Social Media

Wal-Mart Tells DRM-Infected Music Downloaders to Burn it or be Gone!


Just twelve days into the future (Oct 9), people silly enough to think that a megalith retailer like Wal-Mart couldn’t sustain a DRM server for folks who opted to purchase music through its website laden with copyright protection software (that it was quite willing to adopt to appease RIAA members’ fears before it pledged seasons ago to do without such burdensome locks) will have to regard those transactions from years past as money not well spent.

All is not lost, however. So long as you have in your possession recordable audio disc with which to “back up” your DRM-infused media, you can retain the freedom to do as you please with your files. Naturally, burning digital copies for safekeeping will degrade the audio quality of your songs somewhat, but that’s not much of an issue. You were likely satisfied enough to purchase subpar recordings from Wal-Mart’s online storefront to begin with, so what’s a little less bitrate for your buck anyway?

Now, Wal-Mart doesn’t insist that you purchase recordable discs from its own shelves, of course. To do so would be tantamount to a near complete abrogation of corporate propriety. But there’s a good chance you did spend (or will do so in the coming weeks) that other bit of cash for that physical media with the same species consumis gigantis. know...there it is.

Boing Boing co-editor and staunch anti-DRM machine Cory Doctorow too exhibited no reservation in poking fun about the news as it broke late this week. He wrote, “Hey suckers! Did you buy DRM music from Wal-Mart instead of downloading MP3s for free from the P2P networks? Well, they're repaying your honesty by taking away your music. ... Boy, the entertainment industry sure makes a good case for ripping them off, huh? Buy your media and risk having it confiscated by a DRM-server shutdown. Take it for free and keep it forever.”

In short, the initial payment was anywhere between $0.88 and $0.99 per track, from which buyers are given the option to pay more (for the discs) to obtain less (lower quality hard copies). Do correct me if I’m wrong, but I think this is precisely why people don’t smile and think happy when the subject of DRM and all the nastiness it entails enters and re-enters and re-re-enters the public conversation. Also, it drives us to revisit the fact that the largest seller of DRM-laden music active on the Web today (Apple), is still forced by manipulative record studios to continue to hawk millions of protected songs each and every day to the consumer class to the (presumed) eventual revolt of people who pay their salaries. Now that’s a recipe for success if there ever was one.

Load Comments

What's New

What's Rising

What's Hot