I think my percentage of DRM music is much lower. I have about 300 purchased DRM trackes from iTunes and another 19,600 unprotected tracks from CDS....
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Steve Jobs 'Thoughts on Music'
- Thread starter spicyapple
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Wishful thinking. More likely, Apple's contract with the Big Four stipulates that Apple not get into the recording business.
I'd venture to guess this is also the reason why Apple doesn't offer DRM-free songs from independent lables.
No DRM
Yes! No DRM. I would actually buy more music from the iTunes store if it didn't have DRM. As it is, I'm more likely to buy a new or used CD and rip it. That's still an excellent option, though, because it keeps my local music store in business. . .
Yes! No DRM. I would actually buy more music from the iTunes store if it didn't have DRM. As it is, I'm more likely to buy a new or used CD and rip it. That's still an excellent option, though, because it keeps my local music store in business. . .
It's only recently that they've put a lot of that non-original-artist crap up. It is annoying. But, for the right kind of listener emusic is still cool. They just don't have 'mainstream' music because (almost by definition) mainstream musicians are all on the major labels, and the major labels all demand DRM.
Steve's point is that the DRM is not Apple's doing, it's the labels. The same labels that are already selling 90% of their music the old-fashioned no-DRM way, on CD. And that remains the best choice for consumers. The same major labels that are the boat anchors on the music business keeping it from adapting to the reality of the times, keeping the market static.
Apple is damned if they do and damned if they don't by the deal they have struck with the big four. Open FairPlay up, face an (inevitable) leak, lose the whole license to the library. Not a good choice, I agree with Steve.
Those who have too much time on their hands have already demonstrated some cracks in the armor of HD-DVD/BluRay DRM, so is there really any hope for DRM?
I do find the article a bit short sighted in that it doesn't discuss movies, TV shows or software which face similar problems. Plus, I agree with those that say that Steve could put his money where his mouth is in offering at least some music DRM free or at least in FairPlay wrapped Apple Lossless (essentially unprotected).
B
As for "when" I think you have some rosy goggles on. Microsoft is very far from taking over the iPod. They don't have a truly competing product. It's not that they aren't capable of making one, they just don't have it yet, and their track record would suggest they will never have one with their current business strategy.
I beleive that was the whole point of the article. (did you not read it?)
Apple's Fairplay DRM is in place because that's how Apple can license the music library they offer. The music industry demands DRM for online music stores.
Some Eurpean countries are "attacking" Apple's DRM scheme, and Apple is telling them, "Don't shoot the mesenger".
I think Apple really isn't afraid of a DRM-free world. I beileve that's the way SJ would prefer it, because DRM in any form is limiting (although Fairplay is about a usable as possible). I believe the music industry would probably consider DRM free music because they are desparate to wrangle control from Apple. They have been shot down 3 times (that I know of), trying to increase revenues. They tried to up the price of songs twice, and they have tried to get a cut from iPod sales. Apple has not bowed to them in any of these attempts. If the music industry was to setup their own stores, they would have to sell DRM free tracks for it to be usable on the world's most popular music player - the iPod.
I think this letter is a good move. And I think it shows that Apple has nothing to fear. Competition is good.
emusic has great stuff
emusic has some great stuff. I just got the following that is actually quite hard to find elsewhere. (edit: the Waits release was featured in iTunes front page)
It's all, 100% legal, DRM free and 1/4 the price of iTumes and I've imported it to my iTunes library. Oh and the quality is typically better then 128kbps too.
They have stuff that no one else does. But they don't carry the the top 40 stuff the kids listen to that I'm sure accounts for 90% of music sales.
emusic has some great stuff. I just got the following that is actually quite hard to find elsewhere. (edit: the Waits release was featured in iTunes front page)
- Philip Glass' 2nd and 3rd symphonys
- John Coltrane's European tour from the 1960's
- A new release from Tom Waits
It's all, 100% legal, DRM free and 1/4 the price of iTumes and I've imported it to my iTunes library. Oh and the quality is typically better then 128kbps too.
They have stuff that no one else does. But they don't carry the the top 40 stuff the kids listen to that I'm sure accounts for 90% of music sales.
I agree. This is just postering on Jobs' part so he can tell the European countries that he wants to sell music DRM-free, but see, the record labels just won't cooperate!
I really don't think he's having a go at Europe... its your imagination.
He's describing DRM - and all the hassles that go with it - the complexities arising.
Additionally, as SJ points out - ONLY 3% of music is DRM, whilst the rest is free of DRM. How does that make sense regarding DRM? Music is easily pirated so matter what source - digital or CD. Is DRM the best answer - he's saying No.
All Europe wants are music stores which aren't locked in to a single device. Is that so bad - they want more consumer freedom. You can buy music from Store A and play the content on digital device B. Shocking - you have the freedom to buy online music like you have with brick and mortor stores!!!
