Comments on: Apple's Jobs calls for DRM-free music

Record companies are the ones who demand digital rights management technology, not Apple, CEO says in rare open letter.

[vm019302]

Finally someone with common sense

I hope somebody in the music industry is listening.

I would pay for DRM-free music downloads, but hell will freeze over before I pay for DRM content.

[Dr Dude]

explorer5 has Apple Envy!!!

Hey explorer5, does your name imply that you bend over for M$
and are even stuck on their shoddy products from ages ago?

Sounds like you don't want to admit that your choice was the wrong
one. Be honest with yourself, buy a Mac already!

[alexei_roudnev]

Music labels area dinosaurus

These 4 big labels will die in next 5 - 10 years. Music is the last area which did not adopted to the new reality - compare with telecommunication prices, CPU prices and so so on.

The reasons are simple:
- The amount of money which people spent on music DONT DEPEND of music price. If my kids got $20 for music - tehy will spend $20 on music. It can be 1 CD (unlikely) or 1 MP3 CD (in Russia) or they wil pay it for the snickers and download music for free - but they will spend the same $20. I spend the same money for the music, no matter what is the price (moreover, I never purchase expensive disks).
- If music is too expensive, people just use P2P network or purchase MP3 disk in Russia, or copy from the friends (DRM is not a problem in real life).
- If music is cheaper, people will have more music by the same price (but they will pay the same money).

Today I have disks (from all countries except USA) with 100 - 200 songs on each (MP3 CD), which I can copy into my car, into ipod, into my cell phone and so on. I never EVER (absolutely NEVER) purchase any music with DRM - never did and never do in the future. I will never purchase any player which will lock me in.

Many other people, including kids, do the same.

So, image that music labels changed. You can pay 10 - 20c per song and download it in MP3 format, you can purchse "ABBA GOLD" disk not in Russia but in USA, with 100 ABBA songs in MP3 format (for $15), you can go to a book store and download new 100 songs, released in the last month, for $20. Result - no one will use P2P (no need), you will have 20 times more songs in your households, and digital studios will got THE SAME money as they do now (replication music cost is 0 for them). Moreover, you will not purchase CD's in a box - you come to a books tore,. select 20 or 100 songs (or 10 albums), and have CD burned for you in 5 minutes - so expenses decreses for the music industry.

It's the same, what happened with Voice. Cisco predicted to traditional Telco 10 years ago - change your business or die. It happen - we pay the same monthly $20 - $50 for long distance calls we paid before, but we have 10 - 20 times more time to talk; we pay the same money to the cell companies we paid before - but we can talk 10 - 20 times more and can send data (and it's not just as _replicate disk_ as in music). We already pay the same money in Russia, for example - and have 20 times more songs on disks (no one in Russia purchase CD because everyone purchase MP3).

So, Jobs is 100% correct. DRM music is a fraction of all music, and making music DRM'ed just encourage people to avoid it or hack it (by blacking their perimeter, by hacking Sony weird DRM, and so on). DRM must die, because it don't hold any value and just prevent the whole indistry to change.

DRM can live for software (esp. minor niche one), for digital data, but not for the cosnsumer's.

[tetsuyo]

And the Dinosaurus are no more

Alexei, your comment on this issue was the most on it that i
have read in a long time. It is difficult for people to just come
out and speak clearly and articulate what is going on in the
music world without the fuzziness. I am a music producer and
technologist and I also feel that the major music labels will have
to change their business model at some point or go away. Big
props to Steve Jobs for lending his stature and great visionary
status to hopefully help make the change much sooner rather
than later and to everyones benefit.
Ya know digital technology is dramatically changing the way that
we access all media and yet the music industry has been
notorious for holding us back. This cannot go on forever.

As a music artist and producer i want to get paid for my work
but more importantly i want to be at the forefront of technology.
I definitely DO NOT want to be seen as holding back progress
(the proverbial nail in the road) Up to now I have seen the music
industry be one of the first to embrace new technology and give
music lovers a better product because of it. We need to get back
to that and get back to our artistic roots. The real money and
future of the music industry is grounded in the creativity of the
recording artists, NOT in the corporate greed that breeds DRM
like policies and contempt in the music lover.

[explorer5]

haha

well, you'll probably never believe me.. but "Explorer" comes from "Ford Explorer" of which I was obsessed with years ago - and the name just has stuck.. It has nothing to do with Windows or Internet Explorer - I SWEAR!!

