Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Media (Apple) Media Microsoft

Ballmer Says iPod Users are Thieves 1108

A 'music thief' (apparently) writes "According to Steve Ballmer, CEO of Microsoft: "The most common format of music on an iPod is 'stolen'." He appears convinced Microsoft will lead the way in Digital Rights Management and also believes Microsoft will steal a march on Apple in making the digital home a reality because Apple "doesn't have the volumes". "There is no way that you can get there with Apple. The critical mass has to come from the PC, or a next-generation video device," he said."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ballmer Says iPod Users are Thieves

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:24AM (#10427899)
    I have an iPod. So does my wife, my sister, and two friends. I helped them ALL to import their music collection to their iPod. I know that some of the music has been downloaded, but in about 100 GB worth of iPod music, I would estimate that over 98% of the music is legitimate music.

    I urge them to use MP3 (or some other non DMAC format) because it is a pain when using multiple computers, but I can assure everyone, that most of the music in this case is legitimate.

    So I ask everyone... how much of your iPod is "stolen"?

    B
  • He doesn't get it (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bblazer ( 757395 ) * on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:25AM (#10427916) Homepage Journal
    Since I got my iPod and used a decent music service iTunes, there have been no 'shared' music on my player. Balmer thinks that Apple cant get the job done - can he say iPod for Windows? As long as Apple continues to make accessories for other OS'es, they will have no problem competing.
  • by Roark Meets Dent ( 650119 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:25AM (#10427918)
    Good point here actually - if you have purchased a copy of music on tape, CD, or vinyl, are you entitled to download the same exact music so you have it on your PC? It seems to me there's no question that this would be OK, you're just saving the time of "ripping" it yourself. RIAA would consider this "stealing" otherwise their whole case against P2P would be out the window.
  • Before you argue... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MosesJones ( 55544 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:25AM (#10427919) Homepage

    Think about it....

    CD's, DVD's all were successful either because of the PC or the "next-generation device".

    Of course one could argue that the iPod is the next generation device and just needs to be expanded to the stage where it does video.

    Hang on, then hasn't Balmer just predicted that the biggest portable music player will get to define the format in the same way as VHS beat Betamax ? Maybe the only real issue is...

    Will Apple learn and license ?

    Its a long way around the story but I've just realised that this is Barmy Monkey begging Steve Jobs to license the iPod technology as Microsoft can't compete with the market leader.

    And he couldn't just say that because it hurts to much.
  • by turnstyle ( 588788 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:27AM (#10427944) Homepage
    Ok, Slashdotters!

    1) Roughly what percent of your music collection is unauthorized files from P2P like Kazaa, FTP, etc.?

    2) Roughly what percent of your music collection comes from sources like iTunes Music Store, eMusic, etc?

    3) Roughly what percent of your music collection comes from shareable sources like Creative Commons-licensed music?

    4) Roughly what percent of your music collection comes from rips of your own CDs?

    5) Roughly what percent of your music collection comes from rips of friends' CDs?

    (and what am I missing?)

  • by hype7 ( 239530 ) <u3295110.anu@edu@au> on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:30AM (#10427983) Journal
    I don't understand the "corporate America" distinction.


    it has to do with the fact that the RIAA wants DRM, and the user doesn't. so Ballmer's looking after the corporate interests ahead of the user interests.

    What's funny is that he doesn't realise that new entertainment formats are mostly demand driven. People don't like div-x (the old one, where you had to "connect" to get movies), people don't use it. Same with DVD-A and SACD. Invariably, formats with draconian restrictions on them don't work. And although he wants to label people thieves, there's a very good reason why the iPod is popular, and MS's DRM isn't. The irony is Ballmer himself points it out in the article - "My 12-year-old at home doesn't want to hear that he can't put all the music that he wants in all of the places that he would like it". This isn't about stealing, it's about fair use. 12 year olds just want to do whatever they want to do with their music - like the rest of us. If stolen, free music is the only way we can get there, then so be it. Why pay for restrictions, when freedom is quite literally free?

    It makes me laugh, the 12-y-o son of the man running the most powerful IT company in the world gets it, but Ballmer himself doesn't.

    Which oddly enough is a theme repeated in the second article - his vision for the digital home - which involves "converged devices that integrate video, audio and computer technology". He's pretty much ripped off Steve Jobs' digital hub strategy [macworld.com] from two years ago... and then he goes on to say: "There is no way that you can get there with Apple."

    Sorry Steve, the only organisation you can be guaranteed to not get there with is Microsoft. It makes poor copies of good products, labels consumers who want freedom "thieves", and calls out organisations who innovate as not being good enough.

