Legal music downloads appear to be too cheap!

vbimport

#1

Here’s a part of the article:

Remember how online music stores were going to route around the music industry? The pigopolists have barely got their feet under the table and already demanding more. The Wall Street Journal reports that the major five labels think that 99 cents per song is too cheap, and are discussing a price hike that would increase the tariff to $1.25 up to $2.99 per song.

The major labels want us to view the DRM-encumbered download services as the carrot to the legal stick. But paying more for less is a business proposition that has only worked for the record industry it has been able to make the previous generation of technology, such as vinyl, obsolete. It doesn’t have that option anymore. CD sales and “pirate” downloads dwarf DRM online downloads.

Read it all here.


#2

I will never pay for DRM. Ever.

That said I usually have a $10 rule for CDs and DVDs…if it doesn’t fit under the bar it doesn’t fit into my bag.


#3

I’m also one of those persons who hate to be limited in choiche because the license agreement says so. So no DRM-containing material for me as well.


#4

The tracks have to be cheap, otherwise even clueless people will just get them off of a P2P.

[rant]
I refuse to pay per track for an album. If I buy an album on-line its from ebay, if I want something else, my local music shop can order it in.

Also, what about the cool booklet that comes with most? And sometimes a poster. What will I have to do then? Pay for the PDF and then pay to get it printed?

DRM is bad, getting an album per track is bad.

DRM, just say NO. :slight_smile:
[/rant]