the AACS was more than just disappointed that some basement hacker defeated their code on his winter break, and tried to get websites like digg.com to delete posts or content containing "THE CODE". Of course, the blogosphere reacted violently, reposting the code as fast as webmasters could delete the posts, and eventually digg.com crashed.
Its too late now, the code is leaked, and for those who know what to do with it, all DVDs manufactured before 3 May 2007 are now unprotected.
It will be interesting to see how this gets resolved, because the question to be answered is "How public should public knowledge be?" Or possibly, "Can or Should some public knowledge be removed from the internet?" For example, if someone figures out the administrator username and password for a government online database, or some local financial institution, and pops the username/password on the internet, there is simply no stopping the spread of information. How can the entire blogosphere and all internet users be held accountable for such actions?
The answer you are looking for is: They can't.
It seems right (to me anyways) that some uber-internet-administrator-person should be able to delete all references to such info in the interest of national security, but as we learned from Spider Man, 'With great power comes great responsibility' and we have also learned, Americans love to abuse power. So those with the power need to be monitored, but "Who watches the watchers?"
It also seems right (to me anyways) that freedom of speech be maintained. Somewhere between these beliefs is a line that has to be drawn, and it's the kind of line that gets drawn in all the touchy topics like abortion and gun control and such. People endlessly bicker about where the line gets drawn, and mistake their opinions as facts.
Like I said; interesting to see how this pans out.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
this myspace page for a clue
OF course the AACS was more than just disappointed that some basement hacker defeated their code on his winter break, and tried to get websites like digg.com to delete posts or content containing "THE CODE". Of course, the blogosphere reacted violently, reposting the code as fast as webmasters could delete the posts, and eventually digg.com crashed.
Its too late now, the code is leaked, and for those who know what to do with it, all DVDs manufactured before 3 May 2007 are now unprotected.
It will be interesting to see how this gets resolved, because the question to be answered is "How public should public knowledge be?" Or possibly, "Can or Should some public knowledge be removed from the internet?" For example, if someone figures out the administrator username and password for a government online database, or some local financial institution, and pops the username/password on the internet, there is simply no stopping the spread of information. How can the entire blogosphere and all internet users be held accountable for such actions?
The answer you are looking for is: They can't.
It seems right (to me anyways) that some uber-internet-administrator-person should be able to delete all references to such info in the interest of national security, but as we learned from Spider Man, 'With great power comes great responsibility' and we have also learned, Americans love to abuse power. So those with the power need to be monitored, but "Who watches the watchers?"
It also seems right (to me anyways) that freedom of speech be maintained. Somewhere between these beliefs is a line that has to be drawn, and it's the kind of line that gets drawn in all the touchy topics like abortion and gun control and such. People endlessly bicker about where the line gets drawn, and mistake their opinions as facts.
Like I said; interesting to see how this pans out.
Blog on,
-CZ
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Open Letter To Music Industry Execs
Sounds like it's only a matter of time before you get rid of DRM and the idiot who signed off on it. You don't have a choice really. Without a massive worldwide task force to police every single online transmission, and punish offenders, you simply are not going to stop file sharing. Remember when CDs came out and people could make high-quality copies of new releases from CD to cassette tape ? Remember how you cried yourself to sleep thinking of all those lost dollars? What did you NOT learn from that experience?
Remember Buisness 101 Law of Supply and Demand? Until the price of songs comes down to meet the demand, people will simply P2P their music, or pass on it. Its a mixed blessing: the prevalence of instant music accessibility has driven down the price point. Accept it, and bring the prices down enough that your customers will gladly pay to download the song from you than to try and figure out how BitTorrent works. Hell, if songs were a quarter apiece, I'd probably pay you to download it again, instead of walking out to the car to get the CD!
Instead of crying about how the price of music has gone down, rejoice that your distribution costs have reduced exponentially! Rejoice that you can reach markets you never dreamed of, in countries where CDs have to be sent in by carrier pigeon or camel-ed across the desert!
Now that that's all cleared up, where is the next "Hotel California"? Where is the next "Jagged Little Pill"? Where is the next "Nevermind"? The crap you put out now is the 'Reality TV Programming' of music. You are quick to push shitbands like The Fray, but have you even heard of Vampire Hands? Jagged Spiral? Nothing Gained? Betty X? Where is the imagination? Where is the experimentation? Is Trent Reznor the only Visionary you could find? You need to MAKE new genres, not try to copy ones which were designed to poke fun at you. Let the kids have their "Indie", and make something they haven't even dreamed of.
Stop wasting your resources fighting a losing battle AGAINST YOUR OWN CUSTOMERS, and spend them on making it even easier to get music to your customers!
Get in bed with companies no one else could imagine. Fire your marketing staff, and hire some 16-year olds to run the think tank. Give away free mp3 downloads with Happy Meals or Apple Jacks or Little Debbies.
Figure out why people can't buy a song the second they hear it, anywhere, anytime. If there was a "MINE!" button on your radio, and it cost a quarter to push it, and whammo-o! people could own a copy of the song they were listening to... If there was a way to access the song purchase via cell phone... If there was a simple way for people to provide access to your downloads through links on their own website or e-mail signatures...
If you diverted your funding away from lawsuits against your customers and into technology like this......can your tiny minds grasp how much money you would make?
Also, get people to think about music when they are NOT near their computer, because if you read http://lefsetz.com/ he will tell you that radio simply isn't doing it.
One more thing, abolish Dashboard Confessional. In fact, abolish the entire Emo genre. It is the open chancre sore on the the face of music history.
No charge for this advice.
Love,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Remember Buisness 101 Law of Supply and Demand? Until the price of songs comes down to meet the demand, people will simply P2P their music, or pass on it. Its a mixed blessing: the prevalence of instant music accessibility has driven down the price point. Accept it, and bring the prices down enough that your customers will gladly pay to download the song from you than to try and figure out how BitTorrent works. Hell, if songs were a quarter apiece, I'd probably pay you to download it again, instead of walking out to the car to get the CD!
