Next on their list are blank DVD/CD manufacturers, the people who make CD wallets and God, because with God all things are possible.

Because, Dixon, artists aren't getting anything - just the record labels.

And they're being ridiculous. The technology quite clearly has other uses. Should record companies get cuts from ISPs because the Internet is used for sharing music?

They can't seriously ask for royalties because of what *could* happen; that's retarded. Haven't they learned from all the lawsuits record labels have lost because the software they were going after didn't actually do anything illegal themselves?

I don't know much about the subject, but I guess its possible that Microsoft decided to settle on $1/$250 royalties because that will cost them less than using their lawyers to go against Universal.

I'm just saying, anything that will get rid of even the smallest amount of drama usually associated with downloading music is fine by me.

Besides, when was music about the money? I thought it was about putting your mind and soul out there, for the world to see! Kinda like artistic expression =P

MP3s don't even yield the highest quality music. FLAC is a far superior way of ripping music, but of course the trendy iPod appeases the masses.

This is ridiculous considering that the better artists don't tend to get a lot of CD sales anyway; the artists end up making most of their money performing live. If universal wants royalties they should only accept the highest quality music because as it stands now about 99% of music produced is garbage.

Or, if Jobs doesn't tell them to shove it, hopefully it'll mean that it's totally legal to pirate music to put on an iPod, since you've already payed for it in a sense.

In Canada, there's a tax on all blank media that the courts have interpreted makes it totally legal to download music.

Dixon wrote:

It kinda makes sense, if artists start getting money from Blank CDs and/or MP3 Players its not like its really wrong. These items are mainly used for stolen music, why not let them get payed a little?

I use blank CDs and DVDs constantly for non-pirating purposes. I own every album on my iPod. There are a few single tracks on my PC that I've downloaded and haven't brought but either A) they're impossible to find in stores (up until recently I haven't been able to shop online), or B) I don't listen to them at all. Oh wait, I do have a few bootleg concerts on there, but again while I'm willing to pay it's simply impossible to get to them any other way.
I'm all for anti-piracy systems even when they inconvenience me but I'm not going to pay Universal for something they had no involvement in simply because they assume I'm going to commit a crime against them.
By setting the price at $1 from every sale they're openly admitting that the plan has nothing to do with piracy and everything to do with wanting a cut.

I probably wouldn't have anything against a similar system provided it made sense. Right now it's just 'people pirate music, people play music on iPods, give us money'. Nothing is solved, they're just trying to make anyone they can cover the cost of piracy.

I can't stress enough that my anger isn't coming from the fact I don't want to pay more, it's coming from the fact that the this idea attacks an innocent party just because they can't solve the real problem (heck, I'd even consider Microsoft innocent here =P).

I really hope Apple tells them to piss off, then donates $5 from every iPod sold to charity just to emphasize it wasn't about the money at all.