Steve Jobs 'Thoughts on Music'

[BillyShears]

Can you not use DRM songs in an iMovie or FCP/FCE project?
Can a DRM song not be used in Keynote?

Yes, of course, but that's short-term thinking. It's entirely conceivable I might ditch OS X at some point and want to create a presentation or movie on a Windows or Linux system. I just don't want to have to worry about these limitations.

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.

Right, but I was thinking specifically of home movies. I'm not talking commercial. If I was doing something commercial, I would want better quality music than 128kbps AAC from the iTunes store.

But what uses I'm thinking of isn't even important. The point is that at some point in the future I may want to use the music in some way Apple hasn't thought of or allowed, and it would be a hassle for me to burn the music to CD and then rip it to unencumbered AAC or MP3.

Here's another example. A while ago I was playing around with playing songs in reverse. You know, how they have "satanic" messages. I had a good time fooling around with different songs, playing them backwards. Can I do this with DRM-encumbered AAC? I don't know. Not knowing that puts me off buying DRM-encumbered music. It's also an example of a (fair) use I wouldn't have been aware of when purchasing the music, had it had DRM.

I also buy albums, and not songs. So given the choice between buying an album on iTunes with DRM and buying a CD without DRM, I choose the CD.

 

[AlmostThere]

Steve is full of it, right here and now.

He issues a lot of platitudes- things you all seem to like to hear- but he does not act on it. So I say BS Steve- put your money where your mouth is.

If you are REALLY for DRM-less music, do it. There is PLENTY of DRMless music right now- emusic for one. Same songs on iTunes have DRM- WTF?

So shut the F up Steve, quit your whining UNLESS you are gonna do something. Then, just do it. But this pie in the sky wishful thinking does not cut it, especially when YOU can do it different! Especially when you CAN make it happen.

Sorry, Steve, no pass on this one.

Agreed.

Why should European consumers pressure the music companies when the very same music companies already offer music in a non-DRM format? They already have a choice and shouldn't have to do Apple's negocitations for them.

Apple saw the opportunity to make money through a music store, even if limited directly, indirectly through iPod sales and through the increased profile such a (successful) store brings. It is about profit, nothing else - if it really was such an issue, someone as famously principled as Jobs would not compromise. Apple 'caved' for profit and through their success have given a high-profile demonstration of the successful application of DRM. Few people have done more to further its cause. And, given that success, nobody but Apple has the leverage to tell the music companies to offer a DRM-free licence.

And the argument that Apple could no longer guarantee to protect the music it licenses from the big four music companies is a load of rubbish. iTunes already allows you to burn to CD and remove the DRM.

 

[Flowbee]

I haven't bought anything on iTunes since JHymn was disabled by iTunes 6.

Same with me. I was an iTunes addict until JHymn stopped working. I've since switched to eMusic for most of my music purchases.

 

[surferfromuk]

Everything that Apple do is for the benefit of Apple, that has the knock on effect that people want to buy Apple stuff.

Apple release great products because Apple want to make a bucket load of $$ $$ - and thats the way to do it. SJ wants to do the best he can - like the majority of us want. Not a half hearted job, but the best.

That is a fact of life - its not being cynical.

If Apple want consumer freedom - it wouldn't have restricted iPhone 3rd party applications.

Give me a break with "He's protecting Apple ? by giving consumers a shot at digital drm free music - the freedom to switch players".

Apple are being ( slowly ) backed into a corner, and they need to respond. This A response.

Yeah, that's right - Steve's all about money. You obviously know very little about Steve Jobs. Man, that kind of world view is without grandeur, vision and hope.

Apple is a company - of course - it has to make money - it has shareholders - that's the world we live in - the free market - but the great thing is their products are amazing.

Why are you arguing against Apple on this site ? What good can come from it ? Why do you want Apple to fail - to be run into second place by shoddy second rate enterprises like emusic ? Apple aren't taking anything from you - they GIVE GIVE GIVE...

Apple are not the bad guys. They make YOUR LIFE supremely better for the products you have in them ( that's assuming you actually have some apple products).

 

[radio893fm]

That's why Steve is so ahead of his time.

You are kidding right? Please tell me you are... who was the one that made the iTunes store files playable only on the iPod (including Motorola's phone)? Who was the one that cried when Real Media cracked those files? If he cared so much about US the customers and really wanted us to do whatever the hell we wanted with our songs, then he would have made iTunes compatible with all the player in the world... he is so hypocritical, but he wants to sell iPods so we can't really blame him.

