Title
Slashdot | Labels Agree On Free Music Downloads To Cell Phones
Description
Labels Agree On Free Music Downloads To Cell Phones -- article related to Cellphones and Music.
Referer Text
Slashdot | Labels Agree On Free Music Downloads To Cell Phones
Google Page Rank
Page Content in text format
Slashdot | Labels Agree On Free Music Downloads To Cell Phones
Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Slashdot
Search
News for nerds, stuff that matters
Log In
Create Account
Help
Subscribe
Firehose
Why Log In?
Why Subscribe?
Log In
Nickname
Password
Public Terminal
[
Create a new account
]
Sections
Main
Apple
AskSlashdot
Books
Develop ers
Games
Hardware
IT
Idle
Index
Interviews
Linux
Mobil e
Politics
Science
Technology
YRO
Help
FAQ
Bugs
Stories
Old Stories
Old Polls
Topics
Hall of Fame
Bookmarks
Submit Story
About
Supporters
Code
Services
Jobs
Special Offers
Sponsor Solutions
Jobs
.lb {_height: 90px;}
Slashdot Log In
Log In
Nickname
Password
Public Terminal
[
Create a new account
]
08/02/13/0029253
story
Labels Agree On Free Music Downloads To Cell Phones
Posted by
kdawson
on Tue Feb 12, 2008 09:41 PM
from the free-as-in-bundled dept.
An anonymous reader writes "CNet's Crave reports on a potentially revolutionary digital music service set to launch worldwide later this year. It's offering free, unlimited over-the-air downloads to cell phones, with music from all four major record labels, with no subscription. And the selections that users download get automatically downloaded to their PC or Mac. Rather obviously, the tracks are DRMed, but unlike the similar Nokia service unveiled last year to much disappointment, this MusicStation Max service will have exclusive handsets from LG and no additional fees to customers. This is a little similar to an idea talked about last year, but with all four majors on-board it seems to have greater potential."
cellphones music firsthitisfree !free firstbornson
mobile music story
Related Stories
[+]
Your Rights Online: Universal and Sony Plan "Free" Music Service 98 comments
Damon Tog writes "Macworld reports that Universal Music Group has enlisted the help of Sony to join forces in a new music service. The price of the subscription is expected to be built-in to the cost of digital music players, leaving the music 'free' to the consumer. 'The plan is still in flux and faces several hurdles, BusinessWeek notes. Among them is finding a business model that allows the hardware makers to subsidize the cost of the music. In addition, the labels have tried to develop their own online music services before without success.'"
Firehose:Major labels agree on free over-the-air downloads by Anonymous Coward
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Labels Agree On Free Music Downloads To Cell Phones
More |
Login
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to
use the classic discussion system instead. If you login, you can remember this preference.
Labels Agree On Free Music Downloads To Cell Phones
50 Comments
More |
Login
/
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
More |
Login
Please Log In to Continue
Log In
Nickname
Password
Public Terminal
[
Create a new account
]
Loading... please wait.
They still don't get it!
(Score:4, Informative)
by siyavash (677724)
on Tuesday February 12 2008, @09:45PM (#22401442)
Journal
"...Rather obviously, the tracks are DRMed..."They still don't get it! Do I say more?
Not Free
(Score:3, Insightful)
by goombah99 (560566)
It's not free. It's built into the price of the handset/subscription.
Re:
(Score:2, Insightful)
by ichief (1038054)
Although I am completely against DRM when it comes to music I've purchased to own, I forsee that DRM is quickly becoming a method to apply cheaper and wider access to music, albeit with restrictions. DRM has been really beneficial to allow subscription music users to take their music on the go; with an ad-supported platform or a service or device lockdown (as suggested with the above scheme), other service providers and device manufacturers can provide you low cost or free access to music, but the files wo
Re:They still don't get it!
(Score:4, Insightful)
by Znork (31774)
on Wednesday February 13 2008, @04:13AM (#22403700)
"a method to apply cheaper and wider access to music, albeit with restrictions."In a free market competition drives cheaper prices. Intellectual monopoly products have no competition apart from the yarrr mateys. Prevent copying (or any form of competition) and you get more expensive, not cheaper, music.So, no, DRM is never beneficial.
