Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

EMI Launches Advertising-Supported P2P Service 260

SirClicksalot writes to tell us that EMI is launching the first ad-supported peer-to-peer music downloading service called Qtrax. With Qtrax users will have two tiers of membership available to them, which EMI hopes will draw in a large segment of users to try it out and graduate many of them to stay on with a monthly fee or purchase music permanently. From the article "In the ad-supported, free tier, users will be able to search the network for specific tracks, and those tracks registered with Qtrax will be made available for download in Qtrax's proprietary ".mpq" file format. Users will then be able to play the downloaded .mpq file in full-fidelity sound quality for a pre-defined number of times. Each time a consumer plays a track, the Qtrax player will also offer fans click-to-buy purchase options, as well as the opportunity to upgrade to a premium subscription service for a flat monthly fee."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

EMI Launches Advertising-Supported P2P Service

Comments Filter:
  • by eldavojohn ( 898314 ) * <eldavojohn.gmail@com> on Wednesday June 07, 2006 @07:32AM (#15486168) Journal
    From Qtrax's page of benefits [qtrax.com]:
    DRM! You pay nothing because our DRM technology ensures artists receive royalties each time you play their song.
    Here we have an innovative use of DRM such that it is restricting the decrypting of a particular file to ensure that the user is viewing ads or clicking ads to visit websites that then, in turn, pay the artists.

    Why is this better than iTunes? Because with iTunes, the money comes directly out of your pocket but you're still forced to decrypt those files you're buying. The primary difference is that iTunes gives you the sense that you'll always be able to play that song after you've paid for it, but does anyone have this in writing?

    I'm not sure but I would wager that the "Premium" tier service for Qtrax operates in much the same way as iTunes ... with the music you pay for still being encrypted in mpq. I'll probably give the free tier of Qtrax a try ... because it's free but I'm still going to buy media format discs. Why? Because I'm not depended on a particular company's product to decrypt that disc ... at least not yet.

    Having been in bands that only play the local scene, this new "P2P2A" just looks like another level of penetration preventing bands from "making it big." For a second there, it looked like the internet & P2P networks would allow starting bands to release their stuff for anyone if they so chose (something that used to require signing a label). Now, you have to be signed on a label and it has to be the right label with deals worked with iTunes or Qtrax to make your music available. If consumers are moved to use primarily one of these two programs for their music, how will they ever be exposed to bands on indie labels or bands not on labels at all?

    What I'm trying to say is ... it used to be about the music.
  • by Frenchman113 ( 893369 ) on Wednesday June 07, 2006 @07:40AM (#15486184) Homepage
    Let's see... I get a "free" version of this P2P. Said P2P software contains adware and r00ts my system. Therefore, I pay a monthly fee for songs that are so DRM'ed that I can't play them more than a few times? Am I the only one that thinks there's something broken with this?
  • Permanently? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by haeger ( 85819 ) on Wednesday June 07, 2006 @07:41AM (#15486187)
    ...or purchase music permanently.


    So, that means that I'll be buying .mp3 (or .ogg) with no DRM in them? If not I'm not interested. I refuse to buy the same music over and over again. Give me something that's better than the (illegal) p2p-nets out there and I'll use it.


    Oh, and on an unrelated note ThePirateBay [thepiratebay.org] is back up again.

    .haeger

  • It's *NEW*! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by dwandy ( 907337 ) on Wednesday June 07, 2006 @08:10AM (#15486285) Homepage Journal
    "Working with Qtrax is just one way EMI is actively supporting emerging business models, technologies and platforms to deliver music to fans," said David Munns, Chairman and CEO of EMI Music North America.
    So is "emerging" newspeak for "10-year-old"?
  • by Aim Here ( 765712 ) on Wednesday June 07, 2006 @08:31AM (#15486375)
    Welcome to the DRM age, citizen, where paying customers are turned into criminals and where 12 year olds do a much better job than the multibillion dollar music recording industry by providing the world with faster, cheaper, more convenient and better copies of other people's music .

