Let's root for MP3Tunes!

[JNGold]

Let's hope that Mp3Tunes CEO, Michael Robertson has success with his new DRM-less service. It's currently only Indie stuff now, but Robertson plans to approach the music industry "big wigs".

I know it's a stretch but maybe if Mp3Tunes is successful, it would put some pressure on other music services (ahem ITMS) to become a little more "flexible" with their DRM policy.

What do you guys think?

[Kristiano]

If it's cheaper and more efficient *shrugs...Why not?

[dcmacnut]

The upside of this new service is that it doesn't discriminate against Mac users, as does every other iTunes wannabe out there (Napster, Rhapsody, I'm talking to you...). I like the idea of a "music locker" to go back and download songs if I've lost them, but people should back up their purchases as a rule even with such a feature. Also, 88 cents is a nice round number.

The downsides. Right now it's all indie stuff and oldie music that's practically public domain. There are plenty of free and legal indie sites out there like www.epitonic.com and www.ampcast.com. True, iTunes only started with 500,000 songs, and we shall see how this plays out. If this site doesn't offer anything I can't already get from iTunes, then I think I'll pass. Moreover, if they aren't able to attract the Big 5 record companies, then MP3tunes could be forever a niche service. Even with the Big 5 every non-iTunes download service is struggling to break even. Finally, I'm file-size freak, and don't like hi-bit rate files. I'm willing to sacrifice a little on quality to fit as much music as possible on my iPod.

I also have two beefs with the MP3tunes and it's press release. First, the navigation is a blatant rip off of the iTunes interface. I don't know what sort of patents Apple has on iTunes, but I do know that most of it's is patented. Apple is not going to be happy with someone co-opting their designs. Also, the press releases attacks download services as "renting music" just because of the DRM. Napster and Rhapsody are the only rental services on the market. I don't "rent" anything from iTunes. I own the songs. They are mine. Also, iTunes songs work on both PCs and Macs – something no other download service that uses WMA files can say.

Despite the rabid opposition to DRM by some, I believe that the ability to use iTunes purchaes on 5 computers and to burn 7 unique playlist burns is sufficient. Do I really need that many copies of my songs? And, when you think about it, once you burn to a CD, you are able to make unlimited duplicates from that CD. The real culprits are Napster and the other rental groups that require to to keep paying and paying for the right to listen to your songs, or lose them. With iTunes I buy it and don't have to pay anything else ever again.

[jhollington]

Originally posted by dcmacnut
Despite the rabid opposition to DRM by some, I believe that the ability to use iTunes purchaes on 5 computers and to burn 7 unique playlist burns is sufficient.
Actually, the biggest problem with iTunes DRM is the lack of compatibility. While it's great for iTunes and the iPod, and is the only viable DRM solution for Mac users, it's the lack of support for devices that would complement the iPod (ie, home entertainment units like the SqueezeBox and Soundbridge), and Apple's unwillingness to be flexible on their licensing of the FairPlay technology that is probably the biggest problem here.

I agree that the restrictions themselves are very generous (as DRM-based music companies go), and I'd be more than content to deal with iTunes protected content if I used my iPod exclusively, or if other hardware solutions supported it as well.

As for MP3Tunes.... It would be nice if they could get somewhere with it, but unfortunately, I think the biggest obstacle to overcome is going to be the record labels.... They are the ones pushing DRM down our throats... I firmly believe that Apple/Napster/et al are playing along because they have little choice.