Parent
Re:
(Score:3, Interesting)
by fastest fascist (1086001)
You may have a point, there. DRM on expensive items doesn't work, when the alternative is a free unauthorized download. However, if legal downloads become dirt-cheap, but locked to a device with DRM, the situation might change. DRM will always be crackable, sure, but if you can easily buy music directly on a mobile device at a reasonable price, it could well appear worth the cost to avoid the hassle of getting on a computer, finding what you want, downloading the stuff, and loading it onto your device after
They still be full of DRM
(Score:5, Insightful)
by zappepcs (820751)
on Tuesday February 12 2008, @09:48PM (#22401466)
Journal
Apparently nobody with power has been listening at the **AA, not even a little bit. I couldn't even work up a yawn for this new service, never mind enough excitement to contemplate what missing features will be on the phone and what 'extra' goodies will be there to track my every move or some attempt at that.ooops, there, I yawned.Did I hear someone just call them fucking idiots?
Re:
(Score:2)
by globaljustin (574257)
It is exciting to me in the sense that it's a small sign that some companies (LG) and the 4 major labels are starting to glimpse the potential of the technology developed 5-10 years ago. You're right, in everyday use, this announcement means very little. However, I see it as a social worker might see a drug addict. The addict has stopped using cocaine, but still uses acid and meth almost daily. It's a small sign of growth that could come later. I would accept DRM'd music on my phone if I the ability to dow
Godwin's Law... can't help myself here
(Score:2)
by zappepcs (820751)
So, yeah I'm not holding my breath, but this is a small sign of progress. I'm reasonably certain that is what some of the Jews in Germany said about the new Jewish ID badge they were given.Yeah, yeah, I know it's a real stretch to compare the two, but I'm still waiting to see what the penalties are that come with use of the device/service. A gilded cage is still a cage.
Well
(Score:2, Funny)
by Idiot with a gun (1081749)
All 4 major labels are involved, why didn't they include the part about getting sued?
Re:Well
(Score:4, Funny)
by Technician (215283)
on Tuesday February 12 2008, @10:34PM (#22401768)
All 4 major labels are involved, why didn't they include the part about getting sued?The announcement if by the lables, not the RIAA. In other news, The RIAA to sue all four lables for making avaliable songs.
Parent
Re:
(Score:2)
by snl2587 (1177409)
The big 4 are virtually the RIAA, so I don't think that will be the case.
Why buy music now?
(Score:2, Funny)
by Anonymous Coward
This doesn't add up to me. Free downloads, no subscription fees, transferable to your home computer - so why will I need to buy any music ever again?What's the business model for the record labels?
Re:Why buy music now?
(Score:5, Informative)
by ipsi (1181557)
on Tuesday February 12 2008, @10:15PM (#22401630)
If you read the article, it does say that you'll need a special contract and a special phone. And in addition to that contract, I believe you'll need to buy an unlimited data plan as well. Woo.And it's not like you can put them on your iPod. If you want to use them on the computer, you'll need to use an approved player. Which I'm sure will be *fantastic*, the best *ever*!
Parent
Re:
(Score:3, Insightful)
by MeNeXT (200840)
But it's free! Sure it costs you $$$$ but it's FREE. Free I tell ya! Free! It just costs ya $$$$$$$$ but it's free!It's funny but that's not what I call free. What's wrong with people? How can you even consider this free? It's a service.
I was excited...
(Score:5, Insightful)
by ipsi (1181557)
on Tuesday February 12 2008, @10:06PM (#22401576)
And then I saw that it had DRM. And was limited to certain LG phones. Wow. Underwhelming, sad to say. Not that it'll appear down here, like, ever. Moving on.And hell, it's *NOT REALLY FREE*. You need a special contract. Oh yeah. Sure, each track is free, but you're still paying a premium for it. I don't mind that, but it's a bit misleading. Not that I'm surprised.They haven't even said which player will be able to play the files. It looks like Windows Media Player is a contender.All-in-all, not impressed.
