February 15, 2005 5:07 PM PST

Napster hack leads to free downloads

It's like the old Napster all over again: all the music you want for free, as long as you're willing to get a little geeky.

Blogs were buzzing Tuesday about the resurgence of an old technique for recording music on a computer, reapplied to Napster's all-you-can-eat subscription music plan. Using software freely available from America Online's Winamp division, it's possible to turn Napster's copy-protected downloads into unprotected files that can be burned by the hundreds or even thousands freely to CDs.

This type of antipiracy evasion has repeatedly dogged digital media services from RealNetworks to Apple Computer over the years. Applied to subscription services offering unlimited access to downloads of more than 1 million songs, the idea may have new resonance, however.

News.context

What's new:
Using software freely available from AOL's Winamp division, it's possible to turn Napster's copy-protected downloads into unprotected files that can be burned by the thousands freely to CDs.

Bottom line:
Content providers say "stream ripping" isn't dangerous to their subscription models, even though it can result in the creation of unprotected, fairly high-quality song files.

More stories on this topic

For now, Napster and other content providers are saying the "hack" isn't dangerous to their subscription model, even though it can result in the creation of unprotected, fairly high-quality music files.

"It's not a new thing," said Napster spokeswoman Dana Harris. "We do all we can to make our system as secure as possible for people who want to pay for music." Record label executives nevertheless said privately that they were worried at the attention the technique was getting.

The news is the latest wrinkle in a long-running technological arms race between hackers and media companies that has helped keep digital media, from DVDs to downloadable songs, from settling into stable markets.

For the most part, digital rights management (DRM) advocates say their anticopying wares are aimed at stopping "casual" pirates. They concede that determined programmers will almost certainly be able to find ways to copy music despite protections.

In a handful of instances, hackers have actually managed to completely break, or strip out, the digital rights protection tools applied to media files. Because this kind of technique preserves the original quality of the digital file, it is potentially the most dangerous to content companies.

The tools that allow DVDs to be copied have been the most widely used version of this technique, with commercial products even showing up temporarily on mainstream store shelves. An early version of Microsoft's Windows Media was broken in 2001, but the company was able to fix the problem with updates to its media player.

More recently, Apple has repeatedly changed its iTunes software to block hackers who have figured out ways to remove the copy-protection software from songs purchased at its online store.

The "stream ripping" problem is a different one, essentially a

CONTINUED:
Page 1 | 2

56 comments

Join the conversation!
Add your comment
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!
A silly subject line for a silly music service model. I am holding
my breath until the Labels pull the licese from Napster. Jobs was
right.

If Napster can't compete on the basis of a quality service, then I
guess they have to give away artists property for free. Maybe if
M$ had an ounce of creativity, they could come up with
something better than Janus.

