CNet has an article about the new Napster flat fee service, which I have to take issue with.
Now, I could not care less about the Napster service, or really about iTunes either. But I have to disagree with the line in the article that says "Apple's approach is to charge 99 cents for each song downloaded. But you own the music, no strings attached."
Really? Is this some new version of iTunes that doesn't restrict you to only playing the music on a few machines associated with you by their DRM? Is it a new version that sells songs that don't stop working the moment that you decide you don't want to use an iPod anymore? Maybe it's a new version that will let you sell or give a song that you have purchased to someone else?
No? I didn't think so. At least with the Napster service you are getting what you pay for - limited access to all the songs in their library for the duration of your subscription. Apple on the other hand is selling, for an upfront fee of $0.99 the right to use a single specific song, on the hardware of their choice (which you have to buy from them), under whatever limitations they feel like imposing on you - forever. You can't sell your songs to someone else if you decide to get rid of your iPod, you can't even give them away. You own nothing.
Which is fine, since a lot of people seem to be okay with this deal with the devil. Shame on CNet though for claiming there are "No Strings Attached".