Tag: music biz

Possible Sony/BMG Settlement

BetaNews reports today that there is a possible settlement in the Sony/BMG spyware case.

According to the report, Sony will agree to:

(a) continue to replace the spyware-affected CDs with clean CDs

(b) allow the affected customer to choose to receive either (i) $7.50 and one free album from a list of 200, or (ii) no cash payment and three free albums from the list.

(c) stop manufacturing CDs with a specific type of DRM program until 2008.

To be eligible, customers must provide evidence that they bought a Sony/BMG CD containing the DRM spyware and that the hidden DRM program was uninstalled from the computer or updated with the software fix released after the initial outcry.

While this seems like a pretty fair compromise, there are a couple of troubling parts.

First of all, the settlement does not prevent Sony from using DRM on its CDs. It only prohibits the use of hidden DRM. Sony is allowed to use DRM prior to 2008 as long as no programs are installed on the customer’s computer without the customer’s consent and only certain data is collected by the DRM program.

Additionally, we need to see the list of 200 albums. If it’s a decent list, then this sounds like a fair solution. If it’s not, it doesn’t.

While this is certainly a win in the war against DRM, this is really about Sony’s bad decision, initally bad management of the reaction and ultimate admission of fault and agreement to fix it. The greater war against DRM will continue to be waged.

Technorati Tags:
, ,

More DRM Madness

rootkit

If you want to read more reasons while I will never buy a DRM-infested song or CD, check out David Berlind’s article over at ZDNet.

He mentions a couple of problems that the record label cartel’s beloved DRM forces on the unwilling and perhaps unsuspecting public- one of which is the inability to easily pass your music collection on to someone else when you die. That’s a good point that I’d never thought about before. For the casual music fan who has a couple of hundred songs on an iPod, DRM probably isn’t that big of a deal. Where it is a gigantic problem is when you are a huge music fan with thousands of records comprising a vast music collection that you spent a lifetime and tens of thousands of dollars putting together. In other words, the record label cartel is screwing its best customers the hardest.

Let’s think about the practical effects of this problem. I have over 20,000 songs in my music library, all of which came from LPs, cassettes and mostly CDs that I have bought. All of them have been ripped onto my music server (which after several evolutions is now a dedicated hard drive in my computer and a synchronized back-up drive on my network). The CDs are all stacked in boxes in my garage- hard, tangible assets my kids can dust off and enjoy when they hit 40 and realize that dad’s music isn’t as lame as they thought (this happened to me when I had my “blues epiphany” back in 1994 and realized that most of the old blues songs I thought I hated were awesome songs). While I have some songs from my old LPs and cassettes that would never be recovered if my digital music library got destroyed, most of the songs are on those CDs in those boxes. On the other hand, if I had compiled my music collection via DRM-infested downloads, what exactly would I own? Or would I own anything? Is it truly an asset if you can’t sell it at a garage sale or on eBay or leave it to your children? What’s next, DRM on your mutual funds?

Whatever I would have (and I tend to think that conceptually I wouldn’t own much), I would not be able to legally and easily pass that music on to my kids and even if somehow I could and/or did, the music could stop at any moment if I or they run afoul of the ever-growing list of restrictions that the record label cartel is putting on the downloaded music (some of the fine print relating to DRM indicates that additional restrictions can be added after you buy the song). In sum, you don’t truly control (read truly own) DRM-infested song files and that’s a deal-stopper for me.

The record label cartel uses fact that someone might allow others to acquire unauthorized (read unpaid for) copies of a CD as a carte blanche to sell us crippled and broken goods. If CDs do go away and the only music available is DRM-infested downloads, I simply won’t buy any more music. I’ll just listen to the radio (online and satellite- not over the air, since commercials are almost as unacceptable to me as DRM). Talk about an industry in trouble, traditional music radio is in a world of hurt, but that’s a topic for another day.

David’s article also links to a story about Elliot Spitzer’s probe into the pricing of downloadable music. I suspect the Spitzer probe has to do with the record label cartel’s desire to have variable pricing at iTunes and other online stores- that way if some song becomes a huge hit, they could charge more than a buck for the download. Funny how the ten bad songs on a CD never cost less than a buck. This is another proposed screw-job on the American public, and I hope Spitzer can beat the cartel back under its rock, but as far as I can tell this isn’t really about DRM.

