Napster Digital Rights Management (DRM)

[MacRumors]

It's clear based on recent comments that many users are ignorant of Napster's Digital Rights Management implementation of their recently launched service. With Napster's service rumored to be coming to the Mac, here's a recap of their digital rights management system:

Purchased Music ($.99/song, $9.95/album):

- Unlimited burns of individual tracks
- Unlimited transfers to supported Portable Players
- Copy your music to 3 computers
- If you sign into another computer under your useraccount, you can use the "Sync/Restore" feature to download tracks you've already purchased onto the other computer.

Premium Service ($9.95/month)

- Download an unlimited number of songs to three computers.
- Listen an unlimited number of times as long as your subscription is active.


Premium service is optional.

[mymemory]

That is pretty good, competence will be the best for us as a costumer.

Let see if Apple can do something better than that.

Of course all this is at a glance.

[sickracer2015]

dont forget the napster client does not allow you to import your cd's either.. and of course iTunes does...

[pyrotoaster]

The basic service is an iTunes rip-off and the "Premium" service is just a complete rip-off (most people don't want to rent music!).

I think iTunes doesn't have anything to worry about.

[ColoJohnBoy]

I don't understand the point of the subscription service. iTunes already provides streaming, on-demand, commercial free radio and it doesn't cost a dime. Also, if I'm going to pay money for music, I don't want it to "expire" if I choose not to renew my subscription.

And are they supposed to make themselves competitive by knocking four cents of the price of an album? Give me a break.

[brhmac]

Apple needs to adopt this feature...

If you sign into another computer under your user account, you can use the "Sync/Restore" feature to download tracks you've already purchased onto the other computer.

Users should be allowed to re-download files they've purchased on to their computer. Files corrupt, get thrown away accidentally, etc.

If Apple is going to maintain it's marketshare in the "legal download music" biz, it needs to take a best practices approach. Learn from the competition, adopt the new functionality when it makes sense and laugh all the way to the bank.

C'mon, Apple, don't let iTunes/iPod go the way of the Newton.

[arn]

Originally posted by ColoJohnBoy
I don't understand the point of the subscription service. iTunes already provides streaming, on-demand, commercial free radio and it doesn't cost a dime.

I should have figured someone would mis-read that.

The point isn't the radio.

The point is... I want to download 1000 songs this month and see which ones I like, then buy those. These songs act just like other songs you have on your computer. Play them over and over. Throw them in a playlist. etc....

Don't like it? That's fine. It's optional

arn

[arn]

Here's my take.

Napster's rights are "iTunes Rights" plus offer additional rights (subscription). Therefore is "better"... as in more flexible. (It's certainly no worse)

I don't care if you think the Subscription plan sucks or not. It's optional.

There are other reasons to not like Napster's service, but their DRM is not one of them.

arn

[Dippo]

Originally posted by brhmac
Apple needs to adopt this feature...



Users should be allowed to re-download files they've purchased on to their computer. Files corrupt, get thrown away accidentally, etc.

If Apple is going to maintain it's marketshare in the "legal download music" biz, it needs to take a best practices approach. Learn from the competition, adopt the new functionality when it makes sense and laugh all the way to the bank.

C'mon, Apple, don't let iTunes/iPod go the way of the Newton.

I agree, being able to redownload your songs that you buy is really needed. Then you won't have to worry about acidentally having your music deleted or going through all the trouble of having to back it up.

I can't think of any reason not to implement this unless it would be techincally impossible with the way Apple's service works?

[Dippo]

Originally posted by arn
I should have figured someone would mis-read that.

The point isn't the radio.

The point is... I want to download 1000 songs this month and see which ones I like, then buy those. These songs act just like other songs you have on your computer. Play them over and over. Throw them in a playlist. etc....

Don't like it? That's fine. It's optional

arn

At first glance, being able to download loads of songs for $10 a month sounds like a really good deal.

(Unless I am understanding incorrectly) You can't transfer them to a MP3 player or burn them to a CD (without paying). You will be confined to playing this music on your computer.