Glad to see them go.
Posted by (57 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Reply
Oh great another iTunes fanboy.
To a much lesser degree iTunes has the same problem. Apple gives away a free single and Hymn can be used to crack the DRM. If you're looking for quality you don't buy music that has been lossy compressed. Most of the music made today isn't work keeping beyond a few times listening to it. Personally I wouldn't pay for any of these download services. I will however take advantage of their free offering and various peaces of software to get rid of DRM. Who would ***** about getting something for free? DRM encumbered media sucks regardless of who sells it.
Posted by unknown unknown (1951 comments )
Link Flag
lame...
wow...its unbelievable how myopic you are. if your 'apple can do no wrong, M$ (<-- oh look, i'm in 4th grade too and i substituted a dollar sign for the S to signify by distaste for a company and how greedy they are and the like...i just wanted everyone to know since i can't have a mature rational discussion otherwise) can do no right' attitude doesn't want to subscribe to this then don't. here's a couple points that you might want to chew on:
1. the fact of the matter is no drm is hack/work around proof...period. so the arguement of the napster to go could pay a fraction ($15/month) of what an iTunes user (.99/each) is a small almost irrelevant one. the fact that the first person paid the 99 cents on iTunes doesn't mean that that song hasn't been stripped of the drm (and its REALLY easy...) and sent around the world thousands...maybe millions of times over. and considering that iTunes has the lions share of the online paid music service, i would easily argue that iTunes has contributed more to P2P networks than Napster.
2. Napster is offering a choice. Whaaaaat? from MS (<--i tried really hard not to use the $). You must be joking. If you want to buy them one off, you can. You can subscribe to streaming music for $10/month. AND you can use your portable player now for a little more. what a novel concept...something for everyone.
3. Download subscriptions may not be for you and its not for everyone, but for the true music lover, its just a fantasic service. it allows a person to try out new songs without 'chancing a buck', new artists, new genres,...its simply a great service for those that love music. but what about ownership???
4. ownership. you don't really own the music anyway. sure its semantics but if you bought a CD and you broke it in half, Tower or the record label won't send you a new one. ok, so you want to 'own' it. great, then download then one off. cool. but if you look past this usage model that we all have come accustomed to then you will see what a good deal it is. we don't have any problem paying a monthly fee for content or services elsewhere but somehow music is different. whether its cable or satellite tv, satellite radio, online porn subscriptions (cmon, don't lie...), HBO channels, DVD rentals, etc. but not music? cmon...that's crazy. what is your broadband provider partnered with napster and said for an extra $10 you can have all the songs you want at home and while your mobile...you wouldn't at least consider it? but you like paying $10 a month for that digital cable box or cable modem that you could legal buy and own. there's your ownership that you want so much but you don't take it. and lastly...
5. Hacking. Like i said before, there's no way to stop it. much like assault gun legislation, you can make it illegal and do everything you can to stop it, but in the end, those fringe folks that want it, be it criminals, collectors, 'hunters', etc. will get it. but it will essentially stay out of the hands of the vast majority of us...you know why? because the effort is not worth it. same thing with music. if the industry charged $10 per song then you would see pirating even by grandma. charge a fair price, make it easy to use, and have a good user experience and the vast majority of people will opt to pay for it. reminds me of late last night when i went to the store. they had pallets and pallets of 12 packs of soda sitting outside unattended with sales signs etc. while i was going in i noticed what seemed to be a guy walking up, taking one, and leaving. now that guy's an ass, but i didn't steal one. most of us wouldn't. just because he did means NOTHING. if the industry freaks out because of a few freaks with nothing better to do than to download, play, strip, encode, and redo each ID3 tag then we are in trouble...
Posted by tlite722 (160 comments )
Link Flag
Actually....
Actually, last time I checked, Napster didn't use Janus, but a proprietary DRM developed by themselves. It always has to turn into an MS bash, even when MS isn't involved, right?
Posted by mikeg4936 (31 comments )
Link Flag
This is a completely skewed story
What about QTFairUse that strips DRM from iTunes AAC files?

Why doesn't CNet cover this story at this same length ???

<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.infoanarchy.org/story/2003/11/24/22326/600" target="_newWindow">http://www.infoanarchy.org/story/2003/11/24/22326/600</a>
Posted by streamOG (134 comments )
Link Flag
I will only
... buy cds' of music i like... which is 1% of the music they offer... and i HAVE bought cd's of people even if i have several of their songs... if i like it enough...

so screw the pay service... until i get a good deal ... ie... a song for 10 cents im not paying... unless i REALLY want it... all that other crap music i can listen to on the radio anyways
Posted by volterwd (466 comments )
Reply Link Flag
You can try allmymp3.com for a dime a song
They are in Russia.
Posted by bobby_brady (765 comments )
Link Flag
CNet discovers stream recording...
Next they do a gritty expose on how you can copy Napster songs that you burned to CD.

Yawn.
Posted by M C (598 comments )
Reply Link Flag
All DRM goes out the window when burned to CD
What everone fails to realize is that no matter what download service you use, DRM doesn't mean squat when burned to cd. Then you just rip the cd to mp3. Happy ripping!
Posted by 201293546946733175101343322673 (722 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Actually no - you can't rip these to CD
What you don't realize is that with Napster-To-Go you can't burn the songs to CD. You're essentially "renting" them and they can be played back on your PC, streamed to your home stereo (if you have the right digital audio receiver), and transferred to your MP3 player (again if you have the right device). You cannot rip these tracks to CD unless you buy them for $0.99.