Its all about the money...

This is just another PR game... and Steve is very good at it!

 

[BillyShears]

I'm not clear as to why you are saying it's not representative. They took the numbers, added them up, did some division and came out w/22. Even if you were shown all the raw data it still wouldn't change the average number unless someone made a math error or Jobs is lying.

I don't think he's lying. I'm saying it's a very rough estimate.

The mean number of DRM'd songs on an iPod is 22. But obviously not everyone has 22 DRM'd songs on their iPods. Lots of people have none, while others will have many more. So to say "your average iPod is only 3% full of DRM'd songs" is true, but it's misleading.

I don't have stats, but for the sake of example, suppose 50% of iPod owners have no DRM'd songs, and 50% have DRM'd songs. The "average" for people that do have DRM'd songs is then 44 songs. Now, he's saying the 4GB shuffle is the most popular player, which costs $200. If someone were to buy another DAP from another brand (say Zune nano), that's $44/$200 (maybe less), or 22% of the cost of a new player. Would that keep someone from switching to the competition? Maybe.

Maybe they don't have more data than this, though. Or maybe they do, but wanted a simple version to show people. I don't think it discounts his argument, I just thought it was misleading.

 

[Peace]

The solution is not playsforsure or any other current DRM.

I call it OpenDRM.

It's a DRM that is cross-platform and will play on any mp3 player.This allows the record industry to breath a little better while creating healthy competition between various online music sellers.

These "OpenDRM" songs could be downloaded from any music service and played on any player.

The various online services could compete for business in any legal fashion.

 

[Timeline]

From an artists perspective I think Apple should license DRM to the labels that want it for a yearly fee. Give them the code but without warrantee.
Labels can put DRM on everything including the CD and instead of making Apple be the cop, the labels can do it for themselves.

If the labels used DRM to track computers that play the stuff via the internet with auto reporting they could compare against sales. Then they would have a game plan to re-establish the rules for such requirements and proof to make a better case to the public for protections. As it has been, an artist releases his stuff and experiences a few sales and then the income just dies but everyone seems to have the CD in some form. So, what is an artist supposed to do to make a living at making music? At least Apple DRM gets us back a few bucks at .99c per tune.

Those who buy and rip for their own use, that's cool but many will send CD copies to friends and they will do the same so big sales are ultimately thwarted to the point that the industry has just shrunk.

I feel if DRM was used as a tracking mechanism instead of hard licensing mechanism then the labels could simply figure out alternatives and everyone would be happy. Well, some of us anyway.

AS for my opinion on DRM, I obviously don't mind as it does offer several computer copies for different personal uses so I don't care either way. I have never had a problem.

 

[Stella]

I don't want to see Apple fail. SJ wants Apple to make successful and the BEST products, and in turn, that will benefit Apple. I like in most part, Apple's products, otherwise I wouldn't use them.

In this thread - I'm NOT arguing against Apple. I'm just saying that Apple aren't doing this out of the goodness of their hearts, they are doing it for their benefit. Its a strategy.

Why should I not argue against Apple on this site? Some of their decisons stink IMO, and why shouldn't I express my opinions? I'd rather be open minded than a complete fan boi like a large amount of people here.

Apple, and SJ are not 100% perfect Gods!!

Rereading your post, I think we are arguing the same thing.

Yeah, that's right - Steve's all about money. You obviously know very little about Steve Jobs. Man, that kind of world view is without grandeur, vision and hope.

Apple is a company - of course - it has to make money - it has shareholders - that's the world we live in - the free market - but the great thing is their products are amazing.

Why are you arguing against Apple on this site ? What good can come from it ? Why do you want Apple to fail - to be run into second place by shoddy second rate enterprises like emusic ? Apple aren't taking anything from you - they GIVE GIVE GIVE...

Apple are not the bad guys. They make YOUR LIFE supremely better for the products you have in them ( that's assuming you actually have some apple products).

 

[ijimk]

I am all for a DRM free itunes store. I doubt we will see it any time soon, but i feel re-assured that SJ feels this way about it. Well I guess this may be one small step in the direction of something big.

 

[72930]

I am all for a DRM free itunes store. I doubt we will see it any time soon, but i feel re-assured that SJ feels this way about it. Well I guess this may be one small step in the direction of something big.

