A letter from Steve Jobs on DRM: let's get rid of it
By Ryan Block 
posted Feb 6th 2007 3:01PM
posted Feb 6th 2007 3:01PM
iTunes, as we well know, is the world's largest online music distribution system; the iPod, of course, is the best selling line of portable audio players; and the pair are at the center of a very heated conversation, one finding numerous European nations sizing up laws to abolish practices that put DRM at the center of Apple's digital media business model. So Steve did what any good citizen would do: he wrote a letter. In it he reviews the three possible roads ahead for DRM: what we're doing now (using it), what happens if Apple licenses FairPlay (not much good), and what happens if DRM vanishes entirely ("clearly the best alternative for consumers, and Apple would embrace it in a heartbeat."). It's pretty easy to tell where Steve stands on the matter:"Why would the big four music companies [ever] 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. ... Much of the concern over DRM systems has arisen in European countries. Perhaps those unhappy with the current situation should redirect their energies towards persuading the music companies to sell their music DRM-free. ... Convincing them to license their music to Apple and others DRM-free will create a truly interoperable music marketplace. Apple will embrace this wholeheartedly."
Well, that's nice to know -- but is it enough for the head of Apple, possibly the single most important company in digital media right now, to just decry DRM and point the finger when under legal pressure from Europe? Steve, listen, we're glad someone such as yourself has come out and said what needed to be said, written the anti-DRM manifesto, as it were. But don't just leave it to the consumer to pressure the record industry, you need to lead the way -- that's why we wrote Microsoft that open letter. You and Bill have more power over this ecosystem than any two people in the world, and the big four knows it. Perhaps The Mac and The PC need to rally the troops (i.e. us) and lead this charge together.
[Thanks, Pete]
I will fight till the death. Hell Yeah!
Outrageous. Jobs is playing the good ole classic good cop, bad cop routine, only the record companies didn't know they were playing. Fact is Apple is the most restrictive company out there with respect to DRM and he's working hand-in-hand with the record companies. Between this statement and their ads I've come to absolutely detest the hypocrisy of Apple. Never will buy another product from them after this. What a jerk.
Wow, I never thought that some good would ever come from Steve's rampant megalomania.
What Mills said.
I can't believe MSFT would think DRM is a bad thing. Legit Check, Validation, and Activiation are the biggest pain in the asses ever.
That's not Digital Rights Management. That has nothing to do with it.
I think you over estimate the relative power of Apple vs. the record industry. The record companies would just love to get a nice war going between the online distributers so that Apple doesn't have hegemonic control over DRM negotiations, and playing hardball on iTunes DRM is the best way for them to do this. Slimy bastards...
This is Engadget, shouldn't the title read, "A letter from Stevsie, he sez let's get rid of DRM?"
"Apple, possibly the single most important company in digital media"
*chuckle*
"Apple, possibly the single most important company in digital media"
What, you think there's someone else out there who's more influential right now??? Let's not make this a Mac/PC thing - Apple dominates digital music and right now, digital movie sales too. So this is not an opinion, it's a fact, whether we like it or not.
This was brave of Steve, and totally right.
"Apple, possibly the single most important company in digital media"
What, you think there's someone else out there who's more influential right now??? Let's not make this a Mac/PC thing - Apple dominates digital music and right now, digital movie sales too. So this is not an opinion, it's a fact, whether we like it or not.
This was brave of Steve, and totally right.
Steve is a tool.
I wrote an email to Steve a while ago (It's probably not his personal email account, but it's probably monitored by somebody at apple).
In it, I told him how Apple had become a company that I was ashamed of. Many people say Apple never lost their vision, bringing innovative things like the iPod and iPhone to the world. I don't think so. I think Apple lost their vision more than most.
In the 1997 Macworld, Jobs promoted interop and partnership with Microsoft. He said they were going to become better partners, and agree on standards together. However, since that, Apple have taken a road bashing Microsoft every step of the way, and competing with them based on proprietary technologies. How does that satisfy the stage-rattling cheers that Jobs got back in '97?
Anyway, I emailed him and told him that I was ashamed of Apple for losing its vision. We haven't seen a speech like the one in 97 before ever in this industry.
