Apple Negotiating More DRM-Free Music for iTunes

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/11/19/apple-negotiating-more-drm-free-music-for-iphones/)

CNet confirms (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10102414-37.html) some earlier rumors that Apple is in ongoing negotiations with the major music studios to offer more DRM (copy protection) free music in iTunes. Earlier rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/11/09/sony-bmg-to-offer-drm-free-music-on-apples-itunes/) had suggested that Sony BMG had already agreed but CNet was unable to confirm this. A year after iTunes began offering music without copy protection software from EMI, Apple is in discussions with the other three top recording companies about acquiring DRM-free songs, according to two music industry sources.Apple first started selling DRM Free tracks (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/05/30itunesplus.html) known as iTunes Plus in May, 2007.

Despite Apple's willingness to sell DRM-free music, the other major record labels have withheld this ability from the company in an effort to reduce iTunes' marketshare in digital music downloads. The biggest beneficiary appears to be Amazon who currently offers DRM-free digital downloads from all four major music studios.

CNet warns that talks have been on and off for months so there is no guarantee that they will be able to come to a deal.



Article Link: Apple Negotiating More DRM-Free Music for iTunes (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/11/19/apple-negotiating-more-drm-free-music-for-iphones/)

[Aldaris]

I'm sorry but that headline is misleading, anyway, bring it on- as far as I know iTunes Plus songs can be tossed into garageband and make free ringtones... Oops have I said too much...

[ajrandall]

Is it legal for the record companies to offer such a sweet deal to Amazon, but to then not offer the same deal to Apple? Seems like collusion and anti-competitive behavior to me..

[Digital Skunk]

I'm sorry but that headline is misleading, anyway, bring it on- as far as I know iTunes Plus songs can be tossed into garageband and make free ringtones... Oops have I said too much...

I agree, i was wanting to know why just iPhones, like iPhones get their content from somewhere other than iTunes.

And yes! Give me DRM free music!

[alphaod]

Is it legal for the record companies to offer such a sweet deal to Amazon, but to then not offer the same deal to Apple? Seems like collusion and anti-competitive behavior to me..

I think it's fair to say that the record labels don't want just Apple with all the marketshare; by giving leverage to Amazon, it would create a more even market. Quite frankly if you have an iPod or iPhone, odds are you would buy music from Apple. There needs to be a that incentive to not buy from Apple.

[epilef987]

I agree, i was wanting to know why just iPhones, like iPhones get their content from somewhere other than iTunes.

And yes! Give me DRM free music!

I'm more excited about a wider selection of 256kb/s music.

[fleshman03]

And lets not forget that the RIAA does not like that little SJ rant from a little while back.

[Srai-W]

Bring it on I say. If Apple can actually bring out more DRM-Free music then why not. All my friends who have ipods use the :apple:store so it will benefit a heck of a lot of people.

[koobcamuk]

There needs to be a that incentive to not buy from Apple.

I don't believe this is the correct thought process. Apple make the iPod and the iPhone. Surely iTunes is the first port of call - at least there is a choice! Imagine if Apple had originally made iTunes Apple Lossless only... It's like Microsoft installing Internet Explorer - fine in my book. It's like Adobe and pdfs.

Otherwise, let's lose all exclusivity and have all games across all console platforms, all OSes on all computers... :confused:

[Fhybr]

I wonder where some of these decision makers learned their marketing skills. If I have a product that I want to sell to as many people as possible then I would try as hard as I can to get my product into all the outlets that are available to me. And most importantly, I would try to get my product into an outlet that has lots of traffic, ie lots of customers who buy.
But now there seems to be a new scheme, by some "business people" that seems to say, "well I don't really like this outlet because they are too big and have too good a distribution system, so I am not going to allow them (Apple and iTunes) to distribute my music, movies or TV shows. I am just going to cut off my nose to spite my face, so there!!"
I guess some distributors are just doing too well and don't really want us to buy their products.

