Apple and EMI ditching DRM is good, but it's not good enough
By Ryan Block 
posted April 2nd 2007 3:24PM
posted April 2nd 2007 3:24PM
For years Apple has said that given the choice between DRMed and DRM-free media ecosystems, it would always choose the former. Thankfully things seemed to be looking up when Jobs apparently had a change of heart after last year's crippling European pressures wrought havoc on the public perception of the iMonopoly. But we're still nowhere near there yet -- and we don't just mean that the other big labels, Sony BMG, Universal, and Warner, haven't switched over to DRM-free. What we're seeing here is a rabbit being pulled from a hat; it's wonderful, but what does it mean?
We should be clear to start: we don't believe Jobs is leading by example here -- EMI is. EMI is taking a huge, huge step in its business, and we fully commend them. Honestly, we do, kudos to you, EMI. Apple is taking the role of providing the first venue for EMI's great DRM-free music experiment; but what we find disconcerting is that Stevie J. is asking the labels do what he says -- not what he does. Now would be a good time to remind everyone that with last year's acquisition of Pixar, Steve Jobs became the single largest shareholder in the Walt Disney Company. With his $4 billion+ stake in the media megacorp and his seat on the board of directors, you'd think Jobs would be quick to encourage Disney-owned labels, like Hollywood Records, Lyric Street Records, Mammoth Records, and Walt Disney Records, to "embrace [DRM-free] sales wholeheartedly." Perhaps Jobs and Iger don't see as eye-to-eye as they previously postured, or perhaps Jobs is waiting to see whether this is actually the right move for the business, consumers be damned.
The finer details of EMI and Jobs's announcement today were also dubious. Despite the silver lining, which is that full albums should cost the same but will now default to DRM-free files, the two businesses still conflated DRM-free music with the discerning tastes of audiophiles. Steve mentioned that 128-bit AAC just isn't good enough for the sharp-eared, so uncrippled tracks are being bumped to 256Kbps. This gives Apple the ability to sell the music as a separate product and price point, while giving consumers the illusion of greater value. But we don't believe having free, usable, uncrippled media is a feature -- it's what we deserve, and we demand it. Asking customers to pay 30% more for no DRM and a higher bitrate is a distraction, a parlor trick to take our attention away from the philosophical issue: EMI is still selling DRMed music. EMI CEO Eric Nicoli said, "Not everybody cares about interoperability or sound quality." Since when did the two become so intrinsically linked? Sure, not everyone cares to vote either, that doesn't mean it's a premium privilege. Nicoli also stated EMI has taken the view that it must "trust consumers." It's true, today's announcement shows more trust than they ever displayed before -- but it's still conditional trust.
So why not make 99-cent 128-bit AAC tracks DRM free as well? We don't think there's an easy answer, but perhaps this is a move more tentative than people realize; this whole uncrippled music thing might just be an experiment. Assume it's a test to see how many people will buy DRM-free music, and possibly also a test to see how many copy it. If the experiment fails EMI and Apple can blame lack of consumer interest, or quickly inflated rates of piracy -- but they certainly wouldn't ever admit that the 30% price premium and inability to choose smaller file sizes and lower bitrates will have anything to do with lack of uptake. Meanwhile unwitting customers -- the type not to know of the crippling perils of DRM until it's too late -- will just go on buying the cheaper 99-cent tracks. So perhaps you can see why we don't fully believe that Jobs & Co. yet fully believe in a DRM-free ecosystem.
Now take a look at Steve's response to the question of whether TV shows will be sold without DRM. (And keep that $4 billion dollar stake / board of directors seat in mind.) Jobs stated he believed that video is different, and that movies are not an appropriate analogue because they aren't distributed without DRM at the same frequency of sales as music. But why is media not media to the man that's made peddling this media the crux of his business? What is the real difference between music and TV shows and movies when it comes to end-user consumption? We suspect we don't need to answer, but we'd also like to point out that it's probably safe to estimate that nearly 100% of Americans are in range of terrestrial analogue broadcasts from all the "majors" of their particular industry -- and all these broadcasts of flagship, primetime shows are completely DRM-free in analog and often digital TV streams, with which people can record and do with as they please. Jobs's argument about TV, movies, and DRM makes even less sense from a protection point of view: what's easier for users to pirate, a 50MB album, or a 5GB movie?