You're free to make your other opinions about me(of which i dont agree) but i just wanted to explain where Explorer comes from!

[darix2005]

apple

you must thin about it again

---
http://iphone.emigrantas.com - iPhone blog

[bocher101]

We are listening - are you?

Dear Music Industry,

- we all loved our records and CDs and bought them by the ton

- they became comparatively, ridiculously, expensive so when 'online' arrived the shops started emptying

- many of us would love to own a physical music media product complete with artwork and liner notes (remember those?)

- online has forced us to accept lower music quality (128kbs!) which is a compromise I would rather not make.

- sell a CD (or other media) music product for $5 an album and watch the demand sky rocket.

It's a different business model that you need to get your head around. It's based on the most rudimentary rules of supply and demand.

Listen and you will hear the music.

[markdoiron]

Very Smart of Jobs

This is actually very smart of Jobs to say. After all, what does he have to lose? It's very unlikely that the music companies will do it. And Jobs appears the hero to his legions of followers. And, if the music companies eventually do go along with it, it won't be because Jobs says they should give up DRM. It will be because they believe they can make more money by doing so.

Well done, Mr. Jobs! You should run for political offce: You've displayed mastery of the delicate art of not giving an inch to your competition, while at the same time making it appear to the public that you're in complete agreement with him.

--mark d.

[justanotherposter]

Well all politicians a great liars --- so he should be good at it...

Because he's a liar too...

--- QUOTE

Consumer litigation against DRM
Steve Jobs was the first industry figure to convince the labels to offer downloads without many restrictions on copying and burning. However, the parties agreed to deploy Apple's FairPlay DRM, which prevents songs purchased at the iTunes store from playing in any other player than the iPod because of Apple's refusal to license FairPlay to other music services, or in turn, license competitors' DRM technology. European legislators have been giving considerable attention to this "interoperability" failure. But Norway recently actually declared Apple was engaging in anti-competitive behaviour, giving the company until October to repair the situation or shut down. In addition the campaign has been joined by consumer lobbies in four other countries: Sweden, Denmark, France and Germany. If these initiatives are successful, they could be enough to break FairPlay and make Apple either license FairPlay or shutdown iTunes in Europe.

In the United States, Apple's Fairplay also faces a legal onslaught. In Tucker vs. Apple Computer led in July in the US District Court, Northern District of California, the plaintiff alleges that Apple unfairly restricts consumer choice because it does not load onto the iPod the software needed to play music that uses Microsoft's protected standards (PlaysForSure and the new Zune DRM) in addition to Apple's own. The suit is seeking damages for anyone who purchased an iPod or content from iTunes after April 2003. A motion filed by Apple to dismiss the charges was denied.

QUOTE ---

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/02/09/steve_gordon_drm/

[Zunny_Blowsdogs]

steve jobs is fullof cr@p

What a crock! "Opening the FairPlay DRM technology wouldn't be a wise strategy because Apple would have to give up the secrets of how that technology works, and it's likely that a hack for the technology would appear very quickly, Jobs wrote" HEY STEVE, here's an idea, and you don't have to disclose any secrets of your precious "FairPlay" : How about providing iPod support for WMA, like every other mp3/media player sold out there? I know Bill Gates and Microsoft would provide a FREE license to you, just as they do to Napster, Rhapsody, URGE, & every other online music store.

[skeptik]

that's pointless

You can convert wma to mp3 and use it on your ipod. You cannot, however convert itunes content to wma, so your solution accomplishes nothing.

Think before you propose, unless of course you're running for congress!

[HandGlad2]

No he's not, he's completely correct

That's exactly how CSS was cracked.

[ZiggyBop]

Are you sure?

MS doesn't make a player for the Mac that will play WMA 10, the
encoded version. The Windows Media Player distributed for OS X
only plays the unencoded WMA 9.

[K.P.C.]

Actually . . .

For starters:
MS stopped releasing or supporting WMA, WMV & WMP for any
Apple Products well over a year ago.
MS said there were (sub-par) 3rd party products available for
Macs to use for playing those formats on thier computers.

Secondly:
WMA is also DRM'd.

Thirdly:
What Job's is suggesting is having the record labels get rid of all
DRM requirements. That way iTunes would be free to offer music
in AAC or MP3 formats with no DRM restrictions.

