wtf? license required?

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by richard, Jan 17, 2008.

  1. richard

    richard Guest

    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?
    richard, Jan 17, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. richard

    meerkat Guest

    "richard" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > 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?
    >

    Now you`re learning what DRM is all about.
    (Digital Rights Management).
    Try google, and learn what DRM is.

    bw..
    meerkat, Jan 17, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. richard

    Mike Easter Guest

    richard wrote:
    > When attempting to play a couple of mp3's, regardless of media player,
    > I'm told I need a frickin license.


    mp3 is simply a digital media file format. The business of DRM license
    enforcement is a separate issue.

    In order to 'need' a license to play a mp3 file, you 'have to have'
    software which can enforce any licensing requirements which are
    'notified' in the file, and the file has to have the notifications.
    That regards DRM issues about the intellectual or artistic property ie
    copyright of the mp3 file's content.

    Separate from that issue is the patent disputes about mp3 as a format
    itself. You didn't mention what kind of media player you had tried and
    what kind of OS it runs on.

    > You are sent to musicnet.com.


    I looked at musicnet.com -- they mean nothing to me.

    > 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?


    There are numerous open source mp3 players if you don't like the mp3
    patent or license arguments.

    There are too many different places to list all of the discussions about
    the mp3 patents and mp3 DRM policy restrictions.

    If you have a different philosophy about patents and copyright
    restrictions than do those who would try to enforce their policies on
    you, then you will have to either find a way to get around the policies
    or pay for licensing or copyright use privileges.

    --
    Mike Easter
    Mike Easter, Jan 17, 2008
    #3
  4. richard

    Whiskers Guest

    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 ...

    --
    -- ^^^^^^^^^^
    -- Whiskers
    -- ~~~~~~~~~~
    Whiskers, Jan 17, 2008
    #4
  5. richard

    richard Guest

    On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:18:09 GMT, "meerkat" <>
    wrote:

    >
    >"richard" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >>
    >> 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?
    >>

    >Now you`re learning what DRM is all about.
    >(Digital Rights Management).
    >Try google, and learn what DRM is.
    >
    >bw..
    >


    ya ain't gonna believe this. but I did write to the turkeys where the
    license is supposed to come from. And I actually got a reply. Today!
    Is it possible that "Rhapsody" has some sort of triggering mechanism
    in it? As I had used that for the first time today.
    richard, Jan 17, 2008
    #5
  6. richard

    richard Guest

    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.
    richard, Jan 17, 2008
    #6
  7. richard

    Whiskers Guest

    On 2008-01-17, richard <> wrote:
    > 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.


    You said "a couple of mp3s", although you haven't mentioned what they are
    or where you got them. It is certainly technically possible for an MP3
    (or other) music file to include some sort of 'digital rights management'
    feature which would create difficulties for anyone trying to copy or play
    the files if they haven't got the right software to decrypt or bypass the
    'DRM' (which if the DRM is effective, would amount to needing the right
    licence to play them). Such arrangements are commonplace, whether we like
    it or not. Your original post seems to describe exactly that situation.

    Are you now saying that this happens with /any/ and /all/ of your audio
    files regardless of how you got or created them?

    > 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.


    Take that up with Microsoft - or use some other OS.

    --
    -- ^^^^^^^^^^
    -- Whiskers
    -- ~~~~~~~~~~
    Whiskers, Jan 18, 2008
    #7
  8. richard

    Evan Platt Guest

    On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 18:32:57 -0500, richard <>
    wrote:

    >How do they know it isn't mine legally?


    Read up on DRM.
    --
    To reply via e-mail, remove The Obvious from my e-mail address.
    Evan Platt, Jan 18, 2008
    #8
  9. richard

    thanatoid Guest

    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-fucked 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 shit.

    (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.


    --
    Any mental activity is easy if it need not be subjected to
    reality.
    thanatoid, Jan 18, 2008
    #9
  10. richard

    richard Guest

    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-fucked 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 shit.
    >
    >(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.
    richard, Jan 18, 2008
    #10
  11. richard

    elaich Guest

    richard <> wrote in
    news::

    > When attempting to play a couple of mp3's, regardless of media player,
    > I'm told I need a frickin license.


