A simple plan to slash the price of tunes for your iPod
Cut the price of your music
(Credit: Steve Guttenberg)I'm back at my favorite record store and I see a guy approach the owner with a proposition: "I want to buy music to put it on my iPod and then resell the disc to you." Intrigued, I jumped into the conversation, egging the guy on. "That's a great idea. Buy new or used DRM-free CDs, burn 'em to iTunes, and what the hell, burn a CD to keep, and resell the disc." The technique won't be cost effective on every title, but say for example you bought a used copy of Smashing Pumpkins "Zeitgeist" for $8.99, and post ripping sold it back to the store you bought it from for $4.00. Your cost would be $5.00 plus tax. Hmmm, the same music on iTunes goes for $11.99 and will most likely come saddled with DRM, so once the music is on your iPod, you're done. With the CD you're free to do what you want with the tunes, burn a copy for your car, and another copy to play at work. The cost advantages will, in many cases, hold true for brand new CDs as well.
I've already sporadically done the buy, burn, resell deal myself, but the guy clarified the methodology. Then again, I'm not condoning the ethics of the exercise, I like owning discs, I have 3,000 or so, but for you folks who would rather not deal with the clutter, this would be a good way to load your iPod. And if you care about sound quality, you could pack your 'Pod with full CD quality sounds. Apple offers no such alternative, gee, I wonder why.
Steve Guttenberg is a frequent contributor to magazines and Web sites including Home Entertainment, Playback, and Ultimate AV. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network, and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure. 
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/home-entertainment/riaa-boycott-tip-buy-used-cds-246043.php#c1138674
If I lose my CDs, I'm damn sure not going to delete my archives.
If you lose the original by destruction and keep the copy, I think this falls under fair use in that the original no longer exists. At least in software, that's the reason you'd make a backup, so the same principle should apply. If the original is stolen is a really good question. Morally, I see no problem with keeping the copy, but legally, you are probably not entitled to do this.
Keep in mind that this is based on what I've read and heard and I've got no legal training in copyright law.
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/home-entertainment/riaa-boycott-tip-buy-used-cds-246043.php#c1138674
If I lose my CDs, I'm damn sure not going to delete my archives.
If you lose the original by destruction and keep the copy, I think this falls under fair use in that the original no longer exists. At least in software, that's the reason you'd make a backup, so the same principle should apply. If the original is stolen is a really good question. Morally, I see no problem with keeping the copy, but legally, you are probably not entitled to do this.
Keep in mind that this is based on what I've read and heard and I've got no legal training in copyright law.
Really when you think about it though, thats why software DRM is so stupid. The dishonest folks are going to still find a way around the system, it only limits the fair use of the honest paying customer. Down with DRM!!!
Really when you think about it though, thats why software DRM is so stupid. The dishonest folks are going to still find a way around the system, it only limits the fair use of the honest paying customer. Down with DRM!!!
A young person I know decided that he loves music. All kinds. So he has people loan him CDs and he rips a copy to iTunes and gives the cd back.
He was very proud of the fact that he had 5000-8000 songs so far and climbing. The question is, is he stealing.???
WEll, I say yes and no. Why, you ask. Well it turns out that when I spent some time with him lately, he actually only listens to 3 or 4 groups. And he actually ownes their music on cds that he bought.
What about that other 6000 songs??? Well, it seems that once in a while he plays some of the music, but usually is out of the room or doing something else when its playing so he only gets a little of each song or parts of albums. Its like the radio. Its on but noone is listening. :-)
One day, I am sure he will erase it, or forget to save it and it will be gone. All except for the songs he really likes and has CDs for.
Weird. But that is much of the youth of today. IMHO.
en
A young person I know decided that he loves music. All kinds. So he has people loan him CDs and he rips a copy to iTunes and gives the cd back.
He was very proud of the fact that he had 5000-8000 songs so far and climbing. The question is, is he stealing.???
WEll, I say yes and no. Why, you ask. Well it turns out that when I spent some time with him lately, he actually only listens to 3 or 4 groups. And he actually ownes their music on cds that he bought.
What about that other 6000 songs??? Well, it seems that once in a while he plays some of the music, but usually is out of the room or doing something else when its playing so he only gets a little of each song or parts of albums. Its like the radio. Its on but noone is listening. :-)
One day, I am sure he will erase it, or forget to save it and it will be gone. All except for the songs he really likes and has CDs for.
Weird. But that is much of the youth of today. IMHO.
en
Personally I may finally bite the internet acquisition model with Amazon's mp3 service. $10 for an album already ripped, drm free and nothing to do with Apple's lock-in tactics? Finally we're on the right track.
Next I would like 96kHz 24-bit stereo files in FLAC and would probably be willing to pay a bit more for that. Audiophile sound + instant internet gratification + artist's get paid = everyone wins.
- How is this different from just downloading?
- by ArtInvent October 1, 2007 3:20 PM PDT
- . . . so let's see - the artist gets paid almost nil for this instead of really really almost nil. How is this any different from some person you don't know buying the cd and ripping it and putting it online? Lots of people getting the music, one CD sold. Exact same outcome, that's why it's not really 'fair use' and thus against copyright law.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(20 Comments)Personally I may finally bite the internet acquisition model with Amazon's mp3 service. $10 for an album already ripped, drm free and nothing to do with Apple's lock-in tactics? Finally we're on the right track.
Next I would like 96kHz 24-bit stereo files in FLAC and would probably be willing to pay a bit more for that. Audiophile sound + instant internet gratification + artist's get paid = everyone wins.