According to “two sources in the online music biz,” Apple CEO Steve Jobs might have been influenced by EMI to release his anti-DRM “Thoughts on Music” open letter.
“Last year, RealNetworks (the company behind the Rhapsody subscription service) came up with a proposal for switching to MP3s and circulated it among the major labels. In response to that, or maybe just motivated by its need for a cash infusion, EMI started offering online music stores the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to pay the label an extra lump sum in exchange for the right to sell MP3s. The money was described as a way to reimburse EMI for the increase in piracy that was sure to come once it abandoned DRM. Not surprisingly, that proposal didn’t go over well with executives at the online stores, whose margins are thin enough already. So EMI came back with a more acceptable offer, asking for an advance against future royalties,” Jon Healey writes for The Los Angeles Times.
Healey writes, “The deal was apparently not offered to Apple, however; evidently, EMI wanted to build up momentum among the also-rans before making Jobs and offer he might otherwise refuse. Before EMI could sign on the dotted line with the likes of RealNetworks and Napster, however, Jobs dropped his DRM bombshell. Go straight to the head of the parade, Steve! Then the Wall Street Journal reported EMI’s MP3 overtures, and suddenly the record company wasn’t in such a hurry to announce its initiative.”
Full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “nerdbrain” for the heads up.]
Related articles:
Translation of Macrovision CEO’s reply to Steve Jobs’ ‘Thoughts on Music’ – February 16, 2007
Macrovision posts pro-DRM open letter to Steve Jobs and digital entertainment industry – February 16, 2007
62% of music industry execs think eliminating DRM would increase music download sales – February 14, 2007
Warner’s DRM-loving Middlebronfman warns wireless industry it may lose music market to Apple iPhone – February 14, 2007
Windows Vista’s DRM is bad news – February 14, 2007
Monster Cable announces full support of Apple CEO Steve Jobs’ call for DRM-free music – February 13, 2007
Microsoft’s Bach talks Apple iPhone, DRM, Zune, and more – February 09, 2007
Recording Industry Association of America wants their DRM, calls for Apple to license FairPlay – February 08, 2007
Warner’s Middlebronfman: Jobs’ DRM-free music call ‘without logic and merit, we’ll not abandon DRM’ – February 08, 2007
Dvorak: Apple CEO Steve Jobs is dead right about DRM – February 07, 2007
Apple’s Jobs jolts music industry; Zune exec calls Jobs’ call for DRM-free music ‘irresponsible’ – February 07, 2007
Apple CEO Steve Jobs’ posts rare open letter: ‘Thoughts on Music’ – calls for DRM-free music – February 06, 2007
Doesn’t anyone proofread these things before they go out?
What? Did you find and error?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
Why would the big four music companies agree to let Apple and others distribute their music without using DRM systems to protect it? The simplest answer is because DRMs haven’t worked, and may never work, to halt music piracy. Though the big four music companies require that all their music sold online be protected with DRMs, these same music companies continue to sell billions of CDs a year which contain completely unprotected music. That’s right! No DRM system was ever developed for the CD, so all the music distributed on CDs can be easily uploaded to the Internet, then (illegally) downloaded and played on any computer or player.
In 2006, under 2 billion DRM-protected songs were sold worldwide by online stores, while over 20 billion songs were sold completely DRM-free and unprotected on CDs by the music companies themselves. The music companies sell the vast majority of their music DRM-free, and show no signs of changing this behavior, since the overwhelming majority of their revenues depend on selling CDs which must play in CD players that support no DRM system.
The answer is simple.
When the music cd and player industry was created, computers didn’t have cd readers. The music industry thought they had a natural hardware lock for their content. Much like the record album before it.
It was actually Apple who pushed the development of the cd for personal computers.
Apple rocks.
“before making Jobs and offer”
DRM makes the record companies feel warm and fuzzy but in reality it doesn’t prevent copying content. Ah, from what I hear.
The question is not whether DRM works or not. As Steve pointed out, 90% of music sales
are currently in the form of unprotected CD’s. So if you’re a music distributor and you’re
doing alright without DRM protection on your CD’s, why are you so bloody terrified of
giving up the DRM you’ve applied to the other 10% of your sales? It just doesn’t make
sense. The clincher, of course, is that DRM is also a royal pain in the behind for your
customers, who wish you nothing but ill will. So who really benefits from this pointless
scheme? No one!
When the music cd and player industry was created, computers didn’t have cd readers.
Right, but this is now ancient history. I think the issue for music distributors is that CD’s must be playable in such a wide variety of devices that DRM protection is not practical. Customers would howl and stop buying CD’s.
The lawyers benefit. That’s who.
Finally a story where one can use the term: Booyah!! 😀
DRM keeps the online music distributors on a leash that provides the music companies with a level of control. For example, it probably limits the sale of singles which might otherwise take over music sales.
Booyah!!!!
Steve was giving the Scandinavian countries and France a heads-up about DRM.
Did you all get the message? He’s NOT FOR DRM!
By the way, all music purchased from the iTunes music store IS and ALWAYS HAS BEEN compatible with all MP3 players.
Just buy some music, burn it onto a CD, rip that CD into whatever music program you want and load it onto any player.
And why is it that the Scandivavian countries and France have no real entertainment business?
THEY SUPPORT COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT!
EMI are having serious financial problems at the moment.
http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,2012904,00.html
The headline is “EMI issues shock profits warning”.
No wonder that EMI are desperately trying to find ways to get a large injection of cash as urgently as possible. Their folly was that they asked on-line record stores that are already losing money. Their financial position is not as good as EMI, because although EMI’s business isn’t making as much profit as before, it’s probably not yet making a loss, which is what some of the on-line stores are effectively doing.