Mike
Posted by msmikecol (1 comment )
Link Flag
so what exactly is the problem?
That I can take a song I BOUGHT and strip it of DRM? How is that a major problem? Didn't I pay for it already?
Nobody seriously expects me to pay again to listen to it on a my home stereo, and again in my car do they?
I will never subscribe to any service that doesn't allow me to manage the music I've purchased as I see fit.
Home users have always had court up-held rights to record music for personal use. This most certainly falls into that category.
Stripping a song of DRM, while a crime, is not an economic problem for anyone. And as we all know the industry is taking aggressive steps to stop P2P song trading, so... where is the harm in this?
Posted by skeptik (590 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Read it, learn it, deal with it....
.....any and all DRM schemes will fail. No matter how hard they try, no matter how many people they sue, somebody will always find a way around it.

Indeed, the loss of quality with MP3 players and such actually hurts more than it helps. If you are in a car, or jogging, you are not going to get concert-hall level acoustics. Who cares if you don't have that extra 50 or 100 bits of sample, you'd never hear it the way most people play it anyway. Thus cheap, free, legal, or illegal downloads, copies, and bootlegs are always going to be around.

Even if they don't know it, they are already at the point of diminishing returns with their attempts, which are costing more money, lasting few and fewer weeks, and at some point another "big new thing" will overwhelm their ability to monitor, sue, or otherwise counter.

And they haven't even pushed anybody to just run a cable from one system to another to create fresh files devoid of any DRM. Some Russian will figure out there is a market for mainstream audio cards or toys with Vacume tubes to wash the audio through. They already make MOBOs with them.

The best advice for DRM companies: Go into the light, goooo into the light....

NWLB
****
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.nwlbnet.blogspot.com" target="_newWindow">http://www.nwlbnet.blogspot.com</a>
Posted by NWLB (326 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Music infested with DRM is a rip off
The RIAA needs to be taught a lesson for ripping off the public for decades.
Posted by bobby_brady (765 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Rights
Labels have a right to protect their music from Piracy. Your phone company does it. Your cable company does it. Your car alarm does it. Your bank does it with your ATM card. Why should music be any different?
Posted by streamOG (134 comments )
Link Flag
Napster by the month is very diffent from iTunes DRM
Many people here don't seem to understand - the Napster
subscription is only allowing you to rent the music and copy it to
an MP3 player. This hack allows you to burn the files and keep
them even if you cancel your subscription.

It's true that you can burn a song from iTunes Music Store to a
CD to rip off the DRM, but you could keep the song in the first
place because you bought it. Napster only allows you to keep
the songs as long as you keep paying the monthly fee.

That's why this could be huge.
Posted by zarathustra911 (35 comments )
Reply Link Flag
probably not a big deal
If funny. I subscribe to a stream broadcast and pay $10/mth. I have always been able to "rip" the stream and the technique discussed with Napster is really not new ( drop two audio cards in a comp and you can input / output and capture it, though quality drops some).

Yet, though I initially did actually rip the stream to capture songs i really liked it soon got tiresome and now I don't rip at all. Cost versus effort not worth it. Same goes for Napster, the cost is cheap enough that is it really worth it to rip. I mean what you spend $180 a year for listening to any music they offer. I don't know about you but the time to rip and re-encode is just not worth it.

I think once you continue to see inexpensive pricing models like this that the majority of people will not rip them off. I don't and now actually enjoy purchasing music I want because these "all-you-can-listen" services enable me to sample my tastes and find those songs I want.

