A letter from Steve Jobs on DRM: let's get rid of it
By Ryan Block 
posted February 6th 2007 3:01PM
posted February 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]
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