jacman Posted July 28, 2003 Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 i got this in my e-mail today. it's the 2nd time they've sent the same letter in the last couple of months. i always send them a cheery reply, and thank them for a great website. Dear EMusic Subscriber, Over the past several weeks we have noticed unusual activity on your EMusic account. Your account has been identified as having download activity that far exceeds that of the overwhelming majority of subscribers. In order to maintain EMusic's low price while providing a flexible and compelling service, we must focus on limiting instances of service-abuse by monitoring the site for unusual activity. Examples of service-abuses include, but are not limited to, password sharing, use of automated downloading systems (other than the EMusic download managers) and downloading quantities of tracks far beyond one's reasonable personal use. Obviously, the definition of "reasonable" varies by user. Based on our current analysis of typical subscriber behavior, we consider downloading more than 2,000 tracks in a 30-day period beyond reasonable for personal use. Using a 12-track album as the average, this represents more than 165 albums and over 7,000 minutes of music. Less than 1% our subscribers ever approach these levels. Accounts found to be used in violation of the expressed or implied guidelines of EMusic's service are subject to immediate cancellation. (See EMusic.com's Subscription Agreement at http://www.emusic.com/bem/new_signup/terms.html, particularly the termination provisions set forth in Section 7.1.) We ask that you carefully consider these guidelines and the EMusic.com Subscription Agreement terms and conditions as you use the service in the future. We sincerely hope that you are enjoying our service and will continue to be an EMusic member well into the future. Sincerely, EMusic.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John L Posted July 28, 2003 Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 (edited) E-music has been sending these out on a regular basis for a while. The fact that some vague notion of "reasonable usage" is put in the small print of a contract somehow leads E-music to believe that "unlimited downloads" is not false advertising. And what is "far beyond one's personal use" supposed to mean? Obviously, if someone purchases unlimited downloads for three months, he or she is going to continue listening to the acquired downloads after the three month period is over. I bet that it would not hold up in court. If they want to impose limits, then they should impose them explicitly. It sorts of reminds me of the restaurant where I ate on Saturday. They have a huge advertisement on the road. "Fresh Crab: All You Can Eat for $25" The "small print" when you get there is that they impose a 2 hour limit. That may sound like more than enough time to eat all the crab you want. NOT! They start counting the time from when you are seated. They don't rush to take your order. Then only bring you a few small crabs for "starters" and make it extremely difficult to get their attention after that. If you do get your order in, you have to wait a long time again before getting a couple more crabs. Before you know it, you have burned a full two hours and you are still hungry. Edited July 28, 2003 by John L Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claude Posted July 28, 2003 Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 (edited) It is understandable that they want to avoid people who join for the minimum possible perod of time (3 months, for $45 total cost) and then download as much as they can during that time. I did that before they changed the rules (about 2000 albums in 3 months). Although there was no limitation, I expected them to sent me a warning, suspend my account or do something else, but nothing happened. I spent about half an hour per day searching and selecting the albums I wanted and just put them in my download manager (not the emusic software). My computer was downloading day and night. Having the complete OJC catalog available was addictive. I stopped my subscription because I knew I would not be able to listen to all the albums I had accumulated. So I paid about 2 cents per album, whereas other commercial download sites charge 99 cents per song! I don't know how emusic's licensing contracts work, but it's clear they can't make money with customers like me. So it's inevitable they had to do something to avoid a situation comparable to a an "All you can eat" restaurant where people would come with bags to fill their refrigerators. But even with the current limitations emussic is still very attractive, especially for jazz fans. Edited July 28, 2003 by Claude Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Larsen Posted July 28, 2003 Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 (edited) I've been downloading tons of cds I already have just because with my cable modem, downloading the MP3s is faster (about one second per four minute song) and more convenient than importing the songs into my computer. I guess I'll be getting one of those letters soon. Edited July 28, 2003 by J Larsen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parkertown Posted July 28, 2003 Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 I've been downloading tons of cds I already have just because with my cable modem, downloading the MP3s is faster (about one second per four minute song) and more convenient than importing the songs into my computer. I guess I'll be getting one of those letters soon. Now that's fast, Jan! You must be the only one with a cable modem on your hub. B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Alfredson Posted July 28, 2003 Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 CDBaby, the company that handles our CD orders on the web, is supposedly hooking up a distribution deal with emusic and other online retailers. I don't know what the actual price of such things we be, but I do know we get 91% of whatever that is and CDBaby gets 9%. Not bad. If I had a cable modem, I'd be going nutso! There was talk at one time of Comcast (our cable company) putting bandwidth restrictions and usage restrictions on your cable modem account to curb file sharing (thanks, RIAA). So far they haven't done anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Larsen Posted July 28, 2003 Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 (edited) Now that's fast, Jan! You must be the only one with a cable modem on your hub. B) It wouldn't surprise me if I were. Due to my girlfriend's reluctance to pay rent, I live in a fairly low-income area. I honestly don't think that any of my neighbors even have computers, and I'm dead serious about that. According to http://bandwidthplace.com/speedtest/ , my connection speed is over 300kbs, which is faster than what I pay for. BTW, that 300kbs is just for file-sharing and downloads. That site says my communications speed is 1.5MBs. Edited July 28, 2003 by J Larsen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John L Posted July 28, 2003 Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 (edited) I don't know what the actual price of such things we be, but I do know we get 91% of whatever that is and CDBaby gets 9%. Not bad. The definition of "such things" would seem to be critical here. That sounds like one of those fantastic sharecropping deals that they used to offer ex-slaves in the South. After paying off the operating costs, land rent, and outstanding debts, you can keep 91% of the profits.... At any rate, it might help get your music more widely heard. I imagine that would be the real benefit. Edited July 28, 2003 by John L Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgraham333 Posted July 28, 2003 Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 It sorts of reminds me of the restaurant where I ate on Saturday. They have a huge advertisement on the road. "Fresh Crab: All You Can Eat for $25" And that reminds me of when Homer Simpson goes to the Frying Dutchman restaurant for all-you-can-east seafood. They kick Homer out and then he goes to attorney Lionel Hutz who tells him, "Mr. Simpson, this is the most blatant case of fraudulent advertising since my suit against the film, 'The Never-Ending Story.' Episode 9F06 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacman Posted July 28, 2003 Author Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 thanks for the link, JL. 863.3K this afternoon. even if they booted me, i'd still be way ahead. i downloaded all of the Miles Davis, Milt Jackson, Thelonious Monk, Bill Evans, Louis Armstrong, John Coltrane they had. plus tons more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John L Posted July 28, 2003 Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 It sorts of reminds me of the restaurant where I ate on Saturday. They have a huge advertisement on the road. "Fresh Crab: All You Can Eat for $25" And that reminds me of when Homer Simpson goes to the Frying Dutchman restaurant for all-you-can-east seafood. They kick Homer out and then he goes to attorney Lionel Hutz who tells him, "Mr. Simpson, this is the most blatant case of fraudulent advertising since my suit against the film, 'The Never-Ending Story.' Episode 9F06 I find it amazing how many good one-liners they can fit into a single Simpson's episode. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.