iTunes Plus DRM-free music now official(er)
By Thomas Ricker 
posted May 30th 2007 8:48AM
posted May 30th 2007 8:48AM
Please note: If you're a current Engadget commenter, you do not need to re-register. Simply login and you will be prompted to select a username.
fuck you and your drm's and your eula's. i support opensource software only. dont like it? then be slaves to the corporate giants that tell you what to do and how to do it. and milk every penny out of you until they think theyve had enough.......thing is, with them, enough is never enough.
So does this finally mean that you can play your purchased iTunes music on your Xbox360?
The $3.00 is to "upgrade" a previously purchased album. Not for buying a new one, that would be a fantastic deal.
"Now put down that BitTorrent client and get out there and support Fair Use kids"
But I don' Wanna!
Hmm. My 7.2-upgraded iTunes doesn't "see" the Upgrade My Library button.
This is it- we're almost at the point where the pirates are separated from the people that really mean it when they say "but I only do it because the music companies won't sell it un-DRMed". Of course, the fact that only EMI is included leaves a lot to be desired (still waiting for the chance to buy from iTunes Japan with a US credit card) but still, it's a start.
Where did you find the page in iTunes from the screenshot? I can't find an iTunes Plus page anywhere.
...and there it is. I guess it just took a few minutes.
Hmm. My 7.2-upgraded iTunes doesn't "see" the Upgrade My Library button.
FWIW, I had a total of 10 songs (out of the 389 I have purchased) qualify for iTunes Plus. $3 well spent, IMHO.
free single of the week is not working... it tries to debt my account!
Nice. The new file "Kind," according to iTunes, is "Purchased AAC audio file" as opposed to "Protected AAC..."
Rachel gave me a nice morning LOL there.
Anyone know if this has hit the UK yet, or is it a case of we will have to wait for 9 months?
I just gave them £1.40 to upgrade 4 songs and a music video - it's in the UK now as much as it's in the USA
Is anyone else not seeing iTunes Plus, or even yesterday's new album releases? Not only can I not find the iTunes Plus stuff, but the store is still showing album releases from last week (such as Ozzy's new album).
I upgraded to 7.2 this morning, and I also "enabled iTunes Plus" on my Account page.
Nothing here in Holland either... It'd be nice if Apple were a bit clearer about this in their communications. So far, most new announcements turn out to be disappointments, making us feel like second-rate customers.
maybe this will be more obvious when i log into itunes but...
i thought they said albums would cost the same --- why $3 more now?
Plus albums cost the same as non-plus albums (usually). *Upgrading* a previously purchased album costs ~$3.
err...seems to be missing suddenly.
Yup, no iTunes plus on my newly upgraded version either
Not getting it on Swedish iTunes either.. a site called Musicbrigade started selling DRM free EMI MP3s last week. Only in Europe I think but still..
It's not showing up for me here and I am in Florida. It updated to 7.2 but nothing is new. How are you accessing the iTunes Plus area?
guys, in iTunes, if you click on your profile in the upper right corner of the window. go into your profile. There is a button that says "Manage iTunes Plus".
Check the box that says "Always show me iTunes Plus...". Bob's yer Uncle, you will see the iTunes plus option in the iTunes store. Hope this helps.
It's a good step, anyway. I'll download my music just as soon as they offer me lossless compression. It's the same reason I haven't used p2p for five years.
you and about three other people.
Yeah... upgraded and what not, but I'm not seeing any way to access this phantom "iTune Plus" I keep hearing about. Anybody successful in accessing it? Will there be a 7.2.1 in the near future?
First, go your account details (email adress button top right of store), and enable itunes plus.
Dunno what to do next to get the itunes plus page up tho :(
I sorta found a way to show it in iTunes, slightly hidden, lol.
Basically, find an EMI artist (I chose the rolling stones), go onto one of their records, and on that page (just above the buy album link) you'll see something like "Qualifies for iTunes Plus", just click on that, it'll take you through a load of screens, making you accept new ToS.
Uh oh... "Unknown Error" when I try to go access iTunes Plus (using Ben's method). I click the iTunes Plus button and I get an "unknown error (-9843)"?
I hate lossy downloads. Give lossless AAC or FLAC and I will actually start buying online. Otherwise I get DRM-free higher quality music with CDs.
Same problem as Gino.... Looks like a slow rollout.
