We learned this morning that it was the latter option. And while the press conference didn’t have the zing of a Beatles event, dropping DRM is by far a more significant step than giving people the option to pay for moptop music online. Beginning next month, EMI songs purchased from iTunes music store will come in two versions: the ones available now at 99 cents. (79 pence U.K.), and a new format without DRM and with higher sound quality for $1.29 per song. These will play on any device: iPod, Zune, mobile phone, Sony Reader or Sonos home stereo system. Also beginning in May you can upgrade previously purchased EMI songs to those in the new format, for 30 cents a tune.
Let me explain why this is important. In negotiating licenses for Apple’s iTunes store, which debuted four years ago, Jobs had to overcome music executives’ outright paranoia about selling their product over the Internet. Until iTunes launched, the labels had only considered selling songs bound in digital files with Draconian rules for backing up songs, burning disks and moving songs to other devices. Jobs convinced them it was in their interest to liberalize the rules so that, for the first time, customers would have a good experience buying music online. Jobs also got the labels to sign off on the idea of selling songs for 99 cents a track, liberating customers from the necessity of buying a whole album when they only wanted one or two songs. (These rules became the standard for all retail outlets selling music online.) But as the years passed, and people bought billions of songs online, even those relatively relaxed rules began to feel restrictive. One particular sticking point: if you bought songs from the iTunes store, they couldn’t be played directly on devices other than the iPod. Another: songs purchased from online emporiums like Rhapsody or Zune Marketplace couldn’t be played directly on iTunes or the iPod. Apple drew fire for this lack of interoperability; in response, Jobs suggested that the music industry drop DRM altogether, arguing that it really didn’t stop piracy (CDs, which greatly outsell online versions of songs are unprotected and can easily be ripped into digital files and distributed on the Internet), and law-abiding customers would appreciate the freedom to use their music more flexibly.
EMI’s move is a huge step towards Jobs’s vision of a music world without DRM. “We’ve been analyzing whether to move off DRM for months now,” says EMI’s top digital exec Barney Wragg . After customer surveys and experiments released unprotected files by artists like Norah Jones, “We’ve concluded this was the right thing to do,” Wragg said. It certainly is. Jobs is correct in saying that DRM doesn’t stop piracy–instead, it gives music fans an incentive to engage in more piracy, since songs illegally snapped up on the Internet have no DRM, and are thus more flexible than legally purchased songs. Jobs says that he’s soliciting other major labels to follow EMI’s lead (many independent labels have been clamoring to do this for some time) and he expects over half the songs on iTunes to be available on the new format by the end of the year.
The new format will obviate the worries about how many computers hold your song collection, how many times you can burn a playlist, and, of course, whether your iTunes song can play on a Zune or a Samsung phone. In a larger sense, DRM has become a ball and chain that frustrates innovation. Once we get rid of it, the entire music industry is liberated to explore new business models that promote more listening, more experimentation, more discovery of new music and more fun. Ultimately, those new ideas could lead to better days financially for the labels, which are suffering with low CD sales without compensating revenues from online music. And artists, especially emerging ones who care more about exposure than exacting every dime from a small group of record buyers, will also welcome the shift from DRM.
The new arrangement will also make digital music sound better. The new format pretty much doubles the amount of information in a song file–an improvement that will make a big difference when you play your songs on a good stereo system. (Eddy Cue, who heads Apple’s iTunes store, says the sound quality of the new format is virtually indistinguishable from a CD; EMI’s Wragg , a self-described audiophile, says it’s close, but not quite there. Both agree that even casual listeners will hear a difference.) The beefed-up song files take up twice as much space on a hard drive, but since songs purchased online are generally only a small fraction of one’s music collection, that won’t make much difference for now.
