Could 3 Days / 3 Plays Be Up For Review?

[Aaron Roma]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://blogs.chron.com/techblog/archives/2007/01/music_industry_meeting_could_change_the_zune.html' target='_blank'>http://blogs.chron.com/techblog/archives/2007/01/music_industry_meeting_could_change_the_zune.html</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>&quot;Zune owners can share songs with each other, but the music will only last for three days or three plays, whichever comes first. And that restriction is present regardless of whether the song is copyrighted. But in a meeting coming up soon between executives of the music industry and at Microsoft, those restrictions will be up for review.&quot;</em></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>One of the most advertised, and criticized, features of the Zune is its wireless capabilities. Zune's wireless offers much promise, but is very lacking in its current implementation. We are currently limited to photo and music sharing, and as you know, the music sharing is hampered by a 3 day or 3 play DRM restriction, even if the source material isn't copyrighted. Well, this limitation, as well as other wireless scenarios, could soon be under fire at a meeting between Microsoft and music industry executives. We will have to wait and see what comes out of this meeting. Considering the music industry&rsquo;s and Microsoft's, track records, my hopes aren't very high.</p>

[Vincent M Ferrari]

Why not just turn the restriction off for non-DRM files?

That would make 98% of the complainers happy.

JESUS they're aggravating.

[Aaron Roma]

Well, to play devils advocate, because that would give the green light to openly share any copywrited songs you wished. 99.9% of the music on my PC is has no DRM, but it is all copyrighted material that I have no business sharing with others. I can't see industry executives letting that happen.

[Vincent M Ferrari]

I know you're playing Devil's advocate, but anyone who buys that is not thinking clearly.

If you can make the argument that not sharing MP3's over WiFi stops copying of illegal protection you should then, by extension:

1. Ban ad-hoc WiFi connectivity because you can pirate that way.
2. Ban bluetooth because you could beam a file to another computer or device that way.
3. Ban the internet because you can't share files with people you can't connect to.

You see where it goes.

There's no reason to assume that a file without DRM is copyrighted in anyway. The fact that Microsoft bent to the industry on that and bent to the industry on the fee per sale is proof that the industry believes every user of every device is a pirate, and Microsoft has come down squarely on their side in that regard.

DRM is fine. I have no problem with DRM'ing music. It's a reality of media-less distribution. That being said, if I want to share one of my podcasts, why should it be wrapped in DRM? What if the artist is from Podsafe or Magnatune which has a clear "give it away, we don't care" policy? Why should they only be able to expose their music to someone else for 3 days?!

The reality is that the industry is a bunch of grubby bastards and companies like Microsoft are enabling them in the hopes that they can mess up the market for people already out there.

[mrozema]

If all they end up doing is modifying the system to be something like 60 days and 6 plays, people will be much happier.

I've been given music, but I never had a chance to check it out because three days just isn't enough.

[LPD]

This should be interesting. DRM is not working for the recording companies anyway. I'm still waiting for someone to bring a class action suite agaist all of them because they are limiting the free expression of others who create their own content and wanted it distributed freely. That content is not being freely expressed because corporations are stopping it from happening. Its fine to enforce your own DRM, but not to stop others.

I heard that Apple has to renegotiate all of its contracts this spring. I don't think the Music companies like the fact that Apple is the only major player. Maybe they will cut deals with Microsoft hoping that they can bring competion to the market, ultimately giving the Music companies the upper hand again. But hell, I don't know - just speculating.

Also, I've heard a lot of people say that the Music Companies would be selling more music if they put out better music that people thought was good enough to actually pay for.

[Zunewalker]

I do believe that 3 plays/3 days is too restrictive, but I think it's foolish to argue there should be no restrictions. Anybody that has a Zune I'm sure has access to the internet. If the content is truly free to give away, it would be very easy to tag the file with a URL where it can be downloaded. For instance, I'm in a band. Assuming I find someone else with a Zune, I can send them one of our songs. If they like the song, they can go to my bands homepage which I conveniently put as the album title or on the album art. Easy!

[kryptman40k]

this article makes me think that MS was just doing 3x3 to throw a bone to the music industry. They realize it was a bad idea and are probably going to fix it.

At any rate I'm 100 percent for the removal of it. Our files should be used however we want.

whats the difference in burning a friend a dvd full of mp3s or taking the time to send them one by one?

why do record companies want to pretend they have this control that they don't have? MS should have more vision.

[Vincent M Ferrari]

If they like the song, they can go to my bands homepage which I conveniently put as the album title or on the album art. Easy!

Or if the guy's busy he just says "screw it" and doesn't bother and moves on to some other means of finding your band if he cares enough to do it at all.

Sorry, I don't like that argument at all. The Zune could easily tell what is and isn't copy-protected. Not copy-protected is not equivalent to pirated, stolen, hijacked, or anything else. Unfortunately for consumers, Microsoft is deeply in bed with Hollywood, the MPAA and the RIAA (Vista? Universal Music?) and doesn't care to make it more consumer-friendly.

The fact that even with the restrictions you can't squirt all your songs (see Jason's article posted today), I think we have the makings of a huge "FU" to consumers.