Re:
(Score:2, Redundant)
by MeNeXT (200840)
NOT REALLY FREE because the rate plans haven't been set up yet. Once you subscribe to the plan $$$ then you can download for FREE????? How is this FREE??? Sh1t has marketing gone so far that we call this free? If that's the case I'd like to give you a car for free provided you subscribe to one of my lease services. I'll even let you choose the car.
Re:
(Score:2)
by webmaster404 (1148909)
Not to mention that a lot of the phone companies charge an arm and leg for data plans, even if it is small MP3 file that "free music" ends up being expensive fast.
Re:
(Score:2)
by MidnightBrewer (97195)
So, basically, it's a subscription service, with the extra caveat of being tied to your phone? What a pain.
Won't download for free
(Score:2)
by pembo13 (770295)
I'm not willing to download 98% of the music they produce these days, for free via P2P. However, I'm at the point in my life where I could maybe afford an album per month... sucks for them I guess.
Keep it
(Score:2, Redundant)
by syousef (465911)
Dear first-hit-is-free music companies.Keep your DRM music. I don't want it and I don't want to get hooked on your free sample. (One day I may change phones and I'll still want that music). Nice try though.
Nothing Free here, move along please...
(Score:4, Insightful)
by MeNeXT (200840)
on Tuesday February 12 2008, @10:16PM (#22401642)
It's DRMed service which you will pay for. Nothing FREE in any sense of the word.Limited songs on limited phones with limited transfer on limited equipment....Have it right now MP3, BitTorrent, Piratebay and my WiFi enabled smartphone...
This just in!
(Score:5, Funny)
by symbolset (646467)
on Tuesday February 12 2008, @10:19PM (#22401664)
Music companies just found another tech company to take a bajillion dollars to promise them that sweet, sweet DRM.
How many times does that make now? I can think of no better evidence that cocaine makes you dumb.
It's not a bad model ...BUT
(Score:5, Interesting)
by tjstork (137384)
on Tuesday February 12 2008, @10:49PM (#22401852)
Homepage
Journal
Bundling some sort of a music fee into digital items is not a bad business model. The record companies get their piece of the pie, consumers can get a set of appliances where they can have their music.This actually isn't that different from the software model, pre-Microsoft. Software was ultimately bundled in with the hardware and service contract costs and so everyone could just sorta of copy software all over the place. Heck, Microsoft owes a lot of its success to this sort of model for Windows largely due to its lack of DRM. If Microsoft required the sort of authentication with DOS and Windows 3.1 that it requires for Vista, it is very doubtful they would be in the dominant position they are in today. DOS used to be $10!!!Of course, this bundling sucks for Linux and completely free software, but one could envision a distro actually having a service plan with it for DRM content. If you throw in a few extra bucks, the content plan could actually be used to help fund further Linux development. Thus, tacking a few bucks onto teeny boppers wanting to get the latest Hannah Montana on a Linux box could actually be used to help pay for things like additional FireFox, Open Office and other Linux core applications development.The one thing that really hurts the credibility of the music industry, aside from the obvious and vile thuggishness with which RIAA presses its claims, is that, the artist's share of the proceeds is rather small. In the CD / Vinyl days, a large cut for the industry was reasonable because of all the people that the business needed to pay to make physical copies. Now, with electronic distribution, there's really no moral reason why the artist can't get a larger piece of the pie. But as we have seen with the writer's strike, it seems that the content industry isn't really interested in promoting, well, the truly gifted people that make content, but rather, exploiting them, and that completely undermines any legitimate claim onto the advantages of copyright. The recording industry isn't really an enabler of artists, as much as it is more like the Islamic caliphs of old sitting on overland trade routes, exploiting them until the Europeans figured out how to sail around them and avoid the ridiculous surcharges.To have an efficient capitalistic economy, you want to reward investment in people that actually add value, and record companies don't. So, having a more consumer friendly business model won't fix the problem. Record companies have to actually pay the artists a real percentage of the music sales. IF shareware distributors can thrive taking 10-15% of a sale, leaving artists with the lion's share, then so can record companies. The situation is different with movies, which are much more collaborative and capital intensive thing, but, even there, there's no reason that the principals of a movie can't get a bigger piece of the pie.
