Originally Posted by sto-helit.de
|
|
Hey, there are worse limitations out there. Just think about Napster. Though the model doesn't quite compare, it's more like PayTV with a huge number of channcels imho.
|
and of course there are compaines with less limitations or none at all. its like thinking whether a bottle is half full or half empty.
|
Originally Posted by sto-helit.de
|
I don't know US laws, but:
1. you're buying a product with known limitations, so when these limitations are reached, you've got to buy it again. You're charged for a 2nd car when your first one doesn't drive anymore, too.
2. you're not buying the music (it still belongs to one who has the copyright) but a license to play this music. Like with shareware and trials, limited licenses are allowed...
|
this is true, the limitation have to be known. As far as a I know apple has not told me when I purchases music and videos from them that I won't be able to play them on non-apple devices. Or that after using 5 computers I am going to have to buy music from the again.
its like if you bought a new BMW and 6 months down the road the car dealership would ask you to pay them again the full price. this is stealing and not lending.
|
Originally Posted by sto-helit.de
|
|
You can play Videos and MP3s on lots of other devices, too. It's something different with WMA and AAC, but MP3 doesn't have DRM (yet).
|
MP3s from apple have DRM and you cannot play them on other mp3 players except for iPOD.
|
Originally Posted by sto-helit.de
|
AFAIK, most audio download shops offer far better quality than 128kb/s MP3s. Most don't offer MP3s at all, because there's no DRM for them. Other codecs do have DRM, but also better quality at the same bitrate. E.g. an WMA or Ogg Vorbis file with 128kb/s often has about the same quality as an MP3 with 192kb/s.
But yes, you get far less for the same price. But, as said, enough people do buy it...
|
Just because people do buy something doesn't mean that the product is of good quality or nature. For example I can start making drugs and sell them to the people. Yes, they will buy it, but it doesn't mean that the drug should be sold. As a matter of fact a lot of drug companies make all kinds of drugs, run questionable trials and sell them to the public only to discover 1 year down the road about the side effects of this drug. Yes, people do buy but it does not imply that the product should be sold the way it is.
|
Originally Posted by sto-helit.de
|
|
You forgot the main difference: The labels and (non-russian) shops don't get any money! (Well, they could get a bit if they'd take the what this russian association offers, but they're afraid it would legalize them...)
|
If they don't want the money then its not really my problem. And honestly they could negotiate some kind of middle ground (for example more money) from the radio broadcasting rights. The reasons why this has not happened is because Record Labels would loose money and they would not renew any contracts with the artits.