Sony's Idea of DRM-Free Music 370
edmicman writes "Leave it to Sony to mess up DRM-free music downloads. What is the point of DRM-free tracks if you still have to go to a retail store to buy them? From the Infoworld article: 'The tracks will be offered in MP3 format, without DRM, from Jan. 15 in the U.S. and from late January in Canada... The move is far from the all-digital service offered by its rivals, though. To obtain the Sony-BMG tracks, would-be listeners will first have to go to a retail store to buy a Platinum MusicPass, a card containing a secret code, for a suggested retail price of $12.99. Once they have scratched off the card's covering to expose the code, they will be able to download one of just 37 albums available through the service, including Britney Spears' "Blackout" and Barry Manilow's "The Greatest Songs of the Seventies."'"
You have to go to a physical store... (Score:3, Interesting)
Some other shops have got it right, like my local Virgin Megastore who let you pick any cd or 7/12", scan the barcode at a listening station and listen to it before I buy the physical cd... if I can't even do this in their stores, then they've got the completely wrong idea and are so disconnected from their own customers that I really feel quite sorry for them.
Re:thepiratebay (Score:5, Interesting)
http://torrents.thepiratebay.org/3823582/Barry_Manilow_-_The_Greatest_Songs_Of_The_Seventies.3823582.TPB.torrent [thepiratebay.org]
http://torrents.thepiratebay.org/3958971/Britney_Spears_-_Blackout_(2007)_Dance_%5BBYANOUS%5D.3958971.TPB.torrent [thepiratebay.org]
Seriously though, when Sony decided it was ok to include a rootkit with their music I think they did not realize just how much damage they were doing to their brand.
Scratchcard are fine (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:thepiratebay (Score:0, Interesting)
Re:Sony Continues to Amaze (Score:3, Interesting)
Propping up existing distribution chain (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't know if this is good or bad. On one hand, it may keep a music section in retailers a bit longer, providing a place to walk in and lay hands on a physical album set. On the other hand, that extra middle-man keeps the cost of music slightly higher. I think this is a fairly responsible thing for Sony to do, because it will help prevent a drastic change which could be detrimental in the short term.
Dan East
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
So there was a brand called Saunny you say ? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:thepiratebay (Score:4, Interesting)
Not every country has the ridiculous fine/damage levels as the US. This means that in some countries, you could get caught without being indebted for the rest of your life.
Re:thepiratebay (Score:4, Interesting)
And I would happily buy a car stereo (or GPS device) that retails new for $200 for $50 at a pawn shop - assuming that I'm fairly certain the owner of the pawn shop was not knowingly in receipt of stolen goods.
Re:thepiratebay (Score:3, Interesting)
Some are so unangry that they have editcountitis (Score:3, Interesting)
Barry Manilow??? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:thepiratebay (Score:1, Interesting)
How many times must I see this inane argument? You are one of many complete morons who argue this day after day after day. The fact is you are lying when you say you do not want to explain it again. Spouting this nonsense probably releases endorphins in your brain and everytime you post this argument your little penis gets hard.
First, stealing does not have to deprive one of a physical object. You can steal many things which do not even have a physical object form. Second, there is an indirect deprivation when copying music without permission from the copyright owner. As much as you want to define the word "steal" for yourself, its English meaning is not under your personal control. Neither is its legal definition. In order to support your definition you would need to declare that 99.99999% of the population uses the word "steal" incorrectly.
For example:
"She stole my idea!" -- Certainly I can still have the same idea. I have not been deprived of the idea. Rather the meaning is that she deprived me of exclusive use of the idea. I have heard this phrase thousands of times in my life. All of the people who used it are obviously of inferior linguistic capability compared to you.
"To steal ones' thunder" "Steal a march on someone/something" "Steal a glance"
Obviously the word steal can involve the deprivation of a physical object, but only when the direct object is a physical object. When the word steal is used with a direct object that is not of finite physical form, deprivation may be indirect or non-existent. In addition, you can deprive one of something without stealing it.
When music is stolen, it can be stolen in many ways. For example, you could break into an artists studio and copy pre-release tapes, then release the songs as if they were your own. Would you call that stealing? You could also erase those tapes after they were copied. Would that be less ethical than the former? You could wait until they are released and copy them from a store bought CD. Is that more ethical?
The fact is that you do not have any "right" to listen to a musicians product without them being compensated. You do not have any right to copy that music for your friends. You do have a right to make a backup copy to preserve an ability to listen to the music that you have procured from the owner buy just compensation. If you do not believe that they deserve to make so much money, then don't listen to them.