Lastly, we'd like to point out that, coincidentally, very, very few devices actually stand to benefit from Apple selling DRM-free AAC tracks. The iPod plays MP3s, but popular devices devices by all the big companies -- iRiver, Creative, Archos, most SanDisk devices, etc. (we forgetting any?) -- do not support AAC. In fact, the only other devices that we can think of that supports AAC are a handful of Sony players, the Sansa E200R, and the Zune -- and good luck getting that to work with your Mac or iTunes. We understand it may be a little much to ask that iTunes break its vertical integration and be made extensible for additional device support with this new DRM-free approach, but really, what's the point? Almost no devices play AAC, and Apple is deliberately not making these downloads available in MP3.
The bottom line is this: we want to live in a DRM-free world, and while we're not necessarily convinced that Jobs, Apple, Disney, and EMI do too, at least some of the players in this ecosystem are willing to look at it from the consumer's point of view. That's some of the best news we've heard about the record industry in a long, long while, and we honestly do hope that it sparks an uptick in sales for an industry in turmoil. But we don't approve of misleading sales pitches, confusing conditions, and second guessing what should just be a better consumer experience, and making it seem like some kind of privilege. If these companies are going to dump DRM, they need to really dump it, and never look back -- the buying public, Engadget included, certainly won't.
Unlike the idealist meanderings of this story, Apple has begun a process which, I think, will change the market, until no retailer can compete with them without going DRM-free as well. Jobs said that's what he wanted to do, and he has, in the minds of some, taken a huge risk. How about if the village idiot Bronfman just pulls his stuff out of the store? How will the market react? If EMI starts making a bundle, the industry will notice, believe me. Jobs put his money where his mouth is, and he's demonstrated now that there is no link between the iTunes store and the iPod except that the labels make it so.
As for the movie situation, look. After the DVD, no movie has been available unencrypted. You don't know what Jobs' position is on this, but if he told the studios to decrypt, they'd laugh and pull the movies. Period. The eventual freeing of EMI music is a long, long story, starting with Napster, and the RIAA lawsuits, and the continued flourishing of file sharing, and the Sony rootkit debacle, and the excellence of the online product when it comes to files up to about 150 MB -- digital audio. This moment took a lot of hard bargaining, convincing, and the ripeness of events.
Movies, to be acceptable quality online, are BIG. 700 MB for xvid rips. Shareable only through bittorrent. Even Apple has problems with bandwidth, and the home users do too. Then, there's the solid front of the studios.
And don't forget, there's Microsoft, which is the DRM enabler par excellence. They've bet Vista on draconian DRM schemes that deactivate you if you switch to a graphics card with a component out. What's all this Mafia "we'll fuck you up" about? The studios and their extreme plans for hi-def. Plus, why is the Zune a dog? DRM.
I think the situation there will change, but not before some major bankruptcies show the studios that DRM as a business model doesn't work.
"But we don't believe having free, usable, uncrippled media is a feature -- it's what we deserve, and we demand it. "
Really now. Like one deserves world peace, a living wage, long lives of bliss, a month of paid vacation, all of our technology PLUS the pristine air of, oh, whatever, 15th century Europe.
Grow up. Please. I don't want to entrust my Social Security to your generation.
Purchasing a commercial product on your terms rather than those dictated by the person who is selling it is nice, it's not a right. Get some perspective.
-------------------------------
You really believe that don't you? if it were anything BUT an absolute right they would be able to FORCE me to buy there crap.
Thats MORE MONEY than buying a CD! and you think thats a good deal? you think that its something to praise.
When you purchase PROPERTY its just that PROPERTY and its YOURS.
This "concept" of "licensing" content is a fabrication of media companies. There is no such thing in REALITY outside of big media?
Can ford dictate what you can do with your car? But wait you say there is no LICENSING with a car. Well that is where your deluded.
There are 2 types (recognized or not they exist) of property ownership. you have IPR and PPR
IPR is Intellectual Property Rights
PPR is Personal Property Rights.
For HARD items IPR is "patents" for SOFT items its COPYRIGHT
there is no tangible difference between them as far as PPR is concerned.
Once you PURCHASE (not license I never license anything) its YOURS to do with as you please in any way shape or form you please as long as it conforms to PPR and does NOT violate the IPR of the items.