I'm proud of Jobs for that letter. It takes a lot of guts to publically chide your partners for your most profitable products, and shift the blame of the DRM era to them. From somebody as high up as Jobs, this carries a lot of weight. It's a risky move, but I'm proud he took the first step.
But I would like to see a little more than words. Because Jobs can bemoan the partners for not going DRM-free, but what about Disney? They have hundreds of films up on iTunes. All wrapped in that lovely DRM-tasting stuff.
Karl
Somehow you put the onus back on Jobs? Apple has to do everything because no one else can do anything?
Jobs actually has less power in this situation because he has all the power.
The Music industry ended up ceding power to him by hoping he'd remain a niche. Now they are the only player with any success.
How does he have the power to say: "This is unsuccessful." when he's the only one who is successful?
"I know I've been selling you hundreds of millions of songs and it's made us all money, but it doesn't work for me..." That's not going to work. He can say: "Europe is crazy because they are blaming the wrong person." He can say: "We prefer this model and would embrace it... It might even make others successes as well (hint, hint to studios afraid of me)."
But how do you fault the guy for taking the appropriate, consumer-friendly stance that strongly argues his own corporate interests, the studios, the competition, and the governments of Europe in one go while recognizing this is a complex battle involving market strength, successful strategies, consumer acceptance, studio acceptance, legal battles, technological issues, and many other complex factors?
Even Steve knows it only takes one person to un-drm an audio/video file to break ALL of drm. So by this logic DRM will never work. Go Steve Go!
You know this is a great statement by jobs, and I hope DRM is done away with. I find it funny though, because apple's own foray into the music industry wouldn't have been quite as successful had it not been for the DRM which allowed only iPods to play music from the new, very popular iTunes store. I personally don't think that there is any way Jobs would have made this same statement right after the launch of the iTunes store.
I don't agree it was DRM that made the iPod. As Job's stated, the amount of protected music on iPods is a tiny fraction of all music. In fact, that's his main point!
"In the 1997 Macworld, Jobs promoted interop and partnership with Microsoft. He said they were going to become better partners, and agree on standards together. However, since that, Apple have taken a road bashing Microsoft every step of the way, and competing with them based on proprietary technologies."
Huh? TextEdit supports word, Pages supports Word, Keynote supports PowerPoint, Apple has maintained the Office on Mac relationship, ported iTunes/iPod to Windows... Microsoft conversely has closed some doors.
So I guess you only care about marketing and not technology/reality.
>Microsoft conversely has closed some doors.
Uh, you mean ones like allowing windows to run on Macs?
Jobs is such a visionary, I mean, it only took him 2 months to repeat what BillG said back in December (http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/14/ce-oh-no-he-didnt-part-xxi-gates-tells-consumers-to-ditch-dr/).
"Apple, possibly the single most important company in digital media
What, you think there's someone else out there who's more influential right now??? "
Say it with me (or pick one rather)... Sony -- Disney -- Google -- Walmart -- Viacom -- Microsoft
I'd go with Sony or Microsoft
Without Sony, iTunes wouldn't be worth much.
Without Microsoft support for the iPod the iPod would have been DOA.
Steve Jobs can do what Chuck Norris couldn't with his eyes closed...
music is a right not a privelage
Music is a right? Ummm, no. You have the right to free speech and free assembly. You do NOT have a right to be entertained.
-p-
So curious that Steve feels this way when iTunes DRM's the exact same files that are DRM free on Emusic. The head of Nettwerk Records whose albums are on both is on record saying the iTunes DRM does nothing for him and is only to Apple's benefit. This is to say nothing of the fact allowing users to only install your OS on a machine they bought from you is among the most powerful DRM there is.
I think the reasoning for this is that it will complicate the purchasing model. It is the same thinking as keeping the pricing as similar as possible. Although there are variations when it comes to content pricing on iTunes, they aren't as prevalent as other online stores. Now if you factor in another variable (DRM vs. Non-DRM media), it adds another level of complexity to the purchasing process. Obviously the iPod has an impact on people purchasing content from the iTunes store, but I think the pricing model for iTunes being as simple as it is, has helped it as well.
@helio9000: Apple DRMs that music because that is in their agreement with the labels, whereas Emusic has different agreement.
