“The long-standing duel between Apple and three major labels, Universal, Warners and Sony BMG may be coming to an end, with tracks from these majors now showing up within the iTunes Plus music upgrade service,” Jonny Evans reports for Distorted-Loop.
“Sony BMG is already thought to be uploading tracks to make available through iTunes Plus,” Evans reports.
MacDailyNews Note: Several MacDailyNews readers report buying iTunes Plus DRM-free tracks from Warner, Universal, and SonyBMG within the past 24-hours.
Evans continues, “Overnight sundry spies have spotted tracks from the three hold-out majors popping up in the ‘Upgrade My Library’ section of iTunes, where users can upgrade their purchases from DRM’d to DRM-free tracks.”
Full article here.
All we need now is the press release. In the meantime, go hunt for your DRM-free tracks now!
The credit crunch and economic downturn can claim the credit for this one.
What I will wait to see is if they stand by iTunes Plus after the economy recovers in future.
I still think that they are greedy bastards! they are using iTunes to cut back their costs in order to line their pockets whilst shafting starving artists off their royalty dues.
Did you say “starving artists”? Oh puleeze!!!
Jake
It’s going to be a magical Christmas in Norway this year.
When EMI went DRM-free, their track prices were bumped up to $1.29, but then later dropped back down to $0.99. I upgraded the tracks I had immediately, but was pissed off to find that the price dropped not long after and I wouldn’t have had to pay anything additional.
It looks like the same pattern might be taking place with Universal, Warner, and Sony BMG as well. The upgrade price is $0.20 per track. I think I’ll wait a while and see if that holds or if they decide to drop back to $0.99 like EMI.
Is there a way to upgrade individual tracks you already own?? I’ve got a bunch that are available for upgrade, but don’t want to do them en masse.
Release the hounds!!
Even after EMI prices dropped to 99 cents you still had to pay 20-30 cents to upgrade, so you might as well upgrade them now, this won’t change.
aldebaran,
if i go to “upgrade my library” the upgraded tracks are $.30 each but visiting the indiviual albums, the “plus” tracks are only $.99. In other words, they are still charging the $.30 upgrade even though buying the track now for the first time would only cost $.99.
Also, where the heck is this upgrade button at?
@rip off – Think of it as a software version upgrade. Say I buy Panic’s Transmit version 2 for $29, and use it (listen to it) for six months. Then they release version 3 with improvements that I want (DRM-free and higher bitrate). It costs me $10 to upgrade. However, if I had never bought it and was buying it for the first time, version 3 would cost me — $29.
Now, you can also call that a rip-off, but it’s the way that most software upgrades work. The ability to upgrade to iTunes Plus fits all the criteria of a software upgrade, at least to me.
They are charging you to upgrade because the new tracks are now better quality. You can think of it this way: the value (price) of your original, DRM-infested, 128kbps track has dropped to about $0.69, and in order to get the full DRM-free track, you have to pay additional $0.30.
If this is true and consistent, that means that the labels (and most importantly, Universal) have caved and crawled back to Steve. And Steve was generous enough and said to them: “Ok, you can come back now and play with us, but you must promise to behave”.
I’m thinking that the lack of a press release may be the only concession that Steve had to make in order to get them back, so that the labels could avoid embarrassment of crawling back (or so they hope). As we all know, the cat will very quickly get out of the bag and, if this turns out to be consistent across the board, it will come out very, very quickly.
It’s ironic, though, that, as much as labels have been kicking and screaming, this will end up making their year (or at least holiday season).
Still waiting for lossless.
wah wah @ shadowwhatsit
Well, it’s good to see that iTunes had joined the crowd, led by Amazon No, seriously. Given the choice, it’s a lot easier to purchase songs directly from within iTunes than using Amazon’s website and having to load into iTunes. Of course that’s only because iTunes won’t monitor folders.
Now if only they’d drop the price to $0.79 for some tracks.
At the same time, Predrag, Apple haters will argue that Steve Jobs was the one forced to add more DRM-free music, dragged kicking and screaming because FairPlay is one of the important pieces of maintaining the iPod/iTunes “monopoly.” Therefore he was the one who didn’t want a press release or announcement at an event.