    -- james
  • by javax ( 598925 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:30AM (#10427996)
    I suspect that Windows users have - at average - more stolen mp3 files than Mac users.
  • Open Market (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Shotgun ( 30919 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:31AM (#10427997)
    So in an open market, where I can choose among a number of devices that all do the same task, why would I choose the device that treats me as a criminal.

    If I am a criminal, why would I buy the device that makes my job/avocation more difficult.

    In either case, why would I buy the device who's biggest cheerleader treats me with such disdain.

  • by Wansu ( 846 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:31AM (#10428000)

    ... according to Ballmer.

    "My 12-year-old at home doesn't want to hear that he can't put all the music that he wants in all of the places that he would like it,"

    I don't want to hear that either.
  • by intheory ( 261976 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:31AM (#10428002) Journal
    ...is stolen.

    So what if "[you've] had DRM in Windows for years" Microsoft? Windows did anything but halt the 13.6 million Napster users [wikipedia.org] "stealing" music, et cetera.
  • by gowen ( 141411 ) <gwowen@gmail.com> on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:32AM (#10428020) Homepage Journal
    1) Roughly what percent of your music collection is unauthorized files from P2P like Kazaa, FTP, etc.?
    Maybe 1%. And (honestly) I tend to delete what I don't like and buy what I do.
    2) Roughly what percent of your music collection comes from sources like iTunes Music Store, eMusic, etc?None at all.
    3) Roughly what percent of your music collection comes from shareable sources like Creative Commons-licensed music?
    None at all.
    4) Roughly what percent of your music collection comes from rips of your own CDs?
    Maybe 5-10%
    5) Roughly what percent of your music collection comes from rips of friends' CDs?
    2% ish.

    Vinyl, baby, vinyl
  • by Sique ( 173459 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:33AM (#10428033) Homepage
    Your are missing

    6) Roughly what percent of your music collection is your own music?

    7) Roughly what percent of your music collection is your friends own music?

    So for me this comes down to:

    5) 75% (6 MP3s, sent to my by friends, because they wanted me to hear those songs.)
    7) 25% (2 MP3s, the one was mixed by a friend of mine who is sound engineer, the other one was performed by another friend of mine)

    Ok, this boils down to eight pieces of music stored on my computer :)
  • by Greyfox ( 87712 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:34AM (#10428036) Homepage Journal
    But we already knew that. No one's going to buy his intentionaally crippled device, and we've already seen repeatedly just how well copy protection works in the commercial market. Microsoft will try to ram their device down the throat of the marketplace with their usual tactic (Sell as a loss-leader until no competition is left, then dramatically raise prices) but people have already had a taste of actually being able to choose how they want to do things, so I don't believe it will work this time around.

    So Steve, STFU and GTFO. The reflected light from your forehead is blinding us.

  • Ha (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Sheepdot ( 211478 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:35AM (#10428047) Journal
    I don't know if Ballmer has been paying attention.

    My roommate is a die-hard Microsoft fan. I don't just mean he uses Windows over Linux, either. I mean he will get compromised because of a failed update, have to reformat and reinstall, and he *still* favors MS. Why? Because of usability. Linux does not cater towards him and it certainly doesn't offer the gameplay. Mozilla/Firefox, despite what I try to tell him about security, is laughable. After all, why should he use a browser that takes 4 seconds to load a 2 second page?

    Now, despite all of that, he uses iTunes. Why? Because where other "free software" fails, Apple does not. They provide a method for him to get what he needs when he needs it. And not only that, but he pays money hand over fist for services/music through iTunes.

    So my question to Ballmer would have to be: If you've lost even your fanbois to Apple, who also has DRM, how exactly do you intend to actually gain a foothold in this market?

    On a perfectly safe side note, the percentage of my "stolen" music collection used to be 100% MP3, now it's 80% MP3. Any MS representative want to take a guess as to what the other format is for my stolen music?
  • Why post this? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by hruntrung ( 89993 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:36AM (#10428058)
    Who gives a shit what Ballmer thinks? Of course he's gonna talk shit about his competition, of course he's gonna say that the Microsoft way is the only way. It's his job.

    Meanwhile, Apple has a decent lead in the online music market, their hardware is selling rather well, and their stuff works. Who cares what he has to say, as long as its empty crap talk? When he's presenting a concrete business product, let me know. Otherwise, you're just flamebaiting.

  • MS Numbers (Score:4, Interesting)

    by linuxislandsucks ( 461335 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:36AM (#10428065) Homepage Journal
    This year 1 billion mobile devices are deployed with it doubling to 2 billion this next year ..now how many desktops are delpoyed..

    Less than 1 billion..

    The future is not MS PC on mobiles..

    Its J2ME ..Apple just hired people to put iTunes on J2me
  • by cbiltcliffe ( 186293 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:43AM (#10428135) Homepage Journal
    6) Roughly what percent of your music collection comes from P2P services, but you own the original on vinyl, 8-track, reel-to-reel, or some other modern, high-tech recording medium.

    For me, about 90%.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:46AM (#10428176)
    God, what a bunch of fucking liars and hypocrites! In the last few years, I haven't met a single computer geek who hadn't a huge collection of downloaded MP3s. And most people here say they've got almost no illegal MP3s. Sure thing, guys. I guess those millions of users on the P2P networks don't really exist either, eh?

    I, for one, haven't bought a single CD since I discovered that you can download MP3s over the internet. People who make music were always grossly overpaid and I don't think most of them deserve it.
  • by NoMoreNicksLeft ( 516230 ) <john.oyler@ c o m c a st.net> on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:46AM (#10428177) Journal
    That last quote, isn't a confession that M$ plans on using monopoly power to leverage into a new market?

    How do they get away with this shit?
  • by ceeam ( 39911 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:47AM (#10428184)
    If musicians (whoever they are) think that modern technology rips them off, they are always free to go back to old-fashioned ways, like, you know - going in wagons here and there and people will throw them money in their hats. Hard to steal that, right?

    Dang, what makes them believe that they are entitled to millions and care-free lives by making a couple of template "songs" about fucks and drugs?

  • by stoney27 ( 36372 ) * on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:49AM (#10428201) Homepage
    I know it's FUD, but this is just plain lousy FUD. Anyone with half a brain can see right through his attempt to link Windows with anti-piracy.


    Yes but you have to remember who is running the Music companies and head of the RIAA. Who don't have a half a brain between them all.


    -S

  • by sixteenraisins ( 67316 ) <{moc.oohay} {ta} {tnanosnocsworromot}> on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:52AM (#10428234)
    From TFA:

    However, Ballmer conceded it isn't going to be an easy battle to win. "Most people still steal music," he said.

    Most people steal music? This informal poll might suggest a different story.

    I'd love to know what numbers he's using to arrive at his assertation that "most people" still steal music. I seem to remember reading that many people have stopped downloading music from P2P sources [technewsworld.com] - they don't "still steal music," do they?

    I don't know, it sounds like he's making a blanket statement to support his position without telling us how he intends to back his statement up. Perhaps he doesn't intend to?
  • F- Him (Score:5, Interesting)

    by nurb432 ( 527695 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:54AM (#10428253) Homepage Journal
    They are really pissing me off with all this 'thief' crap.

    Just because you have an MP3 does not mean you are a thief. just because you bought an OS-less PC doesn't mean you are a thief. Just because I own a soldering iron and am an EE doesnt mean I'm some 'evil hacker'..

    I have 25GB on my 4G Ipod and not ONE song isn't from a CD I own.. I have several PC's, and NONE run some sort of pirated Microsoft OS.. Either I own a license, or its running a 'free' OS...

    I'm sick and tired of being accused of something I'm not, and then getting legislation passed that restricts my activities, and increases their market share/profit. ( generic statement, this applies to most any 'media' industry )

    To hell with them all. See how little of my money they continue to get from me..
  • by BetterThanCaesar ( 625636 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:56AM (#10428279)

    Do you think that perhaps the ones who are eager to answer this "poll" are so because they don't download most of their music off Kazaa and want you to know about it? Makes them look good, I suppose.

    I think my quote of copyright violating audio files to authorized audio files/my own rips/my own compositions is something like 10 to 1. I'm not going to brag about that on Slashdot. You didn't either; you posted anonymously.

    For the record, I've bought all CDs I own but one since the mp3-revolution. You should thank Kazaa for that, Mr Jean Michel Jarre.

  • by tepples ( 727027 ) <tepplesNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:56AM (#10428285) Homepage Journal

    How do you and your friends manage to keep your songs original and not accidentally copied [slashdot.org]?

  • by cbw82 ( 700178 ) <wilkins@@@freestructure...net> on Monday October 04, 2004 @09:57AM (#10428300) Homepage Journal
    Because all those millions of users on P2P networks are /. readers. I download songs and if I enjoy the music, I will go out and buy the cd or buy CDs that are on sale for really good prices. To me its just a morale issue.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 04, 2004 @10:00AM (#10428341)
    As a musician, I really have to disagree with the last part of your statement. Less than 1% of all working musicians are wealthy. The remainder barely earn a living wage. If you're telling yourself that it's okay to "share" other people's work without their permission because they make too much money, you should either very carefully select what you download, or find another rationalization.
  • by wyseguy ( 513173 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @10:03AM (#10428371) Homepage

    Why is it that Microsoft's cheif bomb thrower is immediately picked up by the trade press and published to the PHBs that control most of the IT infrastructure at most companies? Ballmer's remarks were just plain infantile. I'm starting to wonder if the trade press is a bigger roadblock to wider adoption of more diverse platforms. Linux rarely gets a fair shake, Macintosh is still just a pretty little bauble, and neither having any real value to a serious computer user. All the advocacy of the professionals in your department regarding either platform is immediately lost by a piece of FUD in your PHB's trade mag of choice, or a Microsoft-funded "benchmark test", or "TCO Comparison".

    The simple reality is that Microsoft once again missed the boat on an important innovation. They can't buy the technology so their fumbling attempt to copy it will need a few versions before anyone starts switching to the MS "solution". Apple keeps out innovating Microsoft at every turn and all guys like Ballmer can do is throw more gasoline on the PC vs. Mac fire. Ballmer simply doesn't have the charisma that Jobs does. He can't rile up the PC user base because the vast majority of them don't care about Microsoft the way Mac users care about Apple.

    The iTMS + iPod combination delivers a simple solution on both the PC and the Mac, why switch to the DRM-laden, lock-in ridden MS alternative? I can still rip, mix, burn to CD in relation to my needs. I can legally buy music and upload it to my iPod. I don't have to waste money on entire records for the two songs I want. In essence, I don't have to illegally download music because Apple has made it easy to do everything legally.

    This is simply MS sucking up to the RIAA in an attempt to squeeze out Apple from this market. The mantra is altered slightly to make the point of illegal downloads, but also take a jab at Ballmer's primary competition. We know that MS can't compete head-to-head on the technical merits of their products alone, so they have to undermine the credibility of the user base of the product they're competing against. Add to that the RIAA's core (almost religious) belief that all music on a computing device must be illegal, and you have Ballmer's infantile remarks. Meant to alienate those users of the iPod, and to pass "critical insight" to PHB's that make IT policy decisions.

  • The real failure (Score:5, Interesting)

    by niall2 ( 192734 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @10:03AM (#10428383) Homepage
    Here is the difference between a success and a failure. Its the same one as thinking raising cigartte taxes will make people stop smoking and installing light rail will make people stop driving. When you are working in a free society, success comes from giving people what they want, not telling them what they want.

    Look at MS. People wanted web browsers. They made IE. People wanted a media player, they got one bundled that did a good job of streaming video. They wanted a mailer, the got one. Yes now that there are problems with them people are moving to Mozilla based products, but this is a failure of Microsoft. They didn't give the people what they wanted (they don't want to have to be security experts to be able to browse the web).

    People want to be able to have digital media with as few strings attached as can be so they don't have to become DRM gurus to listen to their jams in the car. This is where Windows Media player fails and the iPod/iTunes succeeds. Jobs thought about what the customers wanted and then did all he could to give it to them, putting in just enough DRM to keep the RIAA happy.

    So the Windows folks can think they will win by putting in as much monopolistic protection as possible for MS and the RIAA/MPAA but it will fail. It will fail for the same reasons that all the other media stores and players have to date. They didn't give peole what they wanted.
  • by DenDave ( 700621 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @10:11AM (#10428503)
    I am not a lawyer but I believe Mr. Ballmer just wrongfully accused me and slandered the vendor of my device. Perhaps a lawyer here sees a possibility for class action? I am sick of these Microsnuffers accusing me of all sorts of shit they know nothing about. Who the heck are they to judge me and what I do? I am sorry Mr. Ballmer but You have no affiliation with the copyright holders of the music I listen to and as such I don't see why you meddle in my business relationship with Apple Computer Corp. and my Music Vendor. I think Microsoft is in breach of many laws and regulations yet I don't particularly feel a requirement in my inner monkey to spout this at my upcoming public speaking arrangements. Maybe I should but I bet you that If I do I will be presented with a lawsuit...
  • by log0n ( 18224 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @10:13AM (#10428520)
    ipod 10gb

    1. 0% (seriously)
    2. 25%
    3. ~ 5%
    4. ~ 70%
    5. 0%

    I have no idea how many songs are on my ipod atm, but it's usually pretty close to full.

    I can't remember the last time I downloaded an mp3 (not counting iTMS)... definitely not within the last 3 years.

    My views on piracy basically shifted once I got a real/steady job (~ 3? year ago) and was able to afford buying what I wanted. When I had no money (college), I didn't really have any respect for intellectual property (as opposed to tangible/physical property), things that I could get easily on the internet, etc.. I needed/wanted things, but I just didn't have the cash. Now that I can afford to buy things, my pride actually grows because I enjoy knowing that *now* I can buy things; I don't *need* to pirate to get what I want. It's a sense of satisfaction knowing that I have solved my problems of once not having money, to now having money.

    Some people are just cheap, or just like to steal for the sake of stealing. But a lot of people who do steal do so not because they are thieves but because they just don't have the finances to get what they want. Nowadays, ultimately a thief is a thief, but intentions are what differentiate a criminal from a normal person.

    $.02, FWIW, IMO, etc
  • Bad assumptions (Score:3, Interesting)

    by littleghoti ( 637230 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @10:19AM (#10428605) Journal
    You are assuming some things which are not always correct.

    1: People want to rip to a lossy format.
    2: The ipod must be full
    3: The ipod must be used for music instead of a portable drive.

    Admittedly there are a few illegal tunes on my ipod, but the vast majority are legal. In fact I probably have more illegal music on my old collection of tapes.
  • by h0mer ( 181006 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @10:22AM (#10428646)
    All the professors I've had in college so far all require soft copies of assignments in Office format. Grades are lowered or not counted for other formats. You're going to tell me to get the Student Edition of Office for $100 but that seems like appeasement rather than a solution to the problem.
  • by k.a.f. ( 168896 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @10:26AM (#10428693)
    95% is recordings from my local classical music radio station.

    5% comes from rips of my own CDs.

    Needless to say, most of the CDs that I buy lately, I buy because I first heard extracts on the radio and liked them...
  • by nathanh ( 1214 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @10:37AM (#10428795) Homepage
    God, what a bunch of fucking liars and hypocrites! In the last few years, I haven't met a single computer geek who hadn't a huge collection of downloaded MP3s.

    Maybe you're hanging around in the wrong circles.

    I won't deny that I know many people who are grade-A pirates. They download music like it's going out of style. I can't imagine that they're listening to even one-tenth of it because they download far more than they'll ever need.

    But one thing I've noticed in common with all the people I know who "steal" music; they're Windows users. I have a theory that many Linux users are exceptionally sensitive to copyright infringement. I think it might be due to the realisation that they have a complete OS, no strings attached, $0. It makes it difficult to justify "stealing" a $10 album when you've just received a gift equivalent of $1000 in basic OS and office software.

    All of the very hard-core Linux users I know (myself included) are strictly anti-piracy. It also helps that we have decent jobs; it's harder to justify "stealing" a $10 album when you can easily afford to buy it. That's not to say that Linux-using pirates don't exist. I simply have never met any. Windows users often seem to have stolen copies of games, movies, software, etc. They have a culture of piracy that we thankfully don't seem to have in Linux circles.

  • by Richard_at_work ( 517087 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @10:38AM (#10428816)
    This informal poll will ALWAYS suggest a different story, precisely BECAUSE we dont want him to be shown to be right.

    Personally? I have 1.3GB of music on my Ipod (10GB, Im not a big fan of music). Roughly 500MB of that music is legal, all from ItunesMS. The rest is stuff Ive collected from various friends, kazaa etc. Im not proud of it, mainly because I take the anti infringement stance here on slashdot, but my collection of infringing files hasnt grown in the past year, while my legal files have, mainly because Im replacing the infringing files with legal files as I can afford it each month.
  • Based on what? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by TFGeditor ( 737839 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @10:43AM (#10428860) Homepage
    Assuming RIAA et al base their accusations on declining sales, is it possible that people are not buying CDs because they are not interested in the music any more?

    Depending on what genre you prefer, when was the last time an artist or group produced something you liked well enough that you were willing to pay $15 for the CD--especially if you were interested in only ONE of the songs on the entire CD?

    Personally, I like country and classical. No royalties on classical (public domain), so no "poor, beleaguered artist" claims. (You pay only the production/distribution costs plus a profit margin.) None of the "modern" country artists produce anything I like. Ergo, I buy/listen to only classical and "classic" country--most artists of the latter already dead. All of which translates that that I do not buy CDs very often.

    How pervasive is this scenario?

  • Re:What? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Zareste ( 761710 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @10:45AM (#10428877) Homepage
    All iPod users are pirates?

    Of course! As well as all P2P users, music lovers, people with CD burners, anyone under 25, everyone who has an eyepatch or a peg leg, moviegoers, DVD owners, people with computers that don't crash every two seconds and catch viruses every time you log on, game players, Linux, and of course those shadow guys in the iPod commercials.

    Psychotic gorilla-esque CEOs who steal massive amounts of cash and kill every other company in existence, however, are exempt.

    I'd list all the other pirates but there are only so many nouns in the dictionary.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 04, 2004 @10:53AM (#10428977)
    and who would pay money for a device that only play drm media?
  • Re:Pot... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by pjrc ( 134994 ) <paul@pjrc.com> on Monday October 04, 2004 @10:55AM (#10429022) Homepage Journal
    For most slashdot readers, likely age 12 to 22 who are full time students with a lot of time on their hands and little disposable income, this logic must seem iron-clad:

    1. spend time on p2p filesharing apps, download lots of music
    2. can't afford many cd
    3. buy (or acquire as gift) ipod
    4. load existing downloaded files already on PC

    Well, that probably is a trend for everyone who has spent most of their life living as a full time student, working perhaps a few part-time, low-wage jobs.

