New CD

[Kasakato]

A new technology slapped into all CD's will prevent iPod users from uploading any songs into their white brick, the technology already has hit the stores in many areas this June and will be the absolute norm everywhere by this time next year.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/washpost/20050619/tc_washpost/burners__bummer

Only problem is that someone will find a way around it. But theres always XM :rolleyes:

[nursie]

WWOOOO...My I-WANNA-IPOD daughter isn't happy! To quote: " You mean if I buy a CD I have to turn around and pay for it off if Itunes to get it on an IPOD?"
Maybe she won't want one anymore :D

[Tuolumne]

From what I gathered, you can download (copy?) the music 3 times maximum, so it doesn't appear to affect the average iPod user, since you need only copy it once. Those who make multiple copies of CD's would be affected.

Someone correct me if I misread/misunderstood, though.

[slipknottin]

From what I gathered, you can download (copy?) the music 3 times maximum, so it doesn't appear to affect the average iPod user, since you need only copy it once. Those who make multiple copies of CD's would be affected.

Someone correct me if I misread/misunderstood, though.


Your talking about the songs you download off of itunes. These 'copy protected' cds can not be played in computers at all.

[Tuolumne]

Oh, that's not so good. :( I got my boyfriend an iPod for Christmas and he uses it all the time. He takes it to work, listens in the car (i got him the transmitter for the car radio.) We NEVER share music with other people, in fact we're very against any form of software/music piracy. This stinks. It was our way of avoiding having to carry CD's around with us all over the place. :mad:

[125gJoe]

Oh, that's not so good. ...We NEVER share music with other people, in fact we're very against any form of software/music piracy. This stinks. It was our way of avoiding having to carry CD's around with us all over the place. :mad:OUCH... I guess now you will have to download the tunes you want.

Seems too much control is never a good thing!

[Walrus]

The RIAA should be targeting illegal file swappers more aggresivouly without restricting the honest publics ability to transfer their music to another medium freely. I think the RIAA's intention was good but the implementation of the idea was poor.

[CajunCC]

That REALLY bothers me actually. As do CDs that don't rip and encode to MP3 properly as a form of "copy protection.

Thing is, I don't go and give my music out to everyone I know or over the internet or anything. What I do is I buy a disc, I throw it in my computer, rip it to MP3 at the highest quality setting, and I listen to it there or burn the MP3 files to a CD so I can listen to them on my car MP3 player. I keep the original disc in its case in a safe place so it doesn't get damaged or lost.

With all this new copy protection crap, I can't do that. It's basically just keeping me from listing to the music that I bought in the way that I want to.

[Raskolnikov]

People still buy CDs?

http://www.allofmp3.com/

I pick the quality, I pick the file type, and it only costs $.02 a MB for legal copies.

[Tuolumne]

I enjoy buying CD's. I like looking at the CD jackets, reading the acknowledgments and thanks from the artists, glancing at the lyrics, etc. Yeah, I can probably get most of that online, but I'd rather just look at the CD jacket when I buy it.

[tomm10]

I haven't bought a physical CD in a long time anyway. I buy my music off of iTunes now. I get to buy the 4 songs I like off the album for $3.96 instead of a CD with the 4 songs I like plus the 8 total garbage tracks for $18.99.

As far as pirating goes, I don't pirate music I want, I buy it. Does that mean that all the music on my iPod was purchased by me? Nope. But the ones I got from friends are songs I would never have bought in the first place :)

I'm a big believer in the idea that artist should be compensated for their work. I don't buy into the whole "sharing" ideal. At the same time, its just music. How much do they think I'm going to pay for a cd that I can't play on my iPod (the only way I listen to music these days). I'll go without before I'm forced to spend close to $20 on a CD like that. They better hope those teens with the disposable incomes keep spending.

T

[Cheech]

I wouldn't worry about it. There's always a way. And if there isn't one yet, there will be very soon.. .

[mvigor]

If the CD can play, it can be brought back into the computer through a line in to a microphone port.

You won't even have to do it yourself, someone else will put it up on a file sharing network for you.

If you bought it, you deserve to have it on your MP3 player.

