Stream ripping and royalty rates
I’ve addressed many problems with the webcaster’s side in the internet radio royalty rate (I’d start reading here if you you’re interested in a different perspective on the webcaster’s plight), but there is one problem I haven’t touched: Stream-ripping. Stream-ripping is what it sounds like: the ripping (i.e. downloading) of music streams. Well, I came across an article today in my news reader that reminded me that stream-ripping belongs in the conversation. In “RaimaRadio - Internet Radio DVR,” Davis Freeberg explains how users can use a RaimaRadio, a freeware application, to download internet radio streams into .mp3 files. Freeberg calls this download a “time shift” of radio content, but it’s essentially the same as downloading music through a p2p application. Instead of someone offering the song through Kazaa, they can just broadcast the music they want to “share” with others. And with a wink and nod, the listeners can build a mp3 library of songs they downloaded from the stream.
Don’t just take my word for it. Here’s what Freeberg wrote (emphasis mine):
Even more powerful then the scheduling capabilities, is the ability for Raima to monitor and record specific songs or artists that you are interested in. Instead of illegally downloading songs from the P2P networks, Raima allows you to create wishlists and will scan for those songs on any station that you tune into. The number of streams that you can simultaneously record is only limited by your bandwidth. This allows you to set up filters, record 10 different stations overnight, and in the morning you’ll have a hefty MP3 collection.
How is stream-ripping related to the internet radio royalty rate debate? Webcasters want the right to play an artist’s music without his or her permission, and at a rate lower than many artists want for the publication of their music. If the government grants the webcasters that right, music artists will have no ability to control how their music is played. If a webcaster wants to play an artist’s music across an unsecure mp3 stream but the artist will only accept a DRM’d wma format, the webcaster wins. If the artist wants to establish rules about how many times his or her songs can be played, it doesn’t matter. The artist just has to accept the rates and rules the webcasters “negotiated” with the government.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. Webcasters say that one of the reasons they are fighting for lower rates is to protect the artist and the music, but what they’re really doing is using the government to rip away the artists’ intellectual property rights.
Now, I don’t think stream-ripping is a huge concern today, due to one big problem that Freeberg points out in his article: Quality. The quality of sound you’ll hear on many internet streams does not match the quality of sound you’ll hear from a cd or from an online music store. It’s a noticeable difference, and I bet it’s enough to make most people look for some other source for their music. However, this is a problem that will be overcome. As computers gets faster and internet connections get better, the size and quality of internet streams will quickly grow. Just look at what has happened with video and Youtube. Online video used to be slow and a waste of time years ago, but now we’ve reached the point where anybody can put up a video that can be easily watched by anyone else. Just think of the improvements we’ll see in the coming years. CD-quality streams will be the standard someday, and that will make downloading music off of an internet stream worth the trouble.
If artists were allowed to control what happens with their music, they could prevent webcasters who offer unprotected, high-quality mp3 streams from playing their music. If the Internet Radio Equity Act or anything similar passes, artists will have no recourse. Webcasters will get to play their music no matter what the artist says, and they’ll be able to play the music for an incredibly low rate.
Stream-ripping is an example of the problems that can arise when the government meddles in the music industry. The ideal solution is to keep the government out and let individuals negotiate and work out their differences.
Tags: [internet radio, stream ripping]In reply to my last Ubuntu post…
I received some responses to my last post on my decision to dump Ubuntu. They can be read here and here. I replied to all of the comments posted on my site, which took me a while. I’d like to add a few overall points here.
First, there is a difference between having a lot of available software and having access to a large percentage of software. It is true that there are thousands of software programs available for Linux. However, if you pick any piece of software you can find on Windows, chances are you won’t be able to find a Linux version. This difference won’t matter if you’re looking for an internet browser, an email program, or a text-editor, but when it comes to some select software that’s only available for PC or Mac, you’re out of luck.
And yes, you can run Windows XP as a virtual machine inside of Linux, but doesn’t that help prove my point? Linux requires a virtual Windows box to make it useful enough to use. By moving from Ubuntu to Vista, I’m just cutting out the middle-man.
