Filed under: iPod Family, iTS
RIAA: Open up FairPlay to competitors
The RIAA doesn't want to drop DRM. It wants Apple to license FairPlay to competitors. In this Globe and Mail story, Mitch Bainwol, chief RIAA dude, says that licensing FairPlay to other manufacturers would allow iTunes purchases to be played on other devices. This move would, presumably, keep rampant piracy at bay by allowing more people to purchase at the iTunes store and play that music on their...Zune? Er, or something like that. The bottom line seems to be that the RIAA does not want to do away with digital rights restrictions and they still think we're all pirates. Arggggh, me hearties!
Thanks everyone who pointed out the RIAA response.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Pete said 7:28AM on 2-08-2007
' "We have no doubt that a technology company as sophisticated and smart as Apple could work with the music community to make that happen," Bainwol said in a prepared statement. '
So they seem to think that Apple should foot the bill for this too? No doubt various groups would complain if Apple charged something unreasonable -- I notice the RIAA doesn't seem to mention licensing, just working together to allow iTunes songs to play on other players.
I also note that they don't seem to be pursuing anyone else to allow their DRM to work on the iPod...
Ridiculous -- I like Apple's stance on this. No compromise; get rid of DRM, or be stuck with iTunes/iPod.
Reply
Nik Fletcher said 7:54AM on 2-08-2007
I'm with Pete. The RIAA, true to form, is persuing another group of people who they actually need to get on with. First they persue and attempt to screw-over the people who buy music. Now they're trying to screw-over the largest download music service, and their 4th largest vendor (by sales). When are these jackasses going to get a sense of reality? Hopefully soon, and I'll bet it's Apple that brings them down to earth.
Reply
Sam said 7:57AM on 2-08-2007
As I understand it, iTunes Store purchases are re-wrapped by iTunes once they've been downloaded, so perhaps Apple could implement some way for these to be wrapped in another type of DRM - with Apple only taking responsibility for breaches that occur via their own FairPlay DRM.
It seems pretty obvious that Apple don't want to take responsibility for breaches that are made possible with DRM technology outside of their complete control - nor should they have to, so if the RIAA *really* want the iTS to be interoperable something like this seems to be a reasonable compromise.
Sam
Reply
Jonas said 8:23AM on 2-08-2007
But what RIAA don't understand is the fact that -18 kidds doesn't have a seamless way to PURCHASE music legaly.
Today most services require a creditcard.. It's VERY unusual (at least outside USA) for anyone under 18 to have a creditcard..
To pay for music using mobile playments (premium charged SMS etc) is NOT the solution as this adds 35-50% to the price.. and also, who want's to text a message for EVERY song you buy? ;)
Reply
cs0875 said 8:33AM on 2-08-2007
I disagree with Pete, first from a consumer point of view, and from Apples. Everything is fine and dandy as long as iPod has such a large market share. But if their market share erodes, there could be problems for the consumer and for Apple.
First for the consumer if the iPod market share erodes , I would have all these itunes songs that cannot be used anywhere else. So I would be stuck buying another iPod or ripping them to CD and bringing them back on to my PC or going with another company. If Fair Play were licensed I could use those iTunes songs on my new player. So as a consumer I am at the mercy of Apple.
Second for Apple, if their market share erodes they will be selling less iPods and less people will be using iTunes, they lose on both fronts. If they license Fair Play they will still make money off all the licensing and people will still use iTunes even though the market share of iPods is down.
Even if you like Microsoft or not, love or hate their products what they have done that is a great business decision, is license their product. It doesn't have to be the best product to make money, it just has to be the most readily available. Which Windows is.
Before you scoff at my comments saying the iPod will always be #1, think about it. Go back to 1990 and I tell you 15 years from now Nintendo will hold only about 15% of the console market in the US behind Sony and Microsoft you would think I was crazy. In 1990 Nintendo held a market share similar to the iPod. I couldn't nail down a difinitive number, but I have found reports from as high at 85% of the console market to as low at 65%. These are similar to the 70%-75% iPod holds now. Sony came out with the PS1 which nobody including Nintendo saw coming. We don't know what other companies have coming in the future of MP3s and video players. Sandisk or Microsoft may have something coming out that blows everyone away, or some company we never thought of. Then within a few years that player is dominant and is the next PS1 or PS2.
Although personally I don't think in the next 5 years anyone will take over the iPod but beyond that the future is too hard to see. Sandisk scares me the most, their Sansa e2xx series is a well put together, easy to use player that could compete with the Nano. I sell electronics at Radio Shack and I have never had anyone bring one back because they didn't like. I have had it brough back because their kid has to have an iPod. But I recomend all Apple fans and iPod users to look at one. It is well thought out, just doesn't have the hype behind it like the Nano. Plus it does 1 great thing that iPod doesn't it has a slot for expandable memory, which I would love on my iPod.
Reply
Johnny Thrash said 8:33AM on 2-08-2007
A person can easily take their pirated songs from device to device to device with no trouble at all while I can only play my music on the 1 device.
Yes I can work around it, but I'm being punished for buying it.
Quite frankly, with the way things are, it's incentive to pirate the music. It's much easier that way.
Reply
Gary said 9:43AM on 2-08-2007
The record industry has surrendered DRM once already with the CD and that hasn't work out too well for them! The industry had the opportunity to get in on the ground floor of digital music with their own DRM model, but they chose to ignore the issue and sue their customer base instead. So now that Apple has effectively rebuilt the industry model around the more lucrative iPod sales, the RIAA and its members only have themselves to blame. Microsoft has all but abandoned its universal Plays For Sure DRM model and going closed system with the Zune, effectively trying to recreate Apple's model for themselves. Little wonder then that the RIAA is throwing its weight behind European pressure to open up the iPod+iTunes FairPlay 'monopoly' to competitors - its the last chance for the record industry cartels to keep their strangle-hold.
Reply
Quix said 9:55AM on 2-08-2007
"When are these jackasses going to get a sense of reality?"
When we completely stop buying music. Don't pirate, but don't buy either. That will send a message.
Reply
niclet said 10:46AM on 2-08-2007
Get rid of DRM! Locked music is the same as prohibition with alcohol. Black market went down when prohibition was abandoned. Did alcoholism increase then? No, but the market had and people had better quality in those products too. Moreover, consumers learn to be more responsible.
We are in a consummation society and this is an ethic situation. It is the same thing with drugs, prostitution, etc... Since Government and leading companies maintain strong prohibitions on some "merchandises", you can be sure that there will be a flowering of organized crime and piracy to feed consumers with bad and dirty stuff, in their way it's a challenge. So drop DRM an you'll see how the music market will climbed and how piracy will go down (even if there always be pirates!)
The question is always, "who gets the benefits of this?"
Don't forget that DRM are a Majors music companies request, not a composers or musicians request as they says. When Majors try to persuade us with this, they lie.
Reply
Alex said 11:27AM on 2-08-2007
The RIAA doesn't get it that DRM doesn't help their business? What a surprise!
They are trying to deflect the blame, make Apple the bad guy. Its big bad Apple that doesn't let you use other devices. I don't see them asking Microsoft to open up their DRM scheme. Maybe we should buy CD's again and share them via p2p without DRM and at high bit rates.
Being greedy and stupid is a bad combination. Insist on DRM and you are going to further alienate your customers. As it is the RIAA has lost a generation of customers. At this rate you will have none left before the end of the decade.
Reply
Wheels said 11:38AM on 2-08-2007
"There's no such thing as the Mafia." - Tony Soprano
"Yeah, but there is such a thing as the RIAA." - Wheels
Reