There has been some talk recently about Ruckus, a subscription-based service that has struck a deal with the UMD system to provide its content to students "free" of charge (student tuition and fees notwithstanding). Services like this one continue to be lauded as the "legal alternative to downloading", and indeed this particular incarnation has been endorsed by SGA.
However, services like this one come up short in some key areas which is why to the music enthusiast or serious downloader, they will never compare to what is available on torrent trackers.
- Music can only be played via their software, not your music player of choice and not on your operating system of choice.
- While there is considerable selection, it is nowhere near complete and nowhere near what is available on elite music trackers.
- The DRM-laden songs prevent transfer to a portable music device, like my iPod. Even if you do use software to (illegally) remove the DRM, the files are not .mp3 but .wma, a format that is not compatible with iPods.
- Even after going through all the trouble of freeing the songs, they are still in poor quality. If you decide to transcode to .mp3 to put the songs on an iPod, your quality will go down even further.
5 comments:
I understand that software like Soundtaxi seems like such a hassle. But from someone who has gotten caught downloading music, paying the fine, being kicked off resnet, and making a educational poster sucks. And the consequences of getting caught again... $400, 4 week resnet suspension, university probation, I will pay the $15 dollars to illegally use soundtaxi, than risk the chance of getting caught going for the "better stuff".
What this means to me, though, is that services like Ruckus completely fail in their attempt to stop piracy. The only reason to use it instead of torrents is because one is willing to take a quality hit to reduce the chances of getting caught. Either way you're still operating in the legal gray area the supporters of Ruckus were trying to eliminate.
Just to clarify, Ruckus music can be played on portable devices. This includes Windows Mobile devices (phones and PDAs), Creative players, some Sony players, and even high-end devices from Denon. The only reason iPods can't play the music is because Apple refuses to allow anyone to enter its exclusive platform.
The problem with your music player is that it's made by a company that doesn't want to play ball - but then again, the root of that problem is DRM in general. It doesn't work now, and it never will.
Apple's iPods fully support the widely-accepted .mp3 format. They do not support the unfavorable and DRM-laden .wma tracks Microsoft has convinced the lesser portable player manufacturers to support. If "playing ball" means "supporting ridiculous DRM schemes", I'd rather not.
You can't say much for your support of portable devices when you aren't supporting the most popular portable device of all.
You can't support the iTunes DRM because it's closed - they won't give anyone else the opportunity. Because the industry decided that the files need to be "protected," you ahve to pick one - and since iTunes isn't an option for other vendors, they go with something else. Ruckus uses both the MP3 and WMA format, and you'd be hard pressed to find a popular player other than the iPod that doesn't play WMA. The iPod doesn't because Apple doesn't want to go anywhere near Microsoft.
The fact is, Apple refuses to be interoperable with other formats, and has said as much in the media - that's why your iPod doesn't play Ruckus music, and that's also why Ruckus music can't be adapted to the iPod. When you have one company standing in the way of interoperability, you can't reasonably say that it isn't their fault.
But again, it all comes back to one thing: DRM in any form is a raw deal for the consumer. The "Digital Rights" it manages are not those of the purchaser.
Post a Comment