About five years ago, Universal put part of their back catalog on eMusic, back when they briefly owned the site. They never published the results of their earlier experiment. However, it seems that they weren't driven into bankruptcy, so I think they'll survive this one too.

Universal's logic simply does not make any sense at all. So many other stores are Windows only. Gee, guess I'll just sell my Mac so I can buy a few crappy songs without DRM attached.

The piracy excuse doesn't make sense either. If I wanted to pirate files, I'd buy the CD and pirate the hell out of it. What are they talking about? It literally makes no sense!

The part about trying to take Apple down a peg or two is probably the real agenda, but it doesn't make sense either. With plenty of competition (although limited, seeing that I am barred from entry in so many of the other stores, see above) Apple clearly seems to be the most successful by virtue of coming up with the best combination of price, selection, availability (Windows and Mac both welcome), interface and player.

But Universal, as the labels have all along, still insists it can push consumers where they do not want to go. It's insane.

Universal, it's very simple: Me, conusumer. You, provider. Me have dollars, you want? Then meet my terms! I sure as hell am not going to jump through endless hoops to meet YOUR terms. Me not jump, you not get money.

Quit being so goddamn moronic. Grow the hell up! Make your product available and I will buy it. Or don't, and I will not buy it. That's the transaction we're talking about. Why do you keep trying to outsmart such a simple thing?

does anyone know which online stores carry the drm-free emi and universal tracks? i keep trying emusic but they never have enough of what i'm looking for. i didn't like rhapsody's stream or burn model when i tried it a few years back. what else is good?

From Universal's press release:

Participants including Google, Wal-Mart, Best Buy Digital Music Store, Rhapsody, Transworld, Passalong Networks, Amazon.com and Puretracks, will offer downloads to consumers in the DRM-free audio format of their choice in a variety of bit rates. For the most part, the DRM free downloads will be offered at standard wholesale prices.

In addition, DRM-free downloads will also be available through artist and label-branded websites, including will.i.am.com, sum41.com, evefans.com, www.common-music.com, ryan-adams.com, blaqkaudio.com, dianakrall.com, sectionquartet.com, as well as defjam.com, islandrecords.com and classicsandjazz.co.uk, among many others.

Isn't Apple's share of iTMS profits minuscule? I have read that Apple sees iTMS mainly as a "loss leader" to spur iPod sales, handing over most of the proceeds from music downloads to the labels. And since a single digital file can be downloaded (i.e. sold) any number of times, that means that having your music for sale on iTunes is a virtually cost-free revenue stream. Why end that? Universal just seems to be sulking now, pissed that Apple has done this so well that many music fans never buy any music anywhere else. So their reaction is simply to thumb their nose at Apple and take their marbles elsewhere. The "experiment" is going to be worthless if it is enacted on sites that total less than 10% of the download market. Besides, the results are already available: Let's just see how EMI has been doing since it went DRM-free, or how eMusic has been doing since its inception (that would be the #2 music download site, BTW).

So conversely, how does this petulant behavior hurt Apple? Now that the iTMS is dominant, customers may be pissed that their BEP or 50 Cent tracks are not there, but they're still going to get the rest of their downloads from iTunes. Apple will continue to sell iPods and iPhones and whatnot, and Universal will only have denied itself the profits that come with being part of that.

Except you won't be barred from those stores anymore, or what part of DRM free don't you understand? Without anysort of Windows Media DRM scheme, the mp3's available on many of these stores will no longer require Windows to download. I'm not sure the specific method through which downloads for these DRM-free songs will be authorized, but I presume it will be web-based, and available to anyone with a browser. Even if some stores don't offer said web-only purchasing and transfer, Realplayer is available for Mac, and you'd be able to use that to download the newly DRM-free content.

So read the damn article before you pipe up. While I'm not a big fan of Universal, or any major label, DRM free is the way things should be.

In his famous article "Marketing Myopia" Professor Ted Leavitt described the buggy whip industry and observed that no amount of product improvement could prevent the evaporation of the industry.

The record industry is on its way to becoming a new buggy whip industry. Eliminating DRM is the kind of ineffective product improvement Leavitt described.

Buggys gave way to the automobile. Recorded music is falling prey easy piracy. The industry needs to reinvent itself as a free, ad-supported medium if it is to survive.

Check out the Ad-Supported Music Central blog:http://ad-supported-music.blogspot.com/

I for one will not purchase any music from Universal Music. They are trying to regain the glory days of their greedy ownership of the music business. Apple came in and upset this dynamic. Illegal downloading also upset this model. This is not about getting more money for the artists. The artists get a very very small piece of the eventual royalty pie. People have a right once they purchase a song to use it in any way they desire. Apple supports that premise.

I am in the music business. The only parties who benefit from higher priced songs are the executives who long for the return of their fat expense accounts, first class travel and limousine service. By attempting to undermine Apple they are trying to regain control and create once again more barriers to entry. Apple is the best thing that has happened to the music business and I look forward to Universals failure of this "experiment."