:cool:

[Jollins]

I wonder where some of these decision makers learned their marketing skills. If I have a product that I want to sell to as many people as possible then I would try as hard as I can to get my product into all the outlets that are available to me. And most importantly, I would try to get my product into an outlet that has lots of traffic, ie lots of customers who buy.
But now there seems to be a new scheme, by some "business people" that seems to say, "well I don't really like this outlet because they are too big and have too good a distribution system, so I am not going to allow them (Apple and iTunes) to distribute my music, movies or TV shows. I am just going to cut off my nose to spite my face, so there!!"
I guess some distributors are just doing too well and don't really want us to buy their products.

:cool:
Perhaps they figured they could cut back on Apple's marketshare and that they could build up and then push around a smaller online music seller, and thus make more money by raising licensing fees (which a smaller distributor couldn't fight back against as easily).

Anyway this is good news. I've got a lot of iTunes credit that I rarely use because most of the music I want in the store is DRM-ridden, so this means the iTunes music store will soon actually be a source for music for me.

[dernhelm]

Is it legal for the record companies to offer such a sweet deal to Amazon, but to then not offer the same deal to Apple? Seems like collusion and anti-competitive behavior to me..

Yeah it sure does. Record companies have deep pockets and lots and lots of attorney's, and it wouldn't be in Apple's interest to sue them, but it sure seems like behavior that is not in the interest of any consumer.

[TuffLuffJimmy]

That thread title is a pretty lame way to get more views. Come on MacRumors, seriously?

Anyway of course Apple is negotiating for more DRM free music. How in anyway is this news?! This is really scraping the bottom of the bucket.

This just in Apple researching faster chips for their next iMacs, no one is quite sure if the faster chips will make their way into the next Macbooks.

[Digital Skunk]

I'm more excited about a wider selection of 256kb/s music.

This too. I have plenty of space on my Classic for better sounding, crisper music.

[macbookairapple]

So if they do get DRM free music, what happens to all our songs purchased with DRM, will we be able to remove DRM from the songs?

[TuffLuffJimmy]

So if they do get DRM free music, what happens to all our songs purchased with DRM, will we be able to remove DRM from the songs?

not a chance.

[Bobcat37]

So if they do get DRM free music, what happens to all our songs purchased with DRM, will we be able to remove DRM from the songs?

I'm sure you'll just have to pay the 'upgrade' fee like they offer right now... I think it's like 30 cents per song to get rid of the DRM.

It's lame, I know, but I for one would do it to get the higher quality files without protection.

This is why I comparison shop between Amazon and Apple these days... usually Amazon wins, so it would be in Apple's interest to get on the ball and be more competitive.

[PlaceofDis]

not a chance.

of course you will. for an 'upgrade' cost. its already in place.

[TuffLuffJimmy]

of course you will. for an 'upgrade' cost. its already in place.

But there's no price difference between current DRM'd tracks and iTunes plus tracks. So what's the incentive for them to give us the choice?

[Winni]

More DRM-free music on iTunes. Good for those who care.

In the meantime, can't we just remove some jail features from iTunes itself so that I can use my iPod Touch as a backup device for my music, meaning that I can also copy all those DRM-free mp3 files back from the iPod to ANY of my computers? As you all know, this currently only works for files that one has bought from the iTunes store, but NOT for self-ripped music tracks.

That's my most hated "feature" #1, and it effectively makes any iPod Touch or iPhone a useless piece of junk. At least with the other iPods, you can use third party software (like Banshee, for example) to work around that Apple DRM-crap.

My iPod Touch was the first and the last iPod that I've ever bought thanks to that idiotic crippling of the device.

[Snowy_River]

I wonder where some of these decision makers learned their marketing skills. If I have a product that I want to sell to as many people as possible then I would try as hard as I can to get my product into all the outlets that are available to me. And most importantly, I would try to get my product into an outlet that has lots of traffic, ie lots of customers who buy.
But now there seems to be a new scheme, by some "business people" that seems to say, "well I don't really like this outlet because they are too big and have too good a distribution system, so I am not going to allow them (Apple and iTunes) to distribute my music, movies or TV shows. I am just going to cut off my nose to spite my face, so there!!"
I guess some distributors are just doing too well and don't really want us to buy their products.