Instead of crying about how the price of music has gone down, rejoice that your distribution costs have reduced exponentially! Rejoice that you can reach markets you never dreamed of, in countries where CDs have to be sent in by carrier pigeon or camel-ed across the desert!
Now that that's all cleared up, where is the next "Hotel California"? Where is the next "Jagged Little Pill"? Where is the next "Nevermind"? The crap you put out now is the 'Reality TV Programming' of music. You are quick to push shitbands like The Fray, but have you even heard of Vampire Hands? Jagged Spiral? Nothing Gained? Betty X? Where is the imagination? Where is the experimentation? Is Trent Reznor the only Visionary you could find? You need to MAKE new genres, not try to copy ones which were designed to poke fun at you. Let the kids have their "Indie", and make something they haven't even dreamed of.
Stop wasting your resources fighting a losing battle AGAINST YOUR OWN CUSTOMERS, and spend them on making it even easier to get music to your customers!
Get in bed with companies no one else could imagine. Fire your marketing staff, and hire some 16-year olds to run the think tank. Give away free mp3 downloads with Happy Meals or Apple Jacks or Little Debbies.
Figure out why people can't buy a song the second they hear it, anywhere, anytime. If there was a "MINE!" button on your radio, and it cost a quarter to push it, and whammo-o! people could own a copy of the song they were listening to... If there was a way to access the song purchase via cell phone... If there was a simple way for people to provide access to your downloads through links on their own website or e-mail signatures...
If you diverted your funding away from lawsuits against your customers and into technology like this......can your tiny minds grasp how much money you would make?
Also, get people to think about music when they are NOT near their computer, because if you read http://lefsetz.com/ he will tell you that radio simply isn't doing it.
One more thing, abolish Dashboard Confessional. In fact, abolish the entire Emo genre. It is the open chancre sore on the the face of music history.
No charge for this advice.
Love,
-CZ
Labels: DRM Sucks, Music Industry, Open Letter
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Bum Rush The Charts
An interesting idea, the website bumrushthecharts.blogspot.com is urging people with I-Tunes accounts to purchase an indie single today and push it to #1 on the charts as a 'stick it to the record industry' gesture.
How the band is selected is beyond me, and isn't the fact that your music on I-Tunes (and therefore DRM infected) imply that you have given in to the man, and how is it possible to 'Stick it to the man' by buying music on his website???
I would probably dig deeper before participating, to make sure you aren't getting sucked into a very clever marketing scheme, but I don't have an I-Suck account, so I'm not going to fret about it. If you are interested in proving that a bunch of people can send an indie single to #1, and if you think that will somehow make the record industry jealous, head over to the following link and show your support.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
How the band is selected is beyond me, and isn't the fact that your music on I-Tunes (and therefore DRM infected) imply that you have given in to the man, and how is it possible to 'Stick it to the man' by buying music on his website???
I would probably dig deeper before participating, to make sure you aren't getting sucked into a very clever marketing scheme, but I don't have an I-Suck account, so I'm not going to fret about it. If you are interested in proving that a bunch of people can send an indie single to #1, and if you think that will somehow make the record industry jealous, head over to the following link and show your support.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: DRM Sucks, music, Music Industry
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
The 2007 'Worst Company in America' Award
Conratulations to the RIAA on their overwhelming landslide victory in the 'Worst Company in America' Award" for 2007!
Don't forget, this month is Boycott the RIAA month! Help get the word out that DRM infection and lawsuits against innocent people are not acceptable. Tell the Recording Industry to read Lefsetz if they want to know why their CD sales are in the shitter.
Tell them a quality band or two might be in their own best interest. Arcade Fire is a good start. Hinder (Rhymes with 'bee-hind-er') is Not. Tell them Divas are DONE, and they should trade in one Gwen Steffani for a dozen talented bands. Tell them to shoot their marketing departments and put Lefsetz or myself in charge, (maybe both), and we could turn that dying dog around. Maybe.
Or perhaps, tell them to stop living in the past, join us in the present, and listen to reason, instead of Keeping Their Heads Buried In Their Lower Intestines.
For gods sake, someone tell them that MTV is dead, and we need a necromancer to bring it back!
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Don't forget, this month is Boycott the RIAA month! Help get the word out that DRM infection and lawsuits against innocent people are not acceptable. Tell the Recording Industry to read Lefsetz if they want to know why their CD sales are in the shitter.
Tell them a quality band or two might be in their own best interest. Arcade Fire is a good start. Hinder (Rhymes with 'bee-hind-er') is Not. Tell them Divas are DONE, and they should trade in one Gwen Steffani for a dozen talented bands. Tell them to shoot their marketing departments and put Lefsetz or myself in charge, (maybe both), and we could turn that dying dog around. Maybe.
Or perhaps, tell them to stop living in the past, join us in the present, and listen to reason, instead of Keeping Their Heads Buried In Their Lower Intestines.
For gods sake, someone tell them that MTV is dead, and we need a necromancer to bring it back!
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Business Phenomena, DRM Sucks, Music Industry
Friday, March 09, 2007
Burnlounge
Burnlounge is a classic Multi-Level Marketing site that gives YOU the OPPORTUNITY to make money selling music! Open and Manage your own virtual music store! Your very own Sam Goody (or Musicland, for those who remember such things). Make your OWN website, PROMOTE it YOURSELF, then sit back and RAKE IN THE CASH!
Of course, we know this is bullshit. What this really is, is a chance for you to try to make other people money.
