You Don't Own Anything With DRM - Consumerist Comments

You Don't Own Anything With DRM

AcidReign — Tue, 16 May 2006 01:20:51 EDT

.....I'll buy CDs. Till they stop selling them. It's an instant non-plugged-in backup. So far, I haven't seen one I couldn't rip an MP3 from. Sure, if you've still got autoplay on, you might be screwed. And you'll get a website instead of your media player. And the neato thing is that when they start making CDs where you have to install their software to listen, it won't be considered "CD Audio" anymore. Yay, Phillips! They've stood fast so far on that point!

AcidReign

You Don't Own Anything With DRM

John Brownlee — Mon, 15 May 2006 18:51:50 EDT

"The changes (I think) have been 10 burns of 1 playlist had been changed to 7 burns. 3 authorized computers are now 5 authorized computers." That's not really too bad, actually. The 3 burn decrease sucks, but they upped the computers, which is probably the more important thing.

John Brownlee

You Don't Own Anything With DRM

Ben Popken — Mon, 15 May 2006 13:03:55 EDT

Ben writes: " I read your article about Apple changing DRM, and you're right they did change it. It's rather baffling how difficult to find any google evidence of this, but here's what I've come across. The changes (I think) have been 10 burns of 1 playlist had been changed to 7 burns. 3 authorized computers are now 5 authorized computers. (google term: apple changes fairplay -French, -france, -PyMusique) http://www.applelinks.com/articles/2003/04/20030430002640.... small mention: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairPlay#Restrictions I've aleady spent too much time looking for it, but if memory serves, I think Steve Jobs actually announced the FairPlay changes during a MacWorld keynote (2005, maybe?). The only way to be sure to is watch the 2004/2005 keynotes. Good luck."

Ben Popken

You Don't Own Anything With DRM

crayonshinobi — Mon, 15 May 2006 10:32:08 EDT

Wikipedia has a wicked description of iTunes DRM. Perhaps this is what you are looking for? The idea that people are only buying a license to music is probably a legally correct one (IANAL), but it is self-deprecating. Afterall, if people really knew that they are only buying a license to music and not a physical copy of the music to do with as they wish, they probably wouldn't shell out .99 a track or $12 and album... This is something the RIAA would prefer you don't think about. My main argument against the idea of a license is that a license tends to suggest that the medium is irrelevant. In other words, if I bought a movie on a VHS cassette, thereby obtaining a "license" to the movie, I shouldn't have to buy another "license" to the movie in order to get it on DVD. Instead, I should only have to pay the cost of the medium, a DVD which costs around 30-40 cents. Anyway, don't bother buying music from iTunes or anywhere else for that matter...that's what friends and libraries are for.

crayonshinobi