Imagine if you bought a CD and, a few months or years later, some guy came to the door and said, "Sorry, if you ever move from this house, or buy new stereo equipment, you won't be able to play that CD any more. Too bad."

Or, perhaps, you simply downloaded music from MSN's Music Store.

Customers who have purchased music from Microsoft's now-defunct MSN Music store are now facing a decision they never anticipated making: commit to which computers (and OS) they want to authorize forever, or give up access to the music they paid for. Why? Because Microsoft has decided that it's done supporting the service and will be turning off the MSN Music license servers by the end of this summer.

MSN Entertainment and Video Services general manager Rob Bennett sent out an e-mail this afternoon to customers, advising them to make any and all authorizations or deauthorizations before August 31. "As of August 31, 2008, we will no longer be able to support the retrieval of license keys for the songs you purchased from MSN Music or the authorization of additional computers," reads the e-mail seen by Ars. "You will need to obtain a license key for each of your songs downloaded from MSN Music on any new computer, and you must do so before August 31, 2008. If you attempt to transfer your songs to additional computers after August 31, 2008, those songs will not successfully play."

This doesn't just apply to the five different computers that PlaysForSure allows users to authorize, it also applies to operating systems on the same machine (users need to reauthorize a machine after they upgrade from Windows XP to Windows Vista, for example). Once September rolls around, users are committed to whatever five machines they may have authorized—along with whatever OS they are running. 

This is why DRMed (Digital Rights Management) music sucks. Because you don't really own it if it only works as long as the music servers are maintained online.

It's as if they actually want us to buy (and rip) CDs instead ...

Filed under :: Hi-Tech :: Media Moguls
Link · Print · Edit · Comments (3) · Pings (0) · TR/G

Time to clear out the various tabs ...

1. At what point do fanfic and fan websites cross the line from fair use to infringement. A new Harry Potter case may help pin that down.
2. What actually kills you in a crucifixion?
3. Not quite sure what Six Apart's new ad network is supposed to give me that simply including Google Ads doesn't do. Not that Google Ads have netted me any big bucks.
4. Recreating childhood photos.
5. Dora the Carefully-Tailored-by-Committee Explorer. Bruce mentioned this article the other evening. I thought we were past Dora, but since Kaylee loves it, Katherine's gotten back into it, too. And, worse, Go, Diego, Go.
6. Worst baby names. It's almost impossible to come with a name that some kid, somewhere, isn't going to poke fun at, but it's nice to at least make the ffort.
7. How to terminate a Terminator.

Filed under :: Blogging :: Media - Cartoons :: Media - Movies :: Media Moguls :: Parenting :: Potpourri :: Writing and Language
Link · Print · Edit · Comments (2) · Pings (0) · TR/G

Great Scott! 

A federal judge here on Wednesday ruled that the heirs of Jerome Siegel — who 70 years ago sold the rights to the action hero he created with Joseph Shuster to Detective Comics for $130 — were entitled to claim a share of the United States copyright to the character. The ruling left intact Time Warner’s international rights to the character, which it has long owned through its DC Comics unit.

And it reserved for trial questions over how much the company may owe the Siegel heirs for use of the character since 1999, when their ownership is deemed to have been restored. Also to be resolved is whether the heirs are entitled to payments directly from Time Warner’s film unit, Warner Brothers, which took in $200 million at the domestic box office with “Superman Returns” in 2006, or only from the DC unit’s Superman profits.

All of which may -- due to appeals and negotiations -- put the kibosh on a Superman Returns sequel and the announced Justice League of America film. Not to mention future animated Superman projects. A similar 2006 ruling on "Superboy" is the main reason why the current Legion of Super-Heroes cartoon refers to Kal-El as "Superman" instead.

The ruling specifically upheld the Siegels’ copyright in the Superman material published in Detective Comics’ Action Comics Vol. 1. The extent to which later iterations of the character are derived from that original was not determined by the judge.

[...] By 1937, the pair were offering publishers comic strips in which the classic Superman elements — cape, logo and Clark Kent alter-ego — were already set. When Detective Comics bought 13 pages of work for its new Action Comics series the next year, the company sent Mr. Siegel a check for $130, and received in return a release from both creators granting the company rights to Superman “to have and hold forever,” the order noted.

In the late 1940s, a referee in a New York court upheld Detective Comics’ copyright, prompting Mr. Siegel and Mr. Shuster to drop their claim in exchange for $94,000. More than 30 years later, DC Comics (the successor to Detective Comics) gave the creators each a $20,000-per-year annuity that was later increased to $30,000. In 1997, however, Mrs. Siegel and her daughter served copyright termination notices under provisions of a 1976 law that permits heirs, under certain circumstances, to recover rights to creations.

The heirs to Shuster get their turn at bat starting in 2013.

Compensation to the Siegels would be limited to any work created after their 1999 termination date. Income from the 1978 “Superman” film, or the three sequels that followed in the 1980s, are not at issue. But a “Superman Returns” sequel being planned with the filmmaker Bryan Singer (who has also directed “The Usual Suspects” and “X-Men”) might require payments to the Siegels, should they prevail in a demand that the studio’s income, not just that of the comics unit, be subject to a court-ordered accounting.

