7digital is named Ubuntu One Music Store

[David D Lowe]

The new music store that is going to be included in Ubuntu 10.04 is called the Ubuntu One Music Store.

I propose that the store be named "7digital music store" because it is more accurate and honest.

The store should not be named after Ubuntu, for these reasons:
1. The music is sold in MP3 format, which is a patent-encumbered format in some jurisdictions. This goes against the Ubuntu philosophy/promise/spirit, which aims at providing working software to all without restriction and for no charge. Furthermore, Ubuntu cannot play MP3 audio by default. Solution: provide music in a free format such as Ogg Vorbis or disassociate the Ubuntu values from the store by renaming it to "7digital music store".

2. The music is sold at a price. Once again, this goes against the Ubuntu philosophy/promise/spirit. Ubuntu's software is always gratis. Why should this not apply to art? Ubuntu has gone out of its way to support free and gratis art , it would be inconsistent to associate the brand with selling music per unit. (Canonical has donated money to the Creative Commons. Every release features a "Free Culture Showcase". I quote Jono Bacon: "At the heart of Ubuntu’s ethos is a belief in showcasing Free Software and Free Culture".) Solution: provide the music for no charge, or disassociate the Ubuntu values from the store by renaming it to "7digital music store".

3. Neither the Ubuntu community or the official Ubuntu sponsor, Canonical, have any control over the Ubuntu One Music Store. This goes against the Ubuntu philosophy/promise/spirit, which encourages contribution and participation of its users to improve Ubuntu. It's also dishonest advertising, in a way. If anyone has any complaint about the music store, for example too small a variety of music or high prices, Ubuntu will be blamed, despite the fact that the Ubuntu community and Canonical have no method of improving the store, only 7digital does. Users expect music stores to be named after the entities that are responsible for them: Microsoft is clearly responsible for the MSN music store, Apple for iTunis, Amazon for the Amazon MP3 store (but not Ubuntu of the Ubuntu One Music Store). Solution: name the store after the company that is responsible for it: 7digital, or create a new store that is entirely under the control of the Ubuntu community.

4. What has Ubuntu One got to do with this music store? Can't Ubuntu One synchronise any DRM-free music, regardless of its source? There is no special relationship between Ubuntu One and the store. Solution: I think you can guess by now :)

I would like to add that I have no objection whatsoever to Canonical pursuing profits, however, it must do so without brandishing the Ubuntu brand on whatever commercial venture it wishes to pursue if that venture violates the Ubuntu philosophy/promise/spirit. It would be nice if the Ubuntu word was only used for things the community is involved in as well, although I realise that the Ubuntu community has no control or legal rights over the trademark.

[Mark Shuttleworth (sabdfl)]

Thank you for the report, I appreciate the calm and reasoned approach taken on what can be a highly emotive subject.

I'd like to respond to the specific points in your report. I'm not going to change the status of the bug for the moment, in order to encourage conversation here. In due course, we'll make a decision and resolve the bug one way or another.

1. On the music format, it's true that in some jurisdictions there are still patents involved in MP3 playback that preclude easy adoption of open source players. But the format is not proprietary in any sense - there are no restrictions on the use of the content, no DRM, no other problems. And MP3 is the de facto standard for digital music. We can certainly ask our partners to recode music in Ogg format, but that's their decision, and it would be based on whether there was sufficient demand for it. Getting lots of people buying music from Ubuntu is the best way to build credibility for the case that EVEN MORE people would buy it in a patent-free format. If you know a better way to make that case to the music industry, please do invest time and energy on that.

2. The music is sold at a price. This does *not* go against the Ubuntu ethos. Ubuntu is not a priceless ecosystem, there are hundreds of companies that offer services and content for a reasonable charge in the Ubuntu ecosystem. We strongly support open content (the Free Culture Showcase is an example) and open source, but we have also been pragmatic from the beginning, with a willingness to include proprietary drivers, but not proprietary apps. We know there are risks in pragmatism, but there are also risks in puritanism :-). We go to some length to have Ubuntu certified for use with proprietary software, from the server to the client, from DB2 to Flash. Most importantly, we are not in the game of telling artists to give their content away for free, though we are glad to help provide distribution mechanisms for those who do, as well as those who sell their work.

3. Community involvement in the store is limited, but think of this as the first iteration. Over time, we will create the ability for alternative content uploads, including content under open licenses like Creative Commons. This is a prototype to see if the idea has legs. If this is an area about which you are passionate, then please to get involved. Ubuntu is not only the set of things purely provided by the community. That is a naive view of the project, and misses the real strength of the willingness of both Canonical, community (and other organisations) to collaborate on Ubuntu. *That combination of strengths* is the unique thing that Ubuntu brings, and therefor is not something we should be blind to.

4. Ubuntu One will enable you to get the music you buy, instantly on any of your Ubuntu One enabled devices. It's not about the store, it's about the way you consume and sync the content.

Mark

[Ryan (ryan-farmer-personal-deactivatedaccount)]

"On the music format, it's true that in some jurisdictions there are still patents involved in MP3 playback."

