Steve Jobs posts his thoughts on music (and DRM)

Alan: Well...That's one way to look at it. Another way is that you own the music but after you release it, the consumer controls it including how he or she wants to listen to it. Really how can you control the manner in which people listen to series of sound? Sound is no product only CD's and the like are.

Don't want to lose control over your work? Don't release it!

This is just another example of greed and stupidity from the computer industry. As a creator or music, I own it, and you, the consumer, can listen to it, ONLY in the manner I decide. That's the reality. People like napster (and now Apple) are once again attempting to make money with music without paying for it.

It's funny but I didn't see Steve Jobs saying he'd release the next version of OS X WITHOUT copy protection. How come? I guess it's okay for people to steal music they download from Apple, as long as they don't steal the operating system used to play it.

If you'd like to hear what I do, go to

http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/1011883

This Star Wars short was used by Apple for a time on their website as an example of what you could do with an Apple computer and Final Cut.

actually what ian was saying earlier is correct - steve is being a little deceptive here. there are many RECORD LABELS (not just bands) that sell their music DRM-less on emusic and other places that iTMS wraps in DRM.

apple is the main beneficiary from fairplay. it is in their interest to keep it.

this blog post explains it nicely: http://blog.wfmu.org/freeform/2007/02/apple_drm.html

Great statement by Steve Jobs!
Only...well...then...sure wish someone with power and influence would do something about it...– Mark Wilson

This is a move to move the spotlight off of Apple and onto the recording industry.

Non-DRM music on the net, would not work in reality. instead of potential posters of illegal content having to buy at least one album. With that, they'd be able to pick which songs they want to steal.

"If Steve was so against DRM, why are Disney and Pixar movies sold with more restrictive DRM than what the music labels are forcing him to do? This is all spin."

Because Steve isn't the damn sole proprietor of Disney/Pixar - there are other people with their money in there, too, and just because Jobs knows piracy concerns should take a backseat to consumer usability doesn't mean the other board members and shareholders do. If you paid your $35/sh for your DIS stock and only knew that DRM protects against piracy, wouldn't you be a little mad when Jobs up and pulls all DRM from Disney movies on iTS?

If Steve was so against DRM, why are Disney and Pixar movies sold with more restrictive DRM than what the music labels are forcing him to do? This is all spin.

Perhaps Job's strategy in killing Fairplay is to open up iTunes to non-iPod music players? That'd be big.

"Since you've taken care of legal issues with Apple Corps...why not start your own record label."

Why? The margins are shit and Apple doesn't know anything about scouting talent. Who wants to be in that market? Yuck.

"Do you know how many European countries there are? Twenty seven. Try not to judge all twenty seven of us on the actions of what? Two?

Bloody yanks."

Do you know how many Americans there are? 300 million. Try not to judge all 300 million for the actions of what? One?