August 04, 2007

Report: Eminem sues Apple for copyright infringement | Tech News on ZDNet

Report: Eminem sues Apple for copyright infringement | Tech News on ZDNet:

Rap singer Eminem has accused Apple of copyright infringement in a multimillion-dollar lawsuit, according to a story in The Detroit News.

Eminem's music publishers have not given Apple permission to offer the artist's music for download, according to the report in Tuesday's paper, although Eminem's music is available through the Apple's iTunes Store.

Apple pays a portion of the revenue it collects from Eminem downloads to Universal Music Group, which distributes the music, but not to Eminem's publishers, the News reported. Eight Mile Style and Martin Affiliated, the companies representing Eminem, demand that Apple stop offering downloads.

The newspaper suggested that the problem is caused by the confusion over who owns the rights to downloads. Apparently, Eminem is asserting that record companies do not hold these rights exclusively.

December 12, 2005

Oboe and MP3.com

Robert Cringely writes an interesting column on the announcement by MP3tunes.com of Oboe, a service that - for $39.95 a year - will let you upload all of your music and stream it to any machine you're logged into.

What's particularly interesting to me is that all this sounds very familiar: back in 2000, MP3.com was hauled into court by the record companies after launching my.mp3.com, a service that let you stream your music collection to any machine you were logged into. The difference was that my.mp3.com didn't actually let you upload audio files. Instead, you "proved" that you owned a CD by inserting it into your CD drive, and after that you could stream a copy that MP3.com had pre-ripped itself. It was a brilliant service, and, had the record companies have been smart, it could have led to a lot more music sales than it lost. But in 2000, the record companies were very much NOT smart about music.

It's no surprise that MP3Tunes.com is headed up by Michael Robertson, one of the founders of MP3.com itself. Cringely believes that the business model to support Oboe isn't there - you don't have to stream much before you use up $40-worth of bandwidth per year - but it's an interesting service. Personally, I'd pay over the money just to have a backup of my 50GB of music.

October 06, 2005

The Napster Story

Don Dodge, who now works on the Microsoft Emerging Business team, used to be VP of product development for the original Napster. In "Napster - the inside story and lessons for entrepreneurs" he gives a fascinating account of his time there, and some great tips for dealing with large businesses if you're a start up.

One of the most salient points he makes is this:

We told the record labels that we (Napster) had a loyal audience of over 50M users. We had servers that could control distribution. If they didn’t do a deal with us and put us out of business then Gnutella and its derivatives would become unstoppable. There would be no company to sue and no server to shut down. If we worked together now we could convert the market to a paying subscription or per download model. If we didn’t do a deal chaos would ensue. They didn’t believe us and didn’t really understand what this Gnutella threat was. The record labels lost billions of dollars in lost revenue over the next several years, and may never squash the free file trading movement.

How true. There are now many legal download services, and services that meet the needs of pretty much every kind of market (except the "I have no money at all" children's market - and even there, parents, just lay out the cash for a monthly Napster sub!) yet illegal file sharing persists. Why? Because, in part, the record industry missed its one golden chance to convert Napster users into paying customers before the culture of "I'll download it for free, thanks" took root.

Analogy of the day

Courtesy of Apple Matters, from their story titled Note to the Recording Industry: The iPod is not Mtv:

The entire debate really comes down to the following truth: the record companies want more money out of the honest folks who are willing to pay for their music. Before iTunes came along everyone who swapped mp3s could be considered a music thief. When the iTunes music store rolled out a few honest swappers jumped at the chance to go legal. The Music industry regards these folks as sheeple and plans to get them to pay not only for their past sins but for all the sins of file swappers everywhere.
Here one is reminded of the case of Count Fulk the Black of Anjou. The Count, history tells us, was a really bad guy responsible for all sorts of disgusting crimes. At some point the Count decided he wanted to get right with the powers that be so he appealed to the local religious leaders for absolution. Not content with a few prayers and a donation the religious leaders of the day sentenced the Count to a triple pilgrimage to Jerusalem…while shackled. So the Count trudged across France, the Alps, Syria and Jordan and back again three times in chains. Finally, to add insult to grievous injury, on the last trip he was tied to a hurdle and dragged through the streets while being unmercifully whipped by two stout fellows. It is hard to say that downloading music from P2P sites is quite as bad as the crimes committed by the Black Count (though the music industry would probably argue otherwise) but the outcome is the same. When offered a legal option those who seem to be willing to make amends and do what is right will be the ones most damaged by the record companies actions.