This hurts EVERYONE living in the United States (and probably billions living elsewhere, I'm not going to pretend to know which countries recognize bad patents for over 20 years). It's frustrating that a non-free format was chosen. What happened to "freedom"?

"no other problems."

I suppose this includes "spyware" hiding in the id3 tags that personally identifies the customer? :)

"And MP3 is the de facto standard for digital music."

Thank you for helping to continue the propagation of this nonsense. It's only popular cause it's popular, and you are helping make it more popular! You know, it may be cliche but I still say "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem."

"We can certainly ask our partners to recode music in Ogg format,"

You mean you've not done this already? ;) That's encouraging.

"Getting lots of people buying music from Ubuntu is the best way to build credibility for the case that EVEN MORE people would buy it in a patent-free format."

So if we welcome our MP3-spewing overlords with flowers, glorious freedom *might* come later? How many billions of dollars worth of non-free crap do we have to buy before this becomes viable?

"If you know a better way to make that case to the music industry, please do invest time and energy on that."

I've invested PLENTY of time and energy on avoiding MP3, looks like I'll continue doing that.

"The music is sold at a price. This does *not* go against the Ubuntu ethos."

I'm not cheap. Please don't assume that, I buy CDs that are more expensive than the Amazon MP3 crap to avoid the horrid, patented, low quality at any bitrate, MP3 format. NOT because I'm cheap. The format is rotten even without DRM or spyware in id3 tags, or patent issues. It's just not technically up to par with Vorbis, not even close. I'm sure this is not news to you.

But while we're on price... Why are LaLa and Amazon and many other MP3 stores consistently less expensive than 7digital?

"We know there are risks in pragmatism"

Pragmatism isn't a bad thing, gratuitously foisting non-free formats, protocols, and software on people is a bad thing.

"Over time, we will create the ability for alternative content uploads, including content under open licenses like Creative Commons."

Jamendo already does this? Magnatune? Why does anyone need an "Ubuntu One" sticker on top of something that already works today? (idle speculation) So it doesn't work with other Linux distributions?

Thanks.

[David D Lowe (flimm)]

Hello Ryan. Could we keep this bug report as civil as possible? You and I may feel quite frustrated with what's happening, but this is not the place to vent. Ranting is just counter-productive.

@Mark Shuttleworth:
Thanks for the quick response. I realise bug reports like this one can get unpleasant very quickly, so the sooner Ubuntu leaders react, the sooner we can close this bug with a minimal amount of in-fighting.

1. I concede that the MP3 format is not proprietary, just patent-encumbered in some jurisdictions. I'll change the bug report to reflect that. I still think it's against the Ubuntu spirit, as some groups of people are not free to play this format without paying the "patent tax". Furthermore, the practical point still stands: Ubuntu can't play MP3 files by default.
I'm puzzled buy your idea that people buying MP3s from an Ubuntu Music Store would accelerate adoption of patent-free formats. If anything, it would do the opposite, as music stores would begin to think that even the Linux crowd don't really need patent-free formats.

2. Charging money for services has never been against the Ubuntu ethos, I agree. I would be even willing to accept that charging money for copies of software or art is not against it. However, wouldn't you say that legally enforcing a charge on all copies of software or art is? It would be illegal for me to share my music downloaded from this store with a friend. How does this square with "humanity to others"?

3. I'm excited about the future of this music store, and I am pleased with the openness Canonical has already put into the music store (the plug-in is open source, multiple players are going to be supported, etc.) But how could I get involved in providing 7digital's music in a patent-free format, for example? The answer is: I couldn't, because 7digital controls the content, the pricing and the format of its music. Not Ubuntu or Canonical or the community (by which I include volunteers and organisations.) (And I realise that 7digital is limited by record labels and artists wishes, but still, they are responsible for their selection of music.)

4. I'm confused. If Ubuntu One is about the way consume and sync the content, why is the music store named after it? The music store doesn't determine the way you consume and sync the content, only the way you obtain the music.

7digital is the main contributor to the music store. It should keep its name on the store, so that responsibility for the store can lie where it is supposed to lie. Ubuntu names things sensibly in other areas: it's "Mozilla Firefox", not "Ubuntu Firefox", it's "Yahoo search", not "Ubuntu search", it's "OpenOffice.org by Sun", not "UbuntuOffice". Why not call 7digital's store what it is?

[Jan Claeys (janc)]

Ryan: if I remember correctly the fluendo MP3 decoder is licensed by Fluendo, so there shouldn't be legal problems to play your music on Ubuntu (as long as you use a gstreamer player ;) ). Of course Vorbis is still technically superior, but...

According to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuOne/MusicStore Canonical did ask for Vorbis & FLAC. Maybe both users asking for songs to be available in those formats as well as labels/artists providing the necessary files for that would help... (Ask your favourite artist?)

The reason for not using Amazon is also listed there: they don't sell downloadable music in most countries, seems like 7digital has at least a limited selection available (almost?) everywhere.

And of course Jamendo & Magnatune are and will remain part of Rhythmbox, no need to use U1MS to get good music... ;)

BTW: I'm sure music stores like 7digital would love to sell vorbis instead of mp3, as they have to pay 2% of their revenue on mp3 sales to the mp3 patent holders...