:cool:

I think it's more along the lines of "We don't like this outlet because they're too big and are trying to use their size to exert undue influence over us, like telling us how much our music should sell for. So, we'll try to knock some of the wind out of their sales by giving their competitors an advantage over them. Then, when they're nice and softened up, they'll know who the boss really is, and we can go back to lining our pockets with gobs and gobs of money... muhuhahahahahahahahaha!"

Except that it hasn't worked all that well. Sure Amazon has been helped by this, but the number of consumers who actually pay attention to whether or not a song has DRM is, I'd guess, a very small percentage. Most consumers simply go to the easiest source for the music that they want, and that is still, for the most part, iTunes. So, the studios are being shown who the real boss is...

But there's no price difference between current DRM'd tracks and iTunes plus tracks. So what's the incentive for them to give us the choice?

I think the choice is there just because of the legacy of the system. I'm sure that once Apple can move everyone to "iTunes Plus", then all the old songs will one day just disappear. Then there will just be "iTunes" again.

[Michael CM1]

1) It's a freakin' typo, people. The OP meant iTunes, not iPhones. As Bartleby said in Dogma, "you have to keep reading!"

2) This is all nice, but it's a bunch of poo unless they offer free or extremely reduced upgrades on previously purchased music. It would cost me $50 to upgrade just what I have now to iTunes Plus (even though it costs THE SAME now).

3) On AppleInsider, they said "DRM-free MP3s". I hope that was just a typo there. I don't see why Apple would change from AAC to MP3 since, from what everybody seems to say on here, AAC is a lot better at the same bitrate.

[Snowy_River]

2) This is all nice, but it's a bunch of poo unless they offer free or extremely reduced upgrades on previously purchased music. It would cost me $50 to upgrade just what I have now to iTunes Plus (even though it costs THE SAME now).

Do you understand why there's an upgrade charge? They have to pay for the bandwidth to serve all the people who want to upgrade. So, I'd say $0.30 is a pretty cheap price. And $50 means that you'd be upgrading almost 200 songs.

Now, I'm not saying it couldn't be cheaper. I just think that it's pretty silly to get upset for a few cents.

[slughead]

Uh... What does this have to do with the iPhone?

Who the crap cares if the music on my iPhone is DRM free? Apple keeps me from transferring them anyway with their nazi-ass lockout.

As far as DRM free itunes: I don't buy/obtain anything other than DRM-free, so that means I basically don't use itunes 99% of the time due to lack of selection. Oh, plus it costs too much a lot of the time.

I mean, I can't believe anyone would buy DRM, now with that HDCP thing basically showing us that Apple can 'change the deal' anytime they want. How long before something similar to HDCP only for audio comes along and we're unable to listen to all those tracks we bought?

With DRM, you WILL lose your collection some day. It's a fact.

Edited to add this:
I just think that it's pretty silly to get upset for a few cents.

Right now, I have 15,984 tracks in my library. Some of them are audio books so we'll say an even 15,000. If I'd bought all those off itunes and wanted to upgrade, it would cost me $4,500. $.30 is 30% of what I would've paid for those tracks, which is way too much, especially considering it costs them next to nothing for bandwidth (they'd profit off of 1 penny per song).

[slughead]

Do you understand why there's an upgrade charge? They have to pay for the bandwidth to serve all the people who want to upgrade.

There's no way bandwidth costs more than a quarter of a cent per song. I will pay Zero, and with each song I upgrade, I want an apology emailed to me stating that they're sorry for trying to lock me in :)

[arn]

sorry. fixed typo in title.

iphone on the brain. I can't seem to type itunes or iphoto anymore.

arn

[TuffLuffJimmy]

sorry. fixed typo in title.

iphone on the brain. I can't seem to type itunes or iphoto anymore.

arn

I'm still waiting for my iPhone update that allows for better quality prints from Apple's printing service.