Care to know who your comptetition is? I-Tunes. Napster. Rhapsody. You might have heard of them. I hope you have some $$$$ because it's going to take some serious marketing to compete with them. Somehow, burnlounge believes that you are so foolish, and that the power of Multi-Level Marketing will somehow make them a competitor.
Talk about despiration.
Now, they might have had a ghost of a chance except for three things.
1) D
2) R
3) M
The fact that burnlounge has partnered up with Warner, Universal, EMI, and Sony should tell you all you need to know. Never mind that they try to play both sides by including IODA and CD Baby, it did not take long reading through the Terms of Use to find this:
Conditions to Sublicensing of Digital Downloads to You. Digital Rights Management ("DRM") software will be downloaded onto your Approved Electronic Devices along with your Digital Download music files, and will limit your uses as specified in the Usage Rules.
A lot of the online reviews of Burnlounge talk about whether the business model of MLM can succeed or not. It can't, but that misses the point:
DRM IS EVIL!
Don't support burnlounge. Support DRM-Free sites like
emusic
mp3tunes
Audio Lunchbox
Hype Machine
Garage Band
Amazon.com
mp3 Fiesta
etc...
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Of course, we know this is bullshit. What this really is, is a chance for you to try to make other people money.
Care to know who your comptetition is? I-Tunes. Napster. Rhapsody. You might have heard of them. I hope you have some $$$$ because it's going to take some serious marketing to compete with them. Somehow, burnlounge believes that you are so foolish, and that the power of Multi-Level Marketing will somehow make them a competitor.
Talk about despiration.
Now, they might have had a ghost of a chance except for three things.
1) D
2) R
3) M
The fact that burnlounge has partnered up with Warner, Universal, EMI, and Sony should tell you all you need to know. Never mind that they try to play both sides by including IODA and CD Baby, it did not take long reading through the Terms of Use to find this:
Conditions to Sublicensing of Digital Downloads to You. Digital Rights Management ("DRM") software will be downloaded onto your Approved Electronic Devices along with your Digital Download music files, and will limit your uses as specified in the Usage Rules.
A lot of the online reviews of Burnlounge talk about whether the business model of MLM can succeed or not. It can't, but that misses the point:
DRM IS EVIL!
Don't support burnlounge. Support DRM-Free sites like
emusic
mp3tunes
Audio Lunchbox
Hype Machine
Garage Band
Amazon.com
mp3 Fiesta
etc...
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Business Phenomena, DRM Sucks, Music Industry
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
March 2007 - Boycott the RIAA Month
The fight is on.
Gizmodo has declared March 2007 Boycott the RIAA Month
Check the Manifesto here. It explains what the RIAA is, what it does, and why it is harmful to artists, consumers, and the music business as a whole.
If you purchase music at all, whether in CD or download form, and ESPECIALLY if you have an I-Tunes account, you should read this.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Gizmodo has declared March 2007 Boycott the RIAA Month
Check the Manifesto here. It explains what the RIAA is, what it does, and why it is harmful to artists, consumers, and the music business as a whole.
If you purchase music at all, whether in CD or download form, and ESPECIALLY if you have an I-Tunes account, you should read this.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: DRM Sucks, Music Industry
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
"Without Logic and Merit"
For some time now, I've been railing on DRM or Digital Rights Management the poison with which the Recording Industry laces MP3 Files. Chief pusher of the poison has been I-Tunes. With DRM removed, I would gladly have an account on I-Tunes and it would probably change my music buying patterns forevermore. As it is, I have poked fun at I-Tunes since its inept inception, despite the fact that sales from I-Tunes now exceed hard-copy sales.
Instead of backing down, and saying that I was wrong, I came to the conclusion that I-Tunes, Napster (the New Napster), Rhapsody and their ilk are still poisonous, wretched things, and online consumers are simply too stupid or lazy to know that they are giving their money away.
Looks like I might be right.
The surprising news is not that Warner Music steadfastly, adamantly, diametrically opposes the removal of the poison known as DRM, and said the very idea is "without logic and merit", even though continuing to use DRM is like pissing in their own food dish, then complaining about the taste.
The surprising news is that Steve Jobs is the man behind the suggestion to remove DRM. Maybe he reads my blog? Color me shocked.
I think all it will take is a very popular online service to offer un-poisoned downloads, and some big musicians to tell companies like Warner Music to kiss their ass, and then Warner Music can go shrivel up in the corner and die, along with some Old, Fat, White Suits who work there.
Rumors of Amazon offering MP3 Downloads abound, and Myspace is inching its way into music distribution for indies. Mp3tunes.com has been trying this approach for years, but they are simply not adding the big names, nor are they spending a dollar on marketing. Garageband.com is doing better.
Sadly, none of these outlets will work unless people get educated about music copy protection and make a stand. New labels need to open up, working through the new outlets (Like garageband.com) Artists have to cope with the fact that their music will be traded on P2P systems. They have before, and they still are. DRM has not stopped it.
But most importantly, people need to stop being Sheeple and refuse to fund such horrific business practices. Read the damn EULA when you make an account with I-Tunes!
If you understand that the hamburger you are buying is laced with poison, and you don't care, then you can still go right ahead and consume away, that's fine. Hell, people still bought Nike after they were busted running sweatshops. But at least you should know what you are buying, or more importantly, NOT buying.
Now that I think about it, this is a good time for the music industry to iron these distribution problems out, because there is very little music the major labels are releasing that is worth buying. All the good stuff is through the indie channels now anyways.
Thanks to Lifehacker for the link.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Instead of backing down, and saying that I was wrong, I came to the conclusion that I-Tunes, Napster (the New Napster), Rhapsody and their ilk are still poisonous, wretched things, and online consumers are simply too stupid or lazy to know that they are giving their money away.
Looks like I might be right.
The surprising news is not that Warner Music steadfastly, adamantly, diametrically opposes the removal of the poison known as DRM, and said the very idea is "without logic and merit", even though continuing to use DRM is like pissing in their own food dish, then complaining about the taste.
