The DRM crippled "free" service with the all-too Web 2.0 hipster name, SpiralFrog has captured the attention (but not the hearts and minds) of the blogosphere over the last two days. Xeni Jardin of Boing Boing says, "I wonder exactly what kind of ads (how intrusive and time-engaging?), and what bitrate we're talking about -- really low-quality, or high enough that you'd actually *want* to listen?".
Xeni's question can only be answered with another question: What bitrate is high enough for you to accept DRM from a vendor who locks you, the listener, to its own platform?
For me personally the answer to that question is: none. I don't care if I could close my eyes and swear that I was in the same room with the LSO while God himself played his heart out on first chair violin, the trade-off for platform evangelistic DRM isn't worth my time.
A tidbit dug up from a KCRW transcript by Glenn Coolfer goes further towards answering Jardin's question. Glenn quotes, "when consumers download the track, they'll be subjected to a 90 second audio advertisement embedded at the beginning of each track. That's 90 seconds of advertising for every song downloaded. And the downloads will only be available to the listener for six months, where upon the song will be erased from their libraries like a Mission Impossible espionage tape."
Coolfer also points out that "the majors each negotiated with Spiral Frog to get a $2 million upfront payment".
I've been trained to be skeptical of the music business, and specifically the major label's self-serving nature. What I'm left to wonder: Are ad driven deals like SpiralFrog an end run around royalties? Musicians have never been paid for promotional copies of CDs, even if those "promos" were sold rather than given away. When SpiralFrog slips you that new tune your craving, will the musician see a payment? How much of that $2 million dollar up front payment went to the artists who create the content and thus made the major labels such a dominant force?
1. Also, for some people, DRM music isn't even an option, because they're not using the platform they're trying to lock people to. Most DRM only works on Windows based machines, and for a Linux user like me, DRM is not an option.
Not that i would buy it even if it worked on Linux, cause i value my freedom. Restrictions are not good for making a product appeal to anyone. I wouldn't mind paying for music if i really like a band, but the price (and i ain't talking about money here, but freedom) is just too high.
Also, i haven't bought any cd since they started with those copy-protections. Even though they don't work on linux, i don't buy them out of principle.
And besides that, wma sounds horrible. It's the worst format i ever tortured my ears with...
Posted at 6:18AM on Aug 31st 2006 by Mephisto