Jordan,
Looking at the way you worded your comment, it seems that you’re under the impression that somehow Apple was holding out for months, while Amazon listened to its customers and gave it what they wanted. As most of us know, it was the record labels that refused to provide DRM-free ‘iTunes Plus’ tracks to Apple, and at the same time worked with Amazon (and several other insignificant online players) to give them DRM-free music, discounted track pricing, etc, in a valiant (and ultimately futile) effort to unseat iTunes as the dominant player in the music download market.
During this time, several of us continued to remind people not to fall for this trap. We urged everyone to ignore (DRM-free) Amazon and continue buying iTunes as much as possible. Ultimately, the result seems to be forthcoming: labels are indeed crawling back to iTunes and letting Apple sell their catalogues DRM-free.
I don’t think you should expect $0.79 tracks on iTunes, though. Just like you shouldn’t expect $1.40 tracks either. At least not in the near future; not untile iTunes (or music downloads combined) constitute more than half of all music sold (i.e. including CDs).
Shadowself,
Good luck with that. Lossless will never happen. You can forget about it. AAC has proved to be immensly popular. The bump in bitrate for iTunes Plus seems to have placated the vast majority of those complaining of insuficient audio quality of 128kbps tracks. The remaining bunch should focus their efforts on acquiring music on SACD, and building their home audio systems around tube preamps.
You cannot tell the difference between a 256kbps AAC and a 24-bit 192kHz SACD on a crowded subway train (or a busy city street).
R2:
Your argument does bring a point that lingers somewhere in the back of my mind. While Jobs has publicly called for abolition of DRM in music, and has continued to publicly complain about the labels’ insistence on DRM, there is no question that FairPlay played a role (how important is for a debate) in solidifying the market position of the iPod/iTunes ecosystem. I have no doubt that the final removal of DRM will have no impact on its position now, but one must ask oneself how much of a help did this ecosystem receive from being locked-in with DRM?
Thankfully, this is a moot point right now. It seems that DRM is going away from iTunes music (movies are another matter altogether). And this can only be good for the consumers. As for Apple and the iPod, their position is so solid, it would take something much more serious than removal of FairPlay to undermine it.
@ Predrag
I don’t presume to know what the reason was for Apple not offering more DRM-free tracks, and nobody except those involved actually do know. My comment wasn’t intended to suggest that I do, either. I only meant that iTunes has now joined the DRM-free crowd. And to say that Amazon has not unseated iTunes would suggest that you know the sales numbers. I’d love to see them.
That said, until today, it would have been ridiculous to purchase DRMed iTunes tracks when you could have gotten the same songs in higher quality and DRM-free on Amazon, maybe even for cheaper.
My DRM cuffs are loose enough I never notice them really. Kinda like Napoleon exiled to his island… except for the poison.
Predrag: While Jobs has publicly called for abolition of DRM in music, and has continued to publicly complain about the labels’ insistence on DRM, there is no question that FairPlay played a role (how important is for a debate) in solidifying the market position of the iPod/iTunes ecosystem.
That is almost certainly not the case, since only a relatively small minority of customers ever purchased any FairPlay-afflicted tracks.
Most people just rip their CDs and fill up the rest on file sharing.
FairPlay has done nothing but retard iTunes sales. That’s it.
I have bought several iTunes Plus tracks but zero FairPlay tracks. And I’m happy to see that I can finally complete my collection if the other labels have indeed caved at long last.
@ping: “Most people” – which excludes those few that can not get themselves to stealing no matter how dirty some of these big record companies are.
@Predrag and Ping
You must go back to version 1, 2 or 3 of iTunes. No store existed yet.
Just your own CDs, iPod and iTunes software.
Many people forget that iTunes supported other MP3 players at that time. They were: Creative Labs, the leader at the time, SonicBlue, Nike and Nakamichi.
So the iPod did have competition that also would work just fine in iTunes. That all changed with the store and version 4.
@Jordan
What? Do you live under a rock?
Just because YOU don’t know why Apple doesn’t offer more DRM-free tracks, doesn’t mean Apple hasn’t clear stated their position. Have you not read Steve Jobs’ open letter about DRM from 2007? Check it out its the last of the “related articles”.
Just remember, “ignorance of the law excuses no one”. Due diligence!
Bob: “Most people” – which excludes those few that can not get themselves to stealing no matter how dirty some of these big record companies are.
No, it doesn’t. People who exclusively have self-ripped versions of CDs they themselves own on their iPods are among the reasons why FairPlay never worked to enforce Apple’s “monopoly”.
That presumable “monopoly” simply exists because people want to own iPods, not because they’re somehow “forced” to own them.