[Ryan (ryan-farmer-personal-deactivatedaccount)]

"MP3 format is not proprietary."

What is it then if I have to pay money or ask for a license to legally use it? It's not "proprietary" as in "WMA", but it is still a closed format. Instead of calling it what it's not, perhaps we should call it what it is, a closed and patent-encumbered format which needs a patent license for legal use, making it non-free. Being not free, MP3 decoders are also not redistributable. This leaves the user to go grab the free as in beer plug-in themselves. It should be painfully obvious that they are doing something "unpalatable".

"some jurisdictions."

Including the biggest market for the ---- things. :)

"as some groups of people are not free to play this format without paying the "patent tax"."

Even if you use the free as in beer Fluendo decoder, you still have to ASK someone for a PATENT LICENSE to decode files you supposedly "own". What if the English language was patent encumbered and you had to ask someone else to read you your books?

"I'm puzzled buy your idea that people buying MP3s from an Ubuntu Music Store would accelerate adoption of patent-free formats."

I heartily and strongly concur, and would like to see an answer for this one too.

"If anything, it would do the opposite, as music stores would begin to think that even the Linux crowd don't really need patent-free formats."

Bingo. Why should we support Ubuntu One Music Store and show our apathy and contempt for free as in freedom formats that are light years beyond MP3 technically? Some of the senior management at Canonical may not care, but I do. I don't think I'm alone either.

"It would be illegal for me to share my music downloaded from this store with a friend."

That's where the tracking tags and GUIDs in some MP3 stores' MP3 files come in, which is why I call them "spyware". They have no business implanting a GUID in your MP3s and you should use EasyTag to rip them right back out if they do.

Spyware (what these GUID tags are) also goes against the very foundation of FOSS. So does not being able to share, modify, and help your friends (But that's a different problem for a different discussion). I would like assurances to the community that there are no privacy implications involved in the files themselves.

"the plug-in is open source"

"We'll show you how we made the rope to hang yourself with."

"7digital controls the content, the pricing and the format of its music. Not Ubuntu or Canonical or the community... "

Nor anybody really, save the friendly neighborhood SLAPP lawsuit-happy music cartel in your particular area. (RIAA)

Look, I've got no love for the record labels, but we can do something about the bad format. Why not do something about that?

And if I seem frustrated, it's because I am. This is such an affront to FOSS, community standards, and many other things is why.

[Ryan (ryan-farmer-personal-deactivatedaccount)]

Jan: Well, you are paying patent licenses on the files themselves too then, in addition to begging someone to use their decoder. This just makes it worse. I suppose the 2 cents being "built in" makes people unaware of the fact that they must pay a per-file MPEG tax as well.

So in addition to the MPEG kerfuffle, we're now admitting that Americans are screwed on pricing, and most people in most countries have to beg Fluendo for a free as in beer plug-in. Beautiful.

[David D Lowe (flimm)]

@Ryan: there's no evidence that 7digital watermarks or customer-unique tags. Even if they did, the tags would not qualify as "spyware". The MP3s don't magically report your activities to the store. If someone else manages to get this information, the law has been broken at some point (either through your copyright infringement or their intrusion of privacy.)

If anyone else wants to complain about the so-called "spyware" in 7digital's MP3s, could they link to evidence that they do in fact spy on users? Thanks.

[Ryan (ryan-farmer-personal-deactivatedaccount)]

"in some MP3 stores' MP3 files"

I generally believe that affirms that I don't know that they do this but that I don't trust them not to and I'll be "darned" if I'm going to buy one to tear it apart and find out. It's something that people should watch out for given the fact that some stores have done it.

I know iTunes does it, but the AAC container lets them append limitless data onto the file, id3 tags don't go that far. There's about 500 K of tracking data in an iTunes AAC including your account info, IP address, time of download etc. , far more than an id3 tag can even hold, but an id3 tag can still be misused to implant a GUID. That's why I said it would be nice if we could get someone to confirm or deny that they do this. Yes or No would suffice, thank you.

Note that at no point did I imply that an MP3 file can phone home, but having the GUID in the tag is still going too far and does have privacy implications.

[David D Lowe (flimm)]

@Ryan: Well you're welcome to file another bug report.

This bug is about the four objections I mentioned in the description only. These objections concern just the naming of the store. Any other objections belong in another bug report.

(I take what I said at the end of comment #7 back. If anyone has any proof that 7digital's MP3s are watermarked, could they report it in a separate bug report? Thanks.)

[SteVe Cook (yorvyk)]

> The new music store that is going to be included in Ubuntu 10.04 is
> called the Ubuntu One Music Store.

> I propose that the store be named "7digital music store" because it is
> more accurate and honest.

I tend to agree with the above, as it isn’t Ubuntu’s shop it’s 7digital’s
and it would make it clearer who you’re dealing with. After all Jamendo
and Magnatune haven’t been renamed.

I also have a strange vision of Launchpad filling with some very odd Bug
reports:-

XYZ have sold-out with this album.

The production isn’t up to scratch - please remix.

Plus numerous requests for music by 'My Favourite Band' or whoever.