The only way I see to solve the DRM problem is for enough of us to vote with our pocketbooks. That’s what I’m doing.

Technorati Tags:
,

Opportunists on Parade

When something unfortunate happens, you can be sure of two things. A lot of people will try to help while some other people will try to take advantage of the situation to make money. It’s like a bad event works some cosmic mojo that magically separates the angels from the opportunists.

You see this sort of thing on the big scale (think 9-11 or Katrina) and on the small scale.

So we have a little problem with Wikipedia. Some people work to fix the problem and one guy apologizes for his role in causing (or at least demonstrating) the problem.

Meanwhile, other people sit around noodling about how they can take advantage of the situation to make a little easy money. The best they can come up with (so far, anyway) is to file a class action lawsuit.

Some good detective work has provided a little information about the people behind this latest caper. You would think that no lawyer would even consider filing this ridiculous lawsuit. Unfortunately, however, there seems to be a lawyer for every real or imagined wrong. These days if you look at someone funny, some lawyer will be standing by to sue you into the stone age (for a fee). I can imagine the forthcoming treatises on “Trying the Funny Look Case” and “Wrongful Buzz Kills.” We can’t count on the lawyers to solve this problem, so the solution has to come from elsewhere.

Maybe it’s time for a little more internet self-policing. If the voice of the people can change Sony’s corporate policy on DRM, maybe the same voice can stop opportunists from hijacking the system. If these people get the Sony treatment, maybe they’ll find another more productive way to make money. Everyone else in the virtual room needs to stand up and shout – “help us make things better or get out of our way!”

No one who cares about the web community should stand for anything else.

Technorati Tags:

Bad Facts and Mobster Tactics

It’s easy to hate the RIAA. It’s a little harder to make the RIAA’s mobster tactics seem justified.

nostupidpeopleSome lady downloads 1000 songs so she can “determine what she like[s] enough to buy at retail.” Only she forgot to delete the ones she decided not to buy and, I suppose accidently, shared those songs via some file sharing service. Part of her defense was that she buys CDs sometimes- she owns 250 of them. My wife has 250 CDs and she can’t even name the Beatles. 1000 songs is about 83 CDs worth. This defense sounds like some of the excuses my kids give me for not doing their chores. In sum, this is not the test case I would choose if I were looking to make some new law vis a vis the RIAA.

I’d find a grandmother accused of stealing Snoop Dogg music or maybe a dead grandmother who didn’t even have a computer. In other words, if you need to change the law, start with facts that will make someone try hard to rule in your favor.

These are not that kind of facts.

Yahoo story here.
Memeorandum discussion here.

Technorati Tags:
,

My Take on the Grammy Nominations

grammysAbout the only benefit I get from being a member of NARAS (the Grammy organization) is that I get to vote for the Grammys. Here’s my take on the nominations in those genres that I know something about.

Field 4 – Rock
Category 21 – Best Rock Album
(Vocal or Instrumental. Includes Hard Rock and Metal.)

X&Y
Coldplay
[Capitol Records]

In Your Honor
Foo Fighters
[RCA Records]

A Bigger Bang
The Rolling Stones
[Virgin Records]

How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb
U2
[Interscope Records]

Prairie Wind
Neil Young
[Reprise Records]

Coldplay and Foo Fighters came after my musical time, which means one of those two will win for sure. I think U2 is just OK (sorry, but I do). The Stones would be a good choice just for longevity. My vote will go for Neil, but there is no way he wins.

Field 13 – Blues
Category 66 – Best Contemporary Blues Album
(Vocal or Instrumental.)

Make Do With What You Got
Solomon Burke
[Shout! Factory/The One]

Twenty
Robert Cray
[Sanctuary]

Bring ‘Em In
Buddy Guy
[Silvertone/Zomba Label Group]

Cost Of Living
Delbert McClinton
[New West Records]

Electric Blue Watermelon
North Mississippi Allstars
[ATO Records]

Good slate here, although I’m not certain I’d classify the Delbert record as blues. My vote will probably go to Buddy Guy, but I think the Delbert record is the best one of the bunch.