And you can clearly tell which one the labels prefer because the iTunes library dwarfs the Emusic one. This is not to knock Emusic - I like them a lot and I have found some things on their service that I have not found on iTunes. But their selection is rather paltry in comparison.
I found Steve's letter interesting because of the contracts perspective. There might very well be clauses with the majors that prevent Apple from selling un-DRM'd music from minor labels.
If not then expect that the iTunes store will shortly sell mp3s from everyone who allows them to do so.
I also found it interesting that he would apparently much rather compete with all other music stores on their own grounds than play the lock-in game with the iPod. That's smart because it will sell more iPods and he knows it.
Another very interesting tidbit is that the labels have the right to remove all their content from the ITMS if cracks/hacks of the DRM are not addressed within a short period of time. That would indeed be unworkable with licensees. In fact, competitors that license Apple's FairPlay could intentionally lag behind with security upgrades to cause the Apple store to lose a label - if said label wants to get out, or the competitor just wants to hurt the ITMS. No company would take such a risk - it would be plain stupid. Apple is paranoid about legal issues because they get sued for everything and anything, and constantly.
"Jobs is such a visionary, I mean, it only took him 2 months to repeat what BillG said back in December"
It's a completely different message when one's been the biggest proponent and failure at DRM and is conceding that his own store/device offering is miniscule.
When a similar, but more expansive, message comes from the only major success in digital music, the only player being attacked at the legislative and judicial level in numerous countries, it actually means something more than "I admit the Zune Marketplace is pathetic."
DRM or no DRM. Media would still be restricted by proprietary codecs built for the sole purpose of side profit. End result is it's less a pain in the ass to find out most (or all) of your stuff won't play on it.
I want a bumper sticker that says "DRM Failed". I believe everyone (not me) who formatted their computer hoping to copy their music back off of their iPod should have one.
well that's a fucking fail of a human right there, mate.
Whatever is in your itunes app can go into your ipod, your ipod can't put into your itunes.
... A fucking fail...
Wow... simply... Wow.
We just marched into a new era of digital content distribution.
Steve is my hero. I hope the music industry learns from his business model: figure out what the consumer wants and give it to them.
PS Steve, don't leave us high quality freaks out-----How about some DSD recordings or 24bit & 96/192 kHz recordings, PLEASE!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
I would love to have my digital collection compete with my vinyl collection!
Personally, I don't mind burning 3% of my music collection to CD and re-ripping it to an open state if it means I find a new music player I love MORE than my iPod.
This is just smoke and mirrors.
It was less than 2 months ago that apple said they saw no reason to get rid of DRM. I can't be the only one that remembers that statement.
Apple's DRM makes them money, it means that when your iPod breaks you buy another iPod. They have no interest in abandoning that at all.
This is a bunch of PR bs.
And seeing as iTunes is the fastest growing digital distribution channel for music when the physical music world is declining quickly, Steve has lots of power. They make nothing selling the music, all of the money goes to the music industry. If he wanted to say "Look, here's the deal, no drm, or I won't put your music on iTunes." the music industry would have to give it a heavy and serious consideration.
DRM locks you into your iPod, Steve has no intention of abandoning it. The only thing I could see changing that is if iPod sales started declining because of it, but that won't be happening anytime soon.
If my iPod breaks, I am not locked in. Then again I only have a few songs off of the iTunes store. And most of them were free downloads. However, you do have a point about being locked in. Then again, if your stupid enough to pay cd prices for less than cd quality, you deserve it.
As for Apple telling the music labels to remove drm or else. We know exactly what the labels would do, they would walk. They already hate that iTunes is a success. They made Microsoft pay them a royalty for every Zune sold, whether or not you put a single song on it. The labels are greedy scumbags, don't forget it. Their avarice knows no bounds.
I applaud Steve Jobs recent statement. However, remember that Apple has generally been anti-drm. They ran the Rip. Mix. Burn. ads years ago. Jobs stated when they launched ITMS that they would have preferred it drm-free, but it was the only way to get the labels to sign on, and even then they only did it because it was (at the time) Mac-only, so they figured inpact would be minimal.
And don't forget that Apple makes virtually nothing off of music sales. Apple makes its money from iPods, not the store.
"DRM locks you into your iPod, Steve has no intention of abandoning it. The only thing I could see changing that is if iPod sales started declining because of it, but that won't be happening anytime soon."