Now Apple Inc can be a record label (because of their agreements with Apple Corps), maybe the new label's unknown new signings will get their music sold DRM free from the iTS. I would be more happy if the 5 computer thing was increased to around 20 than if the 'iPod only' rule got scrapped...

 

[elppa]

The solution is not playsforsure or any other current DRM.

I call it OpenDRM.

It's a DRM that is cross-platform and will play on any mp3 player.This allows the record industry to breath a little better while creating healthy competition between various online music sellers.

These "OpenDRM" songs could be downloaded from any music service and played on any player.

The various online services could compete for business in any legal fashion.

Great.

What happens when “OpenDRM” gets cracked?

 

[Stella]

Great.

What happens when “OpenDRM” gets cracked?

The same as what happens when fairplay gets cracked - it gets fixed again, and devices and music store updated.

That really is not a good argument to have propriority DRM.

 

[surferfromuk]

I'm just saying that Apple aren't doing this out of the goodness of their hearts, they are doing it for their benefit. Its a strategy.

That's a theory of yours - and it'd be better for your general happiness if you considered that anything Apple does generally does eventually benefits you/us the consumer.

I also believe the majority of the 'movers' and 'shakers' that work in Apple, ( that probably have so much personal wealth that they don't actually need to work!), genuinely do act out of the goodness of their hearts.

That's why Apple make amazing kit like Ipod's, Macbook Pro's and OSX and not guns, bullets and attack ships.

I know Apple aren't perfect but I think it's fair to say they're trying to head in that general direction..

 

[CommodityFetish]

Apple as the new CDBaby.com?

Hmmm... As someone else said, there was the beatles deal, now Steve is dissing the record labels publicly... I wonder if he's not looking towards dealing with artists directly, cutting out the record co. middlemen. Not for the back catalogues, but for the future releases. And a more fair and sane business model for music in this century.

Before he couldn't do this because he needed the record companies on board, and the Beatles had him locked out of that side of the biz. Now, a few years down the road, and so many iPods later, the labels may have more to lose than apple if they pulled out of iTunes. So Apple may now be able to deal with some artists directly - those independent and uncontracted to the majors first, and then build from there into a new paradigm. Apple as the new digital distribution version of CDBaby. (Or emusic ...)

Probably wishful thinking, but this is ultimately what would be best for the artists, the fans, and the industry as a whole. Someone will do it, so it might as well be Apple right?

 

[gugy]

You are kidding right? Please tell me you are... who was the one that made the iTunes store files playable only on the iPod (including Motorola's phone)? Who was the one that cried when Real Media cracked those files? If he cared so much about US the customers and really wanted us to do whatever the hell we wanted with our songs, then he would have made iTunes compatible with all the player in the world... he is so hypocritical, but he wants to sell iPods so we can't really blame him.

Its all about the money...

This is just another PR game... and Steve is very good at it!

Sure, it's all about the money, but look at the other option. Microsoft. Sorry I rather have Steve hypocrisy than Bill gets one.
It's true, he's selling Apple, but hey I rather have Apple that most of the time give me great products (hardware & software) than go to Microsoft, Dell and others.
At least at the end of the day I have a great user experience and my computer and iPod is 99% reliable. That's what I want and Steve is offering me it.

 

[Peace]

Great.

What happens when “OpenDRM” gets cracked?

There is no perfect world.Never will be.

This would be a step in the right direction for all parties though.

[edit]

And since this "OpenDRM" would be one that all music entities used it would be a LOT easier to fix should it be cracked.
[/edit]

 

[Stella]

Personally, I think your being seriously naive if you don't think that Apple does what it does for the benefit for itself - and thus has the side effects of making consumers happy - which it needs to do to keep a float.

Yes, I agree it would be better for my health if I didn't think that!

That's a theory of yours - and it'd be better for your general happiness if you considered that anything Apple does generally does eventually benefits you/us the consumer.

 

[bleachthru]

It is quite refreshing to hear a CEO talk like this. I for one have refused to use the iTunes music store, purely becuase I do not like the idea of DRM, if I buy the music, it is mine. As a consumer I feel like it is a slap in the face to not be trusted by the RIAA to not do illegal things with the music I have purchased. Good thing other industries do not think like this, or soon all cars will start comming with governors limiting them to 75mph, so no one "can break the law". I am very proud of my 40+GB music collection, all DRM free and legally mine. I hope the RIAA breaks down and realizes they are just pissing off the consumer, nobody likes to be treated like a child, especially by the selfish music industry.