Field 14 – Folk
Category 68 – Best Contemporary Folk Album
(Vocal or Instrumental.)

Chavez Ravine
Ry Cooder
[Nonesuch/Perro Verde]

The Outsider
Rodney Crowell
[Columbia Records]

Why Should The Fire Die?
Nickel Creek
[Sugar Hill Records]

Fair & Square
John Prine
[Oh Boy Records]

Devils & Dust
Bruce Springsteen
[Columbia]

Easy choice here- I thought that John Prine record was excellent. He gets my vote but Bruce (Devils and Dust was average, in my opinion) or Nickel Creek will win.

Technorati Tags:

Why the Grateful Dead is Right

gratefuldeadI thought the brouhaha about the Grateful Dead’s misguided, not to mention technically impossible, attempt to remove all of their live show recordings from the internet had blown over in light of their change of heart.

Now I read a Thomas Hawk (who based on his jukebox posts listens to almost exactly the same sort of music I do) post where he quotes this post from Cory Doctorow at Boing Boing. Cory argues that the Dead’s change of heart is merely a smokescreen since the superior soundboard recordings will only stream (e.g., play over the web), but cannot be downloaded. Cory writes:

“Now the rightsholders want it both ways: they want to profit from the goodwill that fans retain for the band due to its generosity, but they want to revise that generosity downwards. They want to change the deal so that fans continue to do just as much evangelizing, spend just as much money on shows and shirts, but get less in return.”

I disagree. For one thing, goodwill is great, but is doesn’t pay the bills. The Dead have already given up tons of cash by making so many of their recordings freely available for so long. In addition, they can’t create any new product, since Jerry Garcia has shuffled off this mortal coil. The band has done more than any other organization in history to give its fans free music. Nowhere does it say that being progressive and consumer-centric requires you to give up all of your valuable possessions. If a restaurant feeds people for free for a while, but stops when its paying business slows, is that somehow worse than never giving away food in the first place? I think not.

Cory supports his point by noting that the Dead control the copyright in the non-soundboard recordings every bit as much as they control the soundboard recordings. Perhaps they do (no legal analysis here- that’s not the point), but that just means the band has elected to give away some of its property but not all. If we want to start bashing bands for being mercenary and greedy, there are a lot of other bands we should target first. Moreover, a sense of entitlement will make other bands weary of taking similar progressive positions on audience recording, trading and downloading.

Then of course there’s Total Recorder and its brethren- but that’s also not the point.

I was all over the band when the news first came out. But I think the current plan is a fair compromise. Fair to us and fair to them. Remember, win-win or no deal.

Technorati Tags:

Grateful Dead Reconsiders

gratefuldead

The other day I talked about the Grateful Dead’s decision to remove downloadable recordings of their live shows from the internet and the outcry that resulted. I predicted that the band would reconsider and a compromise would be reached. In fact, I suggested that audience recordings and soundboard recordings should be treated differently.

Well, that seems to be exactly what happened. The band has decided to allow the audience recordings to be reposted and to be freely downloadable. The soundboard recordings will be availble as a stream (meaning they can be heard but not downloaded).

This is a fair solution.

Technorati Tags:

Un-Grateful Dead

gratefuldeadAs may be evident by the fact that my oldest child is named after one of their songs, I have always been a huge Grateful Dead fan. For as long as I can remember, fans have been able to freely tape Dead shows and many, many concert recordings have been freely and legally available on the net. In particular, Archive.Org has been a great place to find live Dead shows.

Now comes news that Jerry Garcia’s widow and perhaps another living band member have required that the live recordings of Dead concerts be removed from Archive.Org. Audience recordings will be available in streaming format (meaning you can listen but not download). The generally better quality soundboard recordings will not be available (except presumably at the offical Dead site where downloads of live shows are for sale).

John Perry Barlow, one of the coolest people on the planet and the co-writer of many great Dead songs, had this to say about this recent turn of events:

You have no idea how sad I am about this. I fought it hammer and tong, but the drummers had inoperable bricks in their head about it.