Re:
(Score:2)
by sowth (748135)
... It seems that the content industry isn't really interested in promoting, well, the truly gifted people that make content, but rather, exploiting them, ...It seems most big companies aren't interested in anything but exploiting. Take the software industry as an example. Most of them seem to be taking advantage of unknowing users. You could expand that to lawyers, auto mechanics, and so on.
To have an efficient capitalistic economy...Psychopaths don't care about the economy in general, they just care
Re:
(Score:2)
by tjstork (137384)
There is no such thing as FREE, there will always be a hook hidden somewhere in the bait.Well even "Free" software isn't really free. Its costs of development are picked up as part of a consultancy arrangement, or, through funding by companies that distribute that software as part of some other bundled service. Like, Apache is free, but its funded, IIRC, by a coalition of large ISPs that use it. They in turn recover the costs from their hosting customers.
Sounds good, but...
(Score:2, Insightful)
by Superpants (930409)
I only wish the major labels would get some talent to make this service worthwhile.
Not just DRM, but rootkit as well
(Score:3, Insightful)
by dogs4ar (1072988)
on Tuesday February 12 2008, @11:50PM (#22402166)
I started reading the original article, and stopped at this line:
"Every time you download a song to your phone, the same song is downloaded to your computer for playback through your PC speakers."
Just how the heck do they know when my PC is on, much less download songs to it? I don't want them downloading songs onto my PC without my knowledge. This service seems insidious. So you're saying every time I want to download a song, your proprietary player needs to be on a computer that's on and hooked up to the internet? Gee, there's no potential for abuse there.
What if someone sends me a rogue music file? If the same file is downloaded to my computer, isn't that going to mess up my machine? Virus writers are going to have a field day with this. Shame on Omniphone for promoting this garbage, and what is LG thinking, buying into this deal?
This will not replace p2p. It will barely make a dent. How can you justify charging for premium unlimited data when the same thing can be done with any smart phone on a wifi network for free? Really, these companies need to go back to their boardrooms and either disband or think of a better business model.
I'm not worried about the DRM. Whatever DRM these files come with will be broken the day that the first music file is downloaded from this service. I just don't understand why they even bother, anymore.
Can't teach a dinosaur new tricks, I suppose.
Re:
(Score:2)
by JasterBobaMereel (1102861)
I have a small portable device that allows me to listen to music and I believe that some mobile phone already have this built in ... it's called a Radio! unencrypted un DRM'ed free music ....?
How Many Times Do I Need To Say This....
(Score:2)
by pandrijeczko (588093)
...shop around, buy the CD as cheaply as possible and rip it yourself. No DRM plus a nice shiny disk and plastic case to file alphabetically on a shelf and gaze lovingly at.
And if you think a CD has "one or two good tracks on it" then please be a little more selective in your music choice. Don't buy the dross in the charts, there are thousands of classic albums out there that are good from start to finish and are worth every penny you pay for them.
Please don't entertain these idiot music moguls - they w
Re:
(Score:2, Interesting)
by Lunarsight (1053230)
If you do go this route, be sure to purchase albums from independent artists and labels.If you DO plan on purchasing RIAA-stuff, at least buy used copies. You don't want to feed the proverbial bears if you don't have to.In fact, these particular bears I'd love to see die of starvation. Oops - is that sort of comment going to get me in trouble with the animal cruelty people? I mean it figuratively, of course.No real bears were harmed in the posting of this comment.
the impression of piracy
(Score:2)
by 192939495969798999 (58312)
isn't giving people the impression that they're now allowed to commit piracy a really bad idea, even if they are technically paying for it? I think this service will just legitimize and thus boost actual piracy.
Just give me a flash capable cellphone
(Score:2)
by illectro (697914)
And I can listen to any tune instantly, between imeem.com, last.fm, deezer and one of the other less legal sites one of them is bound to have the exact music I need.
Downloads are of course needed so that the internet connection isn't continually active which will never scale.
DRM Sorrows
(Score:3, Insightful)
by Nom du Keyboard (633989)
on Wednesday February 13 2008, @11:31AM (#22407278)
So suppose this is a hit. Everyone gets this phone and this music service. At that point, what point at all will DRM serve, since User A thru User Z can all get the same free music?
