Yeah I know handbrake works, but I’d prefer a one app solution.

Magic Word: ‘Seemed’ like a good idea.

By the way:

“DRM is the future.”
-Steve Ballmer

“Steve Ballmer is an ass.”
-Galloway

Obviously my arguments were intended to degrade to the point of ridiculousness. (I’ll try not to comment on your failure to realize this.)

To echo gorsh, I have no beef with the Ombudsman personally, as I don’t know him personally. I mean no disrespect to the nation of Norway. But I clearly don’t agree (nor do many here) with the Ombudsman’s pronouncement — one that seems selective and misplaced. Whether my analogies are valid or not (and I am not the first to make any of them), the point is that the Ombudsman’s decision seems arbitrary. I would expect he does quite a bit of research before he comes to such decisions, and yet — even without Mr. Jobs’ letter — the barest amount of critical thinking should point to the source of DRM as the record labels, not Apple. Whether they benefited from DRM is at most a side effect, not the root of the matter.

There are strong links — if not outright cross-ownership — between the music labels and the movie studios. The movie studios are constantly fighting to increase DRM on both physical and electronic media. How can it not be virtually obvious that the record labels would have this same ideology?

You argue that the Ombudsman’s decision is helpful because it gives Apple a weapon to use against the music labels in their upcoming negotiations. If that was the Ombudsman’s intention, wouldn’t it just have been easier to make some sort of pronouncement to this effect directly against the music labels? Is this idea an inference of yours or has the Ombudsman said this to some effect in the Norwegian press? Because from the western side of the Atlantic it just looks like a singular attack at Apple because they are successful. Your argument that the Zune is okay — for now — because it only has 2% of the market is spurious. The Ombudsman declared that the iTunes store is illegal in Norway because it is a closed system; well, so is the Zune Marketplace, in exactly the same way. If the concept is the problem, Apple is not the only culprit, so every closed system must therefore be illegal. But that’s not what we heard. We heard the iTunes store is illegal, nothing else. Please correct me if I’m wrong; again, I don’t live in Norway. Mr. Jobs letter, however, supports this assumption.

Either way, of course, the real point is that Apple doesn’t want DRM, Apple didn’t begin the use of DRM as a means to restrict consumer choice (if you accept Mr. Jobs letter at face value, and I see no reason to not do so), and if we are all very lucky this letter will affect some change in the music label’s requirement of DRM on online music sales.

And if that happens, we’ll all be “cheering”.

What did you say?

Fascinating. I wonder whether Bill Gates will be the next “Joe Smith” in 50 years.

And all over a piece of computer hardware and a company that seeks to make a profit from your income.

Fascinating. I wonder whether Steve Jobs will be the next “Joe Smith” in 50 years.

And all over a piece of computer hardware and a company that seeks to make a profit from your income.

Improving Fairplay so that it can do iPod wifi sharing of DRMed music probably causes Apple to use one of MS’ patents. That’s one aspect of self-interest I see on Apple’s part.

The other self-interest I see is Apple’s posturing for its label negotiations. Universal is looking for a fee per iPod. Apple’s response is a precondition of drop DRM and then Apple will begin to entertain that thought.

Apple came back with a software lock, and the Labels agreed to license their music.

Consider that the ‘software lock’ is IP, yes. Apple’s IP. Apple’s little ‘secret’.

Consider that Schlage and MasterLock, et al., have ‘secrets’. They just call them ‘patents’.

If the Labels don’t want Apple’s ‘lock’ then it would seem prudent for THEM to create their own IP, uh ‘lock’. Or remove the locks entirely — and then sell their songs cheaper.

At 25¢, people would by hundreds of songs — well above the average of 22 per ipod. It wouldn’t matter to the Labels that their CUSTOMERS would likely listen to these songs twice. That’s the beauty of impulse shopping and discretionary income.

