On 18 Jan 2008 00:46:33 GMT, thanatoid <>
wrote:
>richard <> wrote in
>news: :
>
>> On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:35:43 +0000, Whiskers
>> <> wrote:
>>
>>>On 2008-01-17, richard <> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> When attempting to play a couple of mp3's, regardless of
>>>> media player, I'm told I need a frickin license.
>>>> You are sent to musicnet.com.
>>>> Can anyone find a link to this license requirement thing?
>>>> I couldn't.
>>>> Not one shred of evidence about a license other than this
>>>> one little page.
>>>> Who the hell are they and what authority do they have to
>>>> tell me/you, we can't enjoy music without their
>>>> permission?
>>>
>>>Presumably they, or clients of theirs, own the reproduction
>>>rights to whatever it is you've acquired copies of and they
>>>don't want people without a licence to have access - and
>>>they apparently have the means to enforce that wish on the
>>>likes of you. So get a licence or live without what isn't
>>>yours. That's life.
>>>
>>>I doubt if the licence is for fricking, by the way ...
>>
>> How do they know it isn't mine legally? So I purchased the
>> song in a store or maybe a friend gave me a copy of his old
>> 45's and I ripped them to mp3.
>>
>> This only started TODAY. From what I've been reading,
>> Microsoft is apparently the culprit. When you click open a
>> song, regardless of media, some program checks for the
>> license. If it isn't there, or the program's encryption
>> feels one is needed, you get told. Problem is, you never
>> get the license.
>>
>> According to M$, you can turn off this license checking in
>> wmp. But when you do, you lose your right to burn anything.
>> Let alone play it.
>>
>> Then what if I don't want wmp? No can do. I don't have the
>> right to uninstall it. I just want to listen to MY damn
>> music when I want to.
>
>DRM was one of the main (if not THE main) reasons Vista was
>released. It has nothing else in it that XP doesn't except a
>bunch of eye candy and insane system requirements (another
>advantage for everyone except the end user).
>
>You should upgrade to 98SE and become free. Or XP and at least
>reduce the quantity of chains somewhat.
>
>Anyway... I see you are on real Usenet. Have you ever noticed
>newsgroups with "sounds.mp3" (and lossless, etc.) in the name?
>Take a look. No DRM in that world. But that world will not be
>around for VERY much longer so get what you want while you can.
>
>Slightly related - I do not have any DRM mp3'S, but has anyone
>converted a DRM-****ed mp3 file to WAV and then back to mp3 (or
>ogg or whatever)? I would think IF the file allows itself to be
>converted , then the DRM will disappear. I would also /think/
>that programs like mptrim would remove the drm ****.
>
>(Needless to say, use a neutral program for the conversions. I
>don't even know IF WMP can do any conversions, and if it can, I
>wouldn't trust it with the quality. After all, there's ONLY
>Windows Media in the MS world, and they're counting on everyone
>buying into that - and being fairly successful.)
>
>ANyway, I don't know for sure. Fortunately, it is of no direct
>concern to me. So just an idea, if someone want to try - or HAS
>tried it.
I obtained these files from usenet newsgroups. The reading I've done
suggests that because the file has no "tag" it won't play.
But that isn't true in all cases. I think it depends largely on how
the DRM interprets the info. The point to all of this is that no
license can be obtained from the site as given.
One person suggested obtaining a license from the msn music store. But
even that came up empty. It sounds to me like the RIAA paid M$ big
bucks to implement their software to keep down illegal filesharing.
|
Similar Threads