"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side."
~Hunter S. Thompson

 

[joeboy_45101]

Viva! Jobs!

 

[gnasher729]

Wishful thinking. More likely, Apple's contract with the Big Four stipulates that Apple not get into the recording business.

Hard to imagine. And it would be thrown out by a court without hesitation as abuse of monopoly power and anti-competitive behavior.

 

[reallynotnick]

Man, I just said this the other week!
If people are going to steal their music they will steal it, if they are going to buy it they are going to buy it.

CD's making stealing easier then typing a paper now-a-days.

 

[maxterpiece]

I have two criticisms of Jobs' 'Thoughts on Music'.

1) Why not cooperate with other companies to allow users who switch from one music store to another to just redownload all their purchased music in the new format?

I doubt the RIAA would have any concerns about this - the music remains DRM'd. Apple has logs of all customer purchases and I'm sure other music stores do as well. Apple doesn't have to worry about supporting fairplay on other devices and media players, but people are no longer locked in.

2) As has already been mentioned, Apple keeps the DRM on songs even if the label doesn't stipulate that they must be DRM'd. Most independent music lables have made it clear that they don't care if their music has DRM, but apple continues to encode their music. Jobs is being a hypocrite by not selling these songs unlocked. It is the perfect opportunity: open up the independent music, promote that it is unlocked, watch as independent music sales explode, rub the statistics in the RIAA's face.

As far as eMusic goes, their selection is weak, but the real problem i have with them is that you have to pay a monthly subscription fee to buy from them. I find being locked into a subscription even more annoying than being locked in by DRM. I know you can cancel whenever you please, but how annoying is it to cancel and restart my subscription whenever i want to buy music from them?

 

[Rocketman]

Great.

What happens when “OpenDRM” gets cracked?

Apple can use any DRM it can access. It made one. Microsoft made one, Sony made one. They choose not to share with each other even though that is "only" three companies (not quite Steve's horrible many company scenario). But I do get his point quite well.

So far not even these three have selected to share code amongst themselves. They are each protecting a vertical system.

So why doesn't the record industry either individually or as a consortium make their own DRM, which I am sure Apple, Microsoft, and Sony would cheerfully add to their players and software?

The answer is simple. They want to restrict online sales, not CD sales. They want to sell CD's. They have an established dealer network they have an allegience to, and despite the rampant piracy through that channel, they value it. It will not be until onlione sales fairly substantially exceed physical sales, that the record companies will take real measures to stamp out piracy. In the mean time there is a small island of limited piracy. That is the download market with DRM.

According to Steve that is lesss than 3% of music sales.

It is more likely record companies would eliminate DRM sales than CD sales at this point even though it goes fully and tiotally against their claim (feign) that piracy is a concern of theirs.

I ask this simple question. Of all the copies of Microsoft Windows (all flavors) on computers in this world, how many are paid for? 30%?

Mac OSX (>80%)? It's not even copy protected!

Rocketman

 

[surferfromuk]

Personally, I think your being seriously naive if you don't think that Apple does what it does for the benefit for itself - and thus has the side effects of making consumers happy - which it needs to do to keep a float.

Yes, I agree it would be better for my health if I didn't think that!

I love being naive - I genuinely work hard at it everday! (straight up)

Steve's not interested in money - you must see that ? I'm sure he get's the occasional buzz from the power and glory perhaps ...but never money...I genuinely think he wants to make the world a better place - I really think that's the legacy he wants to leave...and that's why I will forever believe and defend a Steve Jobs' helmed Apple.

but as a reply - your being equally naive if you think any company exists only to perpetuate it's own existence. That company exists to make great products - that it's fuelled by the dreams of one man is it's shining strength. Without him it nearly folded or became a grey soulless corp like any other - so this particular guy - you shouldn't second guess..

and to return the compliment - I suggest you look up 'transference' - it's a psychological 'quirk' whereby you project your own beliefs, motivations and suspicions into the minds of others...took me a long time to become naive enough to stop doing this - I think ? my opinions were nothing but my own tatty ideas...( still are a little, but at least they have some vision, nobility and charity these days!)

You sound like a fairly nice guy though...glad to have 'sparked with' you for a while..