Steve Jobs -- "Let DRM Die"

Apple makes way more off the iPod than the tunes on it. Yet, certain EU countries are on his case about interoperability. This is absurd. The LABELS-- many of which, as Steve points out, are EU-based-- insist on the DRM.

His full blog entry is well worth reading. Apple is all about making things nice for the USER; it is the company's organizing principal.

absolutely, i agree. our culture is headed more and more towards a service environment, and along those lines, musicians are going to have to perform to make their money. Technology has made music distribution inexpensive and people are no longer willing to pay an economic premium for albums. Writers will not be endangered. No one wants to read a book out of a palm pilot or laptop computer, so the printers are safe, and must continue to pay royalties to the writer. As for film, technology will tend to erode away the theatre's influence on our lives. I already rent more movies than I buy, shelling out less than half the price of an admission ticket to see a film in the comfort of my big-screen, surround-sound enabled living room. I go to the movies to see big films that benefit from the big auditorium atmosphere...oh yeah, and its a social event.

This said, digital rights management is a classic example of industry failing to cater to their consumers. Consumers want ease of use and are willing to pay a marginal price for it. They will not pay for inconvenience.

I totally agree with Steve Jobs on the DRM issue. The music publishers already are selling their music with no protection on CDs. Why protect the online equivalent? After all, i pay for my music. Why should i be limited to play it on a proprietary system? I vote for a DRM free world!!

First off, you can't buy CDs anymore. No one sells them. If you don't believe me, just look at the jewel case for the next disc you buy...do you see the CD logo? There is a thing called the Red Book which defines what a CD is, and which you must meet to use the logo. Due to DRM and other restrictive practices, the major music companies no longer make CDs. They sell audio discs which happen to work in many CD players, but not all.

Second, Steve Jobs is talking like a typical pusher. "Naw, it's not me. I don't wanna do you like that, but if you want more you gotta play the game". Steve Jobs is the main enabler of big media's addiction to infringing on the rights of Americans as established in landmark cases such as Sony vs. Universal, and any statements he makes to the contrary are just more of his marketing RDF. The bad name iTunes has earned among the technologically savvy is something he must stave off - before it jeopardizes iTunes. It is a much more urgent issue now that Wal-Mart has beaten him to being able to sign all the major Hollywood movie studios to their method of online content delivery. This timing cannot be coincidental.

Lastly, I would have everyone notice that the prices you pay for CDs via a CD club (such as Columbia House or BMG Music Club) are no cheaper, per song, than a place like www.allofmp3.com charges. And yet, the RIAA refuses to accept the legal licensing fees collected by the Russian Organization for Multimedia and digital Systems (ROMS) on behalf of the customers of www.allofmp3.com.

The RIAA is an oligopoly; and Jobs, Apple, and iTunes are feeding the beast. However, with the Democrats in power, there is no chance of any meaningful action being taken against the Big Media cartel.

In my opinion this is just a PR stunt. Apple LOVES DRM because it protects its iPod/iTunes business. They don't do it because of the labels... they do it because it is convenient for them!

We'll see what the courts say in the old world and how Apple reacts. For now, I just don't believe Jobs (as much as I agree with what he and everyone here has said so far)

Afraid I don't agree that this is simply a PR exercise for either Steve Jobs or Apple.

Nor can I agree that DRM works in Apple's favour.

The margin isn't in the downloads for Apple, it is in the hardware. DRM-free music removes the barriers for those consumers who want the iPod but don't want to be tied to iTunes. It also allows non iPod owners to purchase from iTunes.

In a way, remove DRM and Apple can't lose.

In terms of the broader issue, I agree with his calls for the removal of DRM - not because music content (copyright) isn't worth protecting, but because DRM doesn't work.

The industry needs to stop trying to prohibit demand (illegal downloading is still demand) and focus on new and innovative ways to supply.

Instead of looking at the number of illegal downloaders as criminals, the industry needs to address them as potential consumers.

Give customers what they want (music...let's not forget that illegal or otherwise, people are demanding more music than ever), when they want it (the beauty of the always open 'jukebox in the sky), how they want it (in a digital form that can be transported across the device of their choice), and at a fair/reasonable price, and sales will come.

Is the genie out of the bottle, and will illegal downloaders (as a percentage of consumers) for now be greater than the percentage of people who would walk into a store a steal a CD...of course.

But remove the archaic restrictions, and consumers will follow.

For me, the interesting thing here is timing.
Why now?

Is it because of the EU regulators, because the label deals are coming up for renegotiation at year's end, because it is the 'right' thing for business?

Perhaps one, perhaps all of the above.

Time will tell.

"he RIAA is an oligopoly; and Jobs, Apple, and iTunes are feeding the beast. However, with the Democrats in power, there is no chance of any meaningful action being taken against the Big Media cartel."

Im sorry but arent the Republicans in office?

can only be a good thing for the consumer (who really cares about hte motives) so why are some of you complaining