So I think this really is a non-issue at this time.
Posted by sonicdivx (15 comments )
Reply Link Flag
...
Of course this doesn't apply to people who actually care about
and like the music they listen to. If you're a boy band afficianado
or if you are on the bleeding edge of nu metal, napster should
suit you just fine.
Posted by montgomeryburns (109 comments )
Link Flag
Napster = PressPlay
PressPlay was a rip off and so is Napster.
Posted by bobby_brady (765 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Again another Alarmist Slighted Story from News.com
This same exploit works for iTunes. They are equally vulnerable. It's interesting though that the obviously ANTI-MS News.com would choose to pick on Napster when this exploit works for iTunes too. The title should have said ALL WINDOWS BASED MUSIC SERVICES VULNERABLE. This includes Rhapsody etc
Posted by streamOG (134 comments )
Reply Link Flag
iTunes Napster to Go
It is not the same. The point is that Napster to Go is a rental service, and in order for you to keep the songs you have to purchase them with an additional cost of $.99. Sure, you can strip the DRM from the iTunes songs (output to audio cd or use HYMN), but you have to purchase them first. With Napster to Go, all you have to do is sign up, and for the first 14 days, get free songs without having to pay more for them to own the track...That is the point of all of this...free, non-DRM tunes. It will be interesting to see how the Recording industry responds to this, because in the end, they are the ones losing money on this workaround to the DRM. At least with iTunes, they are still getting their cut out of it up front.
Posted by jypeterson (181 comments )
Link Flag
ITS NOT A HACK
This sound recorder tool will record any encrypted iTunes song as well as Rhapsody or ANYTHING That is playing on a PC. THIS IS OLLLLLLLD NEWS.
Posted by streamOG (134 comments )
Reply Link Flag
The big difference: Napster is 1-month FREE
True, this technique existed before Napster To Go and can be
used with any DRM-protected music. The big difference is: you
still have to purchase the songs from iTunes in order to strip
them of their DRM. With this new Napster service, one can get
the tunes for FREE (during the first month trail period).
Posted by dejo (182 comments )
Link Flag
Hmmm...
Everyone seems to forget, the iTunes DRM was cracked not long
after it debuted way back when. Doesn't seem to have affected
the sales at the iTunes Music Store. Hmmmm.....
Posted by skellener (111 comments )
Reply Link Flag
11 and a half years
Let's do the math on this technique. Each song is about 4 minutes in length. Multiply that by 1 million songs and you get 4 million minutes of music in the Napster store. Divide 4 million by 60 and you get the number of hours it would take to pirate the Napster store (66,666 and 2/3 hours). Divide that by the number of waking hours in a day (16) and you get 4166 and 2/3 days. Divide that by 365 and you get 11.415 years. It would take more than a decade to de-DRM the store. That's assuming one did nothing other than de-DRM music for their entire waking life for more than a decade. No work, no eating, nothing. It also assumes that one has enough storage space for all of this music.

On a more realistic level, let's say one has a digital music player and wants to fill it with de-DRMed music. With a 40GB player, you have 10,000 songs at 4 minutes a song which is 40,000 minutes of music. Divide that by 60 and you get 666 and 2/3 hours to de-DRM it. Divide that by 16 and you get 41 and 2/3 days to de-DRM it.

Maybe people only want to de-DRM some songs. I currently have a little over 500 songs on my iPod, so let's go with 500. Multiply that by 4 minutes per song and you get 2,000 minutes of music. Divide that by 60 and you get 33 and 1/3 hours to de-DRM it all. That's slightly over two days of every waking hour of my life.

Of course, I won't be able to get near that perfect efficiency never mind the time spent on it. If I really wanted to de-DRM music through this method, it would take me months even for a small music collection. Plus, the resulting files wouldn't be as high quality (not that WMAs are that high quality to begin with). This is one of those areas where a protection isn't needed just because it is too cumbersome to pose a real threat.
Posted by (3 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Reply
Once can start multipule instances of WinAmp and strip the DRM over several song simultaneously. It still takes awhile, but I don't think anyone is going to try and download every song on Napster.
Posted by unknown unknown (1951 comments )
Link Flag
Just Buy Used
Buy your music used on cd. This way you're not paying the
outrageous rates that iTunes charges, you don't have to deal
with 'renting' your music from Napster, and you're not providing
any additional demand or income for crooked record companies.
Concerned about the selection at your local record shop?
Amazon.com has just about everything you can think of
available used. Want music on your favorite mp3 player? Rip the
cd to mp3 and you've got digital music that you can take
anywhere and do anything with.
Posted by montgomeryburns (109 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Cheap Cheap Cheap
" This way you're not paying the outrageous rates that iTunes
charges" ... WHAT outrageous prices! It cost less to purchase
the music from iTunes than it does from a store.

You think that a dollar a song is too much!? Write your own
damn music!@
Posted by Thomas, David (1947 comments )
Link Flag
a marketing ploy?
Ok, so everyone has been talking about the great new Napster hack and getting passed Microsoft's infamous DRM. From a business standpoint no one has pointed out one interesting fact here: Napster just launched a $30 million advertising campaign and all of a sudden this news comes out that you can crack the DRM through a few simple steps. Napster spent upwards of $2 million for an under rated Superbowl commercial that got no excitement. Less than 2 weeks later they are receiving major press from every major news outlet about this supposed hack. I just find this all quite interesting. What got Napster more press a lame overpriced Super Bowl ad or a quick hack on DRM that plastered their name all over the press?