Steve specifically addressed this: 22 tracks or 3% of your library does not lock you in.
iPod sales aren't declining because the average consumer does not agree with your absurd viewpoint.
"Apple's DRM makes them money, it means that when your iPod breaks you buy another iPod. They have no interest in abandoning that at all."
No, it means you buy another iPod you do so because you want one. It takes about 5 minutes to burn 22 songs and then re-rip them.
"Without MS support the iPod would've been DOA"... uh, what Microsoft support? Just because Apple wrote iTunes for Mac and Windows doesn't mean MS "supports" the iPod.
Market share for online music retailers:
Apple iTunes: 67%
eMusic: 11%
Real Rhapsody: 4%
Napster: 4%
MSN Music: 3%
(Source: The NPD Group, January to May 2006)
< ironic>Wow! you're right! Apple is completely pwned by Sony, Microsoft, Wallmart,...!
wow, Justin, your a moron.
Can I please have some of what you're smokin?
"iTunes, as we well know, is the world's largest online music distribution system"... um, no. That would likely be Bittorrent. Maybe iTunes is the biggest legal distribution system...
"Until All Are One!"
Translation. Our music business model is broken - Jobs.
Lets blame it on DRM. Thats an easy target.
Why does Jobs think its ok to strip DRM from music and not video? Perhaps we'll here more on that. I'd love to have DRM free video formats succeed, even HD formats. Is there any change that business model will be better because the formats are somewhat protected? Do you think Steve Jobs will lead the charge on this given his position with Disney?
now if we could kill overpriced lossy audio...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lossy_data_compression
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairPlay
MS allowed Windows to run on Macs? Ummm, no. Apple allowed Windows to run on Macs. MS has absolutely zero say in the matter. To MS it's just another OS license sold, which is all they care about. kthnxbye.
-p-
actually yes. Microsoft bought Connectix, which created virtual PC for the Mac. Then they proceeded to kill it on the Mac.
Since legal issues with Apple Corps have been dealt with, whats to stop Apple from bypassing the big 5 and becoming the big 6th?
Were Apple to become it's own label and sell it's own music sans DRM...I wonder how that would change the playing field?
Jesus Jobs is going to save the world!
very well written (by steve, or whoever wrote it) and he's completely right.
now as to getting "the big four" to actually agree to abolish their failed DRM. good luck.
This is actually really big, in that it's not some off-the-cuff remark but a manifesto on the Apple corporate site.
Don't be misled -- Steve's not doing this because he likes you, but the fact is that there's a DRM storm brewing in Europe and this is Steve doing what he does best: Making a smart move at exactly the right time.
DRM has, through now, been Apple's bargaining tool with the content industry. Suddenly it's turning into a liability to marketshare in Europe -- and so Steve has very smartly maneuvered accordingly.
That guy is a business genius.
Out of all the commenters here, Jonathan Sundy seems to be the only one who understands the situation. Apple's iPod+iTunes model is designed to lock-in customers. Without DRM, that proprietary model simply wouldn't exist, and the dominance of both the iPod and iTunes Music Store may begin to erode over time. They will not be doing away with it.
I suppose Jobs' comments are supposed to make you feel all warm inside as you go out to buy a replacement iPod.
Did you actually read the article? Jobs points out that only 3% of music on IPods is Fairplay DRMed, which is not enough to lock someone into buying an IPod.
People don't buy Ipods because of ITunes, they buy Ipods because they work pretty well, have a "cool factor", and there is a huge selection of aftermarket accessories that only work with the IPod. Getting rid of DRM is not going to change that, which is the real lock in.
"Without DRM, that proprietary model simply wouldn't exist,"
DRM has a lot less to do with it than you think. I can't use WMP11 or winamp to put DRM-less mp3s on my ipod... i cannot use itunes to put drm-less mp3s on my PSP. DRMless podcasts (video or audio) can be loaded onto my ipod or my PSP but I can't use the same method (itunes, other software) for both pieces of hardware.
I would say a vast majority of mp3 player owners use whatever software came with their device. Most people don't know or care which music software is used with their device. So I don't think the software locks you into anything. People use iTunes BECAUSE it's required by the iPod, they don't get an iPod because they use iTunes. Plus the music files are stored on your computer and could theoretically be accessed by any software, so the software doesn't lock you into anything.