Remember, Europe didn't care how this happened - whether DRM was removed or Apple licensed out Fairplay. ADDITIONALLY - it wasn't just aimed at Apple BUT ALL music stores and media players!!!!!!!
Consumer 1 v DRM 0
I feel this is what Apple will start pushing on the labels - "do you think DRM really is the solution?" and ask them to have a long hard think.
He's describing DRM - and all the hassles that go with it - the complexities arising.
Additionally, as SJ points out - ONLY 3% of music is DRM, whilst the rest is free of DRM. How does that make sense regarding DRM? Music is easily pirated so matter what source - digital or CD. Is DRM the best answer - he's saying No.
All Europe wants are music stores which aren't locked in to a single device. Is that so bad - they want more consumer freedom. You can buy music from Store A and play the content on digital device B. Shocking - you have the freedom to buy online music like you have with brick and mortor stores!!!
Remember, Europe didn't care how this happened - whether DRM was removed or Apple licensed out Fairplay. ADDITIONALLY - it wasn't just aimed at Apple BUT ALL music stores and media players!!!!!!!
Consumer 1 v DRM 0
I feel this is what Apple will start pushing on the labels - "do you think DRM really is the solution?" and ask them to have a long hard think.
I'm astounded that Apple, and more specifically Steve Jobs himself would actually publicly comment on the whole DRM situation. I agree wholeheartedly, the sooner the music industry get over this DRM-Fetish the better, its a joke considering CDs are DRM-Free anyway.
I think this is yet more proof that Steve understands the needs and concerns of consumers and while he's stuck with DRM for now, clearly he thinks its time to start moving against it. It's great to see where Apple stands on the DRM issue.
I think this is yet more proof that Steve understands the needs and concerns of consumers and while he's stuck with DRM for now, clearly he thinks its time to start moving against it. It's great to see where Apple stands on the DRM issue.
Well said Mr Jobs. I wholeheartedly agree with your statement. I just hope the record companies do too.
If you don't care that you can play the music you paid for (almost the same price as for a CD!) only on an Apple player, that's your problem. I for one have more than one MP3 player, and not all of them are from Apple. I'm not going to pay the full price for music that I can't play on any device I own.
Anyway, Apple could licence iTunes to other MP3 player manufacturers, then they'd make money with it.
Did you even read the article? The point is that 97% of music on an iPod is not from the iTunes Store.
Can you not use DRM songs in an iMovie or FCP/FCE project?
Can a DRM song not be used in Keynote?
And sorry, but if that movie or presentation or other sort of project involves any sort of non-personal use, ie. public exhibition, entrance into a festival, used to raise funds or otherwise promote your own personal enterprise endeavor (ie. commercials or sales pitches), then you owe the artists/record co. royalties, or at the least, some sort of recognition/permission.
2) License FairPlay to other companies. "The most serious problem is that licensing a DRM involves disclosing some of its secrets to many people in many companies, and history tells us that inevitably these secrets will leak. .... Apple has concluded that if it licenses FairPlay to others, it can no longer guarantee to protect the music it licenses from the big four music companies"
So the FairPlay technology relies on security by obscurity? Come on.. tools to remove the DRM already exist, there's no need for "leaked secrets". This argument just doesn't work.
Just a little self serving don't you think?
I have approximately 1500 protected ACC files on my iPod I also have another approximately 6000 unprotected files from various sources mostly emusic and my own CD collection. This may be a somewhat different ratio from that argued by Steve Jobs but I have a fair bit of disposable income and, I'm sure that his numbers are right as an average.
And here's the but . . . But, on the other hand, I do find Steve's argument a little self-serving. "We are not to blame - it's those guys". Apple has forever tried to keep all of its innovations to itself. It's not a sharing sort of company. Look what happened when they "shared" stuff with Gates - they got ripped off and look what happened when the allowed others to build Mac like machines - it almost killed the company. No friends, we are bound to a highly protectionist company.
The problem is that nobody minded that protectionism when Apple was small and struggling but now that they are described in the press as "Technology Giant Apple" they are perceived" to have monopoly control over downloadable music - now it's another matter. The sharks are circling - look at the huge number of stupid lawsuits that Apple faces - long lines of shiftless CEOs trying to get a payday for the price of a cheap suit (pun intended).
When you couple the tendency toward protectionism with the somewhat hostile waters nurtured by governments that believe that they are protecting "the little guy", I think that Apple finds itself in a pickle. But, self-serving or not, as a result of its success, shifting the blame is probably the best hand that Apple has to play.
At the end of the day, don't get me wrong, I also say to those who are whining - go download from somewhere else or buy a CD.
