Archives Posts
April 2nd, 2007 by musicinterfaces
The web has been positively buzzing with speculation since the announcement of an imminent EMI/Apple “exciting new digital offering”. Would it be the Beatles back-catalogue made available on the iTunes Music Store or something else? Turns out it’s the latter - EMI will be making it’s entire catalogue available via iTMS without DRM restrictions. It’s the first of the mega-corporates to take the leap and it’s difficult to imagine that Steve Jobs wasn’t aware of this when he made his own call for the abolition of DRM.
Everything isn’t quite glory and light: it appears that the deal is $0.99 for tracks locked with DRM and AAC encrypted at 128kbps or $1.29 without DRM at 256kbps. Given Apple’s emphasis upon simplicity, this is a rather surprising move.
Archives Posts
February 23rd, 2007 by musicinterfaces
The following excerpts indicate the remarkable lengths to which the record industry has gone to respond to the unpopularity of DRM, as described in a recent NYT article (my italics):
“… the expansion of the online marketplace, coupled with ever-worsening CD sales, is now all but forcing the music companies to tread on ground they once viewed as off limits.”
“Starting this week, Suretone Records, a label distributed by the Universal Music Group, plans to distribute video files featuring popular acts […] on file-sharing networks that the industry has long viewed as illicit bazaars for pirates… the video files will not be wrapped in protective software to limit copying, executives say. But they will also be incomplete: users who download them will see perhaps half the video and will be directed to the label’s own Web site to watch the complete version.”
“RCA Records […] plans to advance its promotional campaign for Avril Lavigne’s new album with the first in a series of short manga — Japanese comic-book episodes … The video clips, which run two to three minutes each, are expected to be released in unprotected form as free podcasts on iTunes, among other outlets. Fans will also be able to use special software, probably offered on a label’s Web site, to take snippets of the episodes and rearrange them, executives said.”
“[Suretone Records’] files are being distributed online in an arrangement with ArtistDirect’s MediaDefender unit, which is better known as a contractor hired by labels to place fake, or decoy, versions of songs or other media files on file-sharing networks to thwart would-be pirates. Before the Suretone video deal, the company had also begun planting fake files containing promotional messages for advertisers like Coca-Cola.”
Link: Music Labels Offer Teasers to Download (NYT)
See also: Engadget overview of reactions to Steve Jobs’ DRM declaration
Archives Posts
February 8th, 2007 by musicinterfaces
Reaction has been mixed: The Economist thinks Jobs is dead right, but PC Mag quotes an unimpressed Norwegian Consumer Rights Group spokesperson as follows:
“ITunes Music Store and others are unfair to consumers no matter how many download services follow the proprietary approach,” wrote Torgeir Waterhouse, a senior advisor at The Norwegian Consumer Council, in response to a letter written by Apple CEO Steve Jobs and posted on the Apple Web site on Tuesday.
More: NYT: Europe Cool to Apple’s Suggestions on Music, Digg listing on ‘Steve Jobs DRM’
Archives Posts
February 7th, 2007 by musicinterfaces
In an unprecedented move, Steve Jobs has published a statement entitled Thoughts On Music in which he details his views on DRM. Unsurprisingly, he states that iPods can freely play music ripped from CDs and other media before laying responsibility for the increasingly unpopular rights management applied to music sold via the iTunes Music Store fairly and squarely at the feet of the big record companies:
Since Apple does not own or control any music itself, it must license the rights to distribute music from others, primarily the “big four” music companies: Universal, Sony BMG, Warner and EMI. These four companies control the distribution of over 70% of the world’s music. When Apple approached these companies to license their music to distribute legally over the Internet, they were extremely cautious and required Apple to protect their music from being illegally copied. The solution was to create a DRM system, which envelopes each song purchased from the iTunes store in special and secret software so that it cannot be played on unauthorized devices.
He then goes on to suggest three future scenarios: continuing on the current course with incompatible players and systems (not at all desirable for users), licensing Apple’s Fairplay DRM to third parties (deemed highly problematic because difficult to control) and thirdly to abolish DRM (is that cheering I hear in the distance?) with the following argument:
In 2006, under 2 billion DRM-protected songs were sold worldwide by online stores, while over 20 billion songs were sold completely DRM-free and unprotected on CDs by the music companies themselves. The music companies sell the vast majority of their music DRM-free, and show no signs of changing this behavior, since the overwhelming majority of their revenues depend on selling CDs which must play in CD players that support no DRM system.
Given the growing number of European countries threatening to pursue Apple in the courts, Jobs’ statement is timely. Needless to say, the web is awash with the news, it’s excellent PR and it puts Jobs firmly on the side of the consumer.
Link: Jobs’ statement on the Apple site
Further comment: Macworld , Playlist, TechCrunch
Archives Posts
January 29th, 2007 by musicinterfaces
Cory Doctorow writes:
Eboy has posted a new graphic entitled “Tower of Incompatibabel” that very neatly makes the connection between DRM and proprietary formats and the dystopia that followed the fall of the Tower of Babel.
Link: eBoy page
Via: BoingBoing
Archives Posts
January 23rd, 2007 by musicinterfaces
Record Labels Contemplate Unrestricted Digital Music
As even digital music revenue growth falters because of rampant file-sharing by consumers, the major record labels are moving closer to releasing music on the Internet with no copying restrictions — a step they once vowed never to take.
Link: NYT article
EMI Considering Dropping DRM From Its CDs
EMI Group Plc said on Monday it was reviewing its use of the controversial content protection technology used on CDs, known as digital rights management (DRM), but has not scrapped it altogether.
Link: Reuters article
Via: Gizmodo news item
Archives Posts
January 18th, 2007 by musicinterfaces
To approved accessory makers.
Link: iLounge article
Archives Posts
January 17th, 2007 by musicinterfaces
200,000 songs initially + no DRM + encoded at 256kbps = a good idea.
Link: Engadget article
Archives Posts
January 11th, 2007 by musicinterfaces
EMI has announced that it will no longer infect its CDs with DRM. I remember just a few years ago when an EMI customer-service rep sent an email to an irate customer promising that every CD in Europe would have DRM within a decade.
The anti CD-based DRM campaign was closely reported by BoingBoing. The small number of CDs I’ve bought that warn of anti-piracy measures have not protested in any way when I’ve ripped their contents to MP3, nor have any refused to play in any of my four CD players. Which is not to say I don’t scorn the whole concept…
Link via: BoingBoing
Archives Posts
January 10th, 2007 by musicinterfaces
Interesting observation that Apple are effectively a monopoly (or in Arrington’s word, a monopsony) mitigating against any successful competition getting off the ground. Apple the Microsoft of downloadable music - in a parallel universe where the record companies didn’t insist on DRM when the iTMS was being shopped around and set up, I wonder whether Apple would have been happy to go with a DRM-free solution, despite the potential impact of piracy upon music sold through their store.
Link to article