Here's a direct link to iTunes Plus:
http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/iTunesPlusPage
So much for the great "gift" Steve Jobs was giving y'all. This was just another ploy to make more money. Apple users really are gulliable-- they will pay money for stuff they already own!
Reason #100 I'm happy I sold my 5G iPod and bought a PlaysForSure device (Toshiba Gigabeat S). $12.50 a month, unlimited downloads, total music freedom. You chumps are paying money for stuff you already own!
And you're paying money for nothing. Because what happens when you stop paying that monthly bill? All your music disappears. I'd rather have something I can keep, thank you very much.
Nothing happens, because there are ways to strip the music of it's DRM. :)
Do you get to keep watching cable if you stop paying your bill? Can you listen to music on XM if you cancel? No. $12.50 a month is nothing to pay for complete music freedom. I'm about as likely to stop paying for my subscription music service as I am to turn off the gas.
link just times out :-(
Still no Beatles tracks?? Am I the only one who knows about the whole Apple vs. Apple fiasco???
http://www.legalzoom.com/articles/article_content/article11325.html
read up my fellow blogfiends!
Just downloaded a song this AM- seems to take forever and all proof that anything was happening did not exist, no song name appeared in the list- just a two to four minute wait for one song.
Well, itunes customers never really owned the music. This is more of a rent to own scenario. Just like you're renting, except their terms are less explicit and they can continue using their purchases until they've gone through a couple new computers.
@John Miller
You are a DORK. *YOU* are wasting your money. Each month.. what if you dont update your player with new music? You pay $12.50 just to keep the music you have. What if you stop your subscription. Your music will die.
Ha ha ha ha!! FOOOOOOL!
I think it's fully official now, the "iTunes Plus" link just appeared on my "Quick Links" thing in iTunes.
Lets buy some music.
Someone please explain this to me: How is offering "higher-quality" tracks (a near-zero cost to Apple) at a 30% mark-up supposed to show their support for DRM-free music? The biggest arguement has always been that DRM only hurts the consumers who legally purchase and have no intention of illegally distributing the music ...
It appears we're giving this same consumer the "option" now of still being hurt by DRM at $0.99/song or "penalized" at $1.29/song ... while the consumer who would have normally either stole the music or removed the DRM is still going to do so!
What motivation do I have to purchase $1.29 songs that are only going to cut my iPod capacity in half for a quality I will never be able to distinguish over most earphones (especially the ones that CAME WITH MY IPOD!)? ... Especially as well as I need only wait for the DRM to be cracked again.
The $0.30 bump is simply how much the minds at EMI calculated they would lose from otherwise "legal" consumers if they removed DRM vs. the normal $0.99 cents ... that's all ... the brilliant minds at Apple then 'hide' this bump by offering the songs to you at a higher quality that, if they really thought was better, would have offered a long time ago ...
TomK, please keep in mind that they not only removed the DRM but also increased the bitrate of the tracks from 128K to 256K. This may be low-cost for the people and labor involved to re-rip the tracks to the new bitrate. All for only US30¢ per track. Hardly "no cost" as you say- nor is it the ripoff you purport it to be.
It always amazes me how many different ways people will attempt to spin whatever they can.
Earlier in these posts we have someone attempting to spin the added cost of this new initiative and the slow rollout on day one of its functionality as somehow screwing over iPod users and a fundamental reason worth telling us that we should really switch to a different type of DRM that is controlled by Microsoft.
If you feel more comfortable NOT owning the music you pay to listen to... be my guest! But, don't try and tell anyone how that makes you better or simply better off then the rest of us, because it's garbage. You rent your music and the instant you stop paying the monthly fee it all goes away. Unless, of course, you paid more money on top of your subscription fee to get a similarly DRMed version that you get to keep... at a quality level no better then what you get from iTMS.
Of course, then we get another poster trying to spin ownership through iTMS as really being no better then subscribing because somehow we are actually tied to how many computers we can upgrade through and still have access to our music. We aren't. You are only allowed to have a certain number of SIMULTANEOUS computers accessing the song in a library. And, when you're rerady to upgarde one of them or move your music over to a new machine you simply deauthorize the one you're leaving behind. ZOMG, that's just SO damned hard!
Now, in this final post, we have another person spinning the cost aspect and somehow intoning that Apple is screwing us... or, more acccurately, screwing consumers that WOULD legally buy and download music but won't because of the cost and will then PIRATE what they want.