I agree with most of your conclusions. Here’s where I disagree:

1. The fact that the Zune has minimal market share shouldn’t matter; it’s a matter of consistent application of the law. Even if one person buys a Zune, that person faces the same lock-in situation that an iPod buyer faces. (I understand that it is possible that the Ombudsman may be limited in resources, and can only deal with one company at a time. However, just writing that down made it sound all the more ludicrous since he’s obviously dealing with other non-DRM issues at the same time. If he’d just say more often that both are equally wrong, a large number of people would back off criticizing him for what is perceived as “picking on one company.”)

2. The fact that MS licenses PlaysforSure to multiple stores and player mfrs doesn’t mean that a person who buys a PlaysforSure device isn’t equally locked-in. There’s no guarantee that PlaysforSure stores will continue to exist (many have already closed including MS’ own store) and no guarantee that vendors will keep making more choices in players (many have already exited the business).

3. I believe the Ombudsman had knowledge of many of things that Jobs wrote about – i.e., DRM is contractually required by the labels with an out clause having financial repercussions if Apple fails to correct a breach; DRM as implemented by Apple could be more easily breached if licensed – because variations of these thoughts have consistently been in Apple’s public comments and likely more detailed responses were given in its private comments. If this is so, then the Ombudsman should’ve explained why he still believed that Apple was the primary party at fault. Note that altho it looks as if Apple preferred lock-in, there’s plenty of circumstantial evidence (prior to this letter) that pointed in the opposite direction. a. Jobs said a long time ago that downloaded music should be playable on any device (couldn’t find the exact quote right now). b. Apple bought Fairplay not long before the iTunes Store launch; there’s no evidence they were developing DRM, and it looks as if Apple went looking for a DRM solution once they realized the labels demanded it. c. Apple took the same positions when Real attempted to get around Fairplay.

Thanks for contributing to the discussion.

Microsoft is the money man behind all of this Apple DRM lock in bullshit.

Microsoft wants to lock in all of their customers with DRM therefore they believe Apple is playing the same game. They are enraged because they think that Apple has beaten them at their own game. They have paid bloggers posting on this very site trying to perpetuate this myth. They are using every trick in the book to pursue the fight offshore. They and their minions cannot believe that Apple does not want to be bothered with DRM.

They think this DRM denial must just be a marketing ploy. You can’t control your customers by dropping DRM. He can’t really mean what he says.

Loosen up the pressure on DRM, or face the music when we start to sign YOUR artists to the new Apple Inc/Corp Label.

End of story… Apple wins. We all WIN.

Yikes, I hadn’t even considered that – now THAT would be something that the Ombudsman would be hearing from me about.

Well, said – personnaly, I hope DRM goes away, but theft is theft. My Bro-in-law once said it wasn’t wrong (allofmp3 etc) since he paid for it – well, isn’t that like saying I bought a stolen TV, but its not wrong, since I wasn’t the one to steal it.

Hey, man – don’t think this has anything to do with Norway or the Ombudsman – I’m sure he’s a great guy and I’m sure Norway a helluva nice place.

What I’m trying to say is that DRM doesn’t restrict anyone’s “freedoms”. If you want to own music, you have choices. You can buy CD’s, records, tapes, digital music online, etc. You are not locked in to anything until you make the choice to buy. In making that choice, you are deciding what restrictions are right for you.

And yes, the intervention of governments can, indeed, stifle the innovations of companies. No one is afraid that the Ombudsman is going to take away his iPod – but if a committee’s pronouncements make the iTunes store unprofitable in Norway, it will simply close up shop there. Consumers in Norway lose.

You seem to think that the consumer has no responsibility here. It was consumers who raped (and still rape) artists and record companies alike from Napster (in the old days) to BitTorrent. It was the consumer who guiltlessly paid their $1.50 per album on allofmp3.com, knowing full well that only Russian gangsters profited from the sale. And now it’s the consumer who is crying foul that the shop owner has ruthlessly locked his doors after hours. This ‘consumer outcry’ sounds more like a child who’s been told he can’t have cookies before supper…

If all your music is burned from CDs what does it matter. you can move your DRM-free music to any player and trash your iPod. If you don’t like what SJ is offering, go buy whatever you want.