Time Warner is expected to appeal.

Hrm. On the one hand, anything that pokes Big Media in the eyeball and restores some measure of rights to the creators of works is, to my mind, probably a good thing. On the other hand, the likely effect on stuff I want to see makes me (selfishly, to be sure) a bit less sanguine. We'll see.

Filed under :: Media - Comics :: Media - Movies :: Media Moguls :: Politics & Law
Link · Print · Edit · Comments (0) · Pings (0) · TR/G

There have been rumblings about it for some months, but Disney has now confirmed that it will be making changes to Disneyland's "It's a Small World" ride.

So what, some would ask. After all, it's a slow boat ride past treacly animatronics chanting over and over again one of the insidiously brain-addictive Disney songs of all time. Why shouldn't visitors welcome change?

The specific changes mentioned are:

1. Inclusion of Disney characters into some of the scenes, as deemed appropriate. E.g., Alice (in Wonderland) showing up in the UK.
2. Removal or reduction of the New Guinea rain forest scene with an "American" tribute.

Fie! say some Disney loyalists (and, all things considered, I probably number myself among them here). 

1. The attraction has existed as-is (with maintenance) since the 1964 World's Fair. As such, it deserves some respect, as well as respect to the memories of those who have enjoyed it, as well as to Mary Blair, who did the primary design work for this and so much other Disney and Disneyland art.
2. The Blair family has protested the planned changes.
3. It's actually nice having one corner of the park left that isn't a constant marketing pitch for Disney's licensed characters.
4. It's inappropriate to turn a ride that's designed around world peace and friendship into one that pushes commercial properties and includes a special nationalistic section for Americans.
5. The ride's been plenty popular. "Plussing it up" isn't needed. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

To be fair:

1. The Disney character inclusion may actually be done somewhat tastefully. Disney asserts that it won't be as full-blown a change as what was done in building the ride's cousin in Hong Kong (which incorporated 30-odd characters). And in the one example shown (Alice in Wonderland), the figure would be based on some of Mary Blair's design work for the character, so it might be a bit more tasteful than otherwise dreaded.
2. While the LA Times article below confirms the use of (some) licensed characters, no confirmation was made I could find of the (oh so ironic) ripping out of the rain forest in exchange for an "American" section.

But I really have to ask a simple question, in keeping with the maxim that not having a good reason to do something is a reason not to do it: why? Have people been complaining about the ride? Have people been wondering why Simba isn't in the African forest, or Mulan in China? Have too many patriots been offended by the lack of a distinct "USA" zone?

Small World is a throwback to a kinder, simpler time, as a nation and as Disney. Tweaking it should be done with great caution, and only for a strong  reason. No such reason has been forthcoming.

Any change at the park is going to bring howls of protest. Changes that are too blatantly commercial are not only a bad idea per se, but are going to alienate (and create bad press from) some of the most vocal Disney loyalists. There might have been ways to effect some of these changes -- leaving out the geopolitical rebalancing of the USA Zone -- through a careful, very quiet, very gradual slipstreaming of "new character" Easter Eggs into the ride ("Just spotted -- Alice in UKland!"). Instead, by trying to do it under stealth of some other needed maintenance, and then trying to color it as a tribute and "respectful" enhancement, Disney's managed to make a mediocre idea even worse.

But, one might argue, isn't this just protesting by nostalgic adults? Aren't the kids going to want to see Disney characters in ever nook and cranny? Isn't that why they're there? It's an arguable point -- but, then, aren't the Small World characters also "lovable" by kids? Disneyland started -- and still continues -- with lots of areas not specifically branded, except by vague association and by costumed folks giving out autographs. I'd argue that kids aren't just there to see Mickey Mouse everywhere, but for the overall fun, pleasant, even nurturing experience overall. Tweaking Small World doesn't improve that.

All it does is -- maybe -- sell more toys and movies. Which may be a good enough reason for the Disney suits, but not for the attending public.

it's a changed world
Re-Imagineering: A World of Tears
Disneyland to add ‘Alice’ to Small World ride - Travel - LATimes.com
The Disney Blog: Disneyland to add Disney Characters to Its A Small World - confirmed
Save Small World, ride creator’s family begs Disneyland - Travel - LATimes.com
Re-Imagineering: There's so much that we share...
Re-Imagineering: With Utmost Reverence 

Filed under :: Big Business :: Media Moguls :: Travel
Link · Print · Edit · Comments (4) · Pings (0) · TR/G

Huzzah.

It's not so much that I missed added content for my favorite TV shows (I have enough other good stuff to watch to backfill for it), as much as the appalling state of what the networks were throwing out there to fill the airwaves in its stead.

Everyone seems fairly happy with the settlement, both per se and for what each side gave and take. A pity it ended up costing everyone as much as it did in order to reach something reasonable.

