Print
The much anticipated Google Music service is said to have been delayed due to Google's demand for cloud music rights for songs purchased through its service. But as it now turns out, Google is not the only company interested in cloud rights for media content. According to a Cnet report, Amazon is also holding similar discussions with content owners from both the film and music industries. Meanwhile, a separate report claims that Apple too is working on a cloud-based digital locker service of its own.
The largest e-tailer in the United States is planning an online digital locker service for music, films and books purchased from its site, as per Cnet' sources. If these sources are to be believed, Amazon's new service could even cover content not bought from it.
Apple is also rumored to be pursuing a similar strategy by working on a music streaming and storage service, quite simply, called “Locker,” which, according to The Music Void, already has the backing of Warner.
With the likes of Google, Amazon and Apple pressing media content owners to bundle cloud rights with their content, it is more a question of when and how, rather than if, this request will be granted.
Comments are closed on this article
Neufeldt2002
March 26, 2011 at 12:54pm
The problem I have with "cloud" based anything is that you are dependent on the service to continue operating. As most of these companies have already shown, they will not keep the service running forever. I would still rather have everything on my own PC or server. This just reminds me of when computers were nothing more than dumb terminals connected to the mainframe, when it goes down, and it will, you lose everything. Not to mention the more stringent bandwidth caps that ISP's are enforcing, I just can't see it being nothing more than a service for those that have deep pockets.
majorsuave
March 26, 2011 at 4:14pm
Not that I think that Google, Amazon or Apple are anywhere near bankrupcy, I prefer having as much as I can locally because of the bandwidth cap I have to deal with.
My ISP (Videotron, a Canadian cable provider) is also a content provider with on demand tv and web tv and as such, they prefer to see me use their services via the cable terminal than anyone else's through the internet.
I have to keep myself from downloading all the Steam, XBL, PSN or D2D games I own as I want to retain some bandwidth for Netflix movies and the like. So when it comes to listen to MP3s or movies I own I am glad that they sit on my hard drive rather than on a remote location eating awy precious bytes/month
Hamburger
March 27, 2011 at 4:24am
My thoughts exactly. Streaming, cloud computing, and all other internet-technological evolutions will be stunted thanks to monthly bandwidth caps imposed by ISPS here in the U.S.A. and Canada.... Though I'm sure everyone else in the rest of the world will continue to enjoy cap-less ISPs and be able to take advantage of the internet-technological evolutions and leave us looking like backwards people who still by content on physcial media.
chart2006
March 27, 2011 at 9:09am
Until we begin to hold ISPs accountable for their actions cloud computing just isn't going to work. @Hamburger: It's pretty sad when your government enacts a bill that protects big companies and not you by making unlimited bandwidth illegal. Sorry dude! The problem I see is the US following suit which is going to anger a lot of people. I'm ok with a 250GB cap from my ISP ONLY if we can force them to hold up their end of the bargain which is delivery of a product in which they claim it to be. I'm signed up for 12Mb/s speeds however I get well under 1/3 of that bandwidth. Many times it gets down to dial up speeds and messes with my HD channels. Back to topic again cloud computing is going to die before it gets started because ISPs have the FCC in their pockets just like all other politicians.