    The smart move here is to go back to downloading your music in free, unencumbered, formats without the artist's permission. If you have an overpowering urge to pay for the music you listen to, then by all means do so, but don't pay middlemen and marketroids to make your life difficult with DRM and any other fascist digital evil they throw at you - making DRM profitable is probably less ethical than freeloading music. Go to the gig and buy a T-shirt or some other merchandise, or just paypal them directly. The musicians get a *much* higher proportion of the proceeds that way (since they're basically getting the huge chunk allocated to the middlemen as well as the crumbs that were earmarked to them in the first place.

  • by Aceticon ( 140883 ) on Wednesday June 07, 2006 @08:57AM (#15486505)
    Possible reasons to replace tcpip.sys
    - Make their sofware be able to go around your personal firewall to "phone home"
    - Make their sofware, outside the control of your personal firewall, be available as a server so that it can be updated/controlled remotelly
    - Wrapping, at the TCP stack level, all traffic to and from their software in an encryption layer so that you can't figure out what information is being send over the wire by snooping.
    - Increase the (thread/process level) priority of TCP/UDP traffic to and from their software so that your machine is a beter P2P drone.
    - Make your machine a drone in their P2P network all the time as long as Windows is running, even if you kill all user space processes and threads.
    - Making it harder to read any key material from memory when their software checks with the server to see if you're still allowed to listen to your music.
  • by patches ( 141288 ) <patrick,pattison&gmail,com> on Wednesday June 07, 2006 @09:00AM (#15486523) Homepage
    Just go with one of the readily available recorders out there like http://www.soundrecorder.net/ [soundrecorder.net]Sound Recorder.

    Basically it sets up a sound card drvier on your computer that all the programs that emit sound use to play back through, and you can record that sound into different formats like mp3 and ogg as it is played through your speakers...

    Patrick
  • It appears that EMI has seen that P2P can be a legitimate medium for which to distribute music to consumers, but it still has a lot to learn:

    The premium subscription service tier uses Microsoft's Janus DRM technology...for unlimited access to music in the Qtrax network. Subscribers will also have the ability to transfer content to Windows Media enabled portable devices for as long as the subscription stays active.

    1) You don't ever own the music. It's being licensed, and as soon as you cancel your subscription, the DRM will stop the music from playing.

    2) You can't burn the music to a CD, still the most common method for playing music.

    3) You can't play the music on any portable device that doesn't support Windows Media, meaning iPod owners can't transfer the music to their iPods.

    EMI doesn't seem to understand that consumers want to take their music with them, not leave it on the computer. The #1 portable music player right now is the CD player, and iPod is #2. You can't have a viable competitor in the market if you cut off the top two music players, parading your DRM agenda. This service won't fly.

  • Re:Yeah, Cool. (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 07, 2006 @09:22AM (#15486627)
    Not me. Converting a lossy compression scheme to a different lossy compression scheme loses even more fidelity.

    Speaking of which, they say "Users will then be able to play the downloaded .mpq file in full-fidelity sound quality". What, exactly, do they mean by "full" fidelity? As "high fidelity" means "highly faithful to the original performance", then logically "full fidelity" would mean "fully faithful", there's no difference whatever between the original performance and its recording. I can see this obviously bogus statement getting EMI in trouble in the UK, where they're not allowed to flat out lie in ads like they can here in the US.

    How good is the fidelity of these files? What is the frequency response? CD's frequency response is horrible compared to earlier technologies, and compressed files like MP3 have even lower response. Likewise with the dynamic range, which is better in CDs than older tech, but its superior dynamic range has never AFAIK been used. A Compressed file also loses dynamics (but with the original having little or none it doesn't matter much).