The surprising news is that Steve Jobs is the man behind the suggestion to remove DRM. Maybe he reads my blog? Color me shocked.
I think all it will take is a very popular online service to offer un-poisoned downloads, and some big musicians to tell companies like Warner Music to kiss their ass, and then Warner Music can go shrivel up in the corner and die, along with some Old, Fat, White Suits who work there.
Rumors of Amazon offering MP3 Downloads abound, and Myspace is inching its way into music distribution for indies. Mp3tunes.com has been trying this approach for years, but they are simply not adding the big names, nor are they spending a dollar on marketing. Garageband.com is doing better.
Sadly, none of these outlets will work unless people get educated about music copy protection and make a stand. New labels need to open up, working through the new outlets (Like garageband.com) Artists have to cope with the fact that their music will be traded on P2P systems. They have before, and they still are. DRM has not stopped it.
But most importantly, people need to stop being Sheeple and refuse to fund such horrific business practices. Read the damn EULA when you make an account with I-Tunes!
If you understand that the hamburger you are buying is laced with poison, and you don't care, then you can still go right ahead and consume away, that's fine. Hell, people still bought Nike after they were busted running sweatshops. But at least you should know what you are buying, or more importantly, NOT buying.
Now that I think about it, this is a good time for the music industry to iron these distribution problems out, because there is very little music the major labels are releasing that is worth buying. All the good stuff is through the indie channels now anyways.
Thanks to Lifehacker for the link.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: DRM Sucks
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
The Death Of DRM, and some Predictions
Goodbye DRM, glad I could help lay your fat ass to waste.
Instead of writing predictions for 2007, I'll just give you this link. Otherwise, our lists would be close enough to the same that I'd be sued for copyright infringement.
Thanks to J-Man for the links.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Instead of writing predictions for 2007, I'll just give you this link. Otherwise, our lists would be close enough to the same that I'd be sued for copyright infringement.
Thanks to J-Man for the links.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: DRM Sucks, Predictions
Wednesday, January 03, 2007
Ranti-DRM
I.P.O.D. (The Ice Princess Of Darkness, for those who don't know) asked me to explain DRM (Digital Rights Management)
DRM - The long, boring version:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Rights_Management
(When in doubt, always ask wikipedia)
or this http://www.eff.org/IP/DRM/guide/
DRM - Conrad's interpretation:
You can play MP3s without DRM on any player. They just work.
When you go to play a MP3 with DRM on it, the MP3 file asks the device if it is OK to play. The device (IPod, Computer, whatever) must verify that it is OK for you to play the file. It might check whether you have really paid for the file, it might check to see if the device you are playing it on is 'approved' or not, it might check to see if the company that made the file still wants you to continue playing it or not.
DRM - Conrad's lovely car analogy:
If your parents gave you a car for your birthday, and it did not have DRM, you could drive it when and where you liked.
But if the car had DRM, then every time you went to put the key in the ignition, the car would call your parents and ask if it was OK for you to drive, and it might call the city to see if the car is licensed and paid for, and it might call Ford to get permission from them as well.
So, the car really isn't *Yours* if you need permission to drive it. And mp3 files with DRM are not really *Yours* if you need permission to play them.
Really, it changes the music from a Product (that you buy and then can listen to forever) into a Service (you pay for the permission to listen to the files, and that permission can be denied by the service provider.)
Some people don't care, but music is just the start. Soon books, movies and games will follow suit, so I think DRM should be stopped before it gets out of hand. It is the media manufacturers responsibility to come up with a reasonable solution for copy protection, and DRM is not it.
DRM - More Anti-DRM stuff:
http://boycott-riaa.com/
http://ihatedrm.com
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
DRM - The long, boring version:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Rights_Management
(When in doubt, always ask wikipedia)
or this http://www.eff.org/IP/DRM/guide/
DRM - Conrad's interpretation:
You can play MP3s without DRM on any player. They just work.
When you go to play a MP3 with DRM on it, the MP3 file asks the device if it is OK to play. The device (IPod, Computer, whatever) must verify that it is OK for you to play the file. It might check whether you have really paid for the file, it might check to see if the device you are playing it on is 'approved' or not, it might check to see if the company that made the file still wants you to continue playing it or not.
DRM - Conrad's lovely car analogy:
If your parents gave you a car for your birthday, and it did not have DRM, you could drive it when and where you liked.
But if the car had DRM, then every time you went to put the key in the ignition, the car would call your parents and ask if it was OK for you to drive, and it might call the city to see if the car is licensed and paid for, and it might call Ford to get permission from them as well.
So, the car really isn't *Yours* if you need permission to drive it. And mp3 files with DRM are not really *Yours* if you need permission to play them.
Really, it changes the music from a Product (that you buy and then can listen to forever) into a Service (you pay for the permission to listen to the files, and that permission can be denied by the service provider.)
Some people don't care, but music is just the start. Soon books, movies and games will follow suit, so I think DRM should be stopped before it gets out of hand. It is the media manufacturers responsibility to come up with a reasonable solution for copy protection, and DRM is not it.
DRM - More Anti-DRM stuff:
http://boycott-riaa.com/
http://ihatedrm.com
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: DRM Sucks
Sunday, December 31, 2006
Hey 2006, don't let NYE hit you in the ass on the way out!
It's the end of the year, and the poor-old internet gets loaded down with ten-thousand lists of things people think were the "best of" as though 2006 had the best of anything at all.
Emo music hit its Godforsaken Peak this year, and hopefully, 2007 will find everyone involved with this travisty of music will die a slow painful death involving internal hemmoraging. Doubly so for Metal Emo bands. [Special note to the band known as Hinder: Does your name rhyme with Binder? As in Be-Hinder? It should. Your music rhymes with ASS. Your song "Lips of an Angel" is a mockery of music. Your label, A&R rep, band manager, roadies, fans, and any business which perpetuated this Shit-Rock should have the choice of being burned at the stake or exiled to the bottom of the Pacific Ocean. Your choice. Right after Dashboard Confessional, of course.]
