Sony BMG to Offer DRM-Free Music

[err404]

Well they think all songs are worth more than 99 cents, and they want to go back to the CD era where they "bundle" 2 hit songs and some average songs for $18.

These bonehead companies apparently can't remember that it is Apple that popularized the digital purchase of music with the ease of use of iTunes (when the option is FREE file sharing).

So iTunes wins when competing with free file sharing.
The question is would iTunes win when the competition is "variable (high) pricing", "bundling" of songs at a higher price?

Their wont be an iTMS with fixed pricing to compete with. They cant pull out of iTMS yet because there isn't a viable alternative. So first they have to build that alternative.

Step 1. Support resellers who allows for variable pricing by offering lower cost and DRM free.

Step 2. Over time consumers move to the "superior" value

Step 3. Labels pull out of iTMS saying that "iTMS is bad for the consumer"

Step 4. Raise the price.

or

Step 1. Support resellers who allows for variable pricing by offering lower cost and DRM free.

Step 2. Over time consumers move to the "superior" value

Step 3. Apple gives in and allows for variable pricing

Step 4. Raise the price.

 

[EagerDragon]

A mix news:

On the negative side lots of DRM free music will be available at vendors other than iTune store.

But even bigger and positive to Apple, is that the music will still play on the iPods, so it will still drive sales of the device.

 

[Thataboy]

You throw them out?!

If you can't give it to a friend or family member, do what I do. Wait until you have a handful of CD's, and then bring them to the wherehouse or other music store that buys used CD's! You can make a little money back, and sometimes they even give you more for them if you take store credit, so you can buy more music. Works pretty well IMO.

Or even better... join Lala.com -- awesome CD swapping website.

 

[joemama]

i still don't understand why people use these services, just go buy a damn CD, then u get uncompressed music u can rip to whatever format u want. The only time i use itunes is for exclusives

What's a CD?

 

[Poll Smoker]

A mix news:

On the negative side lots of DRM free music will be available at vendors other than iTune store.

But even bigger and positive to Apple, is that the music will still play on the iPods, so it will still drive sales of the device.

And water's wet...

 

[Thataboy]

I completely see why Jobs insisted on non-variable pricing in the first several years of iTMS. People had to get used to buying music legitimately online. Variable pricing would have been confusing and impede adoption of the business model.

That was then. iTMS is now a powerhouse. People are used to buying music online and there is finally a true competitor in Amazon. Therefore, I think it is time for Jobs to allow variable pricing in iTMS. If that is what is holding back the labels from going iTunes+, then that truly sucks. At this stage, would it be TRULY that confusing and upsetting to see an $0.89 or a $0.99 or a $1.09 in front of a track, and checking it before you click Buy? iTMS already allows variable pricing with albums. If anything, I bet it is MORE confusing to the average consumer that some tracks are + and some aren't.

Making the whole iTMS iTunes+ is way more important than non-variable pricing in 2008. And then we can talk about offering Apple Lossless for a small premium (please? PLEASE??)

 

[EagerDragon]

Actually, most people don't even know what DRM is.

Great point, as long as the music is available in iTunes, the large unwashed masses will purchase from iTunes since they don't know what DRM is and as such it would make no difference to them.

Love to hear numbers about percentages of users that know or care what DRM is (for music), and numbers of iPod users that also have other non-Apple devices they want to copy music to. (talking about unwash maseses, not you guys).

 

[Stevp1]

Yes, and it was these very same companies that complained when Steve Jobs posted that manifesto of his stating the record companies should drop DRM all together. The CEO of Warner pretty much said he was crazy and should mind his own business. Now they are offering DRM free music themselves.

Ok, as long as they're the crazy ones and not me!

 

[nagromme]

I wish Amazon used AAC/MP4, and the iTunes search and buying system can't be touched--but Amazon is iTunes-friendly, iPod-friendly AND Mac-friendly, and the MP3s are good quality. So I'll happily shop at Amazon too. Between Amazon and iTunes Plus, I like my options more and more.

 

[SFC Archer]

I think it is good that they are selling DRM free music. This is a good alternative for those who pirate music. However, it is very bad that they are not selling it on the iTunes Music store.

They are not only saying FU to Apple, they are also saying FU to all of Apple's iTunes customers including me. I'm sure they also don't want to let iTunes existing customers upgrade their content for free. Rather have them buy it again.

I'd love to buy iTunes Plus music for all of my catalog. I upgraded all of my content when the option was available. I'd do it again for .30 per track or something reasonable.

I don't want to go to another store to buy my music. I don't want to keep track of which artist is DRM Free and available on Amazon versus iTunes. It's not worth it.

