Amazon Taking DRM-Free MP3s International in 2008

[gerardrj]

To all the responses along the lines of "good, it's more competition and will bring down prices"

Music is not a free commodity, Apple can't just sell music as they want to, the rights must be negotiated with each label in each country. If it were up to Apple they would most certainly sell all DRM free tracks, but the music industry won't allow that.

I don't understand how exactly Amazon is going to go world-wide with their store when Apple has had to negotiate with the rights-holders in each country to open a store there. If Amazon has found some technical loophole in international law or the music industry's licensing schemes then I'm sure Apple will jump on board with the world-wide distribution thing quite quickly under the same auspices.

 

[stcanard]

Its very simple: the first company that is able to sell me DRM free music is going to get my business.

I notice Puretracks has finally started selling to Apple users, so they are at the top of the list, but I think their selection is somewhat limited.

Amazon is currently looking like a close second.

Apple? Well I'm still waiting for even an indication they are even interested in expanding that market.

 

[jfanning]

15 positives, 6 negatives. Why? This is a good announcement for everyone outside the US.

Well that really depends on what they define as "international"

 

[illitrate23]

"We have received thousands of e-mails from Amazon customers around the world"

i wonder how many customers Amazon have in total around the world
it seems to me that 'thousands' would be a tiny percentage of all their worldwide customers

 

[Loge]

I don't understand how exactly Amazon is going to go world-wide with their store when Apple has had to negotiate with the rights-holders in each country to open a store there. If Amazon has found some technical loophole in international law or the music industry's licensing schemes then I'm sure Apple will jump on board with the world-wide distribution thing quite quickly under the same auspices.

They did not say they were going to set up a single world wide store, just that they were "going international". Expect it to be on a country by country basis, just like iTunes have been doing for years.

 

[Digital Skunk]

I haven't found any evidence of this in any of the mp3 files I have purchased from Amazon. As much as I'd like it to be true I haven't been able to determine what their files have been encoded with. Whatever they're using doesn't sound good to my ears.

I will agree that Lame is a top notch encoder. I can't tell the difference between a lame or itunes aac song at 256 kbps.

I agree. I am no audiophile but I do know that the sound quality in most digital formats isn't as good as the RAW stuff. I won't touch an audio track that is to be used in my projects unless it's AIFF. If it's multitrack then I better have each track as a separate file.

MP3s and AACs are pretty much all the same to my ears, a bit muddy. I do like that Amazon's store is taking off because it will force Apple to make some changes in their offerings to keep people using the store. Hopefully, Apple will just make a deal with the music industry to strip the files of their DRM.

I will still be purchasing my most loved music as CDs however....

 

[kkat69]

ROFL my wife asked me "So what does this all actually mean"

To which I replied, "Means more people will be hitting torrent sites now"

She didn't understand so I gave this example:

"Hey man you got that album?"
"Yah, got it off Amazon"
"Cool can I get a copy?"
"Sure"
--one less customer
Now don't get me wrong, I am not against DRM nor for it, but this is what they have to deal with.

Also, what this does is in fact Amazon does loose say a few sales (by few I'm talking probably in the thousands) but they do in fact gain a customer because that one person who "copied" songs from a friend or co-worker just might visit Amazon to buy more songs, so in the end they do win out.

I'm neither for nor against either iTunes or Amazon. I just look at a more realistic side of both. They are both good and both bad in their own respective ways. I will (depending on the selection) patron both sites, since as some of the posters have mentioned, I have a choice.

I'm not going to get caught up in a DRM debate since there is NO debate. DRM is there for a reason. Again not for or against it. DRM is like a software serial number. We apparently have NO TROUBLE typing in a serial number for software but soon as someone says music everyone is like "DRM FREE, FREE MUSIC MAN!" when in fact they are one and the same. DRM is NO different than a serial number for a software. We are under the false assumption that music should be DRM free since we hear it in so many medium throughout our daily lives. I mean, we don't hear MS Office 2008 playing on the radio. Hence we never associate the 2.

Personally I like the choice but if your gonna pay for software, then we should pay for music. Both were developed and work was put in by individuals to bring us both software and music. As far as DRM and DRM-free, well, IMO we might as well have serial number free software as well.

Again, not for or against, just providing a different light on the subject.

 

[clevin]

ROFL my wife asked me "So what does this all actually mean"

To which I replied, "Means more people will be hitting torrent sites now"


Again, not for or against, just providing a different light on the subject.

lol, hardly a different light, bt population and music purchasing population don't overlap that much from the begining.

more like you want to find a way to make the news negative.

 

[sellitman]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A93 Safari/419.3)

I boycott Amazon because they are a major contributor to the Repiggies. Apple is a "Blue Company"

 

[lazyrighteye]

This can only be good news for the consumer.

 

[weckart]

actually, its 320kbps mp3. and mostly $0.89.

The album I got before Amazon broke the site for non-US consumers was encoded at a VBR between 205 and 281kbps.YMMV.

started this drm free movement... why should amazon benefit? i for one will not sell out itms or apple, you shoulden't either!!

EMI of the major labels started this DRM free movement. Apple only joined in because the EU and Norway was onto it for monopolising the DRM market with Fairplay and it saw this as a quick escape route. As a fanboy, you should have remembered reading about that here.

 

[Stella]

The music files are water marked so you still have to be careful. If you pass your purchased music to other people and it gets onto a torrent site then that mp3 can be traced back to YOU.