>Apple DRMs that music because that is in their agreement with the labels,
That is the agreement with some of the record labels. But as I said the President of one of the *labels* (nettwork Records) carried on both has openly questioned why there is DRM on his music on iTunes when in fact, he doesn't require it since he feels it only benefits apple.
>>>>
"But when the same tracks are sold by the iTunes Music Store, Apple insists on attaching FairPlay copy protection that limits their use to only one portable player, the iPod. Terry McBride, Nettwerk’s chief executive, said that the artists initially required Apple to use copy protection, but that this was no longer the case. At this point, he said, copy protection serves only Apple’s interests."
http://nanocrew.net/category/drm/
>>>>>
It sounds like RIAApple is simply throwing a bone to the glassy eyed RIAApple minions who've just now starting to figure out that they're buying DRMed media. Now that Jobs has finished the west wing of his palace with itune$ DRM he looks down from the ramparts at the peasants and says "maybe someone else should take off the chains I sold."
RIAApple fans love to bash other company's for following in RIAAple's DRM footsteps but it was their own idol and savior that first got in bed with RIAA pulled up the covers and snuggled close. And not long after RIAApple gave birth to the posterchild for the success of DRM, itunes.
My god and what self-aggrandizing tools engadget writers are. Welcome to the party engadget where have you been? Oh I remember you were busy talking out both sides of your mouth. Decrying DRM out one side and praising the biggest supplier of it out the other.
"Perhaps those unhappy with the current situation should redirect their energies towards persuading the music companies to sell their music DRM-free. ... "
Awesome spin. You guys should write for Faux News.
Reality check, APPLE sells their music with DRM. The record companies sell it WITHOUT DRM, they are called "CDs".
APPLE put this DRM on the music. Oh I know they cry "but the big bad record companies made us!!!" I'm sure it's just a coincidence that it locks people into the Apple format right? Riiight...
Steve's RDF is just amazing, I mean I knew it was good, getting people to buy overpriced and incompatible computers because they are "cool".. but now... Wow it is able to take the truth and completely reverse the polarity and have people believe it.
"The record companies sell it WITHOUT DRM, they are called "CDs"."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Sony_BMG_CD_copy_protection_scandal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaMax_CD-3
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=960
What's that about Record companies and DRM again?
'Awesome spin. You guys should write for Faux News.
Reality check, APPLE sells their music with DRM. The record companies sell it WITHOUT DRM, they are called "CDs".'
RTFA! That's EXACTLY his point. From the letter you obviously didn't bother to read:
"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.
So if the music companies are selling over 90 percent of their music DRM-free, what benefits do they get from selling the remaining small percentage of their music encumbered with a DRM system? There appear to be none. If anything, the technical expertise and overhead required to create, operate and update a DRM system has limited the number of participants selling DRM protected music. If such requirements were removed, the music industry might experience an influx of new companies willing to invest in innovative new stores and players. This can only be seen as a positive by the music companies."
Oh, my god! You people make me sick! European governments say that DRM is bad, the CEO of Emusic says that DRM is bad, Bill Gates says that DRM is bad, and last week in LA, even the record labels started saying DRM was bad, and all of it was reported right here. Then Steve Jobs saunters in, agrees with everyone else, deflects all blame for the situation as being someone else's fault, and you respond "finally someone had the gusts to say what no one else had the vision to realize!"
Do you have a prayer rug that faces Cupertino?
This may have been said somewhere in the commentary, but I didn't read SJ as saying that the onus is on the consumer to apply pressure to the record companies. It would appear that he is referencing the legal pressures being mounted in Europe, focusing on the retailer of the music (namely Apple, et al.). As they are laboring under the restrictions imposed by the record companies, he is quite rightly "pointing the finger", in my opinion, on to the record labels. In an ultimate irony, I think that it would also make for a much more competitive environment for Apple, since much of the scorn heaped on Microsoft or Sony's media DRMs is in the execution, and the barriers it creates for legitimate purchasers. Eliminating that hurdle would certainly help remove various UI/experiencial hurdles for purchasing...
