On April 21st, we wrote that a price tag of zero isn't the only reason people share music online. The convenience, easy storage and ability to combine songs however you want are also powerful incentives.
With the introduction of Apple's new online music store, though, Internet users can get these benefits legally. Apple cut a deal with all five of the major labels to build a one-click downloading system that supports the music industry, costing customers $1 per song or $10 per full album. Unlike earlier such systems, this one gives customers the right to use their music just like a record bought at the store.
Early indications suggest that people are, as we predicted, willing to pay for the benefits of online music. In its first week of operation, Apple's online store (which is currently available only on Macintosh computers) sold more than a million tracks. As Apple rolls out a planned Windows version and fills the remaining gaps in its 200,000-song catalog, college students will lose the shield of moral ambiguity we have been able to count on when trading music online. Each student who claims to download because of the convenience and other benefits, rather than because of the illicit zero price tag, will now be forced to show his cards. Those who continue using KaZaa or campus network search engines for their music will leave no doubt that they are doing so to avoid paying. The era of excusable piracy is drawing to a close.
Nonetheless, the recent history of music sharing on this campus has had a hefty price tag for one student — Dan Peng. He must pay a $15,000 settlement and legal fees. He has not admitted any wrongdoing, or been convicted by any court. Understandably, he didn't want to pay for a drawn-out court fight, leaving it up in the air how his case would have been decided. On wake, he has set up a system to let people anonymously donate and help him cover his costs.
Peng was used as a scapegoat by the music industry, in an effort to curtail something large numbers of Princeton students do daily. He stood out because he gathered large amounts of publicly available information and made it easy for people to access. We do that ourselves, and definitely do not think it should be illegal. If former users of wake want to help Peng bear his burden, we think it would be humane and commendable for them to do so. — The Daily Princetonian Opinion Board
Read More
Princeton, let’s adopt a digital prox
Jorge ReyesTo prevent pointless replacement and lockout charges, maximize convenience, and create better access to meals and facilities, Princeton should follow the precedent set by some of its peers and adopt a digital prox system.
To prevent pointless replacement and lockout charges, maximize convenience, and create better access to meals and facilities, Princeton should follow the precedent set by some of its peers and adopt a digital prox system.
What is a Princeton degree really for?
Joel IbabaoSo what, in the end, is a Princeton degree really for? I take a more moderate view: Students should prioritize earning potential — unless they feel irresistibly called to something else.
So what, in the end, is a Princeton degree really for? I take a more moderate view: Students should prioritize earning potential — unless they feel irresistibly called to something else.
If there’s one survey you fill out this year, make it the Year End Assessment
Jerry ZhuThe University cares about collecting good data — but it needs to centralize its efforts.
The University cares about collecting good data — but it needs to centralize its efforts.