So IMHO, the premium service is just like an internet radio in which you can choose the songs you want to listen to. And for $10 a month, this isn't a good deal. (my opinion)

[Datazoid]

Originally posted by arn
Napster's rights are "iTunes Rights" plus offer additional rights (subscription). Therefore is "better"... as in more flexible.

Hmmm....Doesn't this go against the entire Apple/Macintosh mantra? I thought the whole idea was quality over quantity? We purchase our computers with relatively little (in some cases, no) flexibility regarding who we purchase them from, the options they come with, the operating system installed, etc. Furthermore, are not the majority of Apple's programs "inflexible"? Practically the whole OS/iLife/etc apps revolve around the philosophy of "adapting yourself to Apple's workflow because it is more efficient/easier/etc", not "Apple adopting itself to your workflow because you know yourself best". If we want more flexibility/options, wouldn't we all have PC's already? After all, they have far more choices and "flexibility" in their hardware and software....

Just a thought, anyways...

[AmigoMac]

It looks like a good deal from a lot of people out there, look, if there are people thinking, "I don't care what kind of PC I have because it just lets me do my work, don't care to reboot 3-5 times a week but works", they won't even care about music quality nor the good look of interface, it just lets listen what they want with an ugly (IMO) portable player, because, they wont care to recharge it everyday. the probably good thing is, some price drops with iPods and new features in iTMS.

just my lines... think about it.

[Java]

I know this is a bit off topic, but I just checked out the screen shot napster provides on their website (have to dig a little), and realized, it looks very difficult to find the music you want.

Here is a link to thescreen shot.

I would think that just trying to find the music you are looking for could prove difficult.

Just my $.02.

[dongmin]

Originally posted by Dippo
At first glance, being able to download loads of songs for $10 a month sounds like a really good deal.

(Unless I am understanding incorrectly) You can't transfer them to a MP3 player or burn them to a CD (without paying). You will be confined to playing this music on your computer.

So IMHO, the premium service is just like an internet radio in which you can choose the songs you want to listen to. And for $10 a month, this isn't a good deal. (my opinion)

sure if you burn your music a lot and have an mp3 player, the premium service is useless. BUT for people like me who don't yet have an iPod (although I may get one in the near future) and play music off my iBook 99.9% of the time, the $10 a month is a pretty good deal. Plus, you get to download to three different computers which is pretty sweet; it essentially comes out to $3.33 per computer for unlimited renting of music. If this service was offered for iTunes, I'd jump on it in a heartbeat.

edit: iTMS has a clear advantage over others because its player is so much better. And the ability to share your music over a local network is huge, especially in campus/office settings.

[nacl99]

The subscription service will be great, I'll tell you why!

Because in the windows world you can always guarantee that someone will crack any protection you can come up with, or find a way around it.

So basically Napster will end up like its predecessor, one way or another.

Good for Pirates, Bad for Napster, Good for Apple.

[Dippo]

Originally posted by Macrumors


- Unlimited burns of individual tracks

According to napster.com

You may burn each Purchased Track to a CD up to five times as part of any particular playlist of songs. A "playlist" is a discrete group of Purchased Tracks that are arranged together in a particular order.

[scem0]

Originally posted by arn
Here's my take.

Napster's rights are "iTunes Rights" plus offer additional rights (subscription). Therefore is "better"... as in more flexible.

I don't care if you think the Subscription plan sucks or not. It's optional.

There are other reasons to not like Napster's service, but their DRM is not one of them.

arn

exactly how I feel...

But I dont see how anyone could think the subscription service sucks - it is a great deal. I never burn my music, I never transport it, and I have a quickly changing group of music I like to listen to. This subscription thing is PERFECT for me, but unfortunately I can't even let go of $9.00 a month. I have plenty of music on my computer from my CDs.

But really, mac users can't argue about this: Napster's DRM is better than apples.

Hopefully this will change, but as of now, Napster has everything apple has and more. And in my case, much more.

scem0

[edit] I bet if the subsription service was offered in iTunes, most mac users would get it...[/edit]

[LethalWolfe]

Originally posted by scem0
exactly how I feel...