DRM also hit it's peak, thanks to I-Tunes and all the I-Diots who bought an I-Pod. Did NONE of you investigate the other options? If you can't name three other mp3 player brands, you shouldn't be allowed to buy one. If you don't know what DRM is, you shouldn't be allowed to buy one. Sheep, sheep, sheep. When you do find out what you really bought, listen for the sound of me laughing at you...
Thankfully, Citypages reports that 2006 was the year that Superstar DJ's died, This assumes that there actually were such things. But if it's true, then I guess 2006 wasn't all bad. Citypages has lots of year-end lists, esp for music, but I find myself turning more towards Vita.MN as my Minneapolis To-Do Resource.
For myself, I'm glad 2006 is over. I will look back on 2006 as a year that was high-maintenance, low-payoff. As far as what I did this year, (besides bitching here on my blog...)
-Although the score for Pray For Daylight (also known as 'The Vampire Movie') was done ages ago, we have yet to see a final version release. To all of you who keep asking to see it, I assure you that it will eventually see the light of day (pun intended, and I promise no more bad puns. This year, anyways.)
-I finished German and graduated from the University of MN with a Bachelors of Philosophy Degree. Hopefully it will soon be supplemented with a Computer Science second major, which should qualify me to work at a Burger King instead of just the Philosophy Major, which qualifies me to debate on the ethics of eating there.
-I worked on The Demonslayers Handbook a lot this year. (also known as "The Book", and not to be confused with "The Good Book") I'm taking a short break from that now, to focus on audio recording, and will attack the DSH again in January.
-"Days From Evil" the Jagged Spiral project creeps towards completion, and the third single, 'Forced Entry' has been entered into the Rift Magazine Compilation CD 2 Contest. My 6-week sore throat and chest cold, and a lovely rebound of congestion is not helping to get this project completed soon. But we are proclaiming 2007 to be The Year of the Spiral.
-The Jagged Spiral website progresses in short bursts of manic creativity, we will release an official announcement once we have some real content. In the meantime, you can catch some audio clips on our myspace page. www.myspace.com/jaggedspiral
-I did not watch any television this year. None. It isn't worth my time.
-I don't drink, smoke or weigh any more or less than I did last year.
Hopefully, 2007 will be more of a payoff for all the work I did in 2006.
Hope you all have a safe, happy, and unboring New Year's Eve. Hopefully, tonight finds you doing something interesting. Probably Not this.
Don't forget, 2007:The Year of the Spiral!
Blog on,
-CZ
5 Comments
Permalink
Emo music hit its Godforsaken Peak this year, and hopefully, 2007 will find everyone involved with this travisty of music will die a slow painful death involving internal hemmoraging. Doubly so for Metal Emo bands. [Special note to the band known as Hinder: Does your name rhyme with Binder? As in Be-Hinder? It should. Your music rhymes with ASS. Your song "Lips of an Angel" is a mockery of music. Your label, A&R rep, band manager, roadies, fans, and any business which perpetuated this Shit-Rock should have the choice of being burned at the stake or exiled to the bottom of the Pacific Ocean. Your choice. Right after Dashboard Confessional, of course.]
DRM also hit it's peak, thanks to I-Tunes and all the I-Diots who bought an I-Pod. Did NONE of you investigate the other options? If you can't name three other mp3 player brands, you shouldn't be allowed to buy one. If you don't know what DRM is, you shouldn't be allowed to buy one. Sheep, sheep, sheep. When you do find out what you really bought, listen for the sound of me laughing at you...
Thankfully, Citypages reports that 2006 was the year that Superstar DJ's died, This assumes that there actually were such things. But if it's true, then I guess 2006 wasn't all bad. Citypages has lots of year-end lists, esp for music, but I find myself turning more towards Vita.MN as my Minneapolis To-Do Resource.
Here is the list of the top words from 2006 according to Miriam Webster.
For myself, I'm glad 2006 is over. I will look back on 2006 as a year that was high-maintenance, low-payoff. As far as what I did this year, (besides bitching here on my blog...)
-Although the score for Pray For Daylight (also known as 'The Vampire Movie') was done ages ago, we have yet to see a final version release. To all of you who keep asking to see it, I assure you that it will eventually see the light of day (pun intended, and I promise no more bad puns. This year, anyways.)
-I finished German and graduated from the University of MN with a Bachelors of Philosophy Degree. Hopefully it will soon be supplemented with a Computer Science second major, which should qualify me to work at a Burger King instead of just the Philosophy Major, which qualifies me to debate on the ethics of eating there.
-I worked on The Demonslayers Handbook a lot this year. (also known as "The Book", and not to be confused with "The Good Book") I'm taking a short break from that now, to focus on audio recording, and will attack the DSH again in January.
-"Days From Evil" the Jagged Spiral project creeps towards completion, and the third single, 'Forced Entry' has been entered into the Rift Magazine Compilation CD 2 Contest. My 6-week sore throat and chest cold, and a lovely rebound of congestion is not helping to get this project completed soon. But we are proclaiming 2007 to be The Year of the Spiral.
-The Jagged Spiral website progresses in short bursts of manic creativity, we will release an official announcement once we have some real content. In the meantime, you can catch some audio clips on our myspace page. www.myspace.com/jaggedspiral
-I did not watch any television this year. None. It isn't worth my time.
-I don't drink, smoke or weigh any more or less than I did last year.
Hopefully, 2007 will be more of a payoff for all the work I did in 2006.