I couldn't agree more with the writer of this. There's a very interesting and similar set of circumstances that occurs in the book "Fast Food Nation" (great book if you haven't read it and sure to be a good film). It revolves around McDonalds (Apple) and Corporate Farms here know as ConAgra (record labels) and the idea is pretty simple...When McDonalds, the largest purchaser/distributor of corporate farmed goods, talks... The largest corporate farm, ConAgra listens.
seriously engadget, are you guys gun-shy from all the apple haters? because honestly, implying that steve jobs personally needs to do more to kill DRM smacks of this "give both sides an equal hearing even at the expense of fact" media ideology that fox news, to name a big one, is so very fond of. If you're going to insert an opinion of "steve jobs, you need to lead the way" in your post, why don't you follow through and suggest how? do you think he's purposely holding back some previously secret ability that would solve apple's europe troubles, create a huge publicity buzz around itunes/ipod, and probably increase sales? oh right, you suggest apple team up with bill gates.
this is the most poorly thought-out post i've ever seen on engadget.
DRM will be replaced soon by new watermarking technology that allows the record labels to track their meta data through online sales channels, while enabling interoperability between the various hardware, software and online music providers.
While it's nice to hear that Apple would support DRM free music sales on iTunes, Steve's manifesto is hardly the first to knock DRM.
Read some of the news that came out of the Midem show last week..most of the major players on all sides of the issue agree that using open standards would improve the user experience, benefit everyone involved and open the flood gates for digital music to help offset the sharp decline in physical sales.
Dilbert... we are talking about "digital media" not just music. I would venture to say that more people get "digital media" on their PC's more then any other device. I'm also willing to put money on the fact that more Videos have been watched on Youtube.com + GoogleVideo then songs/music has been downloaded from iTunes.
So to recap. I'm not saying that iTunes isn't popular and relevant but I think saying "Apple, possibly the single most important company in digital media" is as over stated as when I told the girl at the the bar last weekend that I have condos all over the world. Sure I might own a timeshare, but that doesn't mean that I "own condos all over the world."
And Rip, it's my moron? Or did you mean to call me a moron. I sure hope it isn't the latter. I'm all for name calling someone a moron but you really should... I don't know... use the right words. Shmuck.
Clever, but hardly accurate. The pressure in Europe is NOT for the removal of DRM, but for interoperability with itunes and the ipod.
It's like Jobs woke up one day and said "I know how I can get people to forget about the lawsuits I've caused Apple to sustain. I'll blame it all on "them"."
Too bad stevie, I remember, and others will too.
Dammit, stop using the acronym DRM without stating what the hell that stands for first. Only you geeks know what it means, which means that I want to be a geek. What the hell is DRM?
Digital Rights Management.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Rights_Management
"Did you actually read the article? Jobs points out that only 3% of music on IPods is Fairplay DRMed"
Really? And he knows that how? Do you kowtow nightly and present the holy iCon to his grace for inspection? itune$ is the main supplier of DRM media bar none. And for his Joblyness to now say 'oh it's so bad what THOSE people are doing" is just putrid regurgitated hogwash.
Ya know what edgore as big a tool as RIAApple and engadget are at least they're doing it for a reason. It's purely for profit but at least they have a reason. You're just self deluded along with others tossing their money at RIAApple and trying to rationalize it because you think it makes you look cool. If DRM hadn't been successful it wouldn't exist and people like you slurped up the DRM and begged for more while RIAApple supplied it and websites like engadget pushed it.
So for any of you to now cry about DRM is just hypocrisy. Apple fans, Jobs and engadget should go sit in the corner and shut up about DRM because you're the problem NOT the solution.
Since you can't be bothered to read his actual statements:
"Let’s look at the data for iPods and the iTunes store – they are the industry’s most popular products and we have accurate data for them. Through the end of 2006, customers purchased a total of 90 million iPods and 2 billion songs from the iTunes store. On average, that’s 22 songs purchased from the iTunes store for each iPod ever sold.
"Today’s most popular iPod holds 1000 songs, and research tells us that the average iPod is nearly full. This means that only 22 out of 1000 songs, or under 3% of the music on the average iPod, is purchased from the iTunes store and protected with a DRM. The remaining 97% of the music is unprotected and playable on any player that can play the open formats. Its hard to believe that just 3% of the music on the average iPod is enough to lock users into buying only iPods in the future. And since 97% of the music on the average iPod was not purchased from the iTunes store, iPod users are clearly not locked into the iTunes store to acquire their music."