Brilliant stuff!

September 14, 2005

Quote of the day

Michael Gartenberg - Are Google and Apple the new Novell and Netscape for Microsoft?.

As one MSFT exec said to me, "my kid can't even name an iPod competitor, much less want one."

August 16, 2005

Apple: A Little Curious About Rent-a-Tunes

Link: Apple: A Little Curious About Rent-a-Tunes.

Two music executives tell BusinessWeek Online that Apple began asking questions about the subscription model earlier this summer, soon after Internet giant Yahoo (YHOO ) unveiled a subscription service called Music Unlimited in early May.

While Apple told those music-industry execs that it had no concrete plans at the time, it expressed interest in the strategy of potential new entrants, such as e-tailer Amazon.com (AMZN ) and search powerhouse Google (GOOG ). According to the sources, it was the first time Apple staffers asked so many questions about the subscription model.

That doesn't mean Apple is considering a move into this segment of the market. Indeed, says one of the sources, Apple would likely consider such a move only if one of its rivals began to make serious inroads into its market dominance.

I've said it before (and I'll say it again) - there would be no harm to Apple's business model if it adopted a subscription service in addition to its current sales model. Both can peacefully co-exist, and appeal to different sorts of users.

September 29, 2004

Mark Mulligan: Don't Believe the Copyright Hype

Mark Mulligan: Don't Believe the Copyright Hype

The argument put forward by the industry is that the 50 year limit prevents the music industry the right t exploit its works. No. It prevents particular segments (typically the big majors) from exploiting the works.

June 22, 2004

iTunes for Windows stuttering fix

iTunes is by far my favourite music player on any platform, so it has always been a great annoyance to me that, on my Tablet PC, it stuttered badly on every track, making it basically unlistenable. I could never work out why this was, as the same problem didn't exhibit itself on my desktop PC, which is old enough to be far less powerful than the laptop.

So it was with huge relief that I found a fix here: Go to the QuickTime control panel, and change Sound Out to "Wave out" instead of "DirectSound" and the stutters go away completely, leaving you with the best music player working perfectly.

