Steve Jobs has stepped up to the plate and written an open letter to the music industry in the fight against DRM. We wrote our thoughts on the eventual demise of DRM just last month. Bill Gates gave his own thoughts on DRM back in December.
Despite Apple’s near monopoly on legal digital music sales, he discusses how they got to where they are now with DRM and options moving forward. The record labels then and today demanded protection of their songs — and thus Apple created their internal DRM called FairPlay.
Jobs speaks about how DRM is an ongoing fight — there are a lot of smart people in this world that have spare time on their hands, and like to discover the “secrets” that keep the songs protected. As soon as the DRM is hacked, Apple works to update the DRM by updating the iTunes software, as well as the software found in their hardware devices (iPod). He says that if their DRM is compromised, they have only a few weeks to fix it, or the labels are able to exit their agreement with Apple entirely. Rolling out these security updates is a difficult task with just one company, but if they were to license out their DRM to multiple software and hardware vendors, it’d be a nightmare — this is not an option that Apple will consider.
Another option is continuing the same course — software/hardware vendors writing their own DRM and consumers purchasing songs that only work in certain software/hardware. He brings up that Microsoft decided to ditch their own ‘PlaysForSure’ DRM technology and create a brand new (proprietary) one for their Zune.
The third option that comes as a bit of a shocker is Jobs promoting DRM-free music. He discusses how 90 million iPods have been purchased and 2 billion songs — equating to an average of 22 songs per person on iPods that hold 1000 songs. Internal research at Apple shows that the average iPod is full — meaning that only 3% of songs on an iPod are DRM-protected, with the remaining 97% unprotected (ripped audio CDs; illegally downloaded tracks).
Jobs discusses how 90% of record label sales revenue comes from the billions of CDs sold — CDs that are not DRM-protected (consumers can go home and rip their CDs). In 2006, 2 billion songs were sold DRM-protected, while 20 billion were sold unprotected (as audio CDs).
He makes a good point — and he likely feels Apple could sell more digital music than the mere 3% that occupy iPods, by selling unprotected songs. The question on everyone’s minds is whether the music industry would sell more than the 20 billion total songs in a year if they opened the DRM-free floodgates online. Emusic has been the poster-child for the DRM-free sales of straight MP3s by the Indie labels. Amie Street is another model we like.
Editor’’s Note: This post was written by guest contributor Steve Poland, whose blog Techquila Shots brainstorms web start-up ideas.
Comments
My take:
http://copyrightings.blogspot......n-drm.html
“Jobs discusses how 90% of record label sales revenue comes from the billions of CDs sold — CDs that are not DRM-protected (consumers can go home and rip their CDs)”
The labels don’t care if the cds are drm-protected…once they have sold them, they have the money. cds are not that easy to trade around, digital songs (i am sure we all saw what napster resulted in)
the part that scares them is that mp3’s can be traded around - this is going to take some time. I don’t expect labels to get over this concern anytime soon.
yeah yeah, whatever. It’s easy to state this opinion once you have a near monopoly on online downloads. Where was that open letter 5 years ago?
Does the consumer (me and You) would we benefit, will a song cost less than 99 cents and my take here
http://cultofweb.com/web2.0/20.....ree-music/
Hahaha! Nice timing. I supposed he spent the past six years writing this?
Apple’s DRM-protected downloads just mean that they can only be played on iTunes players. And, anyone can download iTunes. DRM-protected downloads can still be traded around like mp3 files, they just need their respective player to play them. iTunes is free, so what’s the difference DRM or non-DRM.
TUFTS vs CITS
Better late than never…
What is the solution for the music industry?
I’m not a fan of the RIAA but how does the music industry go DRM-less?
My best creative answer is to provide a lifetime service/market for music. Once I buy the music, they maintain my license to the copyright. They would provide the music in a variety of formats at anytime I desired.
At the same time, provide a market for selling licenses, and charge a commission for trades.
Variations could include time-expiring licenses for less, restrictions to specific file types, etc.
This is the best idea I’ve thought up…but it’s full of potential pitfalls.
Steve makes some good points, but I bet if the labels abolished DRM they would only do so if Apple agreed to let them introduce variable pricing. Similar to Amie St. - the more popular artists tracks simply cost more…
And I would not be surprised to see an overall rise in prices if mp3 became the norm.
“yeah yeah, whatever. It’s easy to state this opinion once you have a near monopoly on online downloads. Where was that open letter 5 years ago?”
It’s in their interest to keep the DRM once they have a ‘monopoly’ surely?
Internal Research?
No friggin way - what that boils down to is that iTunes reports back the capacity of the iPod and the percentage of free space left to Apple.
There is simple no other way to obtain that information.
I don’t care as I haven’t an iPod - and it’s really no big deal, but just don’t lump things into a blanket statement of “Internal Research” - what? you think that they just internally sit around and guess how many iPods are full?
Thanks for the posting. It was very interesting.