When you buy a car you can hack it convert it destroy it cut it up modify it resell it make profit off of it ETC.. and all this is perfectly legal and as it should be its your PROPERTY therefore YOUR RIGHT.
NOW if you went to a chinese manufacturer with a car and said reverse engineer this and replicate it for me so I can sell it.
WELL now thats illegal. NOW your violating the IPR of the owner (ford or whoever)
the SAME applies or at least USED to apply to MEDIA or SOFT stuff.
Buy it copy it convert it remix it your FINE. copy it and SELL IT (even for free) and Your NOT ok since once you do that you move from PPR to IPR
they ARE NOT DIFFERENT. its SHEEPLE like you that have accepted the brainwashing to think ANY other way.
ALL the rights are YOURS because YOU are the consumer!!! its YOUR MONEY you bet your damned ass its your freaking right to make your demands and either get them or not buy it.
THE PROBLEM is they are distorting the LAW to REMOVE your PPR rights!!
What happens when there IS NO CD's and the ONLY way to get music is with there license DRM'd CRAP.
What then. your only option is abstinence THIS is not right.
As a CONSUMER we need to make the demand and the manufacturer THEN has a choice COMPLY with our DEMANDS (not requests) or DO NOT SELL THE PRODUCT.
WE have forgotten this and its a very sad thing.
ALL the rights are ours. Companies sell product AT OUR demand and calling. NOT THERES.
They do not even have IPR rights except as GRANTED by law.
The problem is those laws are out of control and 100% funded by the media companies (find me ONE sane american who is not greedily involved who would agree with something as draconian as the DMCA)
You jump for joy at an inferior restrictive overpriced electronic file
a CD goes for $8-$16 if you shop around and you think $1.29 for an inferior 256kbps AAC is a good thing? Thats a joke right? are you THAT brainwashed?
I do not consider an electronic download of a song to be worth more than 25cents and thats EXTREMELY pushing it and it better be 320kbps CBR and DRM FREE. AND include redownload if I lose the file.
10-15cents and you can forgo the redownload and go 192kbps.
anything higher or any other conditions and I am not interested. Period End of discussion you have no other choices. Those are my demands MEET them or DO NOT SELL ME YOUR MUSIC.
THAT is what people need to do. if EVERYONE would STOP being SHEEPLE and STOP buying music till they meet 100% of our (reasonable) demands then they SHOULD go out of business.
THAT IS HOW a consumer oriented capitalist environment is supposed to work.
in a normal environment when Manufacturer X pisses of its customers they move to Manufacturer Y
Manufacturer X has a choice CHANGE there ways and EARN back there customers or DIE.
In this case the labels have decided on another route. LEGISLATE there way through and FORCE us to ONLY pick them and ONLY on there terms.
WHAT THE HELL IS THAT ??? am I the only one that see's that as truly ass backwards or what?
WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE!!
The IPOD is a beautiful peice of hardware CRIPPLED by horrible software (on and off the ipod) and a horrible music format.
Give me an ipod with simple mass storage access and NO software pure file access and I would be all over it.
So would MOST people if they REALIZED how much easier and more free this was than the crap they feed us.
My problem is not the ipod but the media companies desire to strip me of MY RIGHTS (and they are my rights) and REMOVE my options by passing draconian laws (the media companies WROTE and PASSED the DMCA your deluded if you think anything else)
And another delusion. Piracy. First its not theft its Infringement. No that does not make it any less wrong but it also does not make it theft.
Another delusion put forth by the media companies.
DRM has absolutely positively NOTHING to do with piracy. Anyone with half a brain AND who stops to really think about it and ignore the propaganda will come to this same conclusion rather quickly.
the "pirates" the REAL "pirates" see DRM as nothing more than a slight hiccup.
Its the AVERAGE law abiding PAYING USER who feels the pain of DRM and they are the ONLY ones who feels the pain. NOT ONE SINGLE REAL PIRATE will ever feel any pain from DRM.
The sooner people realize this the sooner we DEMAND not REQUEST our rights and give them an ULTIMATUM comply or DIE then and only then will we have our rights as they should be.
AS MANY famous characters have been quoted as saying Freedom is NOT FREE. you have to FIGHT FOR IT BLEED FOR IT DEMAND IT UNCONDITIONALLY.
If our demands are too much for them the choice is simple. GO OUT OF BUSINESS.
Chris Taylor
http://www.nerys.com/