I don't work for Napster's marketing team, but I applaud this very unique timing!

Of course if you want the hack here you go:

Just so everyone knows, I thought about taking advantage of this cause I love tinkering with things. But for only $10.00 a month I get access to their whole catalogue! Great deal if you ask me.
Posted by (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
SUPPORT YOUR ARTISTS, NOT YOUR GREED
So I rent a song, have to pay for a life time, but if i use one of
the easy hacks i can remove all DRM, pay for a month and be
part-cause of a multi-million (possibly billion) dollars loss for
the music industry.

I hear the arguments about DRM being easily removed, but if
that were truly the case, then Apples DRM would have been
exploited much further... but it has not. Hmmmm maybe all
DRMs are not the same and the model that apple provides by
controlling the software and player prevents easy hacks.
Sounds similar to their operating system.

Granted I can burn my AAC encrypted files to a CD, but guess
what. I PAID for them. I didn't RENT them.

Bottom-line, if you want to cheapen the work of artists, there
will be few true artists willing to sell their work. Why would they
want to. All of you clamoring for the "rent" modeling structure
only want to steal from them. You're not helping them, you're
not supporting them, so why should they give a damn about
you?!
Posted by Thomas, David (1947 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Reply
"So I rent a song, have to pay for a life time, but if i use one of
the easy hacks i can remove all DRM, pay for a month and be
part-cause of a multi-million (possibly billion) dollars loss for
the music industry."

Actually their is a 14 day free trial. So you wouldn't even have to pay for month. For all I care the record companies can go out of business. I have zero sympathy for the record companies after they were convicted twice for price fixing.


"I hear the arguments about DRM being easily removed"

Which it is.

"but if that were truly the case, then Apples DRM would have been exploited much further... but it has not."

I am not sure how much further you can exploit then completely removing it. JHymn (tool for stripping Apples DRM) can create a fake GUID than can be authorized with. It can also download and save the keys used to decrypt songs to a local harddrive. It will also strip out the user information Apple embeds in the file. This is in addition to removing the DRM. I am not sure how much easier it can be made to remove DRM. Then there is MyTunes Redux that basicly turns iTunes into a LAN based free music swapping service.


"Hmmmm maybe all DRMs are not the same"

Who said they were?

"the model that Apple provides by controlling the software and player prevents easy hacks."

You mean easy hacks like the previously mention MyTunes Redux that turns iTunes into a filesharing app that will let users swap tunes freely. You don't need stream ripping software like with the Napster exploit because there are tools that will decrypt a protected iTunes song in a matter of seconds.


"Granted I can burn my AAC encrypted files to a CD, but guess what. I PAID for them. I didn't RENT them."

Good for you.


"Bottom-line, if you want to cheapen the work of artists, there will be few true artists willing to sell their work. Why would they want to."

If they don't, then they have to find a new job.


"All of you clamoring for the "rent" modeling structure only want to steal from them. You're not helping them, you're not supporting them, so why should they give a damn about you?!"

The don't have to give a damn about me, cause I certainly don't give damn about them. Given the chance I'd gladly run them into the ground. I've downloaded over 400 songs on Napster with the 14 day free trial. I'll be starting multipule instance of WinAmp and converting them to DRM free Wav files.


Death to the record companies.
Posted by unknown unknown (1951 comments )
Link Flag
One small problem about the RIAA
If you think the RIAA is concerned about about musical 'artists' making money, you are sorely mistaken. They speak for the record companies only, and the record companies use and abuse the singers and bands they sign.

I have no problem with companies making a profit, but they are stealing from their 'artists'. You really think any money the RIAA gets from these lawsuits are going to the people that make the music? Very doubtful, and if any does trickle down, it will be a small percentage of the award AFTER lawyer fees.

The reason sales are down is because CD's are overpriced, and nearly everything they sell is uninspired, prefabricated crap from talentless hacks. You really think that performaers like Brittany Spears, Madonna, Christina Agulara would have sold so much if they hadn't ****** themselves out and made music by number? Or what about emiminem without the manufactured controversy?
Then there are bands that forgot how they got big because of piracy(metallica-bootleg tapes mainly).