Hope you all have a safe, happy, and unboring New Year's Eve. Hopefully, tonight finds you doing something interesting. Probably Not this.
Don't forget, 2007:The Year of the Spiral!
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: anti, Dashboard Confessional Sucks, DRM Sucks, Emo Sucks, Jagged Spiral, year-in-review
Friday, November 03, 2006
Get OFF my side!
You might think I would agree with this article at the Inquirer written by Charlie Demerjian, which takes a stab at DRM.
But I don't. While DRM is just plain evil, Charlie Demerjian ties the concept only to Microsoft, and specifically uses it to bash Windows Media Player 11, which, Charlie point out, no longer lets you back up licenses for DRM-infected content.
That much is accurate, and one more compelling reason to avoid DRM-infected content, but the rest of his article is useless anti-Microsoft flaming, like this:
What WiMP11 represents is one of the biggest thefts of your rights that I can think of. MS planned this...
Microsoft did not invent DRM, nor is Microsoft the only user of DRM. Does your article even mention iTunes and other sites that use DRM? No. Does your article offer alternatives to Windows Media Player? No.
DOES YOUR ARTICLE MENTION THAT ANYONE WHO CAN SPELL DRM CAN TURN IT OFF IN WINDOWS MEDIA PLAYER?
Charlie Demerjian, you are an Idiot. Get off my side. I'm pleased with your abject hatred of DRM, but taking that hatred out on MS and Windows Media Player is not only unwarranted but bad journalism.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
But I don't. While DRM is just plain evil, Charlie Demerjian ties the concept only to Microsoft, and specifically uses it to bash Windows Media Player 11, which, Charlie point out, no longer lets you back up licenses for DRM-infected content.
That much is accurate, and one more compelling reason to avoid DRM-infected content, but the rest of his article is useless anti-Microsoft flaming, like this:
What WiMP11 represents is one of the biggest thefts of your rights that I can think of. MS planned this...
Microsoft did not invent DRM, nor is Microsoft the only user of DRM. Does your article even mention iTunes and other sites that use DRM? No. Does your article offer alternatives to Windows Media Player? No.
DOES YOUR ARTICLE MENTION THAT ANYONE WHO CAN SPELL DRM CAN TURN IT OFF IN WINDOWS MEDIA PLAYER?
Charlie Demerjian, you are an Idiot. Get off my side. I'm pleased with your abject hatred of DRM, but taking that hatred out on MS and Windows Media Player is not only unwarranted but bad journalism.
Blog on,
-CZ
Kill Your Ipod
If you are a music fan, sooner or later you will learn what DRM stands for.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Blog on,
-CZ
Friday, July 28, 2006
Sony BMG tries DRM Free
Hmm,
http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?id=17212&ch=infotech
Guess they read my blog..
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?id=17212&ch=infotech
Guess they read my blog..
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: DRM Sucks, Music Industry
Wednesday, July 26, 2006
DRM = (Customers) Dont Really Matter
Ah yes, another un-satisfied customer of DRM. Sorry you learned the hard way.
Hey RIAA, can you hear me now?
Blog on,
-CZ
1 Comments
Permalink
Hey RIAA, can you hear me now?
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: DRM Sucks, Music Industry
Thursday, June 01, 2006
The Fight Against DRM
There is no question that DRM (Digital Rights Management) is evil. Imagine a virus on your computer that looks at the media you use (movies, games, music, e-books, etc) and decides whether you have the right to use the media or not. If the virus doesn't decide you have the right to use the media, it stops the media from being accessed or copied.
How could this virus possibly know whether you have the right to use the media or not? What are it's criteria? You would never load such a virus on your computer...
But some of you did. Sony got busted making a virus just like this, which infected thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of unsuspecting user's computers.
I understand when people want to 'rise up' and tell The Man that they can't do shit like that. The link above is to a group Defective By Design who wants to put an end to DRM, and 'protect our rights'. I admire their spirit. I applaud their cause. I wish them well. But I won't be joining them.
I won't join them because the approach is wrong. Destructive Criticism of simply saying "Nope, you can't do that!" to the Recording Industry and manufacturers/distributers of DRM is not going to work in a free market society. It is an ineffective approach to stand outside the capital and complain that companies aren't making products the way you want them. FlashMob protests of this nature are really socio-political-jacking-off. You feel like you are doing something, but you aren't. [Ed Note: Hmm, kind of like this blog...]
So that I don't end up falling into the same trap of Destructive Criticism, and simply complaining that Defective By Design's plan wont work, and saying "Nope, you can't do that!" I will make some suggestions of Constructive Critcism:
How about using this new organization to COME UP WITH A BETTER COPY PROTECTION IDEA THAN DRM. Of course, this idea doesn't do much good for Johnny Consumer, who is pissed because he just realized that he does not 'own' all the music he bought on ITunes, and now he wants to Do Something. Without mad programming skillz, what is Johnny Consumer going to do? Of course! Pick up a sign, and storm the capitol! Hmm. Guess we need a better solution...
How about looking at the problem from the industry's point of view? What would you do if you were the CEO of Virgin Records and you learned that record sales were down and piracy was up? Fight fire with fire? Two wrongs make a right, right? Of course that's not the case, but they did it anyway. We know they suck, but what would you do differently?
What if the music industry changed music to a service instead of a product? Design a service which allows people to stream ANY audio or video recording on demand. Now, cross-breed the IPod with a cellular phone, and tie it to a monthly subscripton. Every audio and video recording at your fingertips, and no more concept of 'buying' or 'owning' media. You pay for the right to access it. Suddenly, we are talking about a product I would sell my fucking car to own, and to Hell with Cable, XM, Sattelite TV and Internet radio. Let's see, Gas Bill, Internet Bill, Electric Bill, Media Access Bill...
