Apple Music Service -- Ready?

[MacRumors]

Previous rumors of Apple's music service claimed that only four of the five major record labels had committed to Apple's new service.

This New York Times, talks have progressed... and all five lables are on board:

The online store could be introduced soon. After months of wrangling, all five major music companies finally agreed this week to allow Apple to license their music for a fee for the venture, according to a music executive.

ThinkSecret has reported that new iPods and Music Service are likely to be delivered by month's end.

 

[amnesiac1984]

So when will it actually be released?

 

[nuckinfutz]

Looks like they may be able to announce end of April.

I'm really....really curious to see how this is going to work. I bothers me that the Majors are so enthused about it. To me that means consumers will have little "Portability" of downloaded files. Just my pessimism.

 

[Vlade]

Can someone explain what kind of copyright protection there is going to be? I wonder how hard it will be to crack, but im sure it will be cracked (analog loop)

 

[pilotgi]

I'm really looking forward to this music service.

I just hope there's some material I'm interested in as I'm not a fan of most popular music.

I loves 'da bluez.

 

[mgescuro]

As far as we all know, the Music service will be based on AAC.
The music service will most likely be Mac only because that's really the only way that Apple can control the music. But if you will be able to burn the music to CD... what's to stop someone from moving the CD to a PC and ripping it there? Apple had to have closed the loop somehow. If not, I don't see how you'd get all 5 major labels to buy into the idea!!

I can see the music being in a format that only iTunes or some other program specific. And we all know that Apple believes that if you buy the music legitimately, then you should be able to do what you want with it. So, CD burning and transferring to an iPOD/MP3 player should be possible.

So the question is... what's to stop someone from popping a burned CD into a Windows box and ripping it there to share to people??? Maybe there's something encoded into the burned CD that prevents high quality burning or distorts the MP3 in some way but doesn't prevent playing?? Does it prevent MP3 CD burning??


Argh... too many questions... and still 2 weeks till the end of the month!! :-((

 

[jimjiminyjim]

I am getting quite excited about this music service, even with a 56k modem. I fully expect that downloads to be as reliable as apple's software update and download servers. That in itself is something I'll be happy to pay for, considering the hassle it can cause trying to use p2p programs.

All five music companies on board! Impressive. It must be good, that's all I can say. Really good.
I can't wait until April 28th. Or whatever the date is. If it gets pushed to May, i'm going to be very disappointed.

 

[JPGR_Fan]

As someone predicted earlier, M$ is now poking around the UMG business, according to theNew York Postonline edition today. In addition, the article states that Jobs "has now decided we wants to buy the entire division." Apple is holding talks with private equity firms to finance the deal. Further, the article states that M$ might "intensify its interest as an April 29 Vivendi board meeting approaches."

 

[jimjiminyjim]

Hmmm....

Just a thought... I wonder what kind of influence Apple's research into buying Universal might have had on that fifth music company. Politics are strange, you know.

 

[mgescuro]

I thought that "5th music company" was Sony Music. It was in some article somewhere. Sony was still mvery concerned about their content rights.
I guess that's all been resolved.

 

[C14ru5]

Re: Apple Music Service -- Ready?

Originally posted by Macrumors
...only four of the five major record labels had committed to Apple's new service.

Does this mean that Apple negotiated with all five major record labels, but when Universal Music said "No!", Apple said "Doesn't matter, 'cuz we own you now"?
Just kidding

Disclaimer: The Universal Music deal is still a rumor, AFAIK

 

[kjottbein]

hm. This is what we "know":

• The music files will be in AAC format
• You WILL be able to transfer to an iPod, otherwise the service will be useless
• DRM is a major concern with the participating labels
• new iPods are coming

Suppose the new iPods will have more advanced protection against sharing music (the current ones were easily cracked to be able to access the mp3 files, which were supposed to be locked to one computer only).

I hope this doesn't imply that old iPods won't be compatible with the music service.