The music scene today is a total joke. With or without online file sharing, the music industries sales would still have dropped over the past few years. That is what they can't see and why their sales are not improving.
Posted by Bill Dautrive (1179 comments )
Link Flag
SUPPORT YOUR ARTISTS, NOT YOUR GREED
The artists have alway suffered, and you only want an excuse to
make them suffer more.
Posted by Thomas, David (1947 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Artists need protection from record companies
David,

While I respect your point of view, you need to take a better look at your facts. Most artists revcieve very minimal returns from the record companies. They usually sign for a small amount of money, and are expected to cover most of all expenses out of their percentage of sales. The ones making tons of money are the record companies (And the few artists that had enough money and good fortune to self-manage like Metallica.. although I will say after their tirade with Napster I never listened or purchased another Metallica song). Ask yourself why a product that is mass-produced like a CD has cost $19-$22 for the last 11 YEARS?? Its unit cost is closer to $0.13. How many artists end up struggling while the recording companies drop them for the next big thing. You want to protect the Artist.. support change that puts the rewards from their music back to them.. instead of making a select rich bunch of hollywood morons fatter.
Posted by (55 comments )
Link Flag
Ignorant Headline
C|NET continues to slip towards National Enquirer-esque headlines again. The DRM is not hacked. So you're tapping the sound card to capture the music in real-time. Big deal. That is not "hacked." For the headline to be accurate, there would be a program you can use to make the WMA files freely redistributable.

Please up the effort towards accurate headlines.
Posted by (3 comments )
Reply Link Flag
CNET you are WEAK for contiinuing to run this story
WHY DIDN'T YOU GIVE QTFAIRUse this much coverage. It completely strips the DRM from iTunes Files.

Weak.
Posted by streamOG (134 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Missing the point...
You still have to buy the iTunes song or album, and you have to
have the DRM key on your machine for it to work. I couldn't just
steal someone's files and then clean them of DRM.

In Napster's case you just sign up with the trial period, download
any number of songs and rip them. You cancel subscription and
sign up again with a different user name. You could do this to
get free songs - with iTunes you buy the song and then can
remove the DRM if you so desire.
Posted by zarathustra911 (35 comments )
Link Flag
chill...
Yeah, cause we all know how much News.com LOVES Apple....


Not.
Posted by (54 comments )
Reply Link Flag
p2p manifesto
p2p manifesto

we the people reserve the right to subvert capitalism for the peoples common good. we recognize that our actions are deemed illegal by an arbitrary government. we revoke said authority and persist in our natural glory. our goal of chaotic determinism aims to break the agents of property not the celebrated originators of information. we salute the originators and ask for sanction in bountiful times. we shed not a tear for those who fail our side. yet our intention is not to cause suffering but to exercise our souls in freedom. our world is abundant and we rebuff the system that imposes artificial scarcity. we hail evolution and have faith that our pursuits will cultivate wise change. we prevail in our union of democratic communication ever vigilant of our equal tendencies toward corrupt amoral systems and the peoples will.
Posted by (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
p2p manifesto1
p2p manifesto

we the people reserve the right to subvert capitalism for the peoples common good. we recognize that our actions are deemed illegal by an arbitrary government. we revoke said authority and persist in our natural glory. our goal of chaotic determinism aims to break the agents of property not the celebrated originators of information. we salute the originators and ask for sanction in bountiful times. we shed not a tear for those who fail our side. yet our intention is not to cause suffering but to exercise our souls in freedom. our world is abundant and we rebuff the system that imposes artificial scarcity. we hail evolution and have faith that our pursuits will cultivate wise change. we prevail in our union of democratic communication ever vigilant of our equal tendencies toward corrupt amoral systems and the peoples will.
Posted by (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Music downloads!!! YES!!!!
We used to record songs on cassettes off the radio for personal use...still can. We recorded movies off the T.V. ...still can. I own over 1000 record albums and have purchased over 200 CDS. I would like to be able to download the songs on my albums so I can listen to them in my car etc for my own personal use. I already have purchased the albums so why do I have to pay again to Burn CDS of the same songs. Doesn't seem right to me. We're truly getting ripped off.
Posted by (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
I AGREEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think that misic should BE FREE !!!!!!
Posted by 11kitr (1 comment )
Link Flag
great
Posted by christopherdylan (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
 

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot

Discussions

Shared

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.