As far as I can see, other record labels are feeling the pressure too, so it’s quite clear that they can’t carry on as they currently do, so it remains to be seen what they will do. One option is to tighten up DRM and risk driving existing customers to P2P sites. Another is to sue people who use P2P sites, with the associated risk of annoying music lovers. Neither of those two options are likely to be popular with customers and they haven’t worked in the past either. The third possibility is to listen to what Steve Jobs says. He was right before, he generated two billion bucks of on-line sales and delivered it to the labels. Nobody else is saying anything that looks as though they can expand the customer base and sell more music – that’s what Steve is proposing. Only a fool would turn it down, but the record labels do have some incredible fools running the business.
If EMI and the other labels want to stop hemmorhaging sales, they need to realize that their biggest problem isn’t piracy; rather, it’s the reasons for the rampant piracy: the overinflated price of CDs and the fluff content that they keep churning out. They don’t seem to realize that people would rather pay $1.98 on iTunes for the two decent tracks on an album than pay $15 for those plus a bunch of filler on a disc.
I think what iTunes has proven is that less is more – more or less…
In that, more music is being sold from in-duh-vidual track sales than full compilation sales. And in the long run the antiquated idea of an artist having to produce “x” number of songs for a “cd” will fade when –<U> and only when</U> – the “industry” can figure out a way to keep all of the producers, sound men/women, techies, and manufacturing folks still in jobs…
Maybe they need to cross-train as buggy whip makers. I hear there is a strong developing market there!! And they can beat their customers silly and no one will complain.
I am liking iTunes more and more and “real world” CDs less and less
MDN: less – but I am sure you guessed it was less
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”raspberry” style=”border:0;” />
Wait a minute. Is this the same recording industry that told me in the late 80’s that I couldn’t buy a single song any more? The same industry that screwed me for $20 every time I heard a song I liked and wanted to buy it?
Now we have the option to purchase a single again instead of paying for 14 songs we don’t even like. Forgive me if I don’t give a damn if people pirate music. These bastards had it coming.
Right, but this is now ancient history. I think the issue for music distributors is that CD’s must be playable in such a wide variety of devices that DRM protection is not practical. Customers would howl and stop buying CD’s.
Not really, people haven’t stopped buying DVD’s because of Macrovision’s copy protection. Most folks blindly accept that they can’t make copies of DVD movies. It stops the majority of casual pirates, never the hardcore minority of course. (Macrovision’s DRM was cracked long ago by DVDjohn)
What makes the new DRM’s like Fairplay, ACSS, HDCP so effective that it’s theathered to the mothership. Crack the DRM and they can make your machine not operate unless you download the patch. It’s a dynamic DRM, more effective.
This is really why Apple doesn’t want to license Fairplay. When iTunes 7 rolled out, iTunes 6 users could no longer buy video content unless they force upgraded. The DRM was improved.
Apple will be jumping on the HDCP, ACSS DRM bandwagon, the entire video content industry is on it.
Hilarious that some people spout like they know what they are talking about…
Macrovision had no ‘DRM’ in DVD format, they provided tech that prevented analogue copies of DVD; achieved via a simple pulse signal on analogue outputs meant they work with tvs but prevent VCR from recording. This was ‘broken’ buy hardware box you could put between DVD player and VCR that removed the pulse, simple.
CSS is the copy protection mechanism for DVD, broken by DVD-Jon; found a DVD disc with an open key and voila entire CSS broken.
ACSS is copy protection for HD DVD and Blu-ray and is a DRM, similarly we all know Fairplay<b> is a DRM.
<b>HDCP is not a DRM, it’s an encryption protocol for the data carried over DVI and HDMI cables; it’s like the digital version of Macromedia’s ancient product, prevents copying via the outputs (DRM prevents copying of the source).
HDMI has already been hardware cracked.
They will never win.
“the hardcore minority” LOL! Even many casual users on both Windows and Mac can copy DVDs nowadays. Not saying that’s right, just saying that’s the reality.
DRM will NEVER work. Never. Period. End of story.
“Crack the DRM and they can make your machine not operate unless you download the patch. It’s a dynamic DRM, more effective.”
This is bull. Apple doesn’t hold the entire machine hostage if you don’t “apply the patch”, as scary and Orwellian as you’re trying to make it all sound. For instance, I am on iTunes 7.0 — not 7.1 — and my machine works fine, thank you very much. I have another machine which is on iTunes 1.0. Does it work? Ye-s, it does.
Shut up with the FUD already. If you’d like the new features, you can upgrade. If you don’t, you’re perfectly OK where you’re at.
If you’d like the new features, you can upgrade. If you don’t, you’re perfectly OK where you’re at.
Wrong BustingTheSkullsOfIdiots
iTunes 6 could no longer download video content from iTMS unless one upgraded to the bloated and buggy iTunes 7.
Shows how much you know.
DRM less iTunes music will only make casual pirating easer. Like for example: My bother comes in to town with his Power Book, he has purchased a bunch a music through out the 6 months that I have not seen him. I have also purchase music that I keep on my G5. What would prevent us from swapping tracks from his Power Book to my G5 and vice-versa. Now I have his Power Book like one of my 5 registered Macs and he has mine, so technically we still swap tracks, but this would be a lot easer if we would not have DRM. So DRM dose deter casual iTunes track swapping or pirating among family and friends. It will never stop the commercial black market pirate that makes a living at illegal distributing of copy written material. Me and my brother, technically, are still with in our right to swap files because we have each others Mac registered, but with out the DRM anybody could get tracks from anybody, so I am not sure if Steve open letter view is as clean cut as he states it.