[manu chao]

In the meantime, can't we just remove some jail features from iTunes itself so that I can use my iPod Touch as a backup device for my music
MB per MB, any iPod is probably the most expensive backup device one could imagine. If you really need another 30 GB of storage for backups, I can send you an unused 60 GB drive that is sitting in a drawer of mine. But anyway there is plenty of software that can get you any files out of any iPod.

I always tell people that I have at least for copies of all my data but it never occurred to me that I have a fifth copy of my music on my iPod.

[Michael CM1]

MB per MB, any iPod is probably the most expensive backup device one could imagine. If you really need another 30 GB of storage for backups, I can send you an unused 60 GB drive that is sitting in a drawer of mine. But anyway there is plenty of software that can get you any files out of any iPod.

I always tell people that I have at least for copies of all my data but it never occurred to me that I have a fifth copy of my music on my iPod.

Tell me about it. You can find good 250GB external hard drives for under $100, instead of the 120GB iPod at $250. Whenever Blu-ray Discs hit the Mac, those would be awesome to use for an entire library backup with a single layer disc holding 25GB.

[Lancetx]

This is why I comparison shop between Amazon and Apple these days... usually Amazon wins, so it would be in Apple's interest to get on the ball and be more competitive.

How exactly can Apple be more competitive when the labels (other than EMI) simply won't allow them to sell their music without DRM like they do Amazon? The playing field obviously isn't level, so that's definitely not Apple's fault.

[shadownddust]

I think it really comes down to the record companies making sure they still have influence. It's really not in their interest to let Apple control the majority of their sales. I think their hope is that Amazon will become a household name (which I don't see happening, at least not for online music sales) and then they will gain from the two services competing and neither willing to just toss off a record company the way Apple did to NBC shows before when they didn't agree with pricing issues.

[chequepoint]

I work in the music industry, though no longer for one of the majors. I since have my own label and sell to iTunes DRM free, along with every other outlet.

BUT the legitimate fear of the majors is a pretty simple one. Right now iTunes pays better than any other online outlet, and is the most popular. Its great. No complaints.
However, we've seen this before. When Best Buy and Wal-Mart became major players in the scene it was wonderful. They were moving tons of product, doing creative promotions, and paying better than anyone else.

Now there is nothing but Best Buy and Wal-Mart. The indie record chains have all been destroyed, and Best Buy and Wal-Mart rake us over the coals, demand better and better deals, force us to pay them money just for shelf space, demand exclusive product, etc. Its a nightmare.

Nobody wants to see that happen on the digital side, so the industry has taken an interest in building up the competition to a point. Right now we let them all keep more of the money, cut them special deals, etc. to help them gain market share. Its not that anybody wants to see iTunes fall, they just don't want to see them get greedy and powerful. I think ideally they want iTunes at around 40 percent of the digital market, amazon around the same, and then all the other companies scrambling over the last 20 percent.

[eleven59]

i understand not wanting apple to have the be all end all monopoly on music, but how does that stop you from still giving DRM free music to ALL download places?? you mean to tell me you cant let both amazon and apple have it??

no this is clearly bc they hate APPLE's power to make them force to work with apple. as someone said, if you have a product you want to make money on, you get it to everybodies hands.. unless you are biased..

[BWhaler]

The record labels will be wise to get on board with iTunes+Plus since I will happily upgrade my significant music collection and give them another 30 cents a song.

The support Amazon with no DRM just isn't going to work outside a small niche of the market. The bottom line is most people don't understand bit rates, DRM, etc. They know their iPod and iTunes, and they know with one click they can have more music. Accordingly, instead of hurting Apple, all they are doing is leaving money on the table. A lot of money.

If they don't want my money, fine. With this great economy, I understand they must have tons of options to make money. But if there are smart, they will take people's money while they can.

[Axegrinder]

I gave up buying music from iTunes as soon as I discovered www.7digital.com. Nearly every major labels music catalogue, DRM free, and the ability to download it again for free should you somehow manage to lose your copy with no backup, for instance.

