eMusic selling DRM-free Random House audiobooks
Random House and eMusic have begun to sell DRM-free audiobooks on their site. This is pretty big news, since iTunes has an exclusive deal with Audible for ebooks, and Audible won't sell non-DRM ebooks (though they have other non-DRM products), even when the author doesn't want any DRM. I wonder if Random House will buy audio rights from authors who refuse to allow their works to be released with DRM on iTunes, though.
Back when i still used a Mac, I bought tons of Audible books -- thousands of dollars' worth. When I switched to Linux, those books were the hardest part of my switch. I had to re-encode each one as an MP3 by playing it back while running AudioHijack, which took almost a month, using two Powerbooks at once.
So these days, I buy most of my audiobooks on CD and rip them, then give away the discs to charity, which is kind of a pain in the ass, but it beats the alternative. Nice to know I can buy some titles from eMusic (though I'm still bummed that none of the major audiobook publshers will do DRM-free releases and that Apple won't allow non-DRM audiobook publishers to sell through the iTunes store). Link (Thanks, Ben!)
the latest
latest episodes
I thought this was a great new service, too, until I spent 15 minutes searching the site in vain to find what the subscription price is and what you get for that price. And beware- in clicking around trying to find this info, I apparently signed up for the service (and its $19.99 monthly fee) without any type of notice, confirmation, or verification that I wished to sign up.
I'm generally a huge fan of e-music, but this felt like a tricky ambush move on their part!
I put up with audibles drm for a simple reason. they're a great deal. my subscription was 20 something a month, and i got two audio books. I always found long books i was interested in, like stephen kings dark tower series. it was much cheaper than getting them on itunes or on cd.
On top of that the deal i signed on for got me a free ipod shuffle, so if you took the cost of the shuffle out i paid like 30 bucks or so for 12 audio books.
I let my subscription go month to month till i had simply too much stuff i hadn't listened to, then i cancelled. I'll definitely consider rejoining when i've caught up.
The DRM hasn't been a pain in the ass, and if i've wanted to share something i audiohijacked it. audible also lets you burn to audio cd.
"So these days, I buy most of my audiobooks on CD and rip them, then give away the discs to charity, which is kind of a pain in the ass, but it beats the alternative."
By giving the disks away after you rip them, doesn't that transfer any rights to the ripped files to the charity also? Or do you give the CDs to the charity after you're done listening to the files (and delete the files).
I don't see any issues with using ripped CDs as long as you still own the original but, just like you can't read a book after you've given it away, you shouldn't listen to an audiobook after you've given it away.
This is the same as people who buy CDs (new or used) and then sell them to a used CD store after ripping the tracks.
So, what do you propose doing with the discs? Landfill them? Store them forever?
Cory: I think storing them forever is the point, that way no one else can get them, at least in theory, cause no one has laptops that they can bring to your house and rip your CDs with, right? That's just one more example of the stupidity of the current copyright law.
We've seriously at the point where the current copyright laws need to be scrapped entirely and re-written to fit in with current realities, but how likely is that?
What a useless site. I have to pay a monthly fee (and they hide the fee itself pretty well), and use their software to download anything. I just want a site that charges me $x per book, and lets me download a zip file of MP3s.
Till then, I'll just keep using my local library and ripping the CDs.
This is great news... I own an iAudio mp3player. And they don't have a codec for Audible.com products. But if this is a success for Random House, then I hope more publishers will follow.
E-music is looking better, this way. :)
That's wonderful news. Too bad I can't seem to find the pricing of this service. The help section isn't exactly clear on that. In fact it isn't mentioned anywhere on the site.
I'm not signing up before the pricing/subscription scheme is made public.
It seems like pricing (though I too had to sign up via my current eMusic account) and it signed me up at $9.99/month for one audiobook, and I could upgrade to $19.99 for two (eMusic Audiobook Plus). And there's also the annual subscriptions, which offer a discount, but I couldn't get to those until I'd already signed up...
I'm not overly impressed with how that was done, but I may try out the service for awhile. I like audiobooks, and I'm glad they're DRM free. I've avoided audiobooks on iTunes due to the DRM.
You state that Audible has an exclusive ebook contract with Apple iTunes and that they (Audible) are the ones who refuse to allow authors to sell DRM-free ebooks through their network. You then go on to bash Apple for failing to allow DRM-free ebooks on iTunes. Seems to me like Apple is just abiding by the contract they already have with Audible. I am sure Apple would be willing to sell DRM-free ebooks or video (just as they have with music) at the point that it would not violate their contract.
It just makes you sound like a bitter person with an ax to grind to blame Apple for Audible's shortcomings. Judge Apple on their actions when the Audible contract comes up for renewal. I bet they use their market leverage to remove the exclusivity clause and allow a DRM-free ebook vendor to pressure Audible.
@Cory w/ respect to posts 3,4,5
Yes, landfill them (after destroying them so that no one else can use it) but also write an angry letter to the manufacturer stating that you would buy more and pollute less by allowing the product to be downloaded, and use the appropriate channels to lobby to get things towards the state you would like them to be in.