Second, when I pointed out the hardware issues I was having, I don’t want to imply that everybody will have the same issue. However, I think my situation can be used as an example of the problems that are possible if you try to switch your computer to Ubuntu. And if you look at the hardware support of Linux compared to Windows, I think your chances of having problems with Linux are much higher than Windows.
I don’t want to ruffle so many feathers, I’m just giving my honest assessment of Linux and my time with it. It’s fine if you prefer Linux, but let’s be honest about what it is. Perhaps part of the problem is that I bought into the hype that it was ready for the desktop. If I knew how far it was from being ready for the desktop, I wouldn’t have bothered to try it. Now I don’t think I’ll ever want to go back.
Tags: [linux, ubuntu, vista]Ubuntu experiment over
A couple months ago, I wrote about my decision to try Ubuntu. I thought I could squeeze some more usage out of my old computer, and I was always curious as to how well Linux would work. Well, today I reached a conclusion: Linux is a waste of my time and energy.
There are lots of reasons to avoid it. Here is a quick, top-of-my-head list of reasons why I’m done with it:
1.) It’s hard to install programs. Even though Ubuntu provides a relatively-easy way to install programs from their list of supported software, installing one program often requires looking through their repository for multiple libraries. And if you want to install a program outside of their list… good luck. It’s never as simple as double-clicking an installation file and letting it take over.
2.) It’s very hard to find drivers. You can’t just pick up any hardware from your local Best Buy and expect it to work on your system. You’ll have to search (and hope) for some possible way, or perhaps some driver that will work… kinda. Example: My laptop had some ATI graphic card that would render the desktop, but drawing basic images on the screen took a lot of work for the machine. I know integrated graphics aren’t great, but it didn’t take two seconds to load an image on a web page when I was running XP.
3.) The selection of software for Linux is bad. If you’re on Windows, you can use practically any program you can find. On Linux, you’ll have to hope. This one in particular drove me nuts. Two or three times, I’ve found some program that I want to use, but I’d have to make a note to install it on my work machine or my wife’s computer because I couldn’t use it on my own machine.
4.) The “alternative” software for Linux is not as good as the Windows counterparts. You’ll probably be able to find some alternative program for every program you can’t run on Linux. If you can’t have Photoshop, you can use GIMP. If you can’t have Office, you can use Open Office. If you can’t have Outlook, you can use Thunderbird. These alternative programs can be used, but it’s like they’re not as fleshed-out as the more popular programs. For example, Open Office opens Word documents… most of the time. GIMP can edit image files, but good luck with the GUI. Thunderbird will check your email account, but it’s missing a lot of options and compatibility that Outlook has.
5.) You have to edit config files with a text editor. The last time I had to manually edit a configuration file was in junior high when I’d have a separate set of autoexec.bat and config.sys files to make each of my games work in DOS. I thought that was over with Windows 98. I don’t think I’m being spoiled when I say that I shouldn’t have to touch files like that anymore. Computer software should be moving forward, not backward.
6.) You’re still one tweak away from destroying your GUI. Yes, you can make backup config files and just copy over them, but why? Why should anybody have to deal with it?
7.) It doesn’t look as nice. Yes, I know Ubuntu has Aero or Beryl or whatever library that makes the windows wobble when you move them, but it’s just not as polished as OSX or Vista.
Can Linux work for some people? Yes, if you’re willing to work at it. Personally, there are things I’d rather do than spend hours trying to make my computer compatible with the rest of the world. Things like spend time with my wife. Write on my blog, or read other people’s posts. Read a book. Watch a movie. Sleep! Just do something more productive than Google for a possible way to do something that’s a simple double-click on other operating systems.
Today, I bought a laptop running Vista. I love it. I can use the Objectivist Research CD. I can finally burn a DVD of my wedding video by just dragging the video from my camera. I can see all websites, including my bank’s site. I can run Visual Studio. I can finally check out my local library’s program that will let me borrow audio books. I can do… anything!
My advice to anybody who might take a look at Ubuntu or Linux for their next computer. Don’t waste you time.
Tags: [linux, ubuntu, vista]