Why Apple haters consider this to be a "crock" is beyond me.
I thought that anyone who hates the RIAA and DRM would be
jumpng for joy that Job's would publicly come out on thier side.

But nooooooooo.
Probably because it wasn't Billies idea.

[skeptik]

a calling out of sorts

"In such a world, any player can play music purchased from any store, and any store can sell music which is playable on all players. This is clearly the best alternative for consumers..."

Which is precisely what consumers had in every format right up to the "legal" versions of digital downloads. Industry greed, supported by allegations of FUD imposed new restrictions on purchases, simply because they could get away with it. They leveraged the DMCA to remove already tried fair use rights. The industry is responsible for this mess and Jobs is right. The whole progrm should be done away with. The whole DRM program was NEVER about P2P piracy, and has made ZERO impact on that problem. It was always about controlling the paying consumers... forcing multiple purchases, preventing the resale of music (think used CD market) and stepping towards a pay per use model that nobody but the RIAA shareholders wants.

[skeptik]

lies and damn lies

The Recording Industry Association of America, however, issued a statement interpreting Jobs' letter as an offer to license the FairPlay technology.

"Apple's offer to license FairPlay to other technology companies is a welcome breakthrough and would be a real victory for fans, artists and labels. There have been many services seeking a license to the Apple DRM. This would enable the interoperability that we have been urging for a very long time," it said in an e-mailed statement."

The RIAA must be as illiterate as they are stupid. Jobs offered nothing of the sort, and in fact clearly repudiated the idea in the letter. This statement by the RIAA is obvious smoke to cover their resistance to the idea. (One can only hope the source of the smoke is the friction of RIAA execs cornholing each onther in those luxury offices and backroom palaces they've contructed on the profits stolen from musicians for decades.)

Given the lies they've been spouting for years now, this should come as no surprise. What is surprising is how many politicians believe they can accept and act on this nonsense without the public noticing. We notice. We know you've been bought by the RIAA. Nobody is fooled.
"Res ispa loquitor"

[john55440]

A PR Game. The end result? iTunes business as usual.

Jobs knows that the music industry is not about to go DRM-free. He just wants to divert attention away from Apple's lame excuses for refusing to license their FairPlay-DRM to other companies. The end result? iPod/iTunes business as usual, with the music industry taking the blame for iTune's Walled Garden.

[rapier1]

I wonder

I really do wander if Jobs would have done this if there was
increased rumbling and threats of sanctions fomr various
European countries about unfair business practices with regards
to iTunes. For some reason I don't think so.

Jobs is a business man, if you have a model that works you don't
change it unless you have to. In this case it looks like he has to.
Also, I don't think he'll ever go through with this. It completely
breaks the iTunes/iPod business model. If you can suddenly play
all of your iTune stores songs on another player then it really
lowers the barrier to switching to less expensive hardware. This
means that while there might be some cachet to using an iPod it
will no longer be a requirement. It also will accelerate the
'walkman'ization of PMPs - just look at what happened to Sony
when you could get a walkman type cassette player at 7-11 for
$8.

Oh, as to Steve Jobs' commitment to breaking down DRM - do
any of you remember what happened when another player
company (was it creative?) found a way to play AAC iTunes
protected songs on their players? With the next rev of iTunes
they changed the scheme just enough to prevent that from
happening.

[The_Nirvana]

Well said...

No it was "Real". They cracked the FairPlay DRM to be inter-operable with their Real Harmony store. I remember Apple calling them hackers for that and threatening to sue them. Apple promptly sent out an iTunes update to break the harmony. Talk about hypocrisy.

[nine9nin]

You are probably poor or lower middle class and can't afford Apple products

explorer5 - it's obvious that you're a Microsoft Fanboy but you're
completely delusional and in so much self-denial to think all those
apple adds are false wake up from your coma that is your pathetic
PC (Piece of Crap).

[sh4unz0r]

Snob

Sounds like you are a typical elitist Apple zealot who thinks he is better than everybody else. Owning Apple products has become on par with driving an ultra expensive car, its all about overcompensating for other shortcomings.

[tuesdaysmyname]

READ...

ur an ******* "to poor and lower middle class to afford apple products! im 17 and lower middle class and i have an imac g5, ipod, and a car and i bought it with my own money that i got from my job (things that normal ppl get to pay bills and stuff, u prob dont have to worry about that) so **** u!