I believe that the real problem is the music industry wants to operate a 20th century paradigm in a 21st century world. Technology has finally trumped their dominance in controlling how and when music is made and is distributed. They know it, they just don’t like it, and they will use all the means at their disposal to prolong the use of DRM.

So let me get this straight. On one hand, you think that the “amount of DRM’d songs in my music collection is frighteningly close to the percentages that Jobs mentioned, and I have never – not once – felt restricted by it.”

On the other hand, you believe that you don’t want “committees in Norway or anywhere else stifle the innovations of one of the world’s great companies by trying to force it to hand over its intellectual property to every Tom, Dick, and Sven that decides to crank out an online music store.”

Are you really that personally threatened by the Norway Ombudsman? That he’s going to take your iPod and online stores away? That Apple’s long history of innovation is somehow going to come to a crashing halt because of this ruling by the Ombudsman?

That is very, very, very unlikely. You don’t know Steve Jobs very well, if you think that.

Where’s the logic in railing against a theoretical possibility in the future, instead of working to correct a concrete limitation in the present?

“…these bodies are correct to go after Apple. It is, after all, the party that is tangibly imposing the restrictions – DRM – that limit the freedoms of music consumers”

“…your letter-writing efforts would be far more effective, and beneficial to music lovers the world over, to write to the music labels and pressure them to let music be DRM-free”

First, as Jobs explained, it is not Apple that has mandated DRM – the people who produce music have demanded DRM from distributors like Apple to try and protect their investments from rampant piracy.

Second, I feel no need whatsoever to take to the streets and fight for a DRM-free world. The amount of DRM’d songs in my music collection is frighteningly close to the percentages that Jobs mentioned, and I have never – not once – felt restricted by it. If consumers want DRM-free music – let them buy CD’s. CAVEAT EMPTOR.

If I feel any urgency at all about this entire mess, it is in not wanting to see committees in Norway or anywhere else stifle the innovations of one of the world’s great companies by trying to force it to hand over its intellectual property to every Tom, Dick, and Sven that decides to crank out an online music store.

“Has the Ombudsman declared the Zune illegal because songs sold for it can’t be played on iPods?”

Of course not, at least not yet. As MDN likes to point out, Zune has less than 2% of the handheld music player market. Apple has the dominant position, both in handheld music players and in online music sales. So what’s your point?

“Has he declared the Nintendo Wii illegal because games sold for it won’t play on an Xbox 360?”

Bzzt. False analogy. A better analogy would be if the same underlying game wouldn’t work solely because Nintendo added DRM to restrict it to Wii.

“Has he declared CD players illegal because you can’t play cassettes in them?”

Is this the best you can do? Because it’s a stupid argument – you’re confusing physical media and form factor differences with deliberate imposition of DRM.

In case you’re unaware, Philips (the Dutch company that originated the cassette tape) went to great lengths in the 1940s and 1950s to ensure that every cassette player in the world could play every cassette tape in the world. There was no DRM on cassette tapes, and ditto for music CDs when they came around in the late 1970s and early 1980s.

“Has he declared refrigerators illegal because you can’t cook in them?”

Ok, this is even more moronic. If Aunt Jemima came up with a Cream of Wheat product that could only be (a) stored in Aunt Jemima refrigerators, and (b) cooked on Aunt Jemima stoves, then you might have an argument. But if Aunt Jemima tried to do that, you would clearly rebel against this imposition on your consumer freedoms.

“People are unhappy with the Ombudsman — and you don’t have to be from Norway to find his arguments illogical, or for one’s criticism of him to be relevant …”

You can be as unhappy with the Noway Ombudsman as much as you like. But if you aren’t a citizen or resident of Norway, it doesn’t amount to a hill of beans of difference what you think.

“… because his “declaration” that the iTunes store is illegal holds no more logical weight than any of those arguments.”

If you think the Ombudsman’s arguments are illogical, then what on earth would you call your own “arguments”? You’re making baseless analogies that fall apart if somebody else simply sneezes on them.