    I've never run into DRM protected MP3s and don't even know how they could
    be encoded. I'll bet they were downloaded from some pay music service.

    Using WMP to play music files is a mistake. It has DRM built into it. I use
    Winamp.
    elaich, Jan 18, 2008
    #11
  12. richard

    Guest

    richard <> wrote:

    >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.


    Drop them on VLC see what happens
    http://www.videolan.org/

    If they won't play you need to find what DRM was used, then search for
    for a hack, like fairuse4wm.exe
    --

    Sgt Manhood is on the case
    www.news.com.au/mercury/story/0,22884,23070791-3462,00.html
    , Jan 18, 2008
    #12
  13. richard

    thanatoid Guest

    richard <> wrote in
    news:eek::

    > 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-fucked 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 shit.
    >>
    >>(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.


    I have seen "iTunes" (a strong follower of DRM) and such at the
    start of some files. I do not own any portable music devices. I
    used a cassette Walkman all through the 80's. I don't like to
    leave the house much anymore. I own two DVD players which I
    bought only to play mp3's. They (and both my computers) play
    everything I have DL'd perfectly well. I use mptrim which
    removes all tags. Makes no difference except slightly smaller,
    cleaner, and volume normalized etc. Perhaps the DRM tags only
    work when you want to use iPods and such.

    DL mptrim (free unless you want "PRO") and try it and post what
    the results were.

    Also, not ALL posts to Usenet are good. They almost all used to
    be the ripper's own work (NMR indicating relatively rare cases
    of re-posts or otherwise) but now a lot seems to come from the
    web. But good posters have longevity and are easily recognized,
    as are people who can't post at all or post crap.

    > 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.


    Well, it used to be that the customer came first. Now the
    customer is the LAST concern of any empire's, as Vista amply
    proves. In most cases, they know we have no alternatives (or are
    working hard on eliminating them from the face of the Earth) so
    why SHOULD they care?

    Also, serious efforts are apparently starting/about to start to
    kill Usenet music/movie posts. The only reason it took so long
    is because most people have no idea that the Usenet exists.
    Also, while finding UL's is not that hard, getting /all/ the
    DL's will be impossible.

    > 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.


    No offense PLEASE, but since I have NEVER used this phrase
    before in my life, just for fun, allow me...

    "No shit, Sherlock".

    MS is VERY happy to help "certain" organizations. The "NSA key"
    thing of a few years ago was NEVER resolved/explained, at least
    not to many people's satisfaction. And the new features of Vista
    are 50% DRM and 50% spyware.

    --
    Any mental activity is easy if it need not be subjected to
    reality.
    thanatoid, Jan 18, 2008
    #13
  14. richard

    VanguardLH Guest

    "richard" wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > 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?
    >
    >



    Aw, got your hand slapped for stealing. Some musicians actually
    figure that if you want to hear their stuff then you have to pay for
    it. So what do you for a career where you let everyone steal your
    value? Or don't you work yet? Maybe the site where you got the .mp3
    file will let you buy it so you can then get the license.
    VanguardLH, Jan 18, 2008
    #14
  15. richard

    richard Guest

    On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 09:02:19 -0600, "VanguardLH"
    <> wrote:

    >"richard" wrote in message
    >news:...
    >>
    >> 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?
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    >Aw, got your hand slapped for stealing. Some musicians actually
    >figure that if you want to hear their stuff then you have to pay for
    >it. So what do you for a career where you let everyone steal your
    >value? Or don't you work yet? Maybe the site where you got the .mp3
    >file will let you buy it so you can then get the license.


    Under the "Fair Use" doctrine of the copyright laws, I don't need
    THEIR permission. They do not have the legal right to limit the number
    of uses.

    It works this way, an artist records music. A publisher makes copies
    and sells it to a vendor. At this point in time, the artist has
    already made his money. So has the publisher. Since the RIAA has
    gotten into this kick about file sharing, the RIAA is trying to
    manipulate how we, the consumer, can enjoy that music. Microsoft is
    merely joining the bandwagon and helping them make more money. Neither
    the RIAA nor Microsoft has any legal standing in the copyright
    process.