I have approximately 1500 protected ACC files on my iPod I also have another approximately 6000 unprotected files from various sources mostly emusic and my own CD collection. This may be a somewhat different ratio from that argued by Steve Jobs but I have a fair bit of disposable income and, I'm sure that his numbers are right as an average.
And here's the but . . . But, on the other hand, I do find Steve's argument a little self-serving. "We are not to blame - it's those guys". Apple has forever tried to keep all of its innovations to itself. It's not a sharing sort of company. Look what happened when they "shared" stuff with Gates - they got ripped off and look what happened when the allowed others to build Mac like machines - it almost killed the company. No friends, we are bound to a highly protectionist company.
The problem is that nobody minded that protectionism when Apple was small and struggling but now that they are described in the press as "Technology Giant Apple" they are perceived" to have monopoly control over downloadable music - now it's another matter. The sharks are circling - look at the huge number of stupid lawsuits that Apple faces - long lines of shiftless CEOs trying to get a payday for the price of a cheap suit (pun intended).
When you couple the tendency toward protectionism with the somewhat hostile waters nurtured by governments that believe that they are protecting "the little guy", I think that Apple finds itself in a pickle. But, self-serving or not, as a result of its success, shifting the blame is probably the best hand that Apple has to play.
At the end of the day, don't get me wrong, I also say to those who are whining - go download from somewhere else or buy a CD.
eMusic is the best! I've been a member since May and I've downloaded 440 tracks for $85.92 for an average cost of $.20 (rounded up). That would have cost me $435.60 on the iTS. The interesting part is almost 100% of the tracks I've gotten from my eMusic subscription are available on the iTS, but they are more expensive and have DRM. So I use eMusic.
How do I know they're available on iTS? Because I use iTS to preview everything I download from eMusic.
thats the way it always shoulda been, anyone who buy DRM music is a fool. I just buy CDs and rip them all as unprotected AAC. its the only logical thing to do and what we all did in the past
Agreed. The most telling statistic was that only 3% of music on iPods are iTunes sourced. This means Apple is offering iTunes as a low priority convenience service. Most people most of the time are NOT employing it, except to manage their unprotected music.
I want to see Steve's open letter on Vista and Gates' and Balmer's public comments. That will be a keeper, and please let it be released in Quicktime too. The expressions will be priceless.
Rocketman
Hi Steve
See you at the rocket launch.I'm a fool!thats the way it always shoulda been, anyone who buy DRM music is a fool. I just buy CDs and rip them all as unprotected AAC. its the only logical thing to do and what we all did in the past
I suppose I could go to the store and buy the disk or just download them and burn/rip with my rewritable drive, which takes 10 minutes. Far less time than giong to the store. Well that may not be the case if I were to buy 10 CD's, but I don't usually buy CD's in quantity. 
lets wait when labels stop doing this, that would be the time to test if Jobs said is true, right now, he can blame whoever he want, as long as he doesn't need to make decision right now.
Oh, snap!
Watch as every tech publication, blog, and podcast reports on (and swoons over) this. Jobs has just successfully passed the DRM buck to the labels (where it BELONGS in the first place).
It is great to see Apple ON RECORD saying if the labels allow unrestricted music, they will do it. It is also very clear that Apple considers "option 1", the current model, the only alternative. They will NEVER license FairPlay to tons of manufacturers. When and if they do license it, it will be in a very limited and strictly controlled manner.
EXTREMELY interesting to see him debunk the "FairPlay locks people into iPods" myth. Though I wonder if this is disingenuous. After all, isn't the ENTIRE point of iTMS to sell iPods? If Zune somehow gets 30% marketshare in some imaginary fairyland future, Apple won't mind up to 30% of its iTMS sales going towards Zune users? Maybe this "lockdown" was important in the early stages of the iTunes-iPod development, but now iPod is so ubiquitous that Apple feels iTMS can exist independently?
I sense 4000 Diggs
Watch as every tech publication, blog, and podcast reports on (and swoons over) this. Jobs has just successfully passed the DRM buck to the labels (where it BELONGS in the first place).
It is great to see Apple ON RECORD saying if the labels allow unrestricted music, they will do it. It is also very clear that Apple considers "option 1", the current model, the only alternative. They will NEVER license FairPlay to tons of manufacturers. When and if they do license it, it will be in a very limited and strictly controlled manner.
EXTREMELY interesting to see him debunk the "FairPlay locks people into iPods" myth. Though I wonder if this is disingenuous. After all, isn't the ENTIRE point of iTMS to sell iPods? If Zune somehow gets 30% marketshare in some imaginary fairyland future, Apple won't mind up to 30% of its iTMS sales going towards Zune users? Maybe this "lockdown" was important in the early stages of the iTunes-iPod development, but now iPod is so ubiquitous that Apple feels iTMS can exist independently?
I sense 4000 Diggs
too bad that the artist get less, they always get screwed....kind of like record clubs...