I met Steve Jobs at a conference once. The guy is a genius and incredibly forward-thinking. He is truly a national treasure.
We’ve been waving the DRM-free banner for a number of years and it’s nice to hear that Steve Jobs has officially joined the team of people who feel the same way we do. In fact, we made a lot of the same arguments Jobs made in this article:
http://www.learnoutloud.com/co....._argu.html
We’re getting closer. Apple and Amazon (sale of DRM-free music and audiobooks on Amazon would be huge) have the clout to push the DRM disaster over the side of the cliff. Let’s hope they do sooner rather than later.
Openly supporting the death of DRM should start with selling DRM-free tracks off iTunes that available on Emusic DRM free but Apple can’t even do that:
“But when the same tracks are sold by the iTunes Music Store, Apple insists on attaching FairPlay copy protection that limits their use to only one portable player, the iPod. Terry McBride, Nettwerk’s chief executive, said that the artists initially required Apple to use copy protection, but that this was no longer the case. At this point, he said, copy protection serves only Apple’s interests.”
http://nanocrew.net/category/drm/
Also, does anyone else notice that the 22/songs per ipod is same one used in the Forrester Research study that Apple came out so strongly against? (Opening the keynote with word that the itunes store was a big success and that they sell a song every 58 seconds.) Apple apologist like Pogue pointed out that the 22 songs figure is only valid if you count every iPod ever sold as if it were still in action when clearly a lot of them aren’t. True. But now, because it suits Jobs, we are saying that the poorly conceived figure is accurate? Amazing.
There could have been an Option No: 2.5. Apple licensing WMA DRM. That way they could have the music rental option for iPod, too.
I understand the future has just one retailer - iTunes - so it wouldn’t make sense.
In case you didn’t quite get the conviction of Mr. Jobs, here is the excerpt from his letter that says so:
“The third alternative is to abolish DRMs entirely. Imagine a world where every online store sells DRM-free music encoded in open licensable formats. 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, and Apple would embrace it in a heartbeat…”
His argument is sound: the music industry contributed to this chaos, and the music industry must be brave enough to change its course in order to reverse the slumping sales.
I would add that the music industry needs to make their musicians work for their money by scheduling more concerts, which is a big source of their income. RIAA continues to file lawsuits against downloaders as we speak, and I’m sure Lars Ulrich of Metallica (who initiated the lawsuit against Napster) is feeling the angst in his private jet while some teenagers are “stealing” his songs. Bands like Metallica need to work like everyone else. Oh, wait, they tried, and nobody went to their concerts. Jeez, I wonder why.
“Boo Hoo, Jobs should have written this letter 5 or 6 years ago”, cry the little Windows girls.
You think this little winows girls would know that the iTMS has only been around since April of 2003.
Music shouldn’t have DRM, you should buy it and own it and be able to do whatever with it. Luckily the iTunes DRM isn’t hard to bypass, but still. Just ridiculous they need it in place at all.
in steve we trust.
the record industry on the otherhand, is running around like chickens with their heads chopped off.
i’ve bought one song from the itunes store since it opened. i’ve downloaded one free song on the week. i dont and wont download more because of drm. its anti consumerist and just plan wrong.
i’ll download songs and rip my own 2nd hand cds until there is no drm.
if the labels come to their sense and stop treating their customers like criminals (jeez, even murderers are innocent till proven guilty) and sell fully tagged, drm free songs (cheaper than 75¢, like 50¢) then i’ll buy.
till then, RIAA (& MPAA), consider my actions a peaceful, civil protest. so cease and desist.
I think this is bogus. This is a stunt by Apple to lead by not angering the mob, and giving lip service to make themselves look progressive. There’s a zillion things Jobs could be doing if he wanted non-DRM’d music on Itunes. Like:
+ Allow any band to sell their music DRM-free thru iTunes “cafe-press” style.
+ Sign indie labels that support non-DRMd music and have them sell it on iTunes.
+ Offer “the big labels” a greater percentage of profits for non-DRM’d music sales on itunes.
+ support non-DRMed “give-away” promo music for up and coming artists that want to get reconized.
+ Allow more 3rd party licensees to playback DRMed music, especially for products that don’t compete with iPod (like the Roku home player).
Job is all bark and no bite on this.
I agree with Hanford on allowing Indie (non-DRMd) music into the iTunes store… As a small independent record label, I can vouch for the difficulty in getting in the iTunes music store… You either have to already make a substantial income off your music or you have to pay a 3rd party to get your music in the store…
They could have addresses this years ago and have not.
I think this is more of a “look at us… we’re the cool guys” statement that will eventually lead nowhere.
Also… the title of this article is a bit misleading…
“Apple discusses non-DMR options” would have been more appropriate.
Bill Gates: DRM is lame.
Arrington: Pfft! Bill Gates thinks DRM is lame, that’s funny, because Bill Gates is pretty lame! I’m too cool to record his interviews, because I have a Mac and I’m cool.
Steve Jobs: DRM is lame.
