Color me unimpressed. Encoding a buyer's name is fair game. You still have full control of the info you got.

I didn't say that it is not fair, but I think it definitely is DRM. So maybe it is an example of fair use of DRM.

I still prefer my MP3s name-free, but that only means that I would pay more for name-free than for named MP3s.

DRM stands for digital rights management. Encoding your name doesn't manage your rights in any way.

Maybe it doesn't enforce them, but suppose the police scans my computer and finds lots of MP3s signed to Matt Maroon, would it really not matter? (Honestly I don't know - but if it doesn't matter, why encode the name to begin with?).

Honestly my argument was more semantics. It's not DRM. It's something else, and certainly less odious. All they're doing is creating a way to track illegal activity.

I wonder what the laws are on selling the track and then deleting it though. Is that as legal as selling a cd, or do you get sign some sort of legal agreement when you purchase the track? I've never purchased a single track online so I don't know much about that.

You want to sell an MP3 of a song you haven't made?

Also, maybe you could just remove the information from the file if it bothers you.

Just saying that I can sell a CD. So if a CD costs 10€ in the shop and I know I could sell it for 5€ on ebay, it only costs me 5€ to listen to the songs (admittedly, plus the work for selling it). Not suggesting to rip the CD and then sell it, but if you tire of the music, you can sell it.

Right, but originally you were talking about how the information in an MP3 file restricts your ability to sell it.

You can probably imagine how silly it would feel to make sure you lose your MP3 after selling it, and what would you even ask for the MP3? Fiddy cent ?