Try again, Galloway, because you’re making very poor arguments.

In case anyone is confused about where I stand:

- I fully believe that the Norway Ombudsman is entirely right that DRM limits consumer protections and freedoms.

- It goes without saying that the Norway Ombudsman is acting well within its authority and mandate granted to it under the laws of Norway, which were established by the elected parliament that represents the sovereign will of the people. It’s hard to argue against democracy in action.

- I entirely agree with Apple that the right solution to this problem is to abolish DRM entirely. This maximizes consumer protection and freedom, and establishes a level playing field for both the handheld music player and online music stores markets.

- I disagree with the music labels that Apple should license FairPlay widely, or that Apple, Microsoft, Sony, et al should agree on a common DRM standard.

Cynicism and skepticism can give birth to satire and humor…sometimes. Besides, who else is going to laugh at us fallen humans other than ourselves?

The solution to piracy is simple:

1) Reduce the price of legal downloads (taking advantage of its cheaper distribution costs);
2) Drop DRM – nobody wants hobbled software – except Gates & Co.;
3) Improve the quality of the online product – bit rate, artwork, lyrics….

The solution for the music industry:

1) Increase content (video, studio sessions, live shows – real fans want to own it all );
2) Innovate with new formats (separate tracks for voice and karaoke lyrics in audio and video);
3) Differentiate – different quality and pricing between online legal downloads and hard media.

The lesson here is that one can never stop innovating to deliver better product to consumers and respond to market factors, and it applies to Microsoft too, whose products are of the “fuck consumers, let’s make enterprise/IT happy, ” which is what fuels and facilitates malware.

Mr. Job’s business strategies for the last 24 months have been nothing short of amazing, and this one leaves me almost literally breathless. He leads MS down a path, doubles back, collects the reward on the way, and leaves MS wandering in the woods, and every time this cycle takes place the reward gets bigger.

Its clear that to be a billionare against all odds requires, among other things, cunning honed to a fine point, and inexhaustable patience.

Sooner than later Apple is going to trounce MS – I think the Mac is poised to slingshot into the market place in a way most of us have not been able to imagine.

Anyway – GO STEVE!

Has the Ombudsman declared the Zune illegal because songs sold for it can’t be played on iPods?

Has he declared the Nintendo Wii illegal because games sold for it won’t play on an Xbox 360?

Has he declared CD players illegal because you can’t play cassettes in them?

Has he declared refrigerators illegal because you can’t cook in them?

People are unhappy with the Ombudsman — and you don’t have to be from Norway to find his arguments illogical, or for one’s criticism of him to be relevant, you pompous ass — because his “declaration” that the iTunes store is illegal holds no more logical weight than any of those arguments.

Just to add a little light into th darkness here. It is correct to say that proper encryption algorithms will never be “broken” if their source code is made public.

HOWEVER – in order for licensing of Fairplay DRM to work on all iPods and other players from other manufacturers, as well as all other online stores, each one of those entities would need to also have a copy of the SECRET KEY used to power those same cryptographic algorithms. If the secret key were to be, “outed” it would be then child’s play to use those media files on ANY device whether the user had purchased those files or not.

Thus, it is entirely correct to state that if we spread around the FairPlay DRM system AND ITS ASSOCIATED PRIVATE (SECRET) KEYS, we will be increasing the odds for a compromise of the security system.

1. Who wants DRM?
a. Apple
b. EMI, Sony etc.
c. Consumers
d. Richard Nixon

2. Would Apple ditch DRM if they could?
a. Never ever
b. In a heartbeat
c. Consumers would never allow it
d. Richard Nixon

3. Who is at the forefront of DRM implementation in their OS?
a. Apple
b. Micros**t
c. Linux developers
d. Richard Nixon

If you answered ‘b’ each time you may ‘b’ correct.
Ergo, Steve is correct.

LinuxGuy, feel free to keep on huffing and puffing, if it makes you feel any better.

