Would have loved for this to have a more expensive option so we can finally get Napster/Zune/Spotify-style jukebox subscription.
One More Thing: ‘iTunes Match’ Will Upgrade Your Ripped Music For $24.99 A Year
61–70 of 106 posts
Re: One More Thing: ‘iTunes Match’ Will Upgrade Your Ripped Music For $24.99 A Year
#62Let me correct the title for you ' One More Thing: ‘iTunes Match’ Will DOWNGRADE Your Ripped Music For $24.99 A Year'. There much better. I have my music ripped if VBR at low compression and FLAC. Clearly, itunes isn't dishing out nearly the same quality Music in return
Please provide double-blind test results showing you can distinguish between FLAC and an iTunes Store copy.
Re: One More Thing: ‘iTunes Match’ Will Upgrade Your Ripped Music For $24.99 A Year
#63This is a treasure trove of marketing information. Apple will know your entire library and what you are listening to and when. Not exactly a privacy concern, but its something they can potentially make money off of somehow.
Re: One More Thing: ‘iTunes Match’ Will Upgrade Your Ripped Music For $24.99 A Year
#64iTunes Match premise: Once a pirate, not always a pirate. Pirates are willing to pay $25 / yr for legit 256 kbps AAC tracks of stuff they already have? And you must keep paying $25/yr in perpetuity for access to these tracks?
It lets you redownload them in 256 Kbps AAC with no DRM. How can it make you keep paying to retain access?
Re: One More Thing: ‘iTunes Match’ Will Upgrade Your Ripped Music For $24.99 A Year
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's what I don't understand about your (and a lot of people's, I don't mean to pick on you) comments, please help me understand this: Pirated files are not necessarily identifiable as such, not in the digital world. If I download some albums from what.cd, you can't tell they're pirated, maybe I ripped them with the exact same version of LAME. What I'm trying to say is that today, having a pirated file isn't a prop…
Once you have a receipt from Apple for the music, you have proof of ownership. If you accidentally lost the CD between then and the time you get your PC taken away for discovery in a copyright infringement lawsuit, that's plausible deniability. At least, way more so than just having 2TB of MP3s laying around with no media you ripped them from at all...
The reality here seems to be, people don't get busted for the 2TB of unlawful music they keep on their hard drives. They get busted for the gigabytes of music they actively transmit on P2P networks. So while this is a valid geek conundrum, it may not be of any practical import.
Re: One More Thing: ‘iTunes Match’ Will Upgrade Your Ripped Music For $24.99 A Year
#66Let me correct the title for you ' One More Thing: ‘iTunes Match’ Will DOWNGRADE Your Ripped Music For $24.99 A Year'. There much better. I have my music ripped if VBR at low compression and FLAC. Clearly, itunes isn't dishing out nearly the same quality Music in return
You do realize you're the exception, right?
Re: One More Thing: ‘iTunes Match’ Will Upgrade Your Ripped Music For $24.99 A Year
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
Once you have a receipt from Apple for the music, you have proof of ownership. If you accidentally lost the CD between then and the time you get your PC taken away for discovery in a copyright infringement lawsuit, that's plausible deniability. At least, way more so than just having 2TB of MP3s laying around with no media you ripped them from at all...
Not really. Once you have a receipt from Apple, you have documentation that you used Apple's transcoding service. If you accidentally lost 2TB worth of CDs between that time and the seizure of your PC, you're still going to have some explaining to do.
It would be like presuming guilt, you don't have to prove those mp3s are legal they have to prove that you stole them. Also having mp3s isn't the same as distributing mp3s. tptacek is right I believe. As far as I understand it, every p2p case has been about distribution or suspicion of distribution (make available argument). And they have to have a reason to come scan your computer. Hence why I won't be using this "scan and buy" service, the scan part is dumb.
Also as far as I know all my Amazon MP3 are identical to other users Amazon MP3 I don't think they have watermarks. How could you tell if they were mine or taken from someone.
Re: One More Thing: ‘iTunes Match’ Will Upgrade Your Ripped Music For $24.99 A Year
#68Let me correct the title for you ' One More Thing: ‘iTunes Match’ Will DOWNGRADE Your Ripped Music For $24.99 A Year'. There much better. I have my music ripped if VBR at low compression and FLAC. Clearly, itunes isn't dishing out nearly the same quality Music in return
Please provide double-blind test results showing you can distinguish between FLAC and an iTunes Store copy.
There are other reasons for using lossless audio files, such as archiving, and avoiding degradation through re-encoding.
Re: One More Thing: ‘iTunes Match’ Will Upgrade Your Ripped Music For $24.99 A Year
#69iTunes Match premise: Once a pirate, not always a pirate. Pirates are willing to pay $25 / yr for legit 256 kbps AAC tracks of stuff they already have? And you must keep paying $25/yr in perpetuity for access to these tracks?
So Apple’s basically betting you’ll pay $25 a year to legalize all your content[…] I really don't like the part about legalizing my collection. The music I ripped and encoded myself from hundreds of CDs that I bought retail are just as legal as tracks from iTunes.
Your music is already legal. Not sure what you don't like about the "legalizing" aspect, as it doesn't pertain to you.
iTunes Match sounds like a way for the labels to get finally get income from the music pirates who torrent stuff off of Pirate Bay. A share of the $25/year is better than the $0/year they're currently seeing.
Re: One More Thing: ‘iTunes Match’ Will Upgrade Your Ripped Music For $24.99 A Year
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm guessing that they're going to use an audio hash to look at the file and determine what song it is. It's probably more reliable than using ID3 tags which might get mixed up (especially around remixes, live versions, or just generally missing information). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hash_function#Finding_similar_r...
If the audio hash & protocol gets reverse-engineered, though, it'll make filesharing very quick--- instead of having to trade mp3s, you can just email your friend a list of hashes.
I'm not sure how that would work, for the hash to be the same you would need the original song right? If they use sha1 or something like that how are you going to go from hash to song?