Actually, I think this service will be cross-platform, and also compatible with other brands of digital music players, altough this would complicate DRM (which is a good thing for us). Would the music industry want to participate in this, as it would probably require some economic investments on their part, if it was usable by Apple's relatively small market share only? Also, as the iPod is available for both Mac and Windows, it would be strange if the music download service wasn't.

On the other hand, I read somewhere that Dell was to stop selling iPods, and also Target (which I believe is a big PC retail chain?). Could this mean that Apple is to discontinue the Windows iPod starting with the new iPods (that are due any tuesday now )? maybe as a part of a revamped switch campaign?

 

[nagromme]

iTrax?

Rumors about the name iTracks or iTrax have been around for a LONG time--generally assumed to be an easy music-composition iApp, like a Logic Jr. But maybe all along, iTrax was the name of the music service! Just a though.

Anyway... here's a best-case for copy protection with the new sevice. None. Here's why the recording industry MIGHT possibly permit such an experiment, after months of convincing:

* iTunes/iPod still may not make it 100% transparent to steal music--you'd have to know what you were doing to get files out of the iPod's music folders.

* The service may be limited to Mac, reducing the risk in the record companies' eyes. (iPods will still be for PC, though: they sell well, attract attention to Apple design--and supposedly the new iPods have USB2 and FW both.)

* The service gives HONEST people a way to buy one song--and many, like me, will. Others who are less honest and wouldn't pirate a whole album but WOULD pirate one song, now have an easy way to go legal too. There will still be criminals who steal just because they can get away with it, but the problem of piracy COULD actually be reduced by this.

I won't buy the service unless I can freely burn my own CD mixes (like we can now with tracks bought on CD) AND it is well-priced with no monthly fees--but regardless, I won't call Apple dead and buried for trying it, I won't blame Apple alone when the music companies probably have more to do with it, and I WILL still buy an iPod. I'm prepared for others to be more alarmist, but I really don't think it will kill Apple to do what they can with this idea and then have it fail. I'd rather see this risk than buying UMG...

 

[jholzner]

Well, I for one will sign up as soon as they release it. I use Limewire and Aquisition now to get the songs I want and I know that's illegal but I do not want to pay for a whole album to get one song I want...and I won't do it!! If I can purchase individual songs through Apple I will do it.

 

[sebimeyer]

.mac integration?

I wonder how this will be integrated into .mac? Will you have to sign up with a monthly fee, or will it be purely based on purchases, like the Amazon "one-click" system? Either one is possible.
As I have .Mac already and use it all the time (it really is useful to me) it might be a good idea to somehow give people an incentive to sign up for .mac and get some free stuff (say a CD a month, or at least some tracks)

I am getting REALLY excited about this though. It is definitely coming, not matter if the Universal merger is a true or not. Either way, I will finally be able to get the music I want, when I want it. If it compares to the ease of using iPhoto to order photos, that alone would be worth my money rather then spending hours to find some track on limewire.

Oh yeah... and it would be legal!

 

[s_owen03]

apple insider says that it's due the 28th, although I think this is unlikely due to recent procrastination we've seen from apple; wddc, ppc970, etc. in my opinion, pruchasing universal would be a terrible move for apple, but the online music service, i imagine, would do fairly well because of the loyalty most apple-users have for jobs and the company... this is the idea that i get from reading posts at this site and a few others anyway.

regardless, apple users have a responsibility, as %3 of the market, to support apple; certainly this applies to the music service as well.

 

[SoonToGetAMac]

Does anyone know if Apple had any talks with independent labels? I know quite a bit of my music isn't from the "Big 5," so hopefully some smaller labels will be on board too.

 

[The Shadow]

Several earlier posts were overly concerned with the issue of transferrability / non-transferrability of music downloaded on a Mac to a PC.

IMO there's nothing to worry about - It's not really an issue, because you can already transfer any purchased music CD to a PC! So why would anyone wreck this service just to stop purchased downloaded music being transferred?