[Lila]

I agree. I like to burn my discs then create my own CDs. They're taking that option away from me and others.

I love making my own CDs! Sheesh!

:mad2:

[slipknottin]

I'm a big believer in the idea that artist should be compensated for their work. I don't buy into the whole "sharing" ideal.


Me too, but according to most everything I have read, The average Cd nets the artist/producer/song writer/etc. less than a dollar. Meaning something like $.10 a song. So when a program like Itunes sells songs for a dollar each, the majority of that money is not going to the artist or those responsible for the actual music, its going to the publisher. And the publisher is not providing any service at all for online music. They are not copying, they are not distributing anything. Theyre essentially forcing us to pay them and not doing anything to earn it.

[tomm10]

Me too, but according to most everything I have read, The average Cd nets the artist/producer/song writer/etc. less than a dollar. Meaning something like $.10 a song. So when a program like Itunes sells songs for a dollar each, the majority of that money is not going to the artist or those responsible for the actual music, its going to the publisher. And the publisher is not providing any service at all for online music. They are not copying, they are not distributing anything. Theyre essentially forcing us to pay them and not doing anything to earn it.

I have heard that .8-.10 cent figure myself. I would imagine it varies depending upon the artist and their positioning in the industry. It is certainly the record companies making the big bucks. They also spend a lot on production, promotion, and distribution on the albums although I doubt its really in proportion to their take.

I'd be interested to know if the royalty payout is still the same online. If you do the math per song iTunes is only slightly cheaper when buying a full album than it is to buy it in a Target or Walmart (probably close to a wash when you consider the cost of cd, packaging, printing, and shipping of a physical cd and package). The music only stores like Sam Goody and the like always charge an outrageous markup on their CDs.

T

[Soulmanure]

Hey all,
in case you want to escape being chained to itunes and be able to download your iPod music on to your computer, you can now use winamp:

http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,67593,00.html?tw=rss.TOP

[FishSeller]

As soon as I start seeing standard ranch-style houses with modest furniture and only two cars in the driveway on MTV Cribs, I'll start crying for the poor, starving, major-record-label "artists".
Years ago, when I heard Metallica whining about the downloaded music deal, I signed up for Napster and downloaded the entire Ride the Lightning album. That was the only music I've personally downloaded. At the time, it was legal and on dial-up, so the average song was out of style before all of it was gathered up.
It's amazing that these "artists" are essentially decent performers with little to no professional training and an excellent marketing plan. Up until their moment of fame and fortune, they were the average kid with a skateboard, or basketball, or bag or crack or whatever their previous lower than average profession may be. Now that they're the flavor of the week, they're being taken advantage of by the same people that they used to be!? Does this sound about right? Note to the artist: Hide the $1,000,000 "bling" before you cry out for the public's sympathy. It's also a good idea to cut out all of your songs about all of the crap that you have that your audience can't afford... Oh wait...that cuts out an entire genre of music... My point is this: these people are making more money than they know what to do with, have no problem hiding it, and then turn around and demand more! Perhaps they could take a lesson from bands like the Allman Brothers or the Grateful Dead. Publicity is publicity. Develop a devote fan base through fair and honest marketing and the money will follow. Well, at least you'll have plenty of couches to crash on.

[flyingfish]

Hmmm, this could put a crimp in practicing for duets and trios or such seperately. The only time I make copies is for practice purposes. I was even pressured recently to just copy a CD for a friend. I obviously refused. In my opinion If you can afford an Ipod you can also afford to buy the music you'd like to listen to.

[FishSeller]

Now that I think about it, every time you buy a CD, you're paying the record companies to limit the freedom you have with the product you just bought. What a mess!

[ash]

It is a mess. And I get so annoyed with all of the huffing about piracy. Piracy affects the artists so much less than the greedy scumbag record companies do. If they are so concerned with piracy they should drop their costs. At the same time, I don't want to be sued, so I don't participate in sharing either. I've stopped buying new CDs entirely and I buy fewer used. I think in the long run these companies are shooting themselves in the foot. I hope.