The real downside of this news is the idea that music without DRM will cost more. Jobs has been resisting pressure to raise prices on individual songs on iTunes, saying that he and the music industry had a pact with the customer to hold the line; otherwise, he fears, people would feel that the labels weren’t sincere in giving fans a fair deal online, and would revert to piracy. Offering a new format while still selling the old format gives him cover to sell songs for 30 percent more. “It’s not a price increase–it’s a second product. Price-sensitive people can pay the same, but those who want better sound and less hassle from DRM can pay a little more,” he explained at the press conference. “Customers get what they want, and music companies make a little more money for offering more value.”
Still, something sticks in the craw here. If the higher price were presented solely as a consequence of the higher sound quality of songs in the new format (which cost more to process and send because of the increased file size), that would be one thing. But both EMI and Apple see the new format as having two selling points–the sound quality and the lack of DRM. I find it curious that people are being asked to pay for the removal of something that the sellers now tacitly agree is a failure. If DRM doesn’t stop piracy and instead hampers people from legal enjoyment of music they pay for, there’s simply no justification to charge people more to buy songs without it. Surely Apple and EMI are not implying that people who pay 99 cents for songs are crooks who can’t be trusted, and those who pay $1.29 are pure souls who would never think of infringing.
Interestingly, the higher price does not kick in when you buy an entire album. When you purchase a whole album on iTunes, the non-DRM, high-quality format is available at the same price. This addresses the record labels’ concern that CD and album sales are flagging because customers are cherry-picking favorite singles online. (Apple’s Cue notes that almost half of the songs sold on iTunes are albums, not individual tracks.) Possibly, the higher cost per song–when compared with a static album price–might push people into buying the whole package.
As EMI’s CEO Eric Nicoli noted during the press conference, digital music is only in its infancy, and we’re years from knowing what features and pricing will eventually emerge. (My own belief is that the right price for music online is half or less what it sells for today–that way, people will be less tempted to get songs illegally and will be encouraged to buy much more.) What today’s news does make clear is that our future may soon be free from the onerous rules that treated digital music as if it were the industry’s thieving stepchild. In my view, that’s even better that being able to download Sgt. Pepper on demand.
title: “Levy Death To Drm " ShowToc: true date: “2023-01-29” author: “Robert Lacoy”
We learned this morning that it was the latter option. And while the press conference didn’t have the zing of a Beatles event, dropping DRM is by far a more significant step than giving people the option to pay for moptop music online. Beginning next month, EMI songs purchased from iTunes music store will come in two versions: the ones available now at 99 cents. (79 pence U.K.), and a new format without DRM and with higher sound quality for $1.29 per song. These will play on any device: iPod, Zune, mobile phone, Sony Reader or Sonos home stereo system. Also beginning in May you can upgrade previously purchased EMI songs to those in the new format, for 30 cents a tune.
Let me explain why this is important. In negotiating licenses for Apple’s iTunes store, which debuted four years ago, Jobs had to overcome music executives’ outright paranoia about selling their product over the Internet. Until iTunes launched, the labels had only considered selling songs bound in digital files with Draconian rules for backing up songs, burning disks and moving songs to other devices. Jobs convinced them it was in their interest to liberalize the rules so that, for the first time, customers would have a good experience buying music online. Jobs also got the labels to sign off on the idea of selling songs for 99 cents a track, liberating customers from the necessity of buying a whole album when they only wanted one or two songs. (These rules became the standard for all retail outlets selling music online.) But as the years passed, and people bought billions of songs online, even those relatively relaxed rules began to feel restrictive. One particular sticking point: if you bought songs from the iTunes store, they couldn’t be played directly on devices other than the iPod. Another: songs purchased from online emporiums like Rhapsody or Zune Marketplace couldn’t be played directly on iTunes or the iPod. Apple drew fire for this lack of interoperability; in response, Jobs suggested that the music industry drop DRM altogether, arguing that it really didn’t stop piracy (CDs, which greatly outsell online versions of songs are unprotected and can easily be ripped into digital files and distributed on the Internet), and law-abiding customers would appreciate the freedom to use their music more flexibly.