What you are doing is illegal but so nice as to not get yelled at for doing it. I can't buy a CD rip it, then sell the CD and still listen to the music. Just like I can't download the music, burn it, and then sell/give away the copy, it wouldn't be right, and you should know better.
"So, what do you propose doing with the discs? Landfill them? Store them forever?"
I'd expect you to respect the license/copyright of the work in the same way you expect others to respect the license/copyright of your own works.
If the work was under a license that allowed you to make a copy and then resell/give away the original, I'd say what you were doing was fine. Since the works are probably not under that sort of license, what you're doing is probably not lawful and also not very ethical.
What's wrong with hanging onto the original CDs until you've listened to the audiobook and then, after deleting the rip, giving the CDs away?
I assume that you'd be pretty upset if the reverse happened and someone took one of your CC-licensed books and wrapped it up with copy-restricting DRM before giving it to his friends?
Basically, if you aren't respecting the rights/desires of other copyright holders why would you expect them to respect your rights/desires?
Let me get this straight. You think that people who want to own MP3s that are only available by ripping CDs have a moral and legal duty to buy the CD, rip it and store it forever? And that people who don't want to store it forever should put a piece of plastic that won't biodegrade for millennia into the waste stream? And that the alternative is to not buy music or delete your music when you give away the discs? (and that we should resolve this conundrum by writing sternly worded letters!)
I'm already paying in excess of $7,000/year for storage lockers in three countries. You're out of your mind if you think I'm going to store more junk.
And as to "respecting licensing terms" -- I never signed a license agreement. I'm not a licensee. I'm a purchaser. You're making recourse to licensing law when you should be thinking about first sale, exhaustion and other property doctrines.
The analogy to taking my works and adding DRM to them in order to share them is so incoherent that I can't begin to respond to it, except to point out the risible lengths you've had to stretch your analogy to -- you don't add DRM in order to share things. Might as well as how I'd feel if someone laser-etched my books on the moon in order to give me lung cancer? Um, I'd be opposed to it -- you got me!
CDs can be recycled. A quick search on google will give you lots of options. Also, I believe the first sale doctrine states that you may keep backups or copies for personal use only so long as you own the original work.
Hopefully the folks at Random House are reading this thread, because I just wanted to say: strong work. I've only ever bought a couple of audio books on iTunes, but I recently became an eMusic subscriber. Now I can get audio books there too--super cool.
Yeah, Cory, that isn't right. Thank god the comment system is back so we can give you feedback when you edge too far. This is too far.
When I sell a CD, I delete the tracks from iTunes. It isn't fair otherwise.
Just because you make a living off of being a pundit who is also an author doesn't mean that everyone else does. As screwed up as the system is, it's still not right to copy and distribute. People deserve their royalty checks (no matter how small). If your copy, the CD copy, and however many copies that spawns are being used simultaneously, you're not spreading the word, you're spreading the work. And you, of all people, should know better.
I see. Home taping is killing music.
Also: better for the audiobook industry that people should boycott it, rather than ripping the CDs and giving them away to charity afterwards...
@cory
Giving the CD away to charity doesn't prevent it from going to the landfill it just keeps it out of the landfill for a few years (Think offsets, except instead of driving villagers in some African country out of their homes, burning them to the ground and then planting trees, you're getting someone else to store the CD on its inevitable journey to the bin, CONGRATULATIONS YOU'RE NOW A BETTER PERSON)
You talk about giving it away to charity because that's 'noble', but what prevents the charity from selling it? That the proceeds of some illegal action go to charity doesn't make it right.
Could I make a website where I would 'loan' a copy of an audio book out to whoever wanted it? and would it go too far if I where to only 'loan' it to the person while their download of a digital copy was in progress? I could make one hell of an ad sponsored web page!
What would be wrong with this setup? I would ensure that only one person could be downloading per physical item at a time... I know your not a lawyer but come on... does it matter that I'm the one making the copy? How about I claim that I'm loaning the whole computer to the person while the copy is being made? What percent of the ad money should go to charity to make this noble?
Colin Scroggins wrote "Judge Apple on their actions when the Audible contract comes up for renewal. I bet they use their market leverage to remove the exclusivity clause and allow a DRM-free ebook vendor to pressure Audible."
The exclusive contract with Audible has with itunes was up for renewal last year. It was renewed until 2010 (with no substantial access changes).
Apple is absolutely abiding by their contract. Last year Apple sent a notification to independent recording company "Conquer The World records" stating that their spoken word category albums, that were previously listed in iTunes directory were 'unacceptable and would be pulled from distribution.' They were pulled. It seems that shortly after SFFaudio.com posted about Conquer The World's and iTunes the Audible.com legal department complained to Apple. Apple then told CTW that their spoken word productions violate the Apple/iTunes contract and they pulled all the audiobooks provided by CTW. We knew the contract between Audible and Apple required that all audiobooks on iTunes go through Audible.com but why have a Spoken Word category at all if it audiobooks don't count?