What if Defective By Design actually told you about other sites that Don't use DRM? Strange that they dont. They are so Anti DRM, that they focus only on the companies using it, instead of the companies that aren't. www.mp3tunes.com has been doing DRM-Free music for years. Amazon.com too.
...and audiolunchbox...
...and Hype Machine...
...and GarageBand...
...and I'm doing this from memory.
If you really want to fight the fire-fighting-fire with fire, hows about advocating for some software which defeats DRM? Like this?
No. What Defective By Design intends is a political battle waged on the steps of Congress, wrapped in the American Flag, and touting words like Liberty and Freedom, flogging their signs flacidly in the air, in the hopes that the big "DRM" in a circle with a slash through it will change anything. This might work to keep a Wal-Mart from opening in your town, but I think it is a losing approach to fighting DRM.
So, to Defective By Design, I say "Good luck!" but if this were a fight I would put my money on the Recording Industry. I would feel pretty dirty about it, but the odds are too good to pass up...
PS: Change your freaking name! "Defective By Design" makes me think that the DRM technology can be 'fixed' somehow. If you really want to completely obliterate DRM, you need to give it an unattractive name, like "The AntiFreedom Virus" or something...
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
How could this virus possibly know whether you have the right to use the media or not? What are it's criteria? You would never load such a virus on your computer...
But some of you did. Sony got busted making a virus just like this, which infected thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of unsuspecting user's computers.
I understand when people want to 'rise up' and tell The Man that they can't do shit like that. The link above is to a group Defective By Design who wants to put an end to DRM, and 'protect our rights'. I admire their spirit. I applaud their cause. I wish them well. But I won't be joining them.
I won't join them because the approach is wrong. Destructive Criticism of simply saying "Nope, you can't do that!" to the Recording Industry and manufacturers/distributers of DRM is not going to work in a free market society. It is an ineffective approach to stand outside the capital and complain that companies aren't making products the way you want them. FlashMob protests of this nature are really socio-political-jacking-off. You feel like you are doing something, but you aren't. [Ed Note: Hmm, kind of like this blog...]
So that I don't end up falling into the same trap of Destructive Criticism, and simply complaining that Defective By Design's plan wont work, and saying "Nope, you can't do that!" I will make some suggestions of Constructive Critcism:
How about using this new organization to COME UP WITH A BETTER COPY PROTECTION IDEA THAN DRM. Of course, this idea doesn't do much good for Johnny Consumer, who is pissed because he just realized that he does not 'own' all the music he bought on ITunes, and now he wants to Do Something. Without mad programming skillz, what is Johnny Consumer going to do? Of course! Pick up a sign, and storm the capitol! Hmm. Guess we need a better solution...
How about looking at the problem from the industry's point of view? What would you do if you were the CEO of Virgin Records and you learned that record sales were down and piracy was up? Fight fire with fire? Two wrongs make a right, right? Of course that's not the case, but they did it anyway. We know they suck, but what would you do differently?
What if the music industry changed music to a service instead of a product? Design a service which allows people to stream ANY audio or video recording on demand. Now, cross-breed the IPod with a cellular phone, and tie it to a monthly subscripton. Every audio and video recording at your fingertips, and no more concept of 'buying' or 'owning' media. You pay for the right to access it. Suddenly, we are talking about a product I would sell my fucking car to own, and to Hell with Cable, XM, Sattelite TV and Internet radio. Let's see, Gas Bill, Internet Bill, Electric Bill, Media Access Bill...
What if Defective By Design actually told you about other sites that Don't use DRM? Strange that they dont. They are so Anti DRM, that they focus only on the companies using it, instead of the companies that aren't. www.mp3tunes.com has been doing DRM-Free music for years. Amazon.com too.
...and audiolunchbox...
...and Hype Machine...
...and GarageBand...
...and I'm doing this from memory.
If you really want to fight the fire-fighting-fire with fire, hows about advocating for some software which defeats DRM? Like this?
No. What Defective By Design intends is a political battle waged on the steps of Congress, wrapped in the American Flag, and touting words like Liberty and Freedom, flogging their signs flacidly in the air, in the hopes that the big "DRM" in a circle with a slash through it will change anything. This might work to keep a Wal-Mart from opening in your town, but I think it is a losing approach to fighting DRM.
So, to Defective By Design, I say "Good luck!" but if this were a fight I would put my money on the Recording Industry. I would feel pretty dirty about it, but the odds are too good to pass up...
PS: Change your freaking name! "Defective By Design" makes me think that the DRM technology can be 'fixed' somehow. If you really want to completely obliterate DRM, you need to give it an unattractive name, like "The AntiFreedom Virus" or something...
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: DRM Sucks, Music Industry
Friday, March 03, 2006
The iNoose, or How I learned to start hating DRM
Click the link above to read the story of someone who came to the sad realization many have already learned since the letters D.R.M (Digital Rights Management) darkened our data collections.
I almost feel bad about the thousands of people who are falling for the iShackle, (sorry, I meant, iPod). I suspect a higher number of them are younger people, who quickly click past all the legaleze of the indecipherable End User License Agreement of their iFools (sorry, I meant iTunes) accounts. Some day, they will realize that iTunes sells a SERVICE and not a PRODUCT, that their music is LEASED and not BOUGHT. It won't be long before they realize they have been fisted, and the saying 'Never trust anyone over 30' becomes the anthem for disillusioned 20-somethings...
Print this blog post out and tape it to your refridgerator door. In ten years from now (probably less) check the newswire for this article,
'Local man fined for listening to music'
Mr Local Guy was more than a little irate when his ten-year old iPod finally bit the dust, and he went to purchase another one from AppleSoft, only to discover that the company had phased the product line (along with the MP6 format) out of existance.