    So if you don't want to mess around with the issue, don't use windows
    media player format to record with. Ahhh but that is precisely what
    the vendors do because the RIAA insists they do or they can't sell the
    music. If someone were to file a lawsuit on this issue, it will be an
    interesting case for sure.
    richard, Jan 18, 2008
    #15
  16. richard wrote:

    > It works this way, an artist records music. A publisher makes copies
    > and sells it to a vendor. At this point in time, the artist has
    > already made his money. So has the publisher. ...


    Seems you need to learn more about how the music industry works. Are you
    suggesting that <pick an artist> records a song/album, and immediately
    receives a million bucks? And nothing ever after that?

    You've never heard of royalties, I suspect.

    --
    -bts
    -Friends don't let friends drive Vista
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Jan 18, 2008
    #16
  17. richard

    richard Guest

    On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 19:19:13 GMT, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
    <> wrote:

    >richard wrote:
    >
    >> It works this way, an artist records music. A publisher makes copies
    >> and sells it to a vendor. At this point in time, the artist has
    >> already made his money. So has the publisher. ...

    >
    >Seems you need to learn more about how the music industry works. Are you
    >suggesting that <pick an artist> records a song/album, and immediately
    >receives a million bucks? And nothing ever after that?
    >
    >You've never heard of royalties, I suspect.


    Royalties is not the issue, which I do know about.
    The issue is the copyright license and who controls it.
    Microsoft says, in part, that because you are using their product,
    they can deny you YOUR rights simply because no license was detected.

    The question is, who exactly has the legal authority to issue this
    license? Not Microsoft. The only possible source of the license is the
    publisher. But I do not believe they can limit the use to a set number
    of times that is not reasonable. I would be happy with a 3 year limit
    rather than 10 times. I'll bet that nowhere on any of these pay sites
    do they mention how many times you can use it, except maybe in some
    really fine print somewhere.

    Let's say I downloaded a Mozart tune. I come to find out there's a
    license attached to it. Why? Because microsoft says it has to be
    there. Sorry. But works authored before the office opened for business
    do not fall under copyright laws. Public domain.

    Or maybe I wrote something, performed it, recorded it, and lo and
    behold, microsoft insists I must have a license. Bullshit.

    I for one, am totally dropping windows media player all together and
    not bothering to have any files with the wma extension tagged on it.
    Ever again.
    richard, Jan 18, 2008
    #17
  18. richard wrote:

    > "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" wrote:
    >>richard wrote:
    >>> It works this way, an artist records music. A publisher makes copies
    >>> and sells it to a vendor. At this point in time, the artist has
    >>> already made his money. So has the publisher. ...

    >>
    >> Seems you need to learn more about how the music industry works. Are
    >> you suggesting that <pick an artist> records a song/album, and
    >> immediately receives a million bucks? And nothing ever after that?
    >>
    >> You've never heard of royalties, I suspect.

    >
    > Royalties is not the issue, which I do know about. The issue is the
    > copyright license and who controls it. Microsoft says, in part, that
    > because you are using their product, they can deny you YOUR rights
    > simply because no license was detected.


    Mircosoft does not stop me from playing mp3s. Oh wait, I don't use Vista
    with DRM.

    > The question is, who exactly has the legal authority to issue this
    > license? Not Microsoft. The only possible source of the license is
    > the publisher.


    Hey, you got that one right.

    > But I do not believe they can limit the use to a set number of times
    > that is not reasonable. I would be happy with a 3 year limit rather
    > than 10 times. I'll bet that nowhere on any of these pay sites do
    > they mention how many times you can use it, except maybe in some
    > really fine print somewhere.


    Heh, if you wanna download music, you gotta read it. Else, don't
    complain about it later.

    > Let's say I downloaded a Mozart tune. I come to find out there's a
    > license attached to it. Why? Because microsoft says it has to be
    > there. Sorry. But works authored before the office opened for
    > business do not fall under copyright laws. Public domain.


    If the recording itself was *made* by Mozart, it is public domain. I
    doubt of Mozart published anything himself after 1922. If the recording
    is of a Mozart work by a current artist/orchestra/arrangement, this is
    new, and therefore not in public domain.

    Microsoft does not say it needs a license, the publisher does and
    Microsoft complies.