While the obvious answer is "None!", somehow I still suspect that DRM would remain, and User B copying a file from User A, instead of downloading it for free from the overloaded servers would still be inviting an RIAA lawsuit!
Re:Call me a dinosaur...
(Score:4, Funny)
by DJCouchyCouch (622482)
on Tuesday February 12 2008, @10:13PM (#22401618)
Quick, get off his lawn before he eats us! Run!!!!
Parent
Re:Call me a dinosaur...
(Score:5, Funny)
by toppavak (943659)
on Tuesday February 12 2008, @10:15PM (#22401632)
Exactly! It still boggles my mind that computers do anything other than do math! Whats all this graphics and gaming crap they put on computers these days- just grab a pen and paper or go outside!
*humph* "applications" on a computer... what a waste.
Parent
Re:
(Score:2, Insightful)
by MishgoDog (909105)
Each to their own man.
You only want a phone to make phone calls to your Turok friends, good for you!
I want to send emails and surf the net dinasaur hunting, good for me!
Pre-teens who want to turn their phones into an artfully crafted public-transport-torture device, unfortunately good for them!
And people who want to use their phones as music players rather than carry round two devices... is it really that bad?
Re:
(Score:2)
by penix1 (722987)
Ummmm...YES it is that bad when it becomes increasingly difficult to find a simple phone that doesn't have all the bells, whistles, tampon remover, etc. Just recently they posted a story on how they are planning on using GPS in phones to tell traffic congestion. Great! Now phones are talking all by themselves without my express permission. More importantly than the features that I don't need or want is the hidden strings attached to the service contract for those unwanted services. This is along the same line
Re:
(Score:3, Interesting)
by plover (150551) *
I think you're being deliberately obtuse.
First, phones have those features because the vast majority of people find them desirable. Not everyone wants them, of course, but way more than half. Each different phone has a full set of engineering, manufacturing, marketing and packaging costs, which are substantial and have to be spread across a lot of phones to make them affordable. Thus it's cheaper to make, package, and market 100,000 phones than it is to make 1,000 simple phones plus another 99,000 comp
Re:
(Score:2, Interesting)
by Frank Battaglia (787673)
I'd just like to point out that at&t / Cingular do indeed charge you based upon your phone's capabilities, not simply data usage. Case in point there is MediaNet Unlimited (unlimited data for crippled phones that only have a built in browser), BlackBerry (unlimited data for BlackBerries), DataConnect (unlimited data for laptops), and PDA Personal (unlimited data for PDAs or phones with QWERTY keyboards); all of these (except DataConnect) also have two-tiered pricing depending on whether your device can
Re:
(Score:3, Insightful)
by keirre23hu (638913)
You make good points, but I'll also disagree with you on one area. Having a camera can be a detriment, because there are work environments where one is allowed to have a cell phone, but not one with a camera. Thus the phone with a camera gets left in a locker, at home, in a car, or in some other place where it cannot be used in a pinch, and the camera without the unneeded camera is on your person and available. A small point, but still it is relevant to quite a few people.
Re:
(Score:2)
by houghi (78078)
It took me about 30 seconds to find a phone [phonehouse.be] that you can use just to place calls. No contract, no nothing, just the phone. It is indeed the minority now and I would now have at least bluetooth. The fact that the majority is available with all extra options does not mean that the others do not exist. Also adding the extra is sometimes cheaper then making two different moddels. Some more features will mean a LOT extra different models. Cheaper for the manufacturor means also cheaper for the buyer.
Re:Call me a dinosaur...
(Score:4, Funny)
by yiantsbro (550957)
on Tuesday February 12 2008, @10:19PM (#22401660)
Tsk. Tsk. You and your fancy "number storing" telephone.
Parent
Re:
(Score:2, Offtopic)
by ozmanjusri (601766)
Then buy one that does what you want and leave the cool stuff to the rest of us.
This comment pops up in EVERY damned discussion of advanced phones and it's ALWAYS moderated insightful by mods with more points than sense. It is NOT insightful. It is nothing more than a statement of personal taste by someone with luddite tendecies.