Steve is a good businessman and has been the staunchest and highest profile advocate for removing DRM. He is also a music fan. I know where my loyalty lies. I know who wants me to enjoy music and profit from it and who wants to screw me or sue me at every opportunity. Thanks but no thanks.

And yes it will benefit the sales of MP3 players including iPhones and iPods especially.

Jeff...just so you know, the option is still available and is updated weekly. In the right hand box where you see "iTues Plus (NEW)" Click that button...it will check all of your old purchases before the DRM change and allow you to upgrade everyweek any new songs that have been updated. Check it weekly

Just infor for you!

 

[EagerDragon]

You throw them out?!

If you can't give it to a friend or family member, do what I do. Wait until you have a handful of CD's, and then bring them to the wherehouse or other music store that buys used CD's! You can make a little money back, and sometimes they even give you more for them if you take store credit, so you can buy more music. Works pretty well IMO.

That would be illigal, I do not believe the RIAA would like you to share your music with others in that way. I believe you can sell the CD but I believe you need to get rid of your copy first.

Then again acording to the RIAA, you are not suppoced to rip the CD to begin with, which I hope gets clarified in court soon. RIAA loves FUD.

 

[antmeeks]

I hope they don't * this up.

Steve Jobs should capitalize on this development by going back to all the labels and saying "I'll let you price and package your music however you want, if you give me all the music DRM-free, and allow me to sell & rent all your movies through iTunes." Imagine any media in the world being available, ON-DEMAND, from your TV set-top and a remote. This would be a complete revolution where everyone wins. The entertainment companies open an exponentially growing revenue stream, Apple keeps selling the best software/hardware, and consumers are happy, happy, happy. I, for one, pledge that if this happens, my iPod, iPhone, and AppleTV will never again acquire content from any other source than iTunes.

 

[err404]

You throw them out?!

If you can't give it to a friend or family member, do what I do. Wait until you have a handful of CD's, and then bring them to the wherehouse or other music store that buys used CD's! You can make a little money back, and sometimes they even give you more for them if you take store credit, so you can buy more music. Works pretty well IMO.

I was moving at the time and wanted to reduce boxes. Some of my friends picked through them first. Since then I have largely avoided buying CD's and DRM.

And no, I don't download music illegally (the RIAA is to scary), I abstain where possible. The industry has really turned my off as a consumer. I listen to mainly older or free music.

I only buy what I really like and only if I can do so DRM free.

 

[jholzner]

i still don't understand why people use these services, just go buy a damn CD, then u get uncompressed music u can rip to whatever format u want. The only time i use itunes is for exclusives

Probably because people don't want the whole album. That's why I buy digitally.

 

[PNW]

Their wont be an iTMS with fixed pricing to compete with. They cant pull out of iTMS yet because there isn't a viable alternative. So first they have to build that alternative.

Step 1. Support resellers who allows for variable pricing by offering lower cost and DRM free.

Step 2. Over time consumers move to the "superior" value

Step 3. Labels pull out of iTMS saying that "iTMS is bad for the consumer"

Step 4. Raise the price.

or

Step 1. Support resellers who allows for variable pricing by offering lower cost and DRM free.

Step 2. Over time consumers move to the "superior" value

Step 3. Apple gives in and allows for variable pricing

Step 4. Raise the price.

Step 5. People who said "why steal what I can get legally for a buck", start saying "why pay three bucks for something I can get for free".

 

[SFC Archer]

That would be illigal, I do not believe the RIAA would like you to share your music with others in that way. I believe you can sell the CD but I believe you need to get rid of your copy first.

Then again acording to the RIAA, you are not suppoced to rip the CD to begin with, which I hope gets clarified in court soon. RIAA loves FUD.

The ones I have seen do not give money for them...They give in store credit to use on other CD's/DVD's.

They also do it for VHS. Its like a trade two for one type thing...no money leaves the store...only pawn shops do that. Again...this is for the ones I have seen, there may be others.

ooops...disregard...i see your intent, misread your statement. Still see alot of warehouses doing the 2 for 1 trade/in store credit thing and they haven't been sued...yet, but I think you are right in the "legal" side of things.

 

[brewcitywi]

finally

I can finally stop worrying about germs when I order songs.

Do you know how many times, in the past year, that I have had to wipe down my keyboard, and run anti-virus software? After the Zeppelin boxed set download...I had to do a clean install after I got an ear infection. And you know that it's not covered under my health insurance!

Help!!! DRM quick!

I don't want to have to call the exterminator again!