OK, if you are so keen on this, why can't you help us choose alternative ways to encode our music that are DRM and in fact royalty free. If this is how you feel Steve, give the iphone the ability to play OGG's at least. It's free to do as you don't need to pay royalties, you don't really need to advertise the fact to the masses and confuse them but seeing as this would take very little time to do and there are people like myself out there that like using OGGs for sound quality reasons to rip my own music too. Doing this would be a step towards showing me Apple cared more about user experience than locking me into one player type and DRM.
er, if you encode in iTunes, it is drm-free. AAC, Apple Lossless, MP3, WAV, AIFF... all drm-free. Oh and they work fine on the iPod.
The only drm is Fairplay which you get when you buy a song from the iTunes store.
Sorry if OGG/vorbis isn't supported. I do feel bad for all 10 people that use it.
So isn't the main issue for the Euros along the lines of ... Apple needs to learn how to play nice with others? They aren't saying down with DRM (Jobs is but he's sidestepping what the real problem is), they are saying your DRM only works on your devices. If you want to use DRM, then open it up to other manufacturers so that consumers (you and I) can choose to use our Zunes to play music from iTunes ... and vice versa for that matter.
He's using fancy marketing math to avoid double counting. One thing you can say is that there have been 2B in songs dowloaded from iTunes and you have to assume those are all "unique" (meaning, that 1 user will not buy the same song twice for themselves). What you can't say is that the 90M iPods are unique purchases (meaning, 1 user can buy multiple iPods for themselves). So basically there is some factor greater than 3% of music that is stored on an iPod that is locked in to FairPlay.
Songs that are ripped with iTunes in AAC are locked into Apple's format too. Unless you change the setting to MP3, but most users don't even know that option exists, let alone how to activate it (we are talking about Mac users here...).
Not really marketing math so much as "lazy" math. Any ipod with 4 gigs or more will hold 1000 songs, and the ipod mini/nano with 4 gigs is the most popular ipod sold. He used that as a baseline for all other ipods.
But even if 40% of all ipods ever sold are out of use, you're talking about 37 itunes songs for each ipod, not 22. That's not exactly a huge difference.
>This means that only 22 out of 1000 songs
Hmmm, this figure comes from the same Forrester Research about sales collapsing that Apple and its apologists were denying so vigorously just a few months ago pointing out that counting all iPods sold is rubbish since many of them are out of action. Jobs open the keynote saying:
"What we see is iTunes sales were really up this year. We doubled the number of songs we sold in 2006. We are selling over 5 million songs a day. Isn't that unbelievable? 58 songs every second."
So is iTunes is a failure after all and Forrester was right?
"Hmmm, this figure comes from the same Forrester Research..."
WRONG. The figures come from Apple. Do you people know how to read? Did you just skim through the article? He said how many songs were sold and how many iPods were sold to date and did the math. I think Apple would know their sales figures without going to Forrester.
I'm a mac user. I know how to change the preferences in iTunes. They are located in the Preferences! Mac users, according to statistics, have a higher level of education than typical Windows users; so I would assume most also know how to set preferences.
My own education informs me that you do not "activate" and option, you choose it. I also know that you do not know the rules of ellipsis usage. From all this I can guess that your level of education is somewhat limited, and that statistically you are likely to be a windows user.
I may say you are locked into Windows by your lack of curiosity and or limited intelligence.
I do apologise for suggesting you are dumb; perhaps you should think twice before suggesting that the entire Mac user community is similarly challenged.
keep smiling
waddo
I can't believe anyone would take this at face value. Apple employs the most restrictive DRM right now. Why? Because they have dominant market share and they don't want anyone switching to any other brand of DAP. (Losing as little as $20 of music would make anyone think twice.) For Apple's CEO to say he's against DRM but yet utilize it to maximize profits is hypocrisy at its highest. Are you people blind?
Personally, I think DRM is FANTASTIC. For a quarter of the price of cable TV I can download whatever I want, whenever I want and play it on my DAP. In the past year I've discovered more music than I did in the previous 5 years, especially because I can sample whole tracks and not just 30 seconds. It's like heroin for music lovers. Now, granted, if you only listen to the same crappy Dave Matthews album you have for the past 10 years, then you might not get much use out of it. Fact is, no record company would ever allow this type of service if they weren't protected in some way.