--
Steve

[David D Lowe (flimm)]

When I wrote the bug report I was under the impression that the Fluendo MP3 codecs were not gratis. Apparently, Fluendo now provides it for no charge. It's even included in Ubuntu and Debian's repositories.
The restrictions of the MP3 format are not as bad as I once thought them to be, however, they're still serious enough to be excluded from the default installation of Ubuntu. I still think the Ubuntu brand should not be associated with it.

[Jan Claeys (janc)]

For those complaining about the naming not saying "7digital": according to Wikipedia MSN UK's music store is also just a frontend to OD2/Nokia, and nobody complains that they call it the "MSN UK music store"...

(I'm not 100% happy with Ubuntu One being named Ubuntu One, but that's a discussion from long ago and I doubt that that name will go away now.)

[Alan Pope 🍺🐧🐱 🦄 (popey)]

I have filed the 'watermark' question as a question against the music store:-

https://answers.launchpad.net/rhythmbox-ubuntuone-music-store/+question/102650

It's a bit difficult to test right at this moment. There are only about 12 beta testers and we have all got different musical tastes and some live in different countries/regions, so the chances that two of us have purchased the same track is low.

I had hoped to talk to someone who has purchased a track so that I could buy the same one, and then do some comparative analysis with each person running tools such as:-

sha1sum song.mp3
or
split -b 64K -d song.mp3 tmp. && sha1sum tmp.*

To see if the tracks were the same or not. I have now bought a track that another beta tester has, but unfortunately there's a problem at the backend so I can't download the track until that's fixed.

I think this question will have to wait until Monday, when the system admins and developers are back at work.

[Alan Pope 🍺🐧🐱 🦄 (popey)]

Ok, I just found someone who has downloaded a track from 7digital and I have bought it from U1MS.

20:54:17 <@popey> alan@wopr:~/.ubuntuone/Purchased from Ubuntu One$ sha1sum Amy\ MacDonald/This\ Is\ The\ Life/This\ Is\ The\ Life.mp3
20:54:17 <@popey> b576a6695cce410521c862301f74deeb3ced22e4 Amy MacDonald/This Is The Life/This Is The Life.mp3
20:59:38 <+Dee> [dee@jane Dropbox]$ sha1sum Amy\ MacDonald\ -\ This\ Is\ The\ Life.mp3
20:59:38 <+Dee> b576a6695cce410521c862301f74deeb3ced22e4 Amy MacDonald - This Is The Life.mp3

[Ryan (ryan-farmer-personal-deactivatedaccount)]

Alan: Thank you for addressing that. That takes care of my privacy concerns.

[Sense Egbert Hofstede (sense)]

The Fluendo MP3 decoder is licensed under the MIT license. The binary plugin provided by the website is built from that MIT licensed code, but since the patent fee was paid for this you can use this legally.

Taken from their website:
    "The Fluendo MP3 plug-in project is a combination of multiple things.

    * It is an MIT licensed source code package implementing the MP3 codec.
    * It is a fully licensed binary GStreamer plug-in available for download.
    * It is a redistribution contract allowing distributions to distribute the binary Fluendo GStreamer MP3 plug-in free of charge."

I'm curious about this last bullet point. Does Ubuntu provide this binary GStreamer plugin, or is the plugin compiled from the source?

    "If you are living in a country where the MP3 patents don't apply, you are entitled to use the source code provided by Fluendo (or anyone else) to get legal MP3 support onto your Unix/GNU/Linux desktop.

    In contrast, if you live in a country where patents do apply, or if you are a distribution maker working in countries where the patents apply, you need the licensed binary from Fluendo. If this is the case, please be aware that, even if our binary is made from MIT licensed source code, the resulting binary, combined with our license, is not free software, at least not GPL-compatible. This means that if you ship GStreamer with our binary MP3 plug-in, you need to be sure that you don't ship any GPL-licensed plug-ins that could end up being used together with the MP3 plug-in, as this would be a violation of the GPL. You also need to make sure you don't ship any GPL-licensed players which would use this plug-in.

    Fortunately, most GStreamer plug-ins are LGPL, and many of the playback applications come with licensing terms that allow them to be used with non-free plug-ins. The Totem media player and the Banshee music player are two examples."

Taken from: <http://www.fluendo.com/shop/product/fluendo-mp3-decoder/>.

[papukaija (papukaija)]

About the 2) :"Ubuntu's software is always gratis." - actually Ubuntu is '"Free software" is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of "free" as in "free speech," not as in "free beer." ' Full definition available at http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

[papukaija (papukaija)]

Sense: There seems to be a fluendo package in Ubuntu's repositories.

[Ryan (ryan-farmer-personal-deactivatedaccount)]

The "it's not free software" and "you could be violating the GPL by shipping this" parts sound scary. *shrug*

[Sense Egbert Hofstede (sense)]

@papukaija: I know, I just would like to know if Ubuntu is including a licensed binary, or compiled the code from source.

@Ryan: Please take into consideration that the compiled, licensed binary is not fully free software because of that license. However, that doesn't mean the decoder itself isn't free and gratis.
The binary may not be GPL comaptible, the MIT licensed source is just as GPL compatible as the MIT license is.