[Tomcat Adam]

A mac is a PC, you know.

PC=Personal computer.

Though it isn't as personal, seeing as there isn't really a legal way to build your own mac.

[ajbright]

Again

some is taking the #$@$ I feel.

Jobs is asking for what? Hey Jobs.. pot kettle black.

[philoking]

What about movies

Does his opinion apply to movies also? I think the real problem is people are still viewing content in mediacentric paradigms....it's time the system is reconstructed to take the "buying a CD" mentality out of it.

www.philoking.com

[eddddd89]

Doesn't fix one of the main problems

I can appreciate the value of switching to non drm music, however I do not think this solves an important problem with mp3 players. This problem is that companies force you to use their software and their mp3 players with each other and lock out other combinations. For example, I have an iPod but prefer WMP 11 to iTunes. I have found a program to let me do this (xplay, which is the software that first enabled iPod use with windows back when they were exclusively Mac formated) but Apple tries at every oppurtunity to lock this out. The Zune suffers from this situation as well, as most people say that the Zune software is horrible. I think that the removal of DRM is the first step toward a more open mp3 future, but more needs to be done to give consumers a choice.

[DeusExMachina]

Did you bother to even think about this one?

Um, seriously, did you? Using non-DRM would most CERTAINLY
solve this issue, as all the programs support MP3s. If they are non-
DRM, you could use any application you wanted.

[R.Jefferson]

Only artist and listeners are important...

In the 21st century and beyond, everyone in between artists and fans are going to need to justify their jobs. Music's current business model dates back to the 50's, where music lables know what consumers want and control virtually the entire process. Futhermore, relying on pop garbage and flavors of the month isnt going to fly.

I think the model of having a "friend" P2P music for me is what works. It sucks but hey, propose a model thats as appealing as P2P, but not as intrusive and restrictive as DRM.

[ikiturso]

let's not forget the real issue

Here in Europe many consumer organizations have attacked against iTunes, not only because of the incompatible DRM but also because of the dubious (and illegal in Norway for example) terms which for example give Apple the permission to change the terms of service without notice.

I found it very hard to imagine that Job's letter wouldn't sound at least a little false even to the ears of most fanatic Apple-believers.

The closed iTunes/iPod - system has been the key to Apples's success in this area and I really doubt if Apple would have been so eager to embrace the DRMless world a few years back.
Licensing the FairPlay DRM would be the obvious thing to do now, but if Job's babble about "losing valuable secrets" is not a lame excuse then I don't know what is. Funny how the other internet music stores can still function even when they use a licenced DRM.

iTunes and iPods are great products, but Jobs' comments do sound a little hipocrate, a cheapish way to appear the cool guy again after these accusations. As some commentator put it, Jobs isn't obviously too pleased of the way he has been put into the same category of bad monopoly mongrels as Bill Gates in Europe. =D

[ZiggyBop]

Contracts

Apples contract with the big 4 says if FairPlay fails, it has to be
fixed within a matter of weeks or they can pull there music from
iTunes.

Does MS have the same contract?

Warning: Conspiracy Ahead! Many of the Big 4 don't like Apple's
pricing structure. What if Apple licensed FairPlay and one of the
licensees fails to correct a FairPlay exploit within the contractual
terms. Then a major label pulls their music from iTunes and
demands new terms?

[UltraMegaChicken]

It is always about money

It is always about money, and Jobs wants his cut. Of course he is a hypocrite, everyone knows this (if they are intellectually honest). He wants to stake his claim, financially speaking, and it is through the disguise of open this and non-drm that, which will gain him the footing he desires, in fact that he needs.

The iPod is the only reason Apple makes a profit, and he is hell bent on making sure his company does not go out of business, no matter what it takes. On that note, I guess I really don't blame him, I just despise him.

[Cyber_Dropped_line]

Wisdom of Jobs

Steve Jobs, using Apple as an example, outlines the current licensing of music by large music producers to whom demand that venders like iPod store track "plays" on specific players. Jobs, rightful so, points out what intelligent music lovers already know...buying cds affords buyers the opportunity to play music anywhere they want to! Therefore, Jobs infers, it is "illogical" to have three percent of the music buying public(downloaders using online stores) to be regulated when 90% of music buyers purchase cds...whick can played "freely" without demanding "imbedded Big Brother". Good argument, Steve!