They also have good promotions. I bought Kings of Leon's new album on a pre-order for £5 when on iTunes it was £7.99 and I've just pre-ordered Guns n Roses for £5 too.

bye bye iTunes.

[Michael CM1]

I work in the music industry, though no longer for one of the majors. I since have my own label and sell to iTunes DRM free, along with every other outlet.

BUT the legitimate fear of the majors is a pretty simple one. Right now iTunes pays better than any other online outlet, and is the most popular. Its great. No complaints.
However, we've seen this before. When Best Buy and Wal-Mart became major players in the scene it was wonderful. They were moving tons of product, doing creative promotions, and paying better than anyone else.

Now there is nothing but Best Buy and Wal-Mart. The indie record chains have all been destroyed, and Best Buy and Wal-Mart rake us over the coals, demand better and better deals, force us to pay them money just for shelf space, demand exclusive product, etc. Its a nightmare.

Nobody wants to see that happen on the digital side, so the industry has taken an interest in building up the competition to a point. Right now we let them all keep more of the money, cut them special deals, etc. to help them gain market share. Its not that anybody wants to see iTunes fall, they just don't want to see them get greedy and powerful. I think ideally they want iTunes at around 40 percent of the digital market, amazon around the same, and then all the other companies scrambling over the last 20 percent.

I'll agree with you about the Wal-Mart thing. I think a lot of their turn to evil happened when Sam Walton died and his kids took over, which often spoils other businesses as well. I can also see where you're going with Best Buy since Circuit City is pulling up anchor all around here. Luckily, we have numerous other stores to fill that gap -- hh gregg, Fry's Electronics, Brandsmart USA among others. hh gregg just started building stores here about 5 years ago, so I'm hoping that Circuit City's failing is maybe part of HHG's success. I wanted to laugh every time I saw the Blu-ray Disc prices at Circuit City. Half the stuff was $35.

I get the theory about the major labels, but right now they're looking like the bad guys. They are still the bad guys from trying to stifle downloadable music a decade ago, so I would call it a VERY BAD MOVE on their part. Their movie studio counterparts aren't doing any favors as well with the ridiculous prices for movies on iTunes. No special features, no hard copy, more compressed version, but you're gonna charge me about the same for it. It takes a really good ear to tell the difference between a CD and stuff you buy on iTunes. It's much easier to tell the video and sound quality between a DVD movie and a digital iTunes movie. Not having a way to play said movie with a DVD player is killing that expansion since the smart ones out here will buy DVDs and then go to town with HandBrake.

The good news for you is that indies are on the way back up with digital distribution methods. While I hate MySpace with a passion now, it has allowed independent artists to reach people like crazy. Same thing with iTunes. But if people want to keep iTunes and Apple from dominating, they should make digital media players and digital media stores that don't suck. Amazon has a decent store, but NOBODY makes a DMP that compares to the iPod. Who here would rather have a Zune with a video screen than an iPod Shuffle? (Nada)

[DAAAAAAAVE]

The way i see this is that the further legal digital distribution is deregulated, the larger of the illegal market share they will convert. It has to be accepted that illegal distribution will never be stopped but who can argue with 99c a song? DRM free is just another step to convince people that it is legal. I have a lot of friends who are in to bands that you simply can't find in local cd stores, but are on itunes store. Because of the limitations of DRM the general attitude is "screw this, fire up bittorrent"

[iWizzard]

A subscription service for itunes store (musik and TV/movie) would be way more useful than DRM free media.

With a subscrition sevice I would eaven welcome DRM for the few ocation where I dont have brodband conection and you have to transfer/play media on an offline device.

[MacFly123]

as far as I know iTunes Plus songs can be tossed into garageband and make free ringtones... Oops have I said too much...

Since when is it a secret that you can make free ringtones in Garage Band??? You can also make them for free in iTunes if you just convert the files tricky style.

Anyway, I am all for DRM being rid of forever off the face of the earth!

