|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 9 new of 183 responses total. |
orinoco
|
|
response 175 of 183:
| 
Oct 11 21:36 UTC 2000 |
Interesting. And it would be doubly interesting to see how much damage a
"cover charge" like that would do to the size of Napster's user base.
|
raven
|
|
response 176 of 183:
|
Oct 14 22:54 UTC 2000 |
Also in the same Wired mentioned in #173 a pretty good article by John
Perry Barlow on I.P. and Napster. It makes the same points basicaly he
made in a ground breaking article on IP in Wired in 1994 that have been
addressed here, but still makes for a good read. The URL of the earlier
article is http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/2.03/economy.ideas.html
|
mcnally
|
|
response 177 of 183:
|
Oct 15 23:54 UTC 2000 |
Interesting "is not / is too" accusations are flying between Salon
Magazine (www.salon.com) and Leonardo Chiariglione, head of the
industry-sponsored Secure Digital Music Initiative (SDMI)
Salon, citing anonymous SDMI insiders, claims that *all* of the
watermarking, encryption, and other security technologies proposed
as possible standards by the SDMI have already been cracked in record
time since the SDMI began their "Hack SDMI" challenge (which invites
would-be hackers to try for $10,000 by breaking SDMI's security schemes.)
Chiariglione, quoted in [Inside] magazine (www.inside.com) claims that
nobody knows the results of the contest yet and that none of the 450
submissions have been properly examined to see whether they're successful
cracks or not.
|
krj
|
|
response 178 of 183:
|
Dec 8 00:07 UTC 2000 |
We haven't opened this can of worms for a while. I don't know what to
think about the deal between BMG and Napster, but one element of it,
which proposes that Napster charge its users $5 a month, seems like
it would badly damage Napster by driving away lots of its users,
and thus thinning the available song selection.
mp3.com's streaming service "my.mp3.com" may be in even worse shape.
mp3.com got reamed in the courts for thinking they could save users
the trouble of uploading their mp3 files to the "storage locker"
service. The revamped service will only allow free access to
25 CDs; if you want to "store" more than that, it'll be $50 per year,
thank you. Oh, and major-label products only, please, because those
are the only companies mp3.com has hundreds of millions of dollars
in licensing deals with.
I dunno, I think paying $50 per year to stream CDs that you are supposed
to already own is a non-starter, but then I'm used to dragging a
box of CDs and a portable player around with me.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 179 of 183:
|
Dec 8 00:26 UTC 2000 |
It gets worse than that.. I order to prevent people from borrowing
a copy of a CD to prove that they own it, the my.mp3.com service will
apparently now require listeners to insert the CDs at random intervals
to prove they still have them. If you have to keep the CD media handy
so you can prove you're not a thief whenever you want to listen to
something, what exactly is the benefit of the storage locker concept?
Lower fidelity? High bandwidth usage? Limited selection?
I probably never would have gone for the original service in a big way
but I think MP3.com got reamed while trying to do the right thing --
all they were trying to do was provide a digital repository for content
to which people already had access, even making good-faith efforts to
ensure they weren't delivering music to people who didn't already have
a copy..
|
krj
|
|
response 180 of 183:
|
Dec 27 05:50 UTC 2000 |
Not purely an mp3 item, but an mp3.com news pointer leads to it.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/2/15620.html
discusses a "stealth plan" to put a copyright protection system
into all new hard disks starting summer 2001. Yes, this makes
backups and large disk farms difficult to impossible to operate.
"But for home users, the party's over. CRPM paves the way for
CPRM-compliant audio CDs, and the free exchange of digital
recordings will be limited to non-CPRM media...."
|
mcnally
|
|
response 181 of 183:
|
Dec 27 06:00 UTC 2000 |
I'm extremely skeptical about the overblown claims being made in the CPRM
stories (CPRM = Copy Protection for Removable Media..)
It seems unlikely to me that the system can do all that its critics claim
it will do and if indeed it does those things it seems pretty unlikely
that it will be a widely adopted and successful technological format.
|
krj
|
|
response 182 of 183:
|
Jan 16 07:33 UTC 2001 |
Pete Townshend on Napster:
http://www.petetownshend.com/press_release_diary_display.cfm?id=3961
and if I typoed that, see www.mp3.com/news and dig down.
He seems tired of the old business model -- note his carping about BMI --
and willing to see what's coming.
|
micklpkl
|
|
response 183 of 183:
|
Jan 16 16:04 UTC 2001 |
I'm not sure if I like this proposal, but there is an interesting article on
a way to make free distribution of content profitable here:
http://interocity.com/jukebox/jukebox2.html
|