But I dont see how anyone could think the subscription service sucks - it is a great deal. I never burn my music, I never transport it, and I have a quickly changing group of music I like to listen to. This subscription thing is PERFECT for me, but unfortunately I can't even let go of $9.00 a month. I have plenty of music on my computer from my CDs.

But really, mac users can't argue about this: Napster's DRM is better than apples.

Hopefully this will change, but as of now, Napster has everything apple has and more. And in my case, much more.

scem0

[edit] I bet if the subsription service was offered in iTunes, most mac users would get it...[/edit]

Has in Napsters DRM better? The look pretty much the same to me (save that iTMS lets you burn 10x vs. Napster's 5). Napster has a more flexible service in that you have pay-per-download and subscription options, and if you switch comptuers you can synch yer new computer up w/your Napster music. Neither of those features fall under DRM though, IMO.


Lethal

EDIT: The subscription service doesn't hold any value for me because I listen to my music everywhere (computer in the den, home stereo, car, work, etc.,) so I want stuff I can take w/me.

[Sayhey]

Originally posted by Dippo
According to napster.com

You may burn each Purchased Track to a CD up to five times as part of any particular playlist of songs. A "playlist" is a discrete group of Purchased Tracks that are arranged together in a particular order.

If I remember Fairplay rules correctly it is up to ten times as part of a playlist. So Apple has a less restrictive DRM than Napster in this regard. It isn't in contradiction to what arn posted. On both systems you can burn a song as many times as you like, but you have to change your playlist every so often.

[ITR 81]

After talking with some old hacker buddies of mine. I was told some folks are already working at hack the sub. service. Basically pay for it once a month and dl and burn all you want with no extra charges.

I myself don't want to DL music just to my computer. I want to burn it or put it on the iPod and either way I want to be able to play it on my CD player in my car.
So to me paying sub charge plus 99 cents extra for songs I really want to use is just too much for me. If hack program comes out I will use it just get all music I can DL for 10 bucks. But I bet Roxio will pull the plug on this as soon as folks start doing this or the RIAA will.

[ColoJohnBoy]

Oh oh oh, okay. Yes, I misinterpreted it. I'm still pretty content with just having the 30 second preview and not having to pay extra to decide what I like. But whatever works for people, it's cool.

[dho]

The most usefull part for me would be the "Sync/Restore" feature.

I lack an ipod and switch between two relatively isolated computers every week. Currently, whenever I buy new music I have to wait for my the slow 128 upload from my dsl to allow my other desktop to use it.

[ITR 81]

Thing is folks are saying this and that. Well if I'm not mistaken isn't iTunes 5 coming out in Jan.? If so then most these issues could all be resolved in the next version. I wonder if anyone has an update on iTunes 5 and what extras will it will include.

[arn]

Originally posted by ColoJohnBoy
Oh oh oh, okay. Yes, I misinterpreted it. I'm still pretty content with just having the 30 second preview and not having to pay extra to decide what I like. But whatever works for people, it's cool.

Napster offers free 30second previews too.

Look, I'm not "pro-Napster" by any means... but the uninformed reasons that people come up with to say Napster is worse is just that - uninformed.

Originally posted by Dippo
You may burn each Purchased Track to a CD up to five times as part of any particular playlist of songs.

And you can only burn Apple's songs up to 10 times per playlist. You can create a new "playlist" by rearranging tracks, or simply recreating the list.

Individual songs can be burned an unlimited number of times (on both systems).

arn

[MhzDoesMatter]

Originally posted by arn
And you can only burn Apple's songs up to 10 times per playlist. You can create a new "playlist" by rearranging tracks, or simply recreating the list.

Individual songs can be burned an unlimited number of times (on both systems).

arn

Wouldn't that mean that Apple's DRM is "looser" than Napster's? The other points about Napster's service mentioned in the article and subsequent posts have nothing to do with DRM. Since this is the only point of contention so far, iTunes would appear to be coming out on top.


-Truth Hertz