Filed under :: Media Moguls
Link · Print · Edit · Comments (2) · Pings (0) · TR/G

1. MT Open Source 4.1 is now available. I still have no idea whether to stick with the free MT or the free MTOS. Need to ponder this some time I have some spare cycles.
2. Old valentines.
3. The TSA has confirmed that some locations were asking for people to pull all their cables out of their bags, and that this was not official policy -- and that it won't happen again.
4. Keeping your home Wi-Fi strong and clear.
5. We played some more Galactic last weekend, which was great fun. Whether it's playing Latin romantic pilot Tomas, dreadfully earnest and presently mind-controlled Brad, shrewish and clever Sonja, or even my own Captain Alyssande, it's always a hoot. Never any wandering attention at that table.
6. Online tools to help you prepare for death, including obit/tribute sites, "last e-mail message" sites, wills, perpetual site licenses, etc.
7. While I am deeply suspicious of any pricing scheme that the music labels come up with, the idea behind Total Music sounds good (it's a parallel to the movie industry getting a slice of VCR sales): an incremental charge for music playing devices, in return for a lot less DRM. We'll see where the catch is.
8. I enjoy the new Backward Compatible webcomic by Aaron Williams (Nodwick, FFN, PS238), but what does the man have against RSS feeds? If I can't get it in my reader (or at least a reminder that a new one is up), the chances I'll remember to go back and read it drop close to nil.
9. Guillermo Del Toro will be directing The Hobbit under Peter Jackson's executive producership.

Filed under :: Blogging :: Blogging - Technical :: Gaming :: Health :: Homeland Security :: Media :: Media - Comics :: Media - Movies :: Media - Music :: Media Moguls :: My Computer
Link · Print · Edit · Comments (0) · Pings (1) · TR/G

Too many tabs, too many things to do:

1. This year's Beloit Mindset list of what the Class of 2011 considers a normal part of their world.
2. Let soldiers blog! Folks don't realize that it's our ability to express ourselves, even critically, that makes this country great (esp. in the eyes of the rest of the world).
3. Another case of DRM screwing consumers. Sony's closing down their "Connect" DRM site, which means that folks who licensed music from them can only listen to it until they upgrade their PCs.
4. Yeah, I'm just waiting for a TSA agent to tell me to dump all the cables out of my brief case. Yeesh.
5. Cool interview with Russel T. Davies (of Doctor Who / Torchwood / etc fame). (via Les)
6. I am not a sporting fan, as anyone will tell you. That said, watching the last quarter or so of the Super Bowl yesterday was a real kick, with a record-breaking number of score lead changes and a couple of last-minute game-winning (or near-game-winning) plays. If they were all like that, I might be tempted to watch more football.

Filed under :: Blogging :: Geopolitical Brouhaha :: Homeland Security :: Media - Sports :: Media - TV - Doctor Who :: Media Moguls :: Potpourri :: School Daze :: Travel
Link · Print · Edit · Comments (0) · Pings (0) · TR/G

Micro$oft is offering $45 billion ("It was burning a hole in our pocket") for Yahoo!, which is its last, best hope to keep from slipping behind Google forever and ever in the search/advertising market.

Meanwhile, Google stock has slipped because making $17 billion in profit this last year (or something insane like that) was, evidently, not enough for Wall Street. 

Crazy world.

Filed under :: Big Business :: Media Moguls
Link · Print · Edit · Comments (7) · Pings (0) · TR/G

A few years back, Colorado Public Radio, which has the main NPR station in our area, KCFR, split into two channels.  The old FM station was turned into classical music KVOD, and the NPR news station shifted over to the AM band.

Which, to be honest, is okay, because, y'know, it's just people talking.  Right?

That's the way I feel, until each time I travel to LA and listen to KPCC, and hear the amazing textures of the voices and sounds of the NPR news there.  Coming back and listening to it on AM makes me feel like I have a black and white TV for a while -- yeah, you can see it all, but it's just not as nice.

Recently, KCFR was playing around with HD Radio, so you could get the NPR channel on the FM side of things (with special equipment).  I actually pondered the idea (for about 30 seconds)..

Now, though, it sounds like they're buying another (normal) FM channel, and will be moving KCFR back over to FM.  Which makes me very happy -- almost enough to consider sending them money ...

Filed under :: Fourth Estate :: Media Moguls
Link · Print · Edit · Comments (8) · Pings (1) · TR/G

Coolness.  Sony is the last of the major labels to finally offer non-DRMed MP3 tracks for sale at Amazon.  That's spiffy both because it means, well, music available without PC- and fair-use-crippling DRM, but it sets Amazon up as a serious competitor to Apple's iTunes store. 

The trade-off:  Apple's music has DRM in it, but it's all 99-cents per track; Amazon's music is DRM-free, but is offered at variable prices based on what the music labels want.  (That price variability is almost certainly why the labels have hopped on the Amazon bandwagon, both because it lets them charge what they want  and to pressure Apple to do the same).

Competition.  Non-crippleware music.  It's all good -- and I say that as someone who never buys tracks online.

Filed under :: Media - Music :: Media Moguls
Link · Print · Edit · Comments (0) · Pings (0) · TR/G