[David D Lowe (flimm)]

@papukaija: You missed the Ubuntu promise, which goes beyond FSF's definition of free. I quote: "Ubuntu will always be free of charge, along with its regular enterprise releases and security updates."

[Ryan (ryan-farmer-personal-deactivatedaccount)]

It would be nice to see a choice of MP3 or Ogg. Jamendo does this and I think it would solve the problems of the community once and for all.

The people that need MP3 due to not having a Vorbis-compatible player or who don't care that their freedom to use the file in a time and at a place of their choosing may be superseded by the MPEG-LA groups patents are free to buy that.

People that wish to use a format which does not further restrict their use of the files and/or have Vorbis-compatible players and/or prefer the superior sound quality of Vorbis may choose Vorbis.

Of course I understand that with imaginary property cartels in legal ownership of the entire catalog, it can be difficult to get this stuff done. Jamendo just makes MP3s and Oggs from the lossless source you uploaded at once.

I also understand that supporting two rival formats is not the easy way, but I think in this case it is the way to be ethical and pragmatic at the same time.

[wilsonliam (wilsonliam)]

@David D Lowe:

Well really, the Ubuntu promise from the website is: (Part 4)
"Ubuntu core applications are all free and open source. We want you to use free and open source software, improve it and pass it on"

That's the part that, if any, is most applicable here. And the point is, that while MP3 may be patent encumbered, the songs themselves aren't actually part of Ubuntu's 'Core Applications' - the applications that make up and ship with the default Ubuntu image.

While the store might ship with Ubuntu, the MP3's and MP3 codecs do NOT. They are available from the music and software stores respectively.

Also, while I agree that we should be offered a choice of OGG/FLAC as well as MP3, let's just think about the end-user here, who possibly don't even have an OGG/FLAC compatible device, never mind know what it is. Remember - it's not just for us, it's for everyone else, too.

[Ryan (ryan-farmer-personal-deactivatedaccount)]

@rags: Why leave them uneducated? Tell them about Vorbis. The user should be fully aware of what they're doing before they agree to anything.

There's an awful lot of mainstream hardware out there that understands Vorbis. Obviously if you have anything from Microsoft or Apple, they'll never respect free and open standards and you're just out of luck, MP3s for you. That's why I actively avoid defective hardware that only recognizes MP3, AAC, and WMA.

I do understand that some people may have unwittingly bought such things though, unaware, or not caring what they just did. Again with the MP3 as failback.

[wilsonliam (wilsonliam)]

@Ryan: While I agree that more people should be educated about Open Standards such as Vorbis, we, as people who use and endorse these standards, are a long shot off them becoming mainstream. And while it is true that an increasing number of devices are supporting OGG, the majority of devices do not. And chances are, that a user who is new to or even an existing user of Ubuntu, will have an iPod or other device that doesn't play Vorbis.

Also, the power in this really lies with the record companies that distribute their content on 7Digital. Canonical as a business, is in no way big enough or powerful enough to be in a position to ask record companies or 7Digital to ask for Vorbis content. It's possible that Canonical are lucky enough to have 7Digital as a partner as-is.

It's also worth mentioning that while the downloads from the U1MS will be MP3, that's not to say that there isn't software available that can convert it to OGG. SoundConverter is a very good application at converting audio at high bitrates, to and fro MP3/Vorbis/FLAC/AAC.

[Ryan (ryan-farmer-personal-deactivatedaccount)]

Transcoding an already lossy format to another lossless format is also unacceptable as the quality will not be terrible.

We're back to "You're better off buying the CDs and encoding them to whatever you want." The CDs are only a few more dollars than an MP3 album that sounds nowhere near as good.

[Jan Claeys (janc)]

As I understand it, 7digital sells encoded files as provided by the record company (or other digital music agents) and the provider of those songs has to sign them as "ok".

Maybe because they want to avoid lawsuits in case a song accidentally has weird random encoding artifacts and because of that doesn't sell well or gives the artist a bad reputation... ;)

If you read the FAQ I linked to before, you will see that 7digital also has some .wma tracks in their catalogue (which will be filtered out of the Ubuntu store!), so I'm sure 7digital can cope with multiple formats in their backend, and the presence of .ogg or .flac is most likely (also) dependent on buy-in from the music suppliers...

@rags: it's not entirely exact to say that Canonical is not big enough a company to ask for vorbis-encoded tracks, as the size of Canonical is not really relevant here, but it probably is not powerful enough yet to convince the big companies; they will first have to prove they bring in a lot of customers...

[Guiodic (Guido Iodice) (guido-iodice)]

I have a proposal:

Waiting for 7digital decision about vorbis files, Ubuntu one could convert mp3s to Oggs, eventually server side.
It is not so cpu expensive. To convert an mp3 to ogg takes about 12-14 seconds.

[Martijn Bastiaan (hmb1)]

I apologize in advance for my not well developed English language.

@David D. Lowe
"I'm puzzled buy your idea that people buying MP3s from an Ubuntu Music Store would accelerate adoption of patent-free formats. If anything, it would do the opposite, as music stores would begin to think that even the Linux crowd don't really need patent-free formats."