Arrington: Steve Jobs makes a great point! I’m going to capture his arguments with flawless integrity and Bill Gates make Zunes! LAME!!!
TechCrunch, licking Apple’s balls like the rest of the pretentious, white-headphone wearing, condescending Mac Whores.
Let’s just say that DRM has been one big experiment that content companies along with Apple, Microsoft and similar agreeable companies have been conducting in the hopes of monetizing content while controlling user experience. Clearly, DRM goes too far, and the lesson learnt is that we need better ways to make this online music and video thing work for everyone - users, content providers and service providers. There is already a recognition that DRM in its current form does not do that - look at the Zune model for revenue sharing, for example. The most interesting thing is of course Bill Gates and Steve Jobs coming out openly with their less than enthusiastic support for status quo - debate is good, and pretty sure there is room for innovation, and improvements.
Having said that, the option to simply do away with DRM begs the question - how would content companies monetize content? With CDs, it is clear - you have to buy them. With online content, DRM is a way to ensure we can collect money for a sale. I am not convinced that there is a clear solution right now to monetization issue, not even eMusic.
Chris said “I’m not a fan of the RIAA but how does the music industry go DRM-less?”
I think he missed what Jobs was saying. The music industry is DRM-less now: it’s called a CD. People can rip and Limewire to their heart’s content.
I once listened to an interview with the inventor of the mp3 format, and he stated one very wise fact: the entire DRM debate is based on flawed premises in that it’s an illusion that one would be able to enforce intellectual property rights using technical measures. If most of us don’t steal, kill etc., it’s not because it’s technically impossible or illegal, but because we naturally feel it’s wrong. Likewise, the only sustainable way for the content industry to protect their content in the long run is to instil in the general public a feeling that piracy is morally wrong. That’s quite a challenge and it would involve a real public debate, but I don’t think there’s a way around this.
What does “DRM free” mean? Can I buy mp3’s from emusic.com and put them on my website for free downloads? Can I in turn sell them on?
Why 25% (at least) of the songs available on iTunes Store are not DRM-free ? I mean, no indie label (or almost) wants DRM on its tracks…
“+ Allow any band to sell their music DRM-free thru iTunes “cafe-press” style.
+ Sign indie labels that support non-DRMd music and have them sell it on iTunes.”
Is it not a possibility that the ‘big 4′ record labels require ALL music on iTMS to have DRM for them to allow their own music on there? Im sure this kind of thing is not uncommon in contracts.
I think that Jobs has been in discussions with the labels about the up and coming renewal of their contract with iTunes and the labels have been trying to leverage Universals $1 pirate tax on the Zune - Jobs has got pissed off and said fek you with this open letter.
Good on him.
Bye-bye DRM, hello democracy. It’s always good when powerful people see the light, even if they do it a little late in the day. Jobs is right, and Gates is golden. The system doesn’t work and they said so. The future of music will be in models like Amie Street that allow artists and listeners to make their own decisions.
‘Internal Research?
No friggin way - what that boils down to is that iTunes reports back the capacity of the iPod and the percentage of free space left to Apple”
Note to the absurdly paranoid purveyors of FUD - that pretty unlikely - do you have any facts to back up this opinion? but then why would I care if Apple knew how much space was on my iPod?
intarweb is full of bizzare people.
One thing that stuck to my mind was that last week the Finnish (yeah, I live in Finland) government agency issued that Apple needs to change the iTunes DRM, that it’s basically against consumer protection laws that music bought from iTunes is only playable on iPod.
http://apple.slashdot.org/arti...../23/169252
Also other European countries are calling out for Apple to change the way its DRM works.
WTF cares what Jobs says. Do it or STFU. Meanwhile http://www.emusic.com .
i guess the european countries are singling out apple because they have a huge market share. meanwhile, MS does a good job of screwing over consumers as does sony and any other music player manufacturer.
i’ll be interested to hear the uproar when vista becomes more commonplace and those pissing on apple (with it’s generous drm) will get a whiff of true drm lock-down.
i can only imagine the time, money, talent and other resources wasted on the artifice that is drm.
Can’t anyone get perspective ?
Apple does not succeed in the ipod because of the fairplay restrictions on other players. Ipod users actually buy very few online music on iPOd (3%)! And they lose the sales to other players.
The truth is Apple would be in a very shaky condition if Vista succeeded to impose their proprietary DRM to customers so that the entertainment industry embraces it. in order to prevent M$ to buid another monoppoly, AAPL needs to prevent Vista DRMs to become widely accepted. So fight the DRM.
And incidentallly, Jobs is right that DRM is harming iPOd and online music business
I hope they move DRM free. :-/ This whole DRM business is a pain, and you can get a non-DRM’ed version of any song for free - so I think the people who want to rip the music companies off already are.
Leave Comment
Commenting Options
Enter your personal information to the left, or sign in with your Facebook account by clicking the button below.
Alternatively, you can create an avatar that will appear whenever you leave a comment on a Gravatar-enabled blog.