ROFL my wife asked me "So what does this all actually mean"

To which I replied, "Means more people will be hitting torrent sites now"

She didn't understand so I gave this example:

"Hey man you got that album?"
"Yah, got it off Amazon"
"Cool can I get a copy?"
"Sure"
--one less customer
Now don't get me wrong, I am not against DRM nor for it, but this is what they have to deal with.

Also, what this does is in fact Amazon does loose say a few sales (by few I'm talking probably in the thousands) but they do in fact gain a customer because that one person who "copied" songs from a friend or co-worker just might visit Amazon to buy more songs, so in the end they do win out.

</snip>

 

[Rantipole]

I'm not going to get caught up in a DRM debate since there is NO debate. DRM is there for a reason. Again not for or against it. DRM is like a software serial number. We apparently have NO TROUBLE typing in a serial number for software but soon as someone says music everyone is like "DRM FREE, FREE MUSIC MAN!" when in fact they are one and the same. DRM is NO different than a serial number for a software. We are under the false assumption that music should be DRM free since we hear it in so many medium throughout our daily lives. I mean, we don't hear MS Office 2008 playing on the radio. Hence we never associate the 2.

Not a good analogy.

The main protest against DRM music is its potential lack of interoperability. You can't download an ITMS DRM song and play it anywhere. If you buy a Zune, you're out of luck (for several reasons ).

Your software example, however, is interoperable. Well, at least you know ahead of time whether you want PC or Mac. But, you can move that software to any other computer with the same OS. You may have to uninstall from one computer before loading on the other, but the point is you can move it. You cannot do that with DRM music.

 

[CWallace]

Another option is good. I prefer MP3 because it is easier to move it amongst my various devices now and will likely remain so in the future.

I agree with Blue Velvet that it is unlikely Apple is intentionally dragging their feet to support DRM-free music. Apple is first and foremost a hardware company and while I am sure they privately welcome Amazon's service (because it helps sell more iPods), they would very much like to move to DRM-free music on the iTunes Music Store because it supports the same result.

The music labels are using these new services to get Apple to accept practices that will make some music - especially "popular" music - more expensive. Apple doesn't like this because it means people are spending money on music and not iPods. However, Apple will accept these practices because it is in their long-term best interests to do so and they know it. The record labels know this, as well, but want to put some pressure on Apple in the interim just to try and "level the playing field" a bit more between them and Apple.

 

[Rantipole]

Another option is good. I prefer MP3 because it is easier to move it amongst my various devices now and will likely remain so in the future.

What device do you have that doesn't support AAC? Even the Zune supports AAC. My Blackberry supports AAC, and I know the Sony phones do, as well.

I don't know if I can agree with the arguments claiming 256 LAME encoded MP3 have the same sound profile as 256 AAC. Does anyone claiming that have a link to a study showing the results?

 

[Loge]

The music files are water marked so you still have to be careful. If you pass your purchased music to other people and it gets onto a torrent site then that mp3 can be traced back to YOU.

Not proven. My understanding is that the watermarks, which may apply to some tracks, only identify the retailer and do not contain personal information. So it cannot be tracked back to the individual who purchased it.

If you have information to the contrary please post a link, since it would be interesting to know.

 

[happydude]

dude, apple, get the memo or be prepared to have iTMS obsolete . . .

 

[happydude]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A93 Safari/419.3)

I boycott Amazon because they are a major contributor to the Repiggies. Apple is a "Blue Company"

huh, good info. i'm on board with you. just wish apple would see the writing on the wall and let go of DRM . . .

 

[stcanard]

The music labels are using these new services to get Apple to accept practices that will make some music - especially "popular" music - more expensive. Apple doesn't like this because it means people are spending money on music and not iPods. However, Apple will accept these practices because it is in their long-term best interests to do so and they know it. The record labels know this, as well, but want to put some pressure on Apple in the interim just to try and "level the playing field" a bit more between them and Apple.

It is exactly situations like this that are leaving my blood boiling. I have steadfastly avoided violating the copyright on published works, as I do believe in fair compensation. I am growing increasingly incensed at:

1) A large amount of taxation and levies that I am paying to support an activity I do not engage in (apparently in Canada copyright violation is not even "guilty until proven innocent" -- even if I did prove my innocence there is no mechanism to get the money refunded to me)

2) A refusal by the companies to proved music and video in a format that is convenient to the customer

3) Attempts to strongarm governments to strip away their citizens rights, while providing inaccurate statistics to justify it

I am very close to a breaking point now brought on especially by the high definition fiasco (not only do I have to gamble on a disc format, they won't even let me buy hi-def movies online if I want to try that way).

I have now decided: If the industry is unwilling to provide a reasonably future proof way for me to view their content I will find my own way to see it.

My money is there for the taking ... apparently they don't want it. When they do I will be willing to give it to them in return for fair use of the copyrighted content.

 

[jpferreira]

i guess the botton line is: buy from amazon (and similar sites) and help the record companies screw us in the future.

 

[Syrus28]

I think Amazon is in a good position to really capitalize on this. I mean, its an existing service so millions of people already have an account with a credit card attached to it already. All it takes is a click over to the MP3 tab and they have a music service to compete with Itunes. No installing any software, no constant updates...

I also like that if Amazon is missing a particular cover art, you can add it yourself so other people don't have to go searching for it. So they end up having a bigger selection of album art. Of course, this probably isn't as important to some as it is to me. Nothing worse than rotating the ole' Touch to see empty album art...