Ubuntu One Music Store Follows You Home
The new version of Ubuntu includes integration with the 7digital.com music store. No longer do open source users have to rely on proprietary applications like iTunes. They can now purchase good-quality music using only free software.
Like most other online music stores today, 7digital sells non-proprietary, but patent-encumbered MP3 files. This is leaps and bounds better than the DRM-laden files which used to be sold by stores like Amazon and iTunes.
And while there is a bug which discusses some of the issues surrounding relying on a patent-encumbered format, rather than something free like Vorbis, there is one critical issue that free software users are not debating.
Allow me to demonstrate by quoting from the 7digital.com Terms and Conditions:
(i) You are authorized to use the Content only for personal, non-commercial use, and not for redistribution, transfer, assignment or sublicense, to the extent permitted by law.
So, unlike a traditional CD you buy at the store, you are contractually agreeing not to lend it to your friend, donate it to your library, or when you’re tired of it, throw it up on eBay for sale. In short, it makes it a breach of contract to share your music or even to sell it when you’re you have outgrown it or lost your job.
The Terms and Conditions continue:
(ii) You are authorized to use the Content on up to five authorized devices at any time. 7 reserves the right to limit the number of authorized devices further and the number of authorized downloads to comply with the wishes of its licensors.
And there we have the DRM. The difference here is that it is implemented in a contract, not in technology.
And just when you thought it might be over, they throw in this little gem:
(iii) You may not use Content as a musical “ringer” in connection with mobile phone calls.
Take all the fun away, why don’t you.
Ubuntu certainly isn’t the only one guilty of implementing the DRM through a contract rather than technology, but honestly, I hoped for better from a distribution that espouses to be freedom-focused.
If the free software community can accept this, what hope do we have for retaining the rights under U.S. copyright law that we have enjoyed for so long? If we contractually give up those rights on music, video and most importantly, books, what does that say for the future of the independent after-markets, fair use and archival?
That is my eternel question: Why not Vorbis?
Ok, no technologic DRM is fine, but limits inside the Contract is not the best option; if you’re using a free (as in freedom) OS, you expect ALL coming from it has the same licenses…
Greetings!
JaD!
That first snippet is analogous to the copyright on most CD’s. You don’t own the music on a CD when you buy it but rather it is licensed to you by the record label for your private use. Same thing with most DVDs. It is illegal to make a copy of a CD for a friend just like a digital file.
Furthermore, if these restrictions were not in place the store would have trouble securing content from anyone but the tiniest indie labels and the selection would suck.
Just because the software that sells you an album is free doesn’t mean the album is free. This argument is like getting upset that you have to pay for things on an online store just because you are browsing that store on Firefox in Ubuntu.
“if you’re using a free (as in freedom) OS, you expect ALL coming from it has the same licenses…” This is a naive expectation.
Jason,
First, I would like to thank you for taking the time to comment. I’d like to respond to your thoughtful insights below:
You’re right that I don’t own the music on the CD or DVD, but I disagree that it is licensed to me to use. It’s no more a license for me to use than there is a license for the artwork on my wall. Of course the RIAA would like to have you believe there is a license, like there is with most software, but the fact is that licenses are contracts. Contracts are voluntary agreements that are entered into between two or more parties with an exchange of value. I have never agreed to any contractual terms when i bought, opened or played a CD or DVD, therefore, what’s left? Simple copyright law. And copyright law allows for a balance of rights. You’re right that I can’t make a copy and give it to my friend, as I didn’t suggest that. That’s covered under the first-sale doctrine. But I can lend, give it or sell it to my friend without the copyright holder’s permission.
As to your point about the restrictions being in place and having trouble securing the content, I think you’re right. The record labels are doing what they can to contract away rights we previously enjoyed. They would like nothing more than to destroy the aftermarket so they can maintain a hold. They tried DRM and when that didn’t work, they resorted to contract law.
Finally, I think you are confusing my use of the word free with the common use. I am using free in the context that free software is often defined in–that is, freedom. I pay for stuff all the time and am happy to pay for quality goods. But when an OS who purports the ideals of freedom integrates a way for users to contract them away, without so much as a warning about what is happening, I think that is cause for concern.