[DAAAAAAAVE]

You can also just bluetooth the whole song off your comp onto your phone and hey presto you have a ringtone

[Eric2]

Good news but wish you could download even higher bit rates. Lossless not this compressed rubbish.

[The Tall One]

DRM is not the future. The sooner Apple realizes this the better.

[NightStorm]

DRM is not the future. The sooner Apple realizes this the better.
Why does Apple need to realize this? They do not control the music... :confused:

[morespce54]

...
With DRM, you WILL lose your collection some day. It's a fact.


Technically that could be true but not if you burn your songs on audio CDs before that day...

[twoodcc]

well i really hope they do come to a deal and get this worked out

[notjustjay]

DRM is not the future. The sooner Apple realizes this the better.

Uh... I think Apple realized this a long time ago.

Hence Apple negotiating for more DRM-free music for iTunes... ?

[shiseiryu1]

The back-stabbing record companies need to stop toying with Apple and put their entire libraries online DRM-free. If it wasn't for Apple, millions of people would still be downloading songs illegally. Apple was the first company to actually do online music right and the record companies ought to be thankful instead of being back-stabbing turds. :)

[spice weasel]

It's not the DRM that gets me, it's the DRM and the low bitrate for iTMS songs. I've long since stopped buying digital music. Now I just pay a bit more for a CD, rip it at whatever bitrate I want, and have it for use in the car. And I buy most of my CDs at a local shop where I have the satisfaction of keeping my money in the community and supporting a music lover (and his dog who roams the shop).

[Digital Skunk]

DRM is not the future. The sooner Apple realizes this the better.

It's okay, your new to the ongoing struggle Apple has had with the music companies to provide DRM free music.

The story did say that the music companies didn't provide Apple with the rights to DRM free music because the music companies were trying to decrease Apple's market share.

In other words.... Apple gets it! One of the few things they do get, but they get it.

[mdntcallr]

It's okay, your new to the ongoing struggle Apple has had with the music companies to provide DRM free music.

The story did say that the music companies didn't provide Apple with the rights to DRM free music because the music companies were trying to decrease Apple's market share.

In other words.... Apple gets it! One of the few things they do get, but they get it.

No, the main thing apple gets is their desire to continue their Hegemony over the portable media market and digital music sales.

honestly, to strip DRM, it probably isn't in artists or labels interests to do such because it is only going to lead to more and more piracy. yes, what happens when you buy a song on itunes and you love it, no DRM, why not just email it to your friend? alot of people are gonna do that and it will really hurt artists.

sorry, but this issue is not as clear cut as you think it is. instead you honestly believe that in your tone that Music Companies are wrong, hell many even think evil. But this is just a part of a long campaign to destabilize the value of music.

why not... artists don't deserve to get paid for their music. go ahead and steal it!

this type of thinking that copyrights and artists shouldn't be valued is bonkers, also there are alot of great people working with artists at labels and more who really work hard and do deserve to earn an income. Getting on tour, music videos, publicity and alot more takes time, people and money.

[aristobrat]

No, the main thing apple gets is their desire to continue their Hegemony over the portable media market and digital music sales.
Most people try to make the point that Apple is *for* DRM because its customers have lots of money invested in songs that only play on Apple devices (so they could never afford to switch to a competing device and repurchase their music). So you're making the point that Apple's *against* DRM so that they can continue their hegemony? Seems like Apple gets to keep it however this comes out.

honestly, to strip DRM, it probably isn't in artists or labels interests to do such because it is only going to lead to more and more piracy.
There are a lot of people who pirate precisely because of the fact that you can't buy DRM-free music (and they don't want to get caught in the DRM-trap as mentioned above (with player lock-in), or have to worry about their DRM'ed purchase not playing anymore, like when MSN Music and Yahoo Music shutdown).

this type of thinking that copyrights and artists shouldn't be valued is bonkers
IMO, what's bonkers is your thought that only thru DRM music will copyrights and artists be valued.

