[vox] Micheal's Minutes: Microsoft and Apple Sell Out Music Fans

[Shwaine]

On Thu, 1 May 2003, R. Douglas Barbieri wrote:

> From http://www.lindows.com/lindows_michaelsminutes.php:
>
> > ...
> > Microsoft is at it again though, trying to use their money and
> > dominance in the OS to get a foothold in music by selling out
> > consumers. Recently, news.com reported  that Microsoft is cozzying up
> > to the leading CD restriction company. This means we're one baby step
> > away from all music CDs ONLY playing on Microsoft Windows XP. Imagine
> > having to buy a copy of Microsoft Windows XP for every music device
> > just so you can listen to your own music, and even then being
> > restricted from making a compilation CD for your car!
> > ...
>

Seeking clarification, because there's a lot of hype and little info in
this tidbit. Reading the article at CNET that was linked to in this little
tidbit, http://news.com.com/2100-1027-998066.html, it would seem this
copy-protection is nothing but the increasingly standard "restrict how a
computer accesses it" sort of deal. The only difference would be the use
of WMA, instead of MP3, both lousy codecs if you ask me, but that's
another matter. It's far short from "having to buy a copy of Microsoft
Windows XP for every music device", since I believe such CDs would still
work in non-computer devices. If MS tries to make everyone buy a license
of WMP for their stereo, car, etc and no such CDs worked on old devices
(like stereos and car CD players), the technology will likely fall flat on
its face. No one wants to buy a whole new stereo system just to listen to
one new CD. It would likely push more people to pirating out of the "f---
this s---" syndrome.

> > ...
> > Apple has understandably succumbed to pressure from the music labels
> > to bolster their chances of securing music licenses for their iTunes
> > music service by trampling music buyers rights. The 2.4% of the world
> > which use Macs will find out that all the music in their newly
> > announced service is wrapped in a digital padlock. This gives Apple
> > (or the record labels) the ability to control what a buyer can do with
> > the music they purchase.
> > ...
>

If you read Slashdot, you would see that someone has already posted ways
to get around Apple's AAC file protections. It was in yesterday's review
of the iTunes Music Store. I also do not find Apple's store such doom and
gloom as this little diatribe implies. It is actually a good business
model and I wish the record companies would take such a stance rather than
go all lawyer. A pay per song service I think is the direction the music
companies should take, and perhaps the success of Apple's store will
convince them this is more "profitable" than suing every Tom, Dick and
Harry who makes a file sharing program. My only problem with Apple's store
is I think the per song price of $0.99 is too high. Something like $0.25
to $0.50 per song would be more appropriate IMO.