I think I know what Mark Shuttleworth means by stating that if lots of people would buy patent-encumbered formats, it would accelerate the use of free/gratis formats.

At the moment, Canonical doesn't have influence on 7digital's decisions whether to offer Vorbis or not. However, if the Ubuntu One Music Store would generate a lot of sales and by that; a lot of money for 7digital, it could starting to "demand" free formats. I know this doesn't sound fair, but I think this is how it works.

Am I right Mark?

[Martijn Bastiaan (hmb1)]

@Guiodic:
That's *a lot* of CPU time. If a thousand songs were purchased per second, it would take (1000*14/8) 1750 8-core servers to process all the files.

[wilsonliam (wilsonliam)]

@Martijn Perhaps it could be done on the client side? Perhaps set an option in rhythmbox as to what format they would like to use, such as with ripping a CD?

[Bruce Wagner (bruce-brucewagner)]

Please include a one- button UN-install of the Music Store.

If you don't, we will.

We will never be distributing, nor installing, any copies of Ubuntu containing a proprietary "Music Store"... or any other kind of store.

Make the music store a web site. Make the browser start page take you there.... But building in proprietary Stores, ala Apple, is just distasteful at least, and sickening at wortst.

If we wanted that sort of proprietary corporate profit adware on OUR computers, we'd still be running Microsoft or Apple.

We love Freedom. We love Ubuntu because it works. But we'll be the first to uninstall any proprietary CRAP that gets included, to bitch about it LOUDLY, and to drop Ubuntu entirely if it gets to be too much of a chore to uninstall and delete all such CRAP.

Feeling Betrayed a Bit?

[Daniel Holbach (dholbach)]

Bruce: calm down! This is not the tone we had in this bug report before and it's not the tone we accept generally.

The store is accessed through a plugin in Rhythmbox which can easily be disabled. You have all the freedom you want.

[Martijn Bastiaan (hmb1)]

Bruce: The plugin *not* proprietary. You can access the source here: http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/main/r/rhythmbox-ubuntuone-music-store/rhythmbox-ubuntuone-music-store_0.0.2.orig.tar.gz

[Bruce Wagner (bruce-brucewagner)]

If it only goes to ONE store which is profiting off of Sales. THAT is
proprietary.

If it sells music in MP3 format, that too, is proprietary.

....and a slap in the face to us all.

On Mar 1, 2010 2:30 AM, "Martijn Bastiaan" <email address hidden>
wrote:

Bruce: The plugin *not* proprietary. You can access the source here:
http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/main/r/rhythmbox-ubuntuone-music-
store/rhythmbox-ubuntuone-music-store_0.0.2.orig.tar.gz

--
7digital is named Ubuntu One Music Store
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/528910
You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
of the bug.

[Bruce Wagner (bruce-brucewagner)]

I'm perfectly calm.

Mark, you are one of a very short list of my heros in life.

However, this is a mistake.

If it only goes to ONE store which is profiting off of Sales.  THAT is proprietary.

If it sells music in MP3 format, that too, is proprietary.

..and a slap in the face to us all.

The corporate world would never roll out machines with iTunes pre-installed. This is the same thing, except it's calling itself "free".

It will require itself to be uninstalled. And that is sad.

Even Ubuntu One is proprietary. Is that going to be the trend? ....littering the OS will proprietary, in effect, "adware"...? What's next, "Quicken Lite" preinstalled with desktop icons?

[Daniel Holbach (dholbach)]

> If it only goes to ONE store which is profiting off of Sales.
> THAT is proprietary.

There are multiple plugins for rhythmbox and various "stores" like Ubuntu One, Jamendo and Magnatune. Each plugin with a specific purpose. I can't really see this as anywhere proprietary.

[Christopher Griffiths (chris)]

I believe what Bruce Wagner might be referring to here has already been brought up and that is the fact that the MP3 format is proprietary in itself. Sorry for using wikipedia as a reference but this will show you although I know that most if not all of you will already know this fact: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_format#Currently_proprietary . Regardless, the plugin itself is not proprietary as has been explained however in an ideal world Ubuntu itself should be trying its best to use stores which are able to sell music in the .ogg as well as the .mp3 formats which again has been said before. We'll just have to wait and see what will actually happen regarding this little mess.

[Bruce Wagner (bruce-brucewagner)]

Am I the only one who sees a bit of irony in the fact that Ubuntu, out-of-the-box, cannot play MP3 files. Yet, the Ubuntu OS will sell MP3 files...? :)

I feel that Ubuntu is severely being held back by its inability to fully play media out-of-the-box -- as a consumer would expect it to.

This might be the legal, FOSS, answer to that dilemma:

A friend has created a way to legally distribute all the multimedia codecs, etc., that most users need, want, and are forced to install manually. If they are in a country where these codecs are legal to download, install, and use, then they are free to use this simple little tool. It's called The One Button. It placed a "red button" icon on the desktop. When clicked, the user is given a list of media codecs, players, etc. that it is about to install. If the user agrees, (and agrees that it is the users own legal responsibility to verify the legality of doing so in his own country and jurisdiction), it's all installed in a few seconds. It then asks the user if he'd like it to delete itself... as it will no longer be needed.