[shadownddust]

What makes this such a sticky issue is that without DRM, sharing would progress even further, keeping the artist from making even a fraction of what they are making right now. The few DRM songs that I have I don't share, because I can't, and I'm not authorizing everyone I know (not that I could). In this instance, it's doing what it is supposed to be doing. The problem is that DRM eventually just makes it difficult for people who spend the money, buy the song, and then want to use it however they see fit, within their legal rights, but can't. That goes for nearly any copy protection implementation.

It sucks both ways, and either solution is cause for concern for both parties. Leave DRM, people are pissed, sharing still occurs. Get rid of DRM, people are happy, sharing still occurs, and artists now have to get a second (or third) job.

Of course DRM-free music is available at any brick and mortar store (read CD's).

[killmoms]

It sucks both ways, and either solution is cause for concern for both parties. Leave DRM, people are pissed, sharing still occurs. Get rid of DRM, people are happy, sharing still occurs, and artists now have to get a second (or third) job.

Of course DRM-free music is available at any brick and mortar store (read CD's).

I think you're overestimating the damage that DRM-free downloads will do. Amazon has had DRM-free MP3s from every major label for ages now, and artists aren't having to get a second or third job.

All DRM does is punish those who want to use the music legitimately. Those who have the know-how will strip (or avoid) it either way. By eliminating DRM you remove headaches from the purchase/use of digital music, thereby opening up the market to people who were before frustrated by incompatibility or weirdnesses. You might have a slight uptick in sharing, but I doubt it will be to the level you describe, if only because it will be offset by the surge in sales due to the increased ease-of-use that comes with DRM-free music.

[notjustjay]

Of course DRM-free music is available at any brick and mortar store (read CD's).

And this is still how I buy the vast majority of my music, then I rip it myself. For a small premium I get a physical piece of media as well as liner art. It's DRM-free and it's already backed up for safekeeping.

I suspect that even if iTunes switches to all-DRM free music, buying CD's will still be a very popular option for precisely those reasons.

[aristobrat]

I suspect that even if iTunes switches to all-DRM free music, buying CD's will still be a very popular option for precisely those reasons.
For some. ;) Personally, I'm old enough where I can't hear the difference between what I download from Amazon.com (256kbps) and stuff I rip myself, and I hate having to physically store the stuff. Digital to me is a godsend. :)

[rhett7660]

I hope this happens.... end drm........ I still have a huge cd collection. Don't mind storing them as long as I have a garage with the space but I agree with others. Digitial is very nice!

[chequepoint]

For me, and my label, we've essentially abandoned the CD for 2009. Its vinyl or digital. If you want to sit at home and experience fidelity, vinyl is the solution. If you want audio in your car or computer, go digital. Burn your own CD if you need it. We package the downloads with the Vinyl. Problem solved. It actually fascinates me that people will spend a ton of money on a blue ray player for added fidelity, but when you suggest they do the same with a record player they look at you like you're crazy. Trust me, try it. Modern Vinyl = High Def.

[wbeasley]

Do you understand why there's an upgrade charge? They have to pay for the bandwidth to serve all the people who want to upgrade. So, I'd say $0.30 is a pretty cheap price. And $50 means that you'd be upgrading almost 200 songs.

Now, I'm not saying it couldn't be cheaper. I just think that it's pretty silly to get upset for a few cents.

$0.30 for a few MEGABYTES is over the top. When you can buy a few GIG a month for $20, the requirements for redownloading arent that high.

Perhaps it's because we are paying for a whole new licence to the music industry. Don't the copyright owners get 8 or 9 cents a song? So maybe that's part of the reload fee... just a thought.

Also, totally agree with other poster about freeing up copying. On other MP3 players I can move anything I damn well like, either onto or off of. If it's not DRMed, we should be able to move anything we like around. The more iPods I collect over time, the harder it gets to stay within the 5 licences arrangement. I'm sure there are people with more than me who would find this restriction even more annoying.

[JQW]

The iTunes store is now offering me upgrades to iTunes Plus of several albums I've bought from Universal's labels. The same albums are still listed in the store as being available in the older format only.

This is from the UK version of the iTunes store, by the way.