June 18, 2004

iTunes Music Store Europe: First thoughts

Last Monday, Apple launched the iTunes Music Store in Europe, covering the UK, France and Germany, with a typically Apple-esque event. Steve Jobs came over (and, as far as I can tell, didn't actually do any interviews - what a waste of time), and the coverage Apple got was incredible, with every broadcast TV station highlighting it on their main evening shows.
Obviously, I signed up as quickly as possible, and Apple will be happy to hear that I've already bought more music from it than I've bought from any other store in the past year - a total of eight full albums and twelve individual songs. That also easily eclipses Napster, which I've been using since its launch and have bought a total of three albums from.
So how do the two services compare? Well first the good news for Apple: I much prefer purchasing music in its AAC format, and not just because I use an iPod. AAC has less restrictive conditions for its DRM, and the sound quality is actually as good as WMA, which is the reverse of my usual opinion (when I've compared CDs that I've ripped in both WMA and AAC formats, WMA almost always wins out). Buying is also ludicrously easy.
But at present, for anyone not tied into an iPod and not bothered about the DRM conditions, I'd recommend Napster over the iTunes Store. First of all, and perhaps most surprisingly, Napster is far more enticing to use and explore. Most albums and artists come with profiles and information that goes way beyond what Apple has, except where an artist is a "featured artist" on iTMS (and at present, there are about five of those on the Euro-store). While iMixes are fun to explore, they're not as interesting as the "related artists" content on Napster.
Secondly, because Napster uses a "play whatever you want" subscription model, it is far, far easy to explore and discover new music on it than on iTMS. Suppose I want to listen to the new album by a band I've never heard of. With Napster, I just listen to it streamed - and if I like it, I can either download it for offline play, or buy it for burning or transferring to a portable player. With iTunes, I have only one choice: buy it and hope for the best. Or, more likely, rip some of it off from Limewire or Acquisition and - if I think it's worth the money - buy it from iTunes.
What's interesting about this is how it's affected my buying. Of the albums I've bought on iTunes, not one has been from an artist that's new to me. Instead, they've largely been replacements for vinyl records that I lost years ago ("October" by U2, for example), or new albums from artists that I know I like ("To The 5 Boroughs" by Beastie Boys). Of the three albums I've bought on Napster, two have been by artists that were completely new to me.
I'd suspect that this pattern is repeated a lot, and if so it suggests that new artists would be better off getting their work on Napster, where users can actually hear and buy, rather than iTMS.
The final advantage that Napster has over iTMS at the moment is content. I don't know what each company is claiming as a number of tracks on their services, but searching for artists on iTMS is often a frustrating experience, and not only with independents (who are still baulking at Apple's terms and conditions, and so aren't on the store). You might not expect to expect to find Campag Velocet on either store, but you'd certainly expect Frank Zappa.
What's most strange is that where the iTMS has an artist, Napster usually has more of their work. Want the new PJ Harvey album? There's one track on iTMS, and the whole album on Napster. The same goes for Scissor Sisters. For Pink Floyd, iTMS lists 11 albums, while Napster lists 39, with iTMS missing obvious ones like "The Wall". And the list goes on.
My experience with iTMS was also marred by two annoying bugs, both of which I reported to Apple immediately (and have heard nothing about since). Very rarely, an album will claim it is no longer available when you try to buy it, despite being available. And iTunes' "Check for purchased music" option is flaky, and sometimes claims you haven't got any bought music when you've got it on another machine. But these issues will no doubt get ironed out in time.
Still, even when iTMS gets more content, I still think Apple is missing a trick with not having a streamed subscription option, which allows you to explore far more new music legally and actually find new artists. iTMS will be great if you are middle-aged and just want to buy all that old stuff you never bought on CD, plus that new Jamie Callum thing your mates all like. Personally, I'll carry o subscribing to Napster - but when I find something I like, I'll try and buy it on iTMS, so I can put it on my iPod. If it's there, of course.

May 21, 2004

Napster UK: First impressions

Yesterday I downloaded and installed the UK version of the all-new, all-legal Napster. It's a Windows Media-based service which allows you, for £9.99 per month, to have unlimited albums streamed, with individual tracks and albums available for sale at either 99p per track or a variable amount per album - again, in copy protected WMA 9 format.
There's a free seven-day trial of the streaming service, and so far I've been pretty impressed with it. Audio quality is very good, as you'd expect from WMA (which in tests I've done, is better sounding that either MP3 or AAC), and the selection of albums is broad enough to cater for most tastes: any service that has both the Best of Vardis and just about every album Ministry ever made is going to appeal to me.
So will I be ponying up the the £9.99 per month at the end of the trial period? Bare in mind that I'm a Mac user half the time, and there's no Mac version of the service, and that I use an iPod, which doesn't support WMA so I can't - legally - download any music to it. On the basis of that, you'd think it wouldn't be attractive: but in fact, I'll probably subscribe. I view streamed services as a different market from paid-for ones where you own the music. Streaming gives me a chance to listen to music before I buy it, or to listen to things that I'd never bother putting on my iPod, or that I'd listen to so rarely that I don't care about owning it. If you think of Napster as a £9.99 per month "super radio" that you have complete control over, it starts to make sense.
Of course, when the iTunes Music Store comes along - and despite the lock-in to iPod - I'll probably be buying music from there as well. But I still envisage that most of my music will be bought in CD format and ripped to MP3, so that I can listen to it on any device.

My Photo

Where I'll be...