This looks suspiciously like a classic anti-trust situation:
1. Non-iTunes audiobooks are impoverished by iTunes software: Audiobooks loaded manually onto iPods lack the available bookmarking features that audiobooks purchased on iTunes have - that is, the EXTREMELY USEFUL functionalities that are built into your iPod are RESTRICTED when you don't purchase your audiobooks through iTunes. Any MP3-CDs, CD's ripped to MP3 or MP3 native audiobooks will not have necessary features (though they can be laboriously converted).
2. A disincentive to buy from anyone other than iTunes: The bookmarking features aren't only available because iTunes purchased audiobooks are DRM protected, quite the contrary! The DRM free MP3 podcast files on your iPod have the bookmarking features! All apple need do is flip a line of code here. Some might call this crippleware.
3. Worse, the iTunes/iPod audiobook market is at the mercy of the audible.com/iTunes exclusive contract. If Audible won't stock it, iTunes can't stock it. In my personal, non-lawyerly opinion, this constitutes a "restraint of trade."
Last year I was hopeful that the original iTunes/Audible.com contract would either be modified (to the extent that it allows audiobook publishers to independently negotiate sales through iTunes) or have the exclusive contract canceled altogether. It wasn't. This isn't cool folks. The situation is analogous to living in a small town with a Walmart that won't stock certain movies, and then having the Ford F150 that you drive to get your consumer goods not be able to start if the destination isn't Walmart. Even if Apple won't enable the features found in every ipod they should as at the very least allow independent audiobook publishers to negotiate sales through iTunes, just like independent music publishers can with music.
i have two words: Local Library.
Wait a second. There is no legal problem with the charity selling or not selling the CDs. We still have the legal right to sell used CDs to music shops, and music shops still have the legal right to sell used CDs.
Cory is donating the original, purchased materials - not ripped copies. He has the right to dispose of these as he wishes, and he has chosen to do so in a considerate manner.
There may be copies of the material on his harddrive. He is not distributing ripped copies, and he is not profiting from owning a ripped copy. Yes, owning a personal ripped copy while disposing of the original may be contrary to the EULA - which he only entered into by buying a legal copy instead of downloading someone else' rip. But that's Cory's legal issue. It has no effect on the charity.
Personally, I can see the argument that copyright holders have against those who distribute or download rips, as there are financial interests possibly being damaged. But I personally can't grasp the argument against keeping a personal copy after disposing of a legally purchased original item. How does one propose enforcing this? Do we register the entire contents of our harddrives and all other data storage to an overseeing body? Truly scary.
As for the donation only keeping them out of the landfill a little longer, unless Cory is immortal (Is there something you're not telling us, Mr. Doctorow?), they will eventually require disposal.
I think there are good points on both sides of this. Maybe Cory could get someone from the EFF to give some insight?
All of this talk about licensing makes me think about new avenues for licensing...
How long until you're licensing your house from the builder who's intellectual property is the design of your home, and any changes you wish you to make to the design have to be run through the builder first. Yes, yes, home owners associations blah blah blah
Or, your car's design is licensed and you have to talk to Honda before you put that spoiler on.
Or maybe, Tiger Woods trademarks his swing and you have send money to him when you try to emulate what he's doing on the golf course.
Doesn't licensing have to end somewhere?
Once I purchase a CD, the contents are mine to do what I please as long as I'm not trying to make money off of it. If I want to have ten copies at home I should be allowed, just as if I'm allowed to photocopy the contents of a book for a paper or article and keep the archived copies even if the source materials exists somewhere else (i.e., the library)...or are the lot of you arguing against Cory going to say that we should all go out and purchase copies of the book every time we wish to reference it? Why should it be different between a book and a CD? And don't start yammering about ease of copy. I've seen plenty of OCR machines that could download the contents of books in mere minutes. Why is one type of intellectual property somehow magically licensed while the other is not?
@deweyeyed #22
Cory is giving the original away (or selling it, which is the same thing) and keeping the digital copy for use. The continued use of the copy after the origonal has been sold/given away is against copyright law (and if there is some loophole it should be plugged). There is no EULA needed for this to be wrong, he is copying a work, which he owns so it's fine, and then selling that work and keeping his copy (which is/should be against copyright law) This is just like renting a DVD and keeping a copy of it forever.
@Maurice Reeves #24
"If I want to have ten copies at home I should be allowed, just as if I'm allowed to photocopy the contents of a book for a paper or article and keep the archived copies even if the source materials exists somewhere else (i.e., the library)...or are the lot of you arguing against Cory going to say that we should all go out and purchase copies of the book every time we wish to reference it? Why should it be different between a book and a CD?"
If you want to make 10 copies of something you own, that's fine, you absolutely can do that while you still 'own' the original (selling, giving it away, or while its on loan to someone else means you don't 'own' it anymore). If you borrow a book from the library and copy more then fair use to be used after you have returned the book then you are infringing on the copyright of the book (note: copyright, not EULA).
If you copy more then 'fair use' would allow and if its taken to court when you 'reference' something then you're infringing on the copyright. Think of it like this: If you buy the new harry potter book, which is still protected by copyright , and proceed to write a book that is a character named Maurice saying *insert whole text of the new harry potter book* and then sell that book over and over again, you are breaking copyright law.