Feel free to try it out. It works on any named version of Ubuntu for which medibuntu has codecs for. It is here:
http://brucewagner.posterous.com/omg-this-is-huge-the-one-button-for-ubuntu

[Chad Miller (cmiller)]

'''That's where the tracking tags and GUIDs in some MP3 stores' MP3 files come in, which is why I call them "spyware".'''

There can be no spyware/watermark to track anything back to an individual. Music-store users do not download the files; Canonical does, once. Canonical sends sale notifications upstream, but transfers the data once. User 10-thousand gets the same file that user 1 does.

[Oli (oli)]

Bruce you're not forced or locked into just using the U1MS. You don't like it? Don't use it. Problem fixed.

I think people need to be more conscious that this is a first go at doing something no other free operating system does AFAIK - selling media. People want copyright-restricted media. It would be awesome if everything was CC/GPL but that's not how the world works. The U1MS aims to give people quick, integrated access to music. You don't have to use it (you can buy your music however you like, just as you don't have to use vim) but it's an option for you.

This makes Ubuntu a lot nicer for users that expect an integrated marketplace. They expect to be able to quickly try and buy music/TV/movies/etc because Apple have done a great job on monopolising and spreading it. Again, this feature is arriving because there is clearly huge demand for it.

Format wise, yes, OGG/FLAC would be immense but we're not in a world where 99.9% of devices can play OGG. There's a reason portable digital music devices are popularly called "MP3 players". MP3 rules the market so naturally the "base" format for all commercial non-DRM stores is MP3 (or AAC if your store is heavily linked to a certain fruit-branded device). Canonical can hardly demand that 7digital transcode terabytes of media into OGG at this stage.

And as for the initial point 4 (why is it called U1MS), I'll refer you back to the point that these are early days. I believe (though I cannot say for certain - I'm not a employee of Canonical) 7digital is just the first partner. They don't sell everything and in time it would be best (and most fair) if the U1MS actually sourced its music from multiple vendors, offering people the best prices for media.

I've talked about people here trying to be considerate toward Canonical but I'd just like to ask Canonical to be considerate of its users too. Don't use this as a get rich quick scheme. Open it up to other media vendors other than 7digital so we get the best prices and the widest possible selection of media. You have the possibility to "do iTunes right", that is without the massive lock-in that Apple has its users in. Please don't go exclusive with 7d or you might find vendors writing their own plugins that bypass you completely.

[Bruce Wagner (bruce-brucewagner)]

Since Ubuntu cannot legally play MP3, nor a host of other non-free formats / codecs,..... in the USA,.... what I WOULD love to see the Ubuntu Store sell us: a COMPLETE multimedia license, along with all proprietary codecs, for use LEGALLY within the USA. But it needs to cost $0.99 ........or $3.99 at the very most.

This would help the widespread adoption of Ubuntu on the desktop in this country more than any other single decision / partnership Canonical could make.

The number one complaint from tech reporters and reviewers, time after time, is always the same: media, flash, Java, DVD, MP3, etc.... "don't work"..... out of the box.

The purchase of the $0.99 multimedia license and Installation of all such codecs is so important, it SHOULD be included in the actual INSTALLATION process.

Imagine 100 times more users simply from this one simple change...

And no more "gray areas", legally, for users in Intellectual Property Police States, like USA.

[Sense Egbert Hofstede (sense)]

You can already buy the codecs from the Ubuntu store,
<http://shop.canonical.com/index.php?cPath=19>. However, $0,99 is not
a reasonable price, it is just not doable to sell the license for so
little money. The full playback license costs $39.95.

On 3 March 2010 01:27, Bruce Wagner <email address hidden> wrote:
> Since Ubuntu cannot legally play MP3, nor a host of other non-free
> formats / codecs,..... in the USA,.... what I WOULD love to see the
> Ubuntu Store sell us:  a COMPLETE multimedia license,  along with all
> proprietary codecs, for use LEGALLY within the USA.  But it needs to
> cost $0.99 ........or $3.99 at the very most.
>
> This would help the widespread adoption of Ubuntu on the desktop in this
> country more than any other single decision / partnership Canonical
> could make.
>
> The number one complaint from tech reporters and reviewers, time after
> time, is always the same:  media, flash, Java, DVD, MP3, etc.... "don't
> work"..... out of the box.
>
> The purchase of the $0.99 multimedia license and Installation of all
> such codecs is so important,  it SHOULD be included in the actual
> INSTALLATION process.
>
> Imagine 100 times more users simply from this one simple change...
>
> And no more "gray areas", legally,  for users in Intellectual Property
> Police States, like USA.
>
> --
> 7digital is named Ubuntu One Music Store
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/528910
> You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
> of the bug.
>

--
Sense Hofstede
[ˈsɛn.sə ˈɦɔf.steːdə]

[Jan Claeys (janc)]

Op woensdag 03-03-2010 om 07:30 uur [tijdzone +0000], schreef Sense
Hofstede:
> You can already buy the codecs from the Ubuntu store,
> <http://shop.canonical.com/index.php?cPath=19>. However, $0,99 is not
> a reasonable price, it is just not doable to sell the license for so
> little money. The full playback license costs $39.95.