    > Or maybe I wrote something, performed it, recorded it, and lo and
    > behold, microsoft insists I must have a license. Bullshit.


    Only if you want it to. You would be perfectly free to give it away,
    free of charge.

    > I for one, am totally dropping windows media player all together and
    > not bothering to have any files with the wma extension tagged on it.
    > Ever again.


    Well, get on it then.

    --
    -bts
    -Friends don't let friends drive Vista
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Jan 18, 2008
    #18
  19. richard

    Evan Platt Guest

    On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:23:05 -0500, richard <>
    wrote:

    >The question is, who exactly has the legal authority to issue this
    >license? Not Microsoft. The only possible source of the license is the
    >publisher. But I do not believe they can limit the use to a set number
    >of times that is not reasonable.


    I do not believe that if there's no other cars on the freeway that
    there should be a speed limit. But someone begs to differ.

    >Or maybe I wrote something, performed it, recorded it, and lo and
    >behold, microsoft insists I must have a license. Bullshit.


    If you performed it, recorded it and made the MP3, there would be no
    license issues with that file.

    >I for one, am totally dropping windows media player all together and
    >not bothering to have any files with the wma extension tagged on it.
    >Ever again.


    Great!
    --
    To reply via e-mail, remove The Obvious from my e-mail address.
    Evan Platt, Jan 18, 2008
    #19
  20. richard

    Mitch Guest

    In article <>, richard
    <> wrote:

    > Under the "Fair Use" doctrine of the copyright laws, I don't need
    > THEIR permission.

    BULL. If you check, that applies only if you do the FIRST part, which
    is usually to actually purchase the item. If you do something else,
    like a rental or limited-use price, then you can't apply that rule.

    > They do not have the legal right to limit the number
    > of uses.

    They do if you acquire it under different conditions.

    > It works this way, an artist records music. A publisher makes copies
    > and sells it to a vendor. At this point in time, the artist has
    > already made his money. So has the publisher.

    Wrong; the artist and publisher both make money based on how many
    copies are _eventually_ sold. You seem to be assuming the purchase
    happens only once, and all sales are then complete.
    If the people who want that music do not buy it (if one person buys it
    but shares it with twenty or a thousand others and they would then bot
    buy it) then they make fewer sales. Isn't that clear?

    > Neither
    > the RIAA nor Microsoft has any legal standing in the copyright
    > process.

    The RIAA is a group whose members have that specific standing.
    The RIAA is an "association," they speak as a group through it.

    > So if you don't want to mess around with the issue, don't use windows
    > media player format to record with. Ahhh but that is precisely what
    > the vendors do because the RIAA insists they do or they can't sell the
    > music.

    The vendors use WMA format (among others) IF THEY WANT THAT PROTECTION.
    It isn't to avoid selling the music; it is the method they use
    specifically to sell the music but prevent you from giving it to
    others.

    If you were just trying to purchase the music, you wouldn't have a
    problem. It only comes up if you try to use music you DID NOT pay for.

    > If someone were to file a lawsuit on this issue, it will be an
    > interesting case for sure.

    If? Geez, Richard, where have you been for six years?
    Mitch, Jan 20, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jens Haase
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    923
    Walter Roberson
    Jan 29, 2004
  2. Anastasio A Rossi

    License Required

    Anastasio A Rossi, Mar 3, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,804
    Unknown
    Mar 4, 2004
  3. Furi Geller

    Drivers License required for surfing?

    Furi Geller, Sep 16, 2003, in forum: Computer Security
    Replies:
    29
    Views:
    850
    Zarggg
    Sep 20, 2003
  4. James Harris

    Drivers License required for surfing?

    James Harris, Sep 16, 2003, in forum: Computer Security
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    370
    James Harris
    Sep 16, 2003
  5. =?Utf-8?B?SmVyZW15IFdvbmcg6buD5rOT6YeP?=

    Request for a downgrade from x64 OEM license to 32-bit OEM license

    =?Utf-8?B?SmVyZW15IFdvbmcg6buD5rOT6YeP?=, Aug 23, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    58
    Views:
    2,662
    Cari \(MS-MVP\)
    Sep 23, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page