All users had to agree to the rules before they were able to download the music. The agreement was clear to me (see "Usage Rules" in the agreement.)

Would it be OK with you if Apple spread your credit card information around indiscriminately the way some want to spread the music company's property around? (And yes, it belongs to the music company - you may own the media it's on, but the music company and artists own the music - exactly the same as when you "buy" a CD.)

JF Duddie, NY/NY,

What we need to focus on here is not the now all-to-cliched music industry vs file-sharer one. Instead we need to focus on the fact that Apple is betraying the trust of it's customers through embedding sensitive data into files without educating their customers on it's existence or being forthright about it's purpose.

Sure, the files are only meant to be used by the customer who owns the data which is embedded, but that is no excuse. Apple needs to fess up to what they are doing, and why they are doing it. Otherwise, just like DRM, and every other copyright protection technology which has been used thusfar - people will design workarounds or stripping programs and the momentary win for the "industry" will in the end be a loss of any remaining public support.

Luke, Sydney, Australia

Yes, we are killing the VAST number of musicians out there. Its fine with me. Music is music. If you can make a buck from it, so be it. If the masses like the music so much that they gobble up all they can and don't pay the artist, that is the artists problem to deal with in order to find another way. Its called life. Get used to it. The lion's share of bands that I have interviewed in the past, in the end make $0 from CD sales because of the contract structures that they agree to. Unless they sell 100,000 copies it ain't technically worth it. All the coin they make is from touring (as long as ticket master ain't involved).

Chad, St. Catharines, ON, Canada

Clark,

If you do not like it then do not buy it. Simple, really.

John, Le Claire, IA

Perhaps the music industry needs to die and start fresh, so the cycle of mainstream music being fed to the masses will start to actually show talent.

John Wilson, Austin, Texas

DRM is imposed on consumers who have legally paid for their music so what are you saying - that consumers buying online should have less rights to the purchased music than somebody who bought a DRM free CD from a music store.

Clark, Sydney,

Music lovers: please consider the impact of the so-called "consumer rights" movement on artists. Downloading and burning are rapidly eroding the right of the artist to control his/her musical creation. For the artist, this means loss of the primary souce of income. For music lovers, it means loss of new and important voices outside of the confined & shrinking world of mainstream music. While downloaders insist that artists can rely on tour income, touring is at best a break even proposition for new and lesser known artists. If artists do not have the right to control their work, how as a society will we fund and support music? Will artists be forced back to the dark centuries of financial patronage, where creativity was restricted by the patron, i.e. the Church or a King? Is it really so unreasonable to pay artists for their recordings? Are we killing music with our own greed?

Cecilia Renn, santa fe, NM

Apple is guilty of falsely pretending to be a consumer advocate. Apple will try to deny these allegations ...watch and listen!! The truth is, Apple is guilty if mining for personal information at it's customers expense. If I were a customer ..... I'd be sure not to do business with them again. It's Apples way of saying ...thankyou for your business ...... it's a sad day!

Sofakingcool, Inman, USA/SC

I boycott any proprietarty system. Apple and Sony are forerunners.

Well_Im_Sure_You_Could_Track_Me_Down, YouNeedAHint, YouDontNeedAHint

So someone steals my iPod then shares all the music. My information is burned into each tune and the RIAA comes looking for me. Such a deal!

fred, Bedrock,

"Everyone is over-reacting. This is not a problem if you keep the music to yourself, as you should, or even share with friends and family. If you start distributing this to strangers, you are at fault. "

Not exactly, if you share your music with friends or even only in your family, it is totally likely that these people will in turn share the music you shared to them to the people you do not know, even if you warned them not to share the music to others.

In this case, things get more complicated.

Allan, Davao, Philippines

The problem begins if a friend I share it to suddenly decides to share it with the world.

Gesh, Rosemont,

Everyone is over-reacting. This is not a problem if you keep the music to yourself, as you should, or even share with friends and family. If you start distributing this to strangers, you are at fault.

We should all just be happy this is a step in the right direction.

Chris, Somewhere,

What the privacy advocates are forgetting is that the elimination of the DRM merely moves the responsibility from software-enforced to the honor system (ethics). As such, it is reasonable for the supplier to include a provision by which a non-trustworthy individual can be identified.

The technology merely provides the means of making sure that fingerprints afe left at a crime - - its still the criminal's fault that he committed the crime in the first place.

-hh, Denville, NJ

Yet another reason why I would never buy an iPod.

Andrew, Cairns, Queensland