Most consumers of DRM crippled music download services are well aware of at least some of the restrictions in place, such as being limited to listening to their music on certain PCs to what players one may transfer their music to. However, what some may not realise is that these restrictions are not fixed and may be freely changed depending on the service provider. For example, imagine the record labels deciding all the sudden to start taking CDs off consumers because they decided they are no longer entitled to keep their legally purchased CDs, well this seems to be exactly what is happening with a few Dutch OD2 based providers in the Netherlands when it comes to music purchased as downloads.
For example, one Dutch broadband provider which runs a music service by LoudEye offers a choice of ways to listen to its music - Stream, Download for PC playback, Download+ for PC & media player support and a 30 second fragment. Unfortunately, consumers who purchased music as downloads using the service have only recently found out that the music they purchased may no longer be playable after January 1st 2007 after the record labels decided to no longer support the downloading of music on the store's service.
This is not the first time content providers have decided to revoke content from providers, for example, consumers with TiVo's who recorded a certain eiposide of the Simpsons or King of the Hill lost the right the right to playback their recordings after the content provider apparently decided to no longer allow the playback of these (despite the Simpsons issue being called a 'bug"). Thanks to mrdataNY for letting us know about the following news:
|
(further down within an e-mail about the Dutch ISP) I would say that they're making an absolute case for totally getting rid of the DRM as they are actually taking away the possibility to listen to the music you've legally bought. It might have been bought via a cheap method, but legally, you where entitled to listen to it on your PC. The only possible means to still listen to your [downloaded] music would actually mean that you've got to disconnect your PC from the Net as then they won't be able to update the licensed files (assuming that they have not already done so). The idiocy of course is that you've bought a product which the seller than decides he doesn't want to support anymore and then revokes your license using DRM. The full article can be read here. C|net gives further examples of various problems experienced with DRM in this article. |
This is just another example of how badly DRM is going out of hand. For example, in this case it is like the record labels coming to knock on their customer's doors to demand their CDs back saying that they have decided that consumers no longer have the right to keep these CDs. With DRM, this is straight forward to do, since the player needs to authenticate with the content providers server to check the song's licensing, at least for the first playback.
mrdataNY added: This really high lights a major problem with DRM and the draconian methods of the "powers that be". People work hard for the money in which they receive and when they follow the rules... they are punished by it. Where would that same person go the next time?.... hmmm
Source: ZDNet - Blogs

And I always believed DRM stood for Draconian Rights Mangled 