    But consider that many ipods are also owned by "movers and shakers", age 25+ who work full time. These days, many jobs are pretty demanding and lots of folks work overtime, eat breakfast in their cars while stuck in rush hour traffic on the way to work, grab lunch from restaurants nearby the workplace as it saves time (getting takeout and eating at your desk is a common trend).

    These people often can afford to buy an ipod on a whim, or don't think twice about buying one as a gift for their spouse or lover. These folks have the money to buy CDs. What they lack is the time... often CDs are purchased as a second thought while shopping for important things (like groceries and clothes for the kids). Most of these people simply don't have a lot of extra time, and with the small exception of the computer enthusiasts among them, mand spend part or all day in front of a computer and don't want to waste time on file sharing networks. Some play computer games, some like to just relax and watch TV, others are active or go the a health club and work out (after about age 30, most people gain weight and lose energy if they don't work out).

    For people in this crowd, a more likely scenario:

    1. Have large collection of CDs... most sit on shelf, except for 5 in the changer at home and some favorites in the car on the way to/from work.
    2. Can afford to buy a CD
    3. Buy ipod, or receive as gift
    4. Use iTunes to load existing music collection already on CDs.

    My point, being 34 myself and personally knowing lots of folks approximately that age, is they love ipods too. But if some exceptions, they just don't have the time to spend fiddling with new software and chasing after songs on file sharing (especially these days, when many are bogus). They have lots of CDs, and when they hear something they like and remember the artist name, they often times just buy the CD if they see it at the store. $15 is just not a big deal, when you work full time with a decent job and the one precious thing you don't have anymore is lots of free time.

    I'm sure a lot of slashdot readers, who are full time students and so far have had only disappointing wages at part-time jobs will find this all very strange. Just wait 10-15 years. Assuming things like the economy and offshore outsourcing don't turn into disasters, you'll know this routine all too well. Of course, if history repeats itself, 10-15 years is about the amount of time it takes for publishers to stop fighting and embrace new technology.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 04, 2004 @10:58AM (#10429064)
    For the record, I've bought all CDs I own but one since the mp3-revolution. You should thank Kazaa for that, Mr Jean Michel Jarre.

    The funny thing is that I was in the same boat until they started suing people. I used the P2P services as a preview (like a radio that I controlled) to see if an album was any good. It was great! I discovered all sorts of new music this way. I didn't much care about bitrate, since if the songs were any good I'd buy the album and reencode anyway. NOW, however, I do the same thing, but I have no intention of ever buying an RIAA CD. I check everything against RIAA Radar, and if it comes up red, I either buy a used CD or poke around the interweb looking for a high-quality rip. I tell this to everyone that listens, and I give all my friends access to my music via web sharing. The RIAA brought this on themselves. They may own congress, but I own the tech that makes them obsolete.

  • by swillden ( 191260 ) * <shawn-ds@willden.org> on Monday October 04, 2004 @11:00AM (#10429105) Journal

    I don't know enough about Photoshop and image editing to know if The Gimp is an acceptable replacement. I've read several posts where people say it is *not* (an acceptable replacement.) I'll have to take their word for it.

    Don't. It is an acceptable replacement for most people. People who don't like the GIMP fall into one of four categories:

    • Professionals who really need Photoshop for pre-press work (the GIMP doesn't do color separation or Pantone colors, yet), or because they have to exchange files with others, or because they need some third-party plugins which have no analogue for the GIMP, or because they've invested many man-years in the Photoshop UI and anything different would make them unacceptably less efficient.
    • People who have a visceral hatred of MDI.
    • People who have learned their way around the Photoshop UI and haven't spent a comparable amount of time learning the GIMP UI and therefore find it cumbersome because it's unfamiliar.
    • People who don't want to believe that open source can produce good software, and who therefore grab onto the fact that there are some reasons why professionals find it inferior to prove that it is inferior (only true if you're doing pre-press work).

    I fell into the third category myself, until I decided that a little time spent learning a new UI could rid me of the need to pirate Photoshop ('cause I certainly didn't have the money to buy it!).

  • by gfxguy ( 98788 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @11:01AM (#10429109)
    1) Maybe 7-10% - but the question is unfair. If I download an "unauthorized" file from Napster (way back when), but I own that song on some other format (vinyl), is that really illegal? Technically yes... but there you go, about 10%.

    2) I've only bought 5 songs... so about 1%.. but I don't use p2p at all, I just haven't been "consuming" music lately.