But you’re just preaching to the choir that has the same ideological blinders that you seem to have on. So you’re not going to convince anyone who doesn’t already agree with you.

Quite simply, the world isn’t anywhere near as black and white as you’re making it out to be, and most importantly, people can reasonably disagree with your ideology, while still agreeing that music should be DRM-free.

1) The Europeans bureaucrats and activists: “It’s your own companies that are doing this, stupid! You’ve let your rush to play to the anti-American gallery in Europe expose your own ignorance of some basic facts. We’ll skin you in court!”

2) Microsoft: “C’mon, Bill, your new Vista is a user-oppressive piece of work! Listen people, another reason not to buy this piece of junk!”

3) The record companies: “Guys, thanks for that initial boost, but guess what . . . the iPod will sell on its own now. It doesn’t need the iTunes store any longer. In fact, we need to make the store itself universal now. If the 30% or so of people who own non-iPod players were able to purchase music from iTunes, that’s exactly what they will do . . . boosting our profits in the process!”

This man is brilliant … innovator (Mac, iPod, iTunes, iPhone), performer (not a word, not a note out of place at his recent Macworld presentation), ultimate survivor and brilliant corporate tactician (this letter).

Steve Jobs for President!

Stop acting like a bunch of Bill Gates’ sock puppets. If Apple is taken down in Europe, all you are doing is damaging the least offensive channel for DRM and enhancing the worst bunch of DRM loving gangsters, Microsoft.

Are Microsoft’s representatives bribing (a corruption approach) or influencing (taking advantage of stupidity) your politicians? M$ tries that here in all of our legislatures and with our bureaucrats – federal, state and below. Why are you shilling for those vile bastards by going after Apple?

Did I say that

I want an unlocked phone

I do

This is an exceedingly simplistic and naive view of what’s going on here.

The music labels could (and probably will) easily retort that FairPlay is entirely Apple’s creation, and it is Apple’s decision not to license it to anyone else. And it is entirely Apple’s choice to license, or not, anyone else’s DRM scheme, e.g. PlaysForSure or Sony’s.

So SJ is correct that Apple has a contractual obligation to impose DRM and to support it actively, or else lose access to the music.

But the contracts with the music labels say nothing about which specific DRM Apple must use, nor where Apple can get it from, nor to whom Apple can license its own DRM.

The music labels position clearly will be: We want DRM, and you (Apple) have to figure it out and make it work.

Apple’s position clearly is: We don’t want DRM, and you (music labels) should figure out how to compete in an online sales market.

Let’s see who wins this battle of the titans.

Norway and other European countries hate and fight DRM. Steve too.
And they choose to start the fight at Apple’s door.

If your milk taste like shit, do you complain to the guy who sold it to you, or do you blame the cow?

I really hope it turns out the way Steve Jobs wants. Then the consumer will rejoice, and Norway and other DRM-fighting countries have won.

Let’s all give LinuxGuy a moment to catch his breath. After all, blowing all that ideological hot air must be tiring.

(Pause.)

There. Feeling better now?

SJ is not telling anyone to STFU. He is trying to pressure the music labels to adopt his favored solution (abolish DRM), while downplaying the favored solution of the music labels (license the DRM).

And if anyone seriously thinks that the Scandinavian authorities will be impressed by SJ’s open letter as a legal defense to the legal charges of anti-consumer practices, then you had better think again.

SJ’s letter is not a legal defense. Not even close to it. And it would be laughed out of any court or regulatory proceeding.

and i guess all of the mac users are genuis because APPLE is a god choice to make in these days.

No doubt, it was timed to Apple’s getting ready to compete in the music industry with the new agreement with the Apple Corps. But the points made are valid.

SJ is telling the EU in so many words to STFU. The EU is a socialist gangster inflicted bureaucracy aimed at their hated American capitalist competitor. Their illogic and hypocrisy are pointed out in detail.

The SJ letter is also an attack on the music companies and their assault on both consumers and consumer electronics companies with their maddening DRM abomination It puts the onus of responsibility where it belongs.