EMI’s move is a huge step towards Jobs’s vision of a music world without DRM. “We’ve been analyzing whether to move off DRM for months now,” says EMI’s top digital exec Barney Wragg . After customer surveys and experiments released unprotected files by artists like Norah Jones, “We’ve concluded this was the right thing to do,” Wragg said. It certainly is. Jobs is correct in saying that DRM doesn’t stop piracy–instead, it gives music fans an incentive to engage in more piracy, since songs illegally snapped up on the Internet have no DRM, and are thus more flexible than legally purchased songs. Jobs says that he’s soliciting other major labels to follow EMI’s lead (many independent labels have been clamoring to do this for some time) and he expects over half the songs on iTunes to be available on the new format by the end of the year.
The new format will obviate the worries about how many computers hold your song collection, how many times you can burn a playlist, and, of course, whether your iTunes song can play on a Zune or a Samsung phone. In a larger sense, DRM has become a ball and chain that frustrates innovation. Once we get rid of it, the entire music industry is liberated to explore new business models that promote more listening, more experimentation, more discovery of new music and more fun. Ultimately, those new ideas could lead to better days financially for the labels, which are suffering with low CD sales without compensating revenues from online music. And artists, especially emerging ones who care more about exposure than exacting every dime from a small group of record buyers, will also welcome the shift from DRM.
The new arrangement will also make digital music sound better. The new format pretty much doubles the amount of information in a song file–an improvement that will make a big difference when you play your songs on a good stereo system. (Eddy Cue, who heads Apple’s iTunes store, says the sound quality of the new format is virtually indistinguishable from a CD; EMI’s Wragg , a self-described audiophile, says it’s close, but not quite there. Both agree that even casual listeners will hear a difference.) The beefed-up song files take up twice as much space on a hard drive, but since songs purchased online are generally only a small fraction of one’s music collection, that won’t make much difference for now.
The real downside of this news is the idea that music without DRM will cost more. Jobs has been resisting pressure to raise prices on individual songs on iTunes, saying that he and the music industry had a pact with the customer to hold the line; otherwise, he fears, people would feel that the labels weren’t sincere in giving fans a fair deal online, and would revert to piracy. Offering a new format while still selling the old format gives him cover to sell songs for 30 percent more. “It’s not a price increase–it’s a second product. Price-sensitive people can pay the same, but those who want better sound and less hassle from DRM can pay a little more,” he explained at the press conference. “Customers get what they want, and music companies make a little more money for offering more value.”
Still, something sticks in the craw here. If the higher price were presented solely as a consequence of the higher sound quality of songs in the new format (which cost more to process and send because of the increased file size), that would be one thing. But both EMI and Apple see the new format as having two selling points–the sound quality and the lack of DRM. I find it curious that people are being asked to pay for the removal of something that the sellers now tacitly agree is a failure. If DRM doesn’t stop piracy and instead hampers people from legal enjoyment of music they pay for, there’s simply no justification to charge people more to buy songs without it. Surely Apple and EMI are not implying that people who pay 99 cents for songs are crooks who can’t be trusted, and those who pay $1.29 are pure souls who would never think of infringing.
Interestingly, the higher price does not kick in when you buy an entire album. When you purchase a whole album on iTunes, the non-DRM, high-quality format is available at the same price. This addresses the record labels’ concern that CD and album sales are flagging because customers are cherry-picking favorite singles online. (Apple’s Cue notes that almost half of the songs sold on iTunes are albums, not individual tracks.) Possibly, the higher cost per song–when compared with a static album price–might push people into buying the whole package.
As EMI’s CEO Eric Nicoli noted during the press conference, digital music is only in its infancy, and we’re years from knowing what features and pricing will eventually emerge. (My own belief is that the right price for music online is half or less what it sells for today–that way, people will be less tempted to get songs illegally and will be encouraged to buy much more.) What today’s news does make clear is that our future may soon be free from the onerous rules that treated digital music as if it were the industry’s thieving stepchild. In my view, that’s even better that being able to download Sgt. Pepper on demand.