What’s worse is that they now want to remove all Dead music from the Web. They might as easily put a teaspoon of food coloring in a swimming pool and then tell the pool owner to get it back to them.

It’s like finding out that your brother is a child molester. And then, worse, having everyone then assume that you’re a child molester too. I’ve been called a hypocrite in three languages already.

How magnificently counter-productive of them. It’s as if the goose who laid the golden egg had decided to commit suicide so that he could get more golden eggs.

This is just the beginning of the backlash, I promise you.

This is worse than the RIAA suing their customers.

Rolling Stone reports that there is a movement afoot to boycott the Dead (i.e., not buy any CDs or tickets to concerts by the surviving members). Boycott and Grateful Dead are two notions that should never have crossed paths.

Taking the other side of the argument, David Gan, host of The Grateful Dead Hour, says that the marketing arm of the Dead organization is not making enough money to support itself and that taping shows was never intended to result in the high-speed, mass distribution of recordings that until now was possible via the internet.

My take? On one hand, it is almost unbelievable that an organization as forward thinking as the Dead is taking such a huge step backwards. On the other hand, with no further ability to create new product, the Dead has a vested, though doomed to failure, interest in trying to control the product that’s out there. I think I come down on the Dead’s side with respect to the soundboard recordings, but not with respect to the audience recordings.

I suspect that the problem is that Jerry’s widow and perhaps others within the organization are getting some different, and in my opinion, shortsighted, advice from someone. There may be a little money to be made by trying to recall these recordings from the internet. The public (read fan) relations cost, however, will be greater than any money that might be made. And of course those recordings are on the hard drives of thousands of people and will continue to be available somewhere- even if not at Archive.Org.

My prediction? Someone will give the decision-makers some better advice and a compromise will be reached. The Dead is not Sony. Let’s give peace a chance.

Technorati Tags:

Hawk on the Cat

Thomas Hawk has a good post today about the Record Label Cartel’s never-ceasing effort to Stuff the Cat Back into The Bag.

I stood up and shouted Amen when I read this passage from his post:

What the media companies need to understand is that for years and years they gouged us over and over again. And now they are still trying to gouge us and at a certain point the anomosity that they have deservedly heaped upon themselves turns into outright hatred. So when the RIAA sues their customers, pouring even more gasoline on the fire, it’s amazing that they cry foul when people shun them altogether and pursue the free and illegal routes.

catoutofbagAs I’ve said over and over, there’s a way to defeat the Cartel without stealing anything. Some smart person needs to create a company that duplicates CDs and creates and duplicates the associated packaging the way Qoop produces photo books. The same company could distribute the music on CD either by itelf or via Amazon and other online stores. The same company, or even the artist himself or herself, could distribute the songs electronically via MusicMatch, Yahoo Music, etc. Take out the middle man, and all the right people benefit.

Let the cat run. Down with the Cartel. Death to Videodrome! Long live The new flesh. And all that.

Technorati Tags:
,

Pot, Meet Kettle

potkettleYou know, just about everyone is free to join the hue and cry against the DRM software that Sony BMG was installing on computers until the bloggers and feds shamed them into stopping, but when the CEO of the greatest example of bloatware and computer hijacking in the history of software starts adding his two cents I start feeling like defending Sony.

In this article in USA Today, Rob Glaser, CEO of RealNetworks says (talking about iTunes):

“Consumers should say, ‘Apple, we won’t buy your music until you make your DRM interoperable.'”

Never, ever have I experienced anything (including DRM and the BSOD) as irritating as all of the crap that RealNetworks software installs on your computer. I am still getting these little pop-up messages from RealNetworks on my downtown office computer, and I have no idea how to get rid of them. In fact, I’d rather not hear something than have my computer overrun with RealNetworks software and messages and whatnot just because I try to install Real Player.

And don’t even get me started about how RealNetworks ruined Rhapsody by buying it. Or how you have to call a number to cancel your subscription.

I’m not a big fan of RealNetworks, in case you can’t tell.

Technorati Tags:
,