    3) About 2% - mostly things like Futurama mixes and kids stuff.

    4) About 85-90% from my own vinyl and CDs.

    5) 0%.

    During napster heydays, I downloaded a lot of songs I owned on vinyl. I know that's technically a no-no. For the past few years it's just been my own rips and recently I got an iTunes account.
  • by thoughtcrime ( 524620 ) <<moc.bmob-krof> <ta> <ezos>> on Monday October 04, 2004 @11:09AM (#10429203) Homepage
    Indeed. Long live eBay and obscure 80's industrial!
  • by Fill Dirt ( 542846 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @12:06PM (#10429900)
    I didn't see anyone else make the point (but I may have missed it), that what is really being stolen here is market share and mind share.
  • by rjung2k ( 576317 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @12:07PM (#10429908) Homepage
    The best revenge against Steve Ballmer for this anti-MP3 nonsense is for all of us to run out and buy an Apple Macintosh or three. It doesn't matter if you actually use them, or give them out as Christmas presents, or sell them on eBay -- the simple act of Slashdotting Mac sales will jump-start Apple's marketshare by several percentage points, giving Ballmer and Gates another thing to worry about...
  • by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) * on Monday October 04, 2004 @12:08PM (#10429944)
    I would actually argue that more iPod users than other media players have primarily legal collections.

    iPods are somewhat expensive, more than most kids would spring for - so the bulk of the market is going to be older adults. These are people with large, established CD collections.

    For new music, ITMS does provide a very convienient outlet for obtaining singles which were a big part of the reason a lot of my friends used P2P. The growth of ITMS represents people having an alternative other than P2P for single tracks they liked.

    I would say just about any teenager is going to be using P2P a lot more, they just don't have the kind of casual money to blow a few dollars here or there on music as they have a smaller budget overall and more entertainment focused lives. But since most of the iPod market is more mature adults, piracy is just not going to be as high.
  • Why can't we ... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by ciderpunk ( 611927 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @12:11PM (#10429983) Homepage
    1. most musicians make very little money from cd sales.

    2. most record companies like to sell music rather expensively in order to maximize their profits, they can do this because they have an oligopoly market with quite high barriers to entry.

    3. many people like to download/share/'steal' music, and a fair number of them would like to see the people who made the music paid properly, even if record companies are somewhat bad at this.

    4. you can find contact details for many musicians or their agents by googling.

    OK, so I have a genius plan.

    If you download something that you like, rather than buying the cd, why not send a cheque to the person who made the music/their producer/someone else involved in the recording?

    They'll do better financially from that than they would from buying a cd anyway and you won't be supporting market distorting monopolist business models that have yet to catch up to the reality of the situation.

    The recording industry is fast becoming an irrelevancy to a large number of people and no draconian laws/drm/suing kids is actually going to change the situation.

    just a thought...
  • by Baki ( 72515 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @12:18PM (#10430105)
    Hmm, I think it is not very fair to change ones view and respect IP only when one has enough money.

    I have never respected IP, and still do not even though I could easily afford anything that I need (earn about $150k a year). It is a matter of principle to me:

    First, the current "IP" companies are mostly immoral entities that want to retain their business models and priviledges at any price, even if that involves changing/buying laws and by that destroying our democracy.

    More importantly and philosophically, the concept of Intellectual Property is a perversion to me that is contrary to human nature and civilization. Civilization and art was built by copying and impoving on ideas (only really seldomly by revolutionary novelties). Imagine the classical composers having been forbidden to "borrow" each others themes and ideas, or painters to get sewed when joining a new style such as impressionism.

    The concept is absurd and sickening.

    Up till 1900 the lack of IP has never prevented progress and inventions. After 1900: we don't know. IP proponents keep brainwashing us that without IP there would be no innovation, but who is to tell? I simply don't believe it when looking at 2000 years of civilization before 1900.

    Also the software industry itself has been highly succesful and profitable even without patents and with quite weak copyright protection. One might even argue that only now, where IP is being introduced in the software industry, things have deteriorated.
  • by ljavelin ( 41345 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @01:18PM (#10430583)
    If this is true, Microsoft should license its technology so it may never be used with non-DRM'ed content.

    Therefore, no Microsoft-based player (such as Windows PCs, portable music players, or the X-BOX) should be able to support non-protected MP3s, OGG, WAV, or other formats.

    If Ballmer really thinks he's right, he should stand behind his statements and take action today.

    Otherwise, he's just giving us bullshit.
  • by pogle ( 71293 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @01:27PM (#10430726) Homepage
    "It makes me laugh, the 12-y-o son of the man running the most powerful IT company in the world gets it, but Ballmer himself doesn't."

    Funny, it makes me want to cry...