Not to be daunted, Mr Guy downloaded a hacker/conversion program from BitTorrent, and he was able to translate his MP6 files from iTunes into an unprotected ancient technology MP3 Format, still popular among the hacker L337 community. It did not take long for AppleSoft Security Enforcement to deduct a significant fine from his credit account, lock down his transportation and communication services, and change his food-delivery service to MLSR (Minimum-Life-Sustaining-Requirements).
'But how am I supposed to listen to my music collection?' ranted Mr Guy, 'I paid over ten thousand American Euros for my MP6s! I own them! Theyre MINE!'
'Not so', says AppleSoft janitor, Bill Gates, 'Had he read the EULA, he would know that the DRM really does not allow any user to translate the media to any other format, or play them on any unsupported devices.'
When asked how users were supposed to listen to their music collections without supported hardware, the answer came quickly.
'Simple,' Gates laughed, 'they just go over to the new AppleSoft MP7 site and buy them again! The MP6 technology is so six weeks ago! He should be glad we let him access that old stuff for so long!'
Now, with the new-and-improved DRM2 looming on the horizon, With it's built-in 6-month-limit feature, which automatically turns all music into Dashboard Confessional songs after 6-months unless customers keep their liscense payments up to date, people are more wary than ever about the new technology. (Of course members who purchase the DRM-Platinum-Plus-AppleSoft-Tunes Account have the limit extended to 9 months.)...
usw,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
I almost feel bad about the thousands of people who are falling for the iShackle, (sorry, I meant, iPod). I suspect a higher number of them are younger people, who quickly click past all the legaleze of the indecipherable End User License Agreement of their iFools (sorry, I meant iTunes) accounts. Some day, they will realize that iTunes sells a SERVICE and not a PRODUCT, that their music is LEASED and not BOUGHT. It won't be long before they realize they have been fisted, and the saying 'Never trust anyone over 30' becomes the anthem for disillusioned 20-somethings...
Print this blog post out and tape it to your refridgerator door. In ten years from now (probably less) check the newswire for this article,
'Local man fined for listening to music'
Mr Local Guy was more than a little irate when his ten-year old iPod finally bit the dust, and he went to purchase another one from AppleSoft, only to discover that the company had phased the product line (along with the MP6 format) out of existance.
Not to be daunted, Mr Guy downloaded a hacker/conversion program from BitTorrent, and he was able to translate his MP6 files from iTunes into an unprotected ancient technology MP3 Format, still popular among the hacker L337 community. It did not take long for AppleSoft Security Enforcement to deduct a significant fine from his credit account, lock down his transportation and communication services, and change his food-delivery service to MLSR (Minimum-Life-Sustaining-Requirements).
'But how am I supposed to listen to my music collection?' ranted Mr Guy, 'I paid over ten thousand American Euros for my MP6s! I own them! Theyre MINE!'
'Not so', says AppleSoft janitor, Bill Gates, 'Had he read the EULA, he would know that the DRM really does not allow any user to translate the media to any other format, or play them on any unsupported devices.'
When asked how users were supposed to listen to their music collections without supported hardware, the answer came quickly.
'Simple,' Gates laughed, 'they just go over to the new AppleSoft MP7 site and buy them again! The MP6 technology is so six weeks ago! He should be glad we let him access that old stuff for so long!'
Now, with the new-and-improved DRM2 looming on the horizon, With it's built-in 6-month-limit feature, which automatically turns all music into Dashboard Confessional songs after 6-months unless customers keep their liscense payments up to date, people are more wary than ever about the new technology. (Of course members who purchase the DRM-Platinum-Plus-AppleSoft-Tunes Account have the limit extended to 9 months.)...
usw,
-CZ
Labels: anti, DRM Sucks, Music Industry, rant
Tuesday, June 22, 2004
I-Tunes Review
I just downloaded ITunes for Windows, to see how it works. The Player is OK, but Ugly as sin, like it fell out of the Ugly Process() and hit every node on the way down. I-Tunes should take a style tip from Windows Media Player or Winamp. I was more excited about the online storage portion to replace the one I lost when the old mp3.com went under (I had over 200 CDs set up online to stream...)
I WAS excited that is, until the registration asked me for my credit card number. Ick. Isn't it possible to try this service out, and decide if I actually want to use it before forking over my credit card number?
Also, all the music offered through the i-Tunes site is infected with DRM, which is reason enough to stick with...well, Anything else.
Meanwhile, ITunes player only supports IPOD hardware (Which is pronounced backwards as "dopey")
Guess it's back to Media Player / Winamp...
Tune out,
-C
0 Comments
Permalink
I WAS excited that is, until the registration asked me for my credit card number. Ick. Isn't it possible to try this service out, and decide if I actually want to use it before forking over my credit card number?
Also, all the music offered through the i-Tunes site is infected with DRM, which is reason enough to stick with...well, Anything else.
Meanwhile, ITunes player only supports IPOD hardware (Which is pronounced backwards as "dopey")
Guess it's back to Media Player / Winamp...
Tune out,
-C
Blog Feeds
Subscribe to this Blog by E-Mail
Zero Links
Jagged Links
Search
Blog Archives
- January 2004
- February 2004
- March 2004
- April 2004
- May 2004
- June 2004
- July 2004
- August 2004
- September 2004
- October 2004
- November 2004
- December 2004
- January 2005
- February 2005
- March 2005
- April 2005
- May 2005
- June 2005
- July 2005
- August 2005
- September 2005
- October 2005
- November 2005
- December 2005
- January 2006
- February 2006
- March 2006
- April 2006
- May 2006
- June 2006
- July 2006
- August 2006
- September 2006
- October 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
- January 2007
- February 2007
- March 2007
- April 2007
- May 2007
- June 2007
- July 2007
- August 2007
- September 2007
- October 2007
- November 2007
- December 2007
- January 2008
- February 2008
- March 2008
- April 2008
- May 2008
- June 2008
- July 2008
- August 2008
- September 2008
- October 2008