Phones already exist for luddites. This discussion is not about those phones. If you want to discuss those phones go and find somewhere else to discuss them, or submit an articl
Re:
(Score:2, Funny)
by Trintech (1137007)
Dinosaur? I think you more likely have a case of functional fixedness [wikipedia.org] rather than a case of old age. Dinosaurs didn't use cell phones and they enjoyed having a peaceful, uninterrupted dinner.
Because it's not a telephone.
(Score:5, Interesting)
by camperdave (969942)
on Tuesday February 12 2008, @10:42PM (#22401820)
Journal
The majority of people want to have four digital devices with them at all times: a phone, a PDA, a camera, and a music player. They also do not want to carry separate devices to do these things. So, they get bundled. A cell phone is a PDA/C, a personal digital assistant/communicator. The PDA/C allows the user to organize contact information, schedules, etc. The audio capabilities keeps the user entertained while travelling. The video capabilities allows the user to capture spontaneous moments, or take video notes (pictures of signs, etc). Oh, and it also allows the user to communicate. That means sending text, pictures, and of course, two way audio. Cell phones are starting to have internet browsers on them. In the future, look for them to have docking stations with full sized keyboards and monitors, as the cell phone and the notebook merge.
Parent
Re:
(Score:2)
by Stormwatch (703920)
Well, that sure is convenient. Which is easier to carry in your pocket: a swiss army knife, or a tool kit? On the other hand, which of them would you rather use to do any serious repair? A dedicated device tends to do its one task much better than an all-purpose device. Audio? Cells tend to have little storage. Gaming? The ergonomics are all wrong. Photo cameras? Even compared to a low-end camera, cells are a joke.
Re:
(Score:2)
by Dionysus (12737)
Audio? Cells tend to have little storage. Gaming? The ergonomics are all wrong. Photo cameras? Even compared to a low-end camera, cells are a joke.My cellphone has a 2 Gb storage (external). Maybe not enough for a cross-Atlantic trip, but plenty for an hour in the gym. Then again, the battery wouldn't last on a cross-Atlantic trip on the cell. The just announced Nokia N96 will have 16 Gb of internal memory + whatever the size of the mSD card you can find (and afford). The mobile games are fine. Different g
Re:
(Score:3, Interesting)
by Nursie (632944)
"Yes it means I have to carry a shoulder bag around with me everywhere" Technology has turned you female. Only instead of lipstick, tampons, tissues and chocolate, it's shiny devices, protective cases, game cartridges, memory cards... Have fun with that. Music on the phone is just as good as from an iPod. You can also now get phones that take memory cards, in a discrete little slot, that bring them up to the capacity of an iPod touch.Games are not anything like a DS. But then it's not a huge number of people t
Re:
(Score:3, Interesting)
by Znork (31774)
So, they get bundled. A cell phone is a PDA/C, a personal digital assistant/communicator. Heck, I'd love one of those things. But it seems, every time I've gotten excited and tried them, it's turned out that I could have drawn pictures better than the ones the crap optics of the cellphone gives me, the PDA cant even handle DST changes and the audio is a PITA to transfer (altho, from what I've heard, that's gotten better these days). So instead of one device with all of those things bundled I get to carry all
Re:
(Score:2)
by RobBebop (947356)
In the future, look for them to have docking stations with full sized keyboards and monitors, as the cell phone and the notebook merge.Why not a Bluetooth application that simply lets you access your PDA/MP3/GSM/CAM filesystem remotely?
As far as merging completely, the laptop still has functionality and a desirable interface that will prevent it from going away anytime soon. Namely, screen size, processing power, and comfort while sitting in bed or at a coffee shop ensure the laptop's future success. Instead of "merge", the words you were looking for is "become more closely integrated".
Get More Comments
Search
"Ask not what A Group of Employees can do for you. But ask what can
All Employees do for A Group of Employees."
-- Mike Dennison
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2008 SourceForge, Inc.
home
awards
contribute story
older articles
sourceforge, inc.
advertise
about
terms of service
privacy
faq
rss
Url
http://mobile.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/02/13/0029 253&from=rss
|