First, do you honestly believe that Apple was the sole architect of quality and price when the iTMS first came into existence? No, they weren't. Quality was determined based on space, bandwidth, what was then available on P2P, and what sounded most acceptable to the majority of listeners. Or, do we forget that the majority of people listening to music can't succinctly tell the difference between 128kbps and CD-quality.
Price, similarly, was decided by consensus. Although, in this regard, Apple had a little more sway over the final outcome, it was still an aggregate decision between all five majors and the then untested Apple iTMS concept. And, you may choose to forget, but let us not... right up until the EMI deal, the other majors were trying to get Apple to UP its prices on iTMS for the 128kbps DRMed content that was being offered.
Had Apple and Steve Jobs not continued to say "no way" legal purchasers would currently be paying $1.29 and more for DRMed music. Instead, we now get the start of a compromise, a slightly elevated price for the loss of DRM and higher quality for those that want it. Albums that maintain their original pricing scheme and still gain the higher quality and DRM-free tracks (the music labels are still trying to salvage the album format as their delivery means du jour).
How did that screw you or anyone else? How did Apple do something negative to its users? Did they tell you, "hey, you want the DRM-free, higher quality tracks, then you have to buy them all over again?" No. Did they pull a Microsoft and set up a DRM scheme that they proliferated through the industry and then decided to move away from entirely and tell their users to rebuy all their music? No.
So, how did you get screwed? How did anyone get screwed?
It is also doubling their bandwidth usage. (128 -> 256)
Oh yay! What a bargain, thanks for saving us Apple, $1.29 per song now? You are really going all out. And charging $.30 to 'upgrade' your DRM'd that shouldn't have been DRM'd stuff?
ouch! tough crowd :-(
st3phen -- (1) i mentioned the higher samplings when i talked about "higher quality" offerings in my post (2) i said near-zero cost, not "no-cost" ... yes, space and bandwidth are a factor here, but a 30% hike? It is in my opinion that this cost is what EMI feels that would otherwise lose from un-DRMing their music. I'm not talking about people hosting sights with un-DRM'd songs ... that's already done ... I'm talking about non-tech-savvy people now saying, "Hey ... how 'bout you, me, and Sparky here split the cost of our next music purchase."
PlaidPJs -- meow! breathe! it's okay. your mother still loves you... Never said Apple was screwing us. I just believe that offering un-DRM'd music at a higher cost with no real added value (your words, buddy: "Or, do we forget that the majority of people listening to music can't succinctly tell the difference between 128kbps and CD-quality") while still offering DRM'd music at a cheaper price is NOT as big a step forward towards unprotected bliss as it's been hyped to be ...
Is Apple screwing me? Not in the least. I will continue to to purchase $0.99 music and continue to legally use QTFairUse or simply burn and re-rip songs to get over the DRM hurdle. With these options available, the only reason to pay the 30% bump to by un-DRM'd music would be (1) you are not aware of these options or simply don't have the technical know-how or (2) you want the higher-quality tracks.
My feeling is, most people who want the un-DRM'd tracks is so they can play their music in their non-iPod devices. I'm saying Apple is penalizing (not "screwing" as you so eloquently put it) these users not once but twice. Once with the higher price. Two, with the needlessly larger file, effectively shrinking the capacity of their non-iPod device ...
... now why would Apple want competing devices to seem less capable then their iPods which can play the smaller, DRM'd music ... hmmm ...
Alrgiht, it's a big step forward, offering DRM-free tracks. But you should not have to pay an extra $0.30 for it. For a dozen song album, it costs $15.48 to download. And if I want to play it in my car, I have to keep stock of blank CDs. And storing recorded CDs in say a visor, where the disc only sticks out from the fold by less than half an inch, makes it much more difficult to recognize a CD than a one that you bought and have album art printed onto the disc. Sure you can buy and print disc labels for your burned albums, but that is just more work and money. You can buy the same dozen song album from a Best Buy from 10-13 bucks. You don't have to keep blank cds or print labels (save for mix cds and what not, but the quantity required to keep on hand is reduced) and you get album art and, most of the time, lyrics. AND, you can rip it to your computer in whatever format you want, DRM-free. Why the $#!% would I want to spend more time, money and effort downloading an album from iTunes? Where's the value? I'll admit, it's an exchange of conveniances, but it's still not worth it.
When you find a subscription based, DRM-free music service, let me know. That would be a consumer friendly business model, but I doubt I will ever see it. It would allow me to download as much music as I want for the same rate.