-Music Lover

 

[err404]

Steve Jobs should capitalize on this development by going back to all the labels and saying "I'll let you price and package your music however you want, if you give me all the music DRM-free, and allow me to sell & rent all your movies through iTunes." Imagine any media in the world being available, ON-DEMAND, from your TV set-top and a remote. This would be a complete revolution where everyone wins. The entertainment companies open an exponentially growing revenue stream, Apple keeps selling the best software/hardware, and consumers are happy, happy, happy. I, for one, pledge that if this happens, my iPod, iPhone, and AppleTV will never again acquire content from any other source than iTunes.

and have 1/2 hour TV shows at $5 an episode? no thank you.

 

[CWallace]

I suppose if the RIAA and MPAA do re-define fair use to not allow you playing CDs except in CD players and DVDs except in DVD players and outlaws DVRs, folks will just read e-books.

 

[EagerDragon]

The ones I have seen do not give money for them...They give in store credit to use on other CD's/DVD's.

They also do it for VHS. Its like a trade two for one type thing...no money leaves the store...only pawn shops do that. Again...this is for the ones I have seen, there may be others.

While unlikely that the RIAA may go after you, they still can, and by posting already said that was guilty. So easy case, LOL.

 

[SFC Archer]

While unlikely that the RIAA may go after you, they still can, and by posting already said that was guilty. So easy case, LOL.

i agree...caught myself...see your previous post...i fixed my statement.

Sorry

 

[LethalWolfe]

I don't understand why the labels want to take "power" away from the iTMS. Do they try to take power away from other retail outlets like WalMart, HMV, or Virgin?

Wal-Mart, for example, is throwing it's weight around to hamstring online movie downloads because they are afraid those will undercut it's retail DVD sales. And since Wal-Mart is the number 1 DVD retailer it can use that power to leverage the movie studios to do what Wal-Mart wants. No company wants to be in a position where a retailer has enough leverage to dictate how that company runs it's business.

Of course a massive irony here is that Apple controls its retailers and resellers w/an iron fist and no one complains, but when, let's say, a record label wants similar control of how it's product is sold people bust out the pitchforks and torches.

Competition is good. I don't want Apple to be the only place to buy music and movies on line anymore than I don't want Apple to be the only place to buy computers or software.


Lethal

 

[antmeeks]

and have 1/2 hour TV shows at $5 an episode? no thank you.

Uh, I don't think anyone would pay $5/episode. I never will. But I will rent them, buy entire seasons, and buy season passes..

 

[SthrnCmfrtr]

Also, stop calling CD's (and WAV's or other lossless codecs encoded from CDs) lossless. They lose audio data during the digitization process. They are merely higher perceived quality than other file types at lower bitrates. I've plenty of blind surveys done indicating that 80%+ of listeners can't hear the difference from 128k AAC to CD, and that number climbs with higher bitrates to practically 100% at over 256kbs.

Iit is called lossless because you can reconstruct the original information perfectly. No, I can't reconstruct Jimi Hendrix in my living room. I can't reconstruct Joni Mitchell either, not that I'd want to. Considering that data is lost in even an analog recording process, your definition of lossless is completely useless. The original, when a CD track or FLAC or ALAC file is being discussed, is the information on the CD -- so yes, a CD is a lossless copy of a CD. FLAC is a lossless copy of a CD. ALAC is a lossless copy of a CD.

The issue of perceived quality is one that comes up time and time again in these arguments. Personally, I can hear the difference between 128Kbps AAC and lossless. I sometimes hear the difference between 256Kbps AAC and lossless, depending on song and system. What I personally like to do is to keep an original in Apple Lossless and then re-encode the library in 128Kbps AAC for my iPod -- so I receive the benefits of improved sound quality for when I'm sitting around the house, and the benefit of increased storage capacity for when I'm jogging.

The catch is that, if I need to, I can re-encode my lossless library as lossy at any time and match the original lossy files. I cannot, however, reconstruct the lossless files from the lossy library. I burn CDs for my mom all the time -- and her car stereo only plays MP3 and WMA. Should I re-encode the 128Kbps AAC to MP3 of whatever bitrate? Obviously, the Lossless -> MP3 conversion would sound better. I used to have my entire library in MP3 -- should I have directly converted it to AAC? The storage requirement would have gone up and the sound quality would actually have been worse!

There are also some formats that must be stored as stereo lossless files because lossy compression will completely destroy the song -- DTS-encoded CDs, for instance, just sound like white noise when encoded lossily.

 

[CWallace]

The catch is that, if I need to, I can re-encode my lossless library as lossy at any time and match the original lossy files. I cannot, however, reconstruct the lossless files from the lossy library.

Bingo.

I rip my entire CD library to FLAC because I know it's as good (enough) as the original CD should I chose to re-encode it in a new format, it is easier to just make a copy of the FLACs to re-encode instead of re-ripping my entire CD library in the new format.