[tomm10]

Rationalizing stealing by saying that the person you are stealing from has enough already doesn't exactly make it right. I don't remember any artist saying they were going broke because of piracy. They simply wanted to get what they are entitled to. The produce a product, its quality and their experience making it are irrelevant. If you want it you have to pay for it. If you don't want to pay the price asked for it, don't buy it.

In the end, music piracy doesn't really affect the overall music sales as I understand. I read the results of a study rcently that basically said the people who are downloading music illegally would never have actually purchased the music in the first place. So, if these folks were never really part of the market, they can't really cut into it by pirating the product.

[ash]

I don't steal it, but all of the whining that the record industry does about piracy and all of the nonsense like sueing kids for downloading songs has jaded me to the point where I spend as little as possible on their product. I realize that if they were shoplifting they woudl and should be prosecuted but to me this is just a bit different. I know legally it isn't but still- they were just making an example. If I find an artist I like on an independant label I'm thrilled to buy it new but I can wait to buy everything else used. These companies are just getting out of hand.

[FishSeller]

Quote
In the end, music piracy doesn't really affect the overall music sales as I understand. I read the results of a study rcently that basically said the people who are downloading music illegally would never have actually purchased the music in the first place. So, if these folks were never really part of the market, they can't really cut into it by pirating the product.

If this is the case, entertainers should be thrilled that people are downloading their music! This would mean that their product is being distributed to people that would never actually purchase their album. Unfortunately, this is not the case.

[tomm10]

If this is the case, entertainers should be thrilled that people are downloading their music! This would mean that their product is being distributed to people that would never actually purchase their album. Unfortunately, this is not the case.

A lot of the indy labels are thrilled with downloaded music. It gets their stuff out there without them having to spend. The real problem as I see it is that the larger labels have gotten so big they think they can force music down our throat by spending huge money promoting it.

Think Jessica Simpson, Britney Spears, and the hundreds formed in their image that failed to sell CDs actually have enough raw talent to be superstars? Not hardly. They're cute, have decent enough voices and were molded into what the record execs thought the public would buy. The label spends a huge amount of cash promoting them (that cash usually comes out of the performer's cut by the way), brainwashes the public into buying their crap, and cashes the checks.

The problem is, for every one Britney Spears there are 20 girls the label spent a ton on who never came close to breaking even. Its their shotgun approach to manufacturing performers that pushes them to take 80% from the sucessful artists to cover their losses on the ones that never panned out.

So, if you want to pirate music because you're protesting the record companies, I might buy into it. They need to alter their practices or they're going to lose. The digital age is making it nearly impossible to wipe out music piracy and increasing costs of legal copies is pushing even the most moral listener to at least try out their music digitally before they buy.

[OrionGirl]

?!? It's not like this is recent. I have several older CD's that can't be copied. What's the big deal? It's not like this applies just to music--book, movies, software--it's all purchased under a license that has limitations on the use.

[ScottoMacD]

I have heard that if you hook up an external regular cd player to your cpu.

There is a program that will let you rip it off of that player bypassing the security features.

Give it a bit of time though. Anything that those boobs at the record companies come up with security wise has already been cracked by the hackers before it is even implimented.

The record companies are a joke they have been ripping people for years by overcharging for a cd that costs them about $2 to make. Now that the world has caught up and caught on to the scam they are now crying foul. What did Sony make last year? What? 5 billion. I'm suppose to feel sorry that it was down from 6 billion the year before? Meanwhile they are charging upwards of $20 for a Velver Revolver cd. Screw them!

Don't feel so sorry for the artists either. The money they make off of cd sales is chump change compared to what they make on tour. That is where the real money is made. They make money off of everything on tour. The tickets, the shirts etc...

The money made off of sales is nothing. usually less than 10 cents an album sold. It is only the real greedy sobs like Metallica who say that it is their property that is being stolen when in fact in 99% of cases the record companies are the intellectual copyright owners of the music once it is recorded. Not the artists. They give that up the second that they sign a record deal.

If you really want to support the artists. Go see them on tour and buy some stuff.

[FishSeller]

Amen Scott!
In the meantime, I need to burn a Social D album for a coworker that "used to be punk rock back in the NOFX days". Wow...I've gotten old.