A more realistic, model would be $0.59 a DRM-free track. That would be a $7.08 dozen track album, and a good value. It would still be a $0.70 profit cut for the labels, but would be supplemented by increased sales volume.
It's just the way it should be.
"You rent your music and the instant you stop paying the monthly fee it all goes away."
I'm more likely to stop paying my gas bill and do without that than stop paying Urge and do without unlimited downloads. For $12.50 a month I can listen to whatever I want, whenever I want. Complete music freedom is worth much more than that.
"Owning" music is an antiquated idea that will one day no longer exist. You'll see.
Just seconding John's statement. Currently, I buy CDs, rip to FLAC, convert to MP3, burn the FLACs to DVD, then file everything away. I don't think I've actually listened to a "lossless" audio file (CD or FLAC) in months.
It's nice to have CD (or lossless file) in case formats change, but honestly, for how I listen music, having a high quality "open" file is more than enough.
aestheticist: When you buy a full album at a time, the price is the same for the non-DRMed version as for the DRMed version: $9.99 in most cases.
I just (today) bought a 28-track album from iTunes for $11.99, which included (as a PDF) the artwork/booklet from the physical CD. When I buy CDs nowadays, I just end up encoding them (usually @ 192kbps) and almost never actually play the physical disc anyway. I hardly see how downloading the disc I just got was more "time, money, and effort" when the disc was $11.99 at Amazon (+shipping) as of the time of this posting, which I then would have had to wait 2+ days to be delivered. Alternately, I could have driven to a brick-and-mortar shop on my lunch hour, doubtlessly paid more (+ sales tax, gas), and taken more time (driving, finding the disc in store [assuming it's in stock], and ripping/encoding.)
I can't personally distinguish between 256k AAC and red-book audio in a true double-blind test, some folks may be able to, so YMMV.
Actually, sorry... not John's. I was trying to reply to ffg's. See, this is why you don't reply.
Just seconding John's statement. Currently, I buy CDs, rip to FLAC, convert to MP3, burn the FLACs to DVD, then file everything away. I don't think I've actually listened to a "lossless" audio file (CD or FLAC) in months.
--
Wow. Great time management there. Your stupidity makes about 20 years of technological progress redundant by all the time you're wasting.
*shakes head
It's called archiving, twit. I've had too many CDs scratched, stolen, borrowed and never returned, etc. to trust hundred of individual discs. The whole process takes, what, 5 minutes (2 minutes for the FLAC rip, 3 minutes for the Mp3 conversion), then you burn an archived backup of the album if you need it again.
PLUS, it's called preplanning. When I need to rerip an album, or burn a copy of friend, I'm not flipping through hundreds of CDs in a binder or on a shelf... I'm flipping through 10-20 DVDs that are clearly labeled with what's there.
Crap... I keep coming back. Also Mike, let's explore the following situation:
Oh no! My hard drive crashed!
a) Find and re-rip all of my CDs
b) Convert a DVD's worth of files into the format that I need. Repeat
I could probably invest in a backup drive, but 2 minutes of additional time per disc is worth the savings of a couple of hundred of dollars.
Lol, the top two albums being sold un-drm'd are Dark Side of The Moon ( Best album ever IMHO) and The Wall, both by Pink Floyd, and the album in fifth is Animals. Think itunes users like Pink Floyd?
How the hell do subscription services make ownership a thing of the past? All the music is owned by the company running the subscription services, in addition to the label (or in the very rare case like Jack Johnson or w/ some smaller labels: the artist). Using a subscription service simply means that YOU own less. The ownership is still there, you're just getting hosed.
I am having significant problems getting iTunes plus to work correctly. Please see my post in iPod lounge under "ambipod"
http://forums.ilounge.com/showthread.php?p=1107912&posted=1#post1107912
ummm... it is funny to me that many people bitch and moan about apple only allowing 5 authorizations for machines... but... ummm... do people not look at the "manage your account" link, because once a year... you can deauthorize all machines for future music, and it gives you 5 NEW authorizations. So... say you share your music with your ex-girlfriend/boyfriend... they can keep it and listen to it, and you can just deauthorize with apple computer, and they give you 5 more... you get to do it once every 365 days... and it is actually nice. So... in 3 years, 15 computers can be authorized, maybe not for your most recent purchases, but 15 computers have access to certain parts of your historical music library.
Does anyone know why smashing pumpkins are taken off the iTunes plus?