Interesting that option 2 involves Apple licensing their fairplay technology to other companies, but some other standard from some other company, or even some kind of open standard (or, at least as open as it could be) is so laughable that it doesn't even make the list.

Nice one, Steve.

Reply

Awesome. Lets hope that both Apple and the consumer can finally beat the DRM machine. Good one Mr Jobs!

Reply

Either I'm caught in the RDF, or that made a lot of sense.

Reply

I'm going to point every idiot that bitches at Apple for their DRM to this article. I try to explain that the music industry wouldn't go along with iTunes without it, but they don't seem to get it.

Reply

good job there will always be piracy I hope cds continue to sell well so no drm is implemented the day i have to pay for music (with money rather then bandwidth) will be a sad day indeed

Reply

That has to be one of the best bitch-slaps that I have ever read. It put's the "Apple is evil for having DRM" crowd in its place, it makes record companies look foolish, and, right at the very end, it slams the Europeans for going after the wrong company (this was my favorite dig because I didn't see it coming). A very nice shot that's going to be heard around the world.

However, I disagree with the 97% vs 3% argument Jobs made concerning downloaded DRM music vs. music acquired by other means. If I suddenly lost 3% of my music collection, I'd be upset in a major way.

And notice that subscription music services were never mentioned.

Reply

Daniel D,

Are your punctuation keys broken?

Andy

Reply

This is a really strong statement by steve jobs.

I don't see a change being made in 2007.. but maybe sometime in the distant future

Reply

No I was just typing at an angle and could not devote myself 100% to writing that comment I am sorry for any offence I may have caused to your gentle disposition. If it helps, I am 19 years old and watch MTV an hour a week.

Reply

Personally, I don't mind burning 3% of my music collection to CD and re-ripping it to an open state if it means I find a new music player I love MORE than my iPod.

Reply

That was definitely a nice read. I was pretty aware of those points before, but it's good to have them all presented in an easily-digestible format.

I really don't have any hopes that the big 4 will go along with non-DRM music, though. They simply have too many technophobes making decisions.

Reply

sam-

there is no such thing as open DRM.

i mean, maybe embracing an open standard would be relevant if it was a discussion of MP3 vs. OGG or FLAC . . . and honestly, if we're going to start talking about things as technical as FairPlay let's start talking about getting something better than mediocre-quality AAC files from iTunes.

Reply

'So laughable it doesn't make the list'?

Or maybe he's just speaking as CEO of his company, thinking of whats best for his company and consumers. He does make it quite clear that licensing FairPlay isnt an option, and also that Apple would favour no DRM at all.

Reply

How about letting us "outside" folk, the bloody indians (from India), buy some music for a change? Just because I'm not a US citizen, doesn't mean I gotta pirate the music...

Reply

Daniel,

lmao =) very nice.

and Andy... you=owned =)

Reply

Steve, you forgot the 4th option...
Since you've taken care of legal issues with Apple Corps...why not start your own record label.
Music sold from the big 5 would continue to sell with DRM.
But music from Apple's label would be DRM free and sell much better.

Reply

There's only one problem with Jobs' statement: the company could already be selling *some* music without DRM if it wanted to. Some labels and bands are already selling songs as unprotected MP3s, and are happy to do so. Take, for example, Bloc Party, who's recently released album is available from iTMS with DRM, or via Warp Records Bleep.com site as unprotected 320Kbps MP3s - all completely legally, sanctioned by the band and its label.

If Jobs really means this, I look forward to the company removing DRM from those bands and labels that it can in the near future.

Reply

1) This is clearly a response to what's going on in Norway right now, shifting the blame from Apple to the record labels.
2) I wonder what Doug Morris thinks of Jobs' admission that most of the songs on an iPod aren't from the iTMS.
3) The record labels are much too much too stupid to ever sell DRM-less music. They fear what they cannot understand.

Reply

Ian ... you are incorrect.

Even if a band chooses to sell their music DRM free ... Apple is still bound by their contractual agreements with the band's labels/publishers. They say that the music has to be DRM'd.

Apple has no say in this other than the strength of their marketshare.

Reply

I think this makes things even more interesting in light of the Beatles-Apple rumors swirling about. Consider this:

1) Apple Inc & Apple Records announce friendship (Yesterday).
2) Steve Jobs publicly decries DRM (Today).
3) (around Valentine's day- a week away) Apple & Apple announce the fruits of their newfound friendship-- The Beatles' catalog, remastered, and available exclusively on iTunes-- with NO DRM.
The catalog sells WILDLY (I would be much much more interested in a Beatles iPod than the U2 iPod from a couple years back). Within a few weeks, Apple/Apple announce that they've broken all sorts of records for online sales & therefore that all you need is some good product to sell music*. Desired result: record companies slowly but surely embrace Apple's DRM-free vision of the future.


Hey, crazier things have happened...

*and love. thanks, i'll be here all week.

Reply