"Owning" music is an antiquated concept. Why would you want to own something that has an intrinsic diminishing marginal utility when you can have an endless supply of new music AND your old music? DRM is the greatest thing to happen to music in our lifetimes and most people aren't smart enough to realize it. This is very frustrating.
Your bring up a good point - subscription systems are an entirely different kettle of fish, and I don't see how you could do them without DRM of some sort, which of course can generally be easily broken like Plays For Sure was.
I think that ultimately we are going to see something that looks very much like allofmp3.com - no DRM, and about a dollar for an album's worth of 128kps music, which seems to be the impulse buy price point. I would buy anything based on a good review or heck,the album cover art, at that price point, and I would probably end up spending more on music per year than I do now (about $700 per year). Heck, all the bands I am interested don't make any money off their CDs anyway.
if Apple takes the DRM away, it would be a good move, but then no one could stop anyone from pirating since EVERYTHING would be UNPROTECTED, therefore ending the iTunes Store, which is not what I want to see anytime soon.. EVER !!!
Leave it to the founder of the company that sells more DRM-protected material than any other in the world to decry its existence. I'm sure this will only fuel the Mac-fanboy fire: ("Golly, that Steve Jobs sure is on our side--not like that evil Microsoft"), but Apple's still reaping the rewards of DRM-protected music sales. It's like Louis Camilleri (CEO of Marlboro's parent company, Atria Group) coming out and derogating the existence of cigarettes.
I dislike DRM, too, but I don't run a company that's sold over *two billion* songs protected by it.
While it is admirable for him to say this, it's also a bit convenient since Apple is now in the mobile phone market.
Now that Apple makes phones and MP3 players they want an open system.
Before they had a phone for you to play it on they didn't care.
He's trying to deflect some of the Euro lawsuits.
Hopefully the end of 2007 ends DRM.
There's keith waddington everyone. The crowning achievement of what the WSJ called a marketing company that also does computers.
That study you guys love to quote Mr. Wad is a prime example of just how low you are. Take any two items where one costs more than the other and you'll find the same statistic. But because you can't tell cause from effect you see it as something to brag about.
But what you're bragging about is that you can afford a more expensive toy than say inner city kids, single mothers and essentially all poor people who would fall into the 90% of people who don't buy Macs.
While I'm certain you and Steve look down on those people for not being able to afford Apple toys I'm personally happy that there is a less expensive option for people and we don't have to live in an Appleworld where only self-righteous self-absorbed elitist snobs can afford computers.
Good going Mr. Wad you just spit in the eye of poor people. Steve will be so proud.
Actually I am unemployed. My first mac was a Mac Plus: 1986. It took me 1 year to save for it. I am not rich, I am just smart: I don't waste money on junk.
And that was a passing comment, not the subject of my post. The subject of my post was lack of education and accusing people of being dumb.
I can see from your comments that you lack reading skills. I will not call you dumb, because I am not like the poster I wasI answering. But I will say you are rude.
keep smiling
waddo
I don't believe that Jobs is being sincere. I find it hard to believe that he is as anti-DRM as his letter at first reads. Why? Because Apple's dominance is the result of locking competitors out with FairPlay DRM. FairPlay protects Apple's business more than it protects content.
For more detailed analysis, http://www.fluxe.com/serendipity/index.php?/archives/65-More-Thoughts-on-Music.html
Alleluia !
His head is in the right place! i've been getting pretty worried.
John Miller you wouldn't be saying any of that if you knew the whole story.
What mills and yayaja said. If this works I will be so happy. I'll get to put songs on my PS3 without finding a hacker to do it for me!
Oh. I thought this was about Digital Radio Mondiale.
What a hypocrite! This was the guy who sued anybody who put a circular control pad on their MP3 player becauwse it would look like an iPod. They even put a little software company out of business because they developed a software interface for PDAs.
See how quickly he jumps to crush anybody who brings out somethng similar to the iPhone interface!
And HE is up there saying that musicians should have their rights taken away while he guards his 'intellectual property' with a battalion of lawyers...again..What a hypocrite!!!
Down with DRM