    I know you kids don't give a rat's ass how bad your shitty 398k (let alone 56k) MP3s sound, but in th e'70s I had vinyl playing through four way speakers with six drivers each, including a fifteen inch woofer in each speaker. If you turned it up and went outside you'd swear there was a live band in the living room, so I'm kind of spoiled. I care about fidelity. I'm a nerd, give me some numbers!
  • by dk-software-engineer ( 980441 ) * on Wednesday June 07, 2006 @09:30AM (#15486671)
    Well given my recent troubles to decrypt an EMI copy protected CD i'm not sure where to go for music that I can listen to in the manner I choose.
    [...]
    It was one hell of a lot easier to simply download the music, why do I feel punished for trying to do the 'right' thing.
    This is what I do:
    If I like a track, but it's in a format I cannot play (DRM wmv, copy-protected CD etc.) I may not buy it. I don't like to support that kind of crap. But if I really like it, I will download it illegally, then buy it. I may not download the file from the online store, or open the case I buy in a physical store, but I've paid for my right to listen to the music.
    I don't know if it's legal (after I've paid), but I don't care. There's nothing wrong with what I do.
  • by kooky45 ( 785515 ) on Wednesday June 07, 2006 @09:46AM (#15486775)
    On a related note (and a story I just submitted to /.) Tiscali have just shutdown their JukeBox online music streaming service. Their reasons are given here Tiscali Jukebox switch off Q & A [tiscali.co.uk]. From the article:
    "Why have you decided to shut down the service today? Because after going online in total accordance with the music industry and having it launched officially, thus letting our users access it with the characteristics we tested and fine-tuned, today the music industry forwards unexpected demands."
    and
    "Clearly, major labels do not understand the business potential that is behind a service like Tiscali Juke Box which, by acknowledging and paying the rights for all songs being listened to in streaming mode, allows the safeguard of the rights of the industry and the artists."
  • by igny ( 716218 ) on Wednesday June 07, 2006 @09:59AM (#15486855) Homepage Journal
    Here we have an innovative use of DRM such that it is restricting the decrypting of a particular file to ensure that the user is viewing ads or clicking ads to visit websites that then, in turn, pay the artists. Let us see, they distribute files which make the computers visit certain sites. And how is it different from creating botnets for DDOS attack?
  • by doublem ( 118724 ) on Wednesday June 07, 2006 @10:18AM (#15486993) Homepage Journal
    Grab a camera and a microphone.

    Put on something you'd expect to see a broadcast journalist to wear on TV

    Grab a friend to operate the camera.

    Go out on the street.

    Interview random people about "The Sony Root Kit Debacle."

    Watch the clueless looks you get, even if you try this stunt on the MIT Campus.

    Joe Six Pack and most the nation most the nation know nothing about the Sony Root Kit.
  • by babbling ( 952366 ) on Wednesday June 07, 2006 @10:46AM (#15487194)
    There's one good thing about this DRM music service: the songs don't cost anything. That means it should be a huge success, right? What if it's not? Won't that then be proof that people are not just illegally copying music because "they're cheap", but because there is no DRM-free alternative way of obtaining music? Maybe the record companies will wake up if this flops.
  • Previewing Music (Score:2, Interesting)

    by ab0mb88 ( 541388 ) on Wednesday June 07, 2006 @10:49AM (#15487225)
    This service seems like an actual answer to the p2p users who defend their actions by saying that they only use p2p to preview music before they buy it. If EMI provides a way to legally listen to songs for a limited number of times for free this could be just what is needed to make this preview system valid and leave the sales model to Apple, they seem to have that market covered.
  • Re:Permanently? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by lkratz ( 243841 ) on Wednesday June 07, 2006 @03:06PM (#15489382) Homepage
    Give me something that's better than the (illegal) p2p-nets out there and I'll use it.

    Go jamendo [jamendo.com].

    Jamendo is hunderds of Creative Commons licensed music albums available on BitTorrent and eMule/kad/ed2k networks, OGG and MP3 no DRM. The system is free for artists, free for music fans and ad supported. Very popular in french speaking countries.

    Download, listen, share legally, pay if you wish.

    Que veux-tu de plus ?

"Little else matters than to write good code." -- Karl Lehenbauer

Working...