It'd be too unreasonable and bizarre. Still, stranger things have happened.

 

[Chef Ramen]

i really hope that if smaller labels arent on board, then they will be in the short future. i think maybe 1/5 of the music i listen to is owned by the big five

 

[kfury]

Originally posted by mgescuro
But if you will be able to burn the music to CD... what's to stop someone from moving the CD to a PC and ripping it there? Apple had to have closed the loop somehow. If not, I don't see how you'd get all 5 major labels to buy into the idea!!

I disagree. Anyone who buys a CD in the store could pop it in to their PC, rip it, and share the MP3s. So what if a user can download tracks for $0.99 a track, burn them to a CD, and do the same thing? They've bought the music prior to burning it to a CD, so this form of online distribution isn't any more piratable than a purchased CD. Either way the label gets their money, only this time with a higher margin, because they didn't have to pay for packaging, shipping, and shelf space.

In fact, an AAc->CD->MP3 copy would be marginally worse than a CD->MP3 copy anyhow, so such bootlegs would be lesser quality than the ripping people do to physical CDs every day.

Apple's apparently convinced the labels that more online track sales are coming from people who would otherwise steal the music, instead of those who would buy the album in a store instead. That's probably a pretty valid claim to make, and even if it's not, everyone's profit margin is still skyrocketing, except for record stores.

Lastly, keep in mind that as far as labels are concerned, the sale of a used CD is just as bad as pirating. There's nothing they'd like more than to create a distribution method that prevents people from selling their digital rights to another person.

 

[yumpin yiminy]

Re: .mac integration?

Originally posted by sebimeyer
I wonder how this will be integrated into .mac? Will you have to sign up with a monthly fee, or will it be purely based on purchases, like the Amazon "one-click" system? Either one is possible.
...

didn't apple just send out a notice to people notifying them that the apple user ID would be rolled into the .Mac ID? So, your Apple Store/Support ID is now being replaced by the .Mac ID....
I think that is right.
regardless, the change happens sometime soon and well the music thing could happen soon.

 

[Vonnie]

Copy protection

Just guessing here, but what if they just add a per-user signature to all your downloaded music? An unaudible audio-watermark. That would make it pretty easy to ban you if they find out that you are sharing your music on kazaa/gnutella. (maybe sue you if you really share allot).

I guess that you then could do whatever you want with your files. Burn them to cd, put them on your ipods, convert them to regular mp3's.. But if they find your music on the net, you get banned from the music service, and have to pay a fine..

 

[maxterpiece]

albums

One thing I worry about with a music service like this is that the idea of an album will completely dissappear. All songs will just be seen as singles -- even if they are released in bunches of 12 or 15. I find myself listening to playlists on my ipod, or just randomizing my entire song list... I sometimes wish i could be forced to just pop a whole CD (or 3 CDs in my changer) into my cd player, but it is too easy to just hit play on my iPod. I see internet music service, eventually, becoming the main way that we get our music. I hope that not every song is sold as a single, or else singles are much more expensive overall than an album. Obviously, the opportunity to make your own album is cool and can express something more personal, but I don't want the concreteness of the idea of an album to become an artifact from another time.
I must be getting old.... talking about the good old days.

 

[maxterpiece]

More thoughts

The key to this is that people don't feel pressured to become a part of this service, but that it makes itself available to the user without them having to do anything active. I don't want any apple pop up dialog boxes suggesting that I look at "such and such" an artist because I've ripped "so and so's" cd. But maybe if I could click a tab in itunes and in that tab, the search field in itunes that usually looks through my own music, would allow me to search through an almost universal (no pun intended) collection of music. Let the user be curious by making the service a part of their experience, but don't sacrifice the performance or experience that the rest of the OS provides.... NEVER!
max

 

[The Shadow]

Shut up Vonnie!
You'll give people ideas!

Oh, and calm down Max.

If albums ever start to die, it'll just add pressure on artists not to dish us up any old crap for the "other 10 songs" on the album.