Actually, the standard license cost[1] for an MP3-decoder seems to be
0.75 USD / unit sold. Of course that doesn't include operational costs
for a webshop, the red tape costs, etc., but less than 5 USD should
certainly be possible?

[1] http://mp3licensing.com/royalty/

--
Jan Claeys

[Oli (oli)]

I agree with Jan. Surely something more reasonable and flexible than Fluendo's mammothly expensive codec packs is possible...

Users should be able to buy patent licenses direct from Canonical. No software has to be written (it's all in non-free anyway), you just need to pass some money along to rights holders and issue the user with a license.

[Marc Belanger (fluffology101)]

It is unfortunate, but reality and good intentions are not necessarily compatible and one of the key concept to humanism is the ability to accept compromises. Isn't Ubuntu about humanistic values - more so than free software, which is but one of the components of these values? I'm happy to use free software, but when I save a "doc" or a "mp3" file, to share it, copy it, send it, etc. I do not feel like I am betraying these values, as I still feel that I do have the ultimate freedom: my ability to choose!

And to me, that's the most fundamental freedom: Choice.

Just as I am presently given the choice to install the Adobe Flash plugin in Firefox, the Nvidia driver for my video card or to use "xls" files in Open Office, I will be given the choice to use the music store or not; where is the difference?

Good intentions, humanism and free software values should not be imposed, nor should they be applied by forcing exclusion in the name of principles or beliefs - dogma is the ultimate humanism killer.

Choice, openness, acceptance and adaptability, Isn't it what Ubuntu is all about? Seen from this angle, it is most likely that a solution (or many!) will emerge in due time and the issues at hand will eventually all be addressed. Because, remember, we have the choice, as a community or individuals, to make it happen!

[David D Lowe (flimm)]

It's been ten days since the bug has been opened. What's the deadline for its closure?

[Alan Pope 🍺🐧🐱 🦄 (popey)]

We don't "close" bugs but mark them with a status that reflects what has happened. These are detailed at the following wiki pages:-

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/HowToTriage/#Actions
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Importance
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Status

[Guiodic (Guido Iodice) (guido-iodice)]

@Martijn Bastiaan: 1000 songs/sec ? You are not youtube, you are not amazon and you are not itunes.
Fly down, please :)

[David D Lowe (flimm)]

After listening to the latest Ubuntu UK podcast, I realised that Ubuntu One (the technology) does have a special relationship with the store. I thought beforehand that music would be downloaded to the customer's computer, uploaded to Ubuntu One's servers and then synced to other computers. Turns out purchased music is transferred to Ubuntu One servers, and then downloaded on every computer connected to that Ubuntu account.

That answers point 4 of the bug report (to my satisfaction at least).

I still think that 7digital is a more accurate name for the store, if not the technology behind the store. But I see where Ubuntu One ties in now.

Will I be able to use Ubuntu One like this with other stores (Jamendo, Magnatune, Amazon MP3, etc)?

[AJenbo (ajenbo)]

"What if the English language was patent encumbered and you had to ask someone else to read you your books?"

Isn't that the current situation in Canada? They have to pay tax to the Queen of England in order to use the English language, I believe.

[Elliot Murphy (statik)]

Hello passionate Ubuntu people!

I appreciate all the comments that have been written on this bug. Now that the music store is in public beta so folks can see it for themselves and better understand how it works I think it is time to resolve this bug. After considering the content of this bugreport I am closing the rhythmbox-ubuntuone-music-store bugtask as wontfix. As I am not a member of the ~ubuntu-community team I won't change the status of the ubuntu-community bugtask but I ask that David, Jorge, Daniel, or Jono go ahead and change that bugtask to wontfix also.

Canonical has partnered with 7digital to provide some major parts of the Ubuntu One music store, has paid developers to implement the client side components of the Ubuntu One music store, and the store uses existing Ubuntu One file sharing servers to deliver the music. Ubuntu is based on Debian, and we still call it Ubuntu. Ubuntu One file sharing is currently powered by Amazon S3 storage, but we still call it Ubuntu One file sharing. Having intimate knowledge of the amount of code and number of full time developers that it took in order to build this music store, I think keeping the name is both accurate and honest. The assertion that Canonical does not have any control over the music store is untrue, we have a contract with 7digital and have reasonable amounts of control (sadly that control does not extend to what format the music labels provide content to us in). I believe other comments have addressed the music being sold at a price and in the mp3 format - neither of those things prevent the music store from being named as it is.

best wishes...

[Chris Hermansen (c-hermansen)]

AJenbo, we Canadians like to refer to her as the Queen of Canada. And, for that matter, she refers to herself as that when she is here. Et malgré la langue que nous parlons, il faut payer les impôts.

I would like to take a moment more to thank Canonical for doing this cool thing - setting up a music store, which does not require us to buy specific hardware, and for which we can get codecs. I at least don't mind paying for the music.

I do have one complaint, though, and that is that the Ubuntu One World Store is a bit disappointing, especially for us Canadians who have a 7digital Canadian music store with a much wider selection. I think the prices are a bit lower too which only makes sense since we have to spend some of our money paying taxes to the Queen of Canada...

Bless.