Free Legal file sharing of music?

Yes, free file sharing. But unless things have changed, you can't listen to the songs more than a few times; LOL. And there are only a handful of compatible portable music players (must have "PlaysForSure" DRM technology from Microsoft.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/23/technology/23qtrax.html?_r=1&scp=4&sq=Qtrax&st=nyt&oref=slogin

Beat me to it Slej, thanx for the update details.

i saw that the DRM junk would be a part of the package, and of course this will be a deal killer for those who want to download just to avoid paying, but for people who want to listen to specific artists or tunes to see if the product is worth buying, this is a step in the right direction. I've been using Pandora to try music that i am interested in but it has restrictions on what you can call up on demand. this will be much better for what i want it for.

i'm sure there will be a 3rd party stream ripper that will enable saving what you want to play on your mp3 player or HD soon to follow.

you mean like radiotracker?

Peter Gabriel has an interesting take on music downloads. I think you get an advertisement at the beginning of the song for the first few weeks and then it goes away and the song is yours. Free.

http://www.we7.com/welcome

Beat me to it Slej, thanx for the update details.

i saw that the DRM junk would be a part of the package, and of course this will be a deal killer for those who want to download just to avoid paying . . .

How about for people who just simply don't support Microsoft? I use Linux and MacOSX, because of a back ground in Unix. While I have had PC's in the past, and probably will in the future, it's always been most important to me to have a player that is compatible with the variety of OS's that I use. To that end, I tend to stick with players that support Ogg files, or that can be hacked to play Ogg files ( http://www.rockbox.org/ )

I'm not interesting in piracy, I'm just interested in having a fully functioning system.

How about for people who just simply don't support Microsoft? I use Linux and MacOSX,
It seems the "player" is mozilla-based (open-source "Songbird"), so if you can use one of those, you should be able to use this. However, it's still Microsoft's DRM, which will be a deal-killer for some.
____

By the way, the company calling this "P2P" is a bit misleading. Qtrax centralizes files that it pulls from the P2P network (built on gnutella), then recodes them with DRM -- and possibly inferior quality due to the lossy nature of MP3, not to mention the questionable source quality.

So Qtrax serves as more than a P2P conduit. You are, in effect, downloading the DRM-laden files directly from them. Which makes the whole P2P aspect not much more than marketing fluff.

Oh, and some of the biggest publishers, Warner, EMI and Universal, are not participating yet, which contradicts the Qtrax press release:
http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/01/warner-were-not-working-with-free-music-service-qtrax-wmg.html

Geez and I thought file sharing was already free?

Sony says it has no agreement either. So, Qtrax has nada.

This part was funny:
EMI Music, Sony BMG and Warner all previously had agreements with Qtrax, which was testing a paid music download service. Sources say those agreements expired in the last year and did not cover the new free, ad-supported model now being promoted by Qtrax.

Something else to ponder: if you d/l Qtrax and open up your existing music files to sharing, aren't you breaking the law? (Short answer: yes.) So Qtrax will take your illegally shared files and make them legal for further sharing via the service, but that does nothing to prevent the RIAA from going after you for the initial illegal sharing. Nice.

the more i read about this, the more it looks like a sting operation.
i think i'll stick with my current method.

Something else to ponder: if you d/l Qtrax and open up your existing music files to sharing, aren't you breaking the law? (Short answer: yes.) So Qtrax will take your illegally shared files and make them legal for further sharing via the service, but that does nothing to prevent the RIAA from going after you for the initial illegal sharing. Nice.

Forgive me for asking but what makes you think this?

Something else to ponder: if you d/l Qtrax and open up your existing music files to sharing, aren't you breaking the law? (Short answer: yes.) So Qtrax will take your illegally shared files and make them legal for further sharing via the service, but that does nothing to prevent the RIAA from going after you for the initial illegal sharing. Nice.

Forgive me for asking but what makes you think this?

Not saying it will happen, just that there's nothing preventing it. But the RIAA has been very clear that just by making your files available for others to download, you are violating the law.

I am by no means an expert on US laws but last I heard RIAA isn't the one to make or change laws. The ones who do will most likly base their opinion on actual laws or precedents instead of what you, me or the RIAA think or want. How about we just wait till the whole show actually starts, or asking someone who actually knows about this kind of stuff, before already judging it based on not much more then guesses fueled by a desire to see things like this fail?

You see, this actually could be a nice thing to happen, if it will work. And like most things it will take some time to get started. IMHO it would be better to either be quiet until there's actually considerably reason to assume big problems will arise or maybe even try your best to make the most of it. Just my two cents. (euro cents, so they're worth about three dollars now :D)

i don't think anyone has a desire to see this fail, i just don't want people to jump into something blindly and open themselves up to unneeded risk.
as to what the laws are, i'm pretty sure slej is correct on his statement about opening up your files (copyright protected) for others.

i think a "wait and see" approach to this would be the best idea

this just in....

http://www.latimes.com/technology/la-fi-qtrax29jan29,1,6460500.story

Qtrax jumped gun on online deal, labels say

Four big music firms say they haven't signed pacts with the service.

By Joseph Menn, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
January 29, 2008

"The executives behind a new music service called Qtrax wanted to get the industry talking. They did -- for the wrong reasons.

Brilliant Technologies Corp., the publicly traded parent company of Qtrax, said Sunday that it had opened the first Napster-like network to feature free music from the four major record labels with their permission. The New York company launched the service during a music-industry conference in Cannes, France, with lavish events including a Qtrax-funded performance by singer James Blunt.

Widespread news coverage sent 61,000 users an hour to the site of Qtrax, which had been working on the file-sharing system for years.

But they came away disappointed: The site didn't work because, although the big four labels had been in negotiations with Qtrax, none said they had actually signed deals authorizing the use of their music.

The premature announcement stunned the music industry and provoked comparisons to dot-com disasters at the turn of the century, when some companies worked harder at throwing good parties than making good products.

"When you launch a service billed as the first legal peer-to-peer, it sets up expectations," said former EMI Group digital executive Ted Cohen, who moderated a panel discussion in Cannes with Qtrax Chief Executive Allan Klepfisz. "It's going to be tough for them to recover from this.""

I am by no means an expert on US laws but last I heard RIAA isn't the one to make or change laws. The ones who do will most likly base their opinion on actual laws or precedents instead of what you, me or the RIAA think or want.

I'm really not sure what you're saying. The legal precedent has already been established by the small number of cases that have gone to court instead of settling. Uploading copyrighted files to a P2P service is illegal. Again, it doesn't seem likely the RIAA would pursue action against someone participating in an industry-supported service, but there are no guarantees.