    Was discussing this sort of thing in general with a friend this morning, and we both agreed that we need some young blood injected into America's political matrix. Until we get some tech-savvy people who understand what American's want from their technology and don't pander to what the corporations try to force on us, we're gonna be stuck in a downward spiral of increasingly draconian restrictions.
  • by PierceLabs ( 549351 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @02:08PM (#10431279)
    I want to sue him, the fools at SCO and anyone else who just goes out and labels or otherwise falsely accuses me of a crime!
  • by rtv ( 567862 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @02:44PM (#10431710)

    Your professors are being unreasonable.

    I'm a CS professor and I don't allow submission in MS formats. This is for two reasons: (i) because I don't think it's fair to require students to buy expensive software just to complete their assignments; and (ii) because I want them to understand that it's possible to do use free, open formats to exchange data. If the students don't discover this in college, they sure aren't going to see it at company X after graduation.

  • Buy buy buy buy! (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 04, 2004 @02:48PM (#10431754)
    "We've had DRM in Windows for years." [...] "Part of the reason people steal music is money, but some of it is that the DRM stuff out there has not been that easy to use. We are going to continue to improve our DRM, to make it harder to crack, and easier, easier, easier, easier, to use," he said.

    In other words, Apple is popular for digital music because Windows' DRM is harder, harder, harder to use. But we're going to get our developers, developers, developers, developers to make it easier, and then people will start buying, buying, buying music from Microsoft.

    That sounds like a good plan, if a little late. I wonder who they're going to hire to make it easier than a Mac!
  • by recursiv ( 324497 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @03:19PM (#10432134) Homepage Journal
    People will never stop making music, even if they have to completely subsidize it themselves. Well, some people might stop, especially those that are exclusively in it for the money. Everyone else might slow down, but there are many true fans of music for it to disappear. MTV and radio might go away in some extreme case, but I guess I don't see that as a bad thing. I have sunk probably close to $10k into being a musician. (the curious can hear a recent track at http://www.tomtheisen.com/Radiant.mp3)

    I'm not planning on quitting my day job, nor am I quitting music. It's already very difficult to make money, much less a living off music, but there are certainly no shortage of musicians. Many of them play music for their own satisfaction.

    I'm not saying people should pirate music, since high quality recording and mastering can definitely be expensive. But pirating will never cause musicians to cease playing. That's like saying people would stop playing video games if the big tournaments stopped offering cash prizes. Most people don't make money on it to begin with.
  • by Parsec ( 1702 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @03:38PM (#10432343) Homepage Journal
    I'm waiting for a 60 GB iPod because I own 99% of my 43 GB collection. (Those songs/albums I don't legally own are on my CD to-buy list, because mp3s are not ok for critical listening on a decent stereo system.)

    Fuck you, Ballmer! Fuck you and that broken down old horse you rode in on!
  • by hesiod ( 111176 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @04:13PM (#10432797)
    > they're the ones preventing the artists from doing what they like to do

    I'm not trying to insult you, but do you seriously believe that if you had sold 20 copies of that CD that you would now magically be a profitable musician? I'm sure you made more than just the first CD, but even then, there's a good chance you'd still have a net loss. Granted that combined, it may have been enough to cover your next CD's costs, since you presumably now own all your instruments, etc...

    I'm not trying to tell you to "quit whining" and I'm not complaining that all music should be free, but try to keep some perspective (which is not the same as saying you've already lost it).
  • by muckdog ( 607284 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @04:17PM (#10432887) Homepage
    I've taken classes at four different colleges as I start and restarted the journey of finsihing my degree. Everyone of the wants .doc format for papers and .xls for spreadsheets. I tried in the past to send PDF and html (two clearly open formats). Professors tossed it back at me. Now I write all my apers in Open Office on Linux but I double check that they are ok on my windows box with MS office.
  • by ScrewMaster ( 602015 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @10:20PM (#10436020)
    His lips move.

    Seriously, he's fooling himself if he thinks that Microsoft's advanced DRM is going to allow people to acquire and maintain the large music collections to which they've become accustomed. What would it cost (at, say, $18 per dozen songs) to acquire a typical 10,000 track music collection? About fifteen grand. Yeah, sure, I'll just use my Microsoft Passport account. Part of the problem here is that popular music was simply never worth what the RIAA charged for it, and by attempting to maintain a high price structure they are simply guaranteeing that DRM won't be accepted. Maybe if they'd been able to stop widespread distribution of MP3s before we all got used to them ... but in true RIAA fashion they completely missed the boat. By the time they woke up to Napster and started throwing lawsuits around, millions of people realized that, hey, it's really really cool having thousands upon thousands of tracks at their fingertips.

    It's gonna be very hard to put that particular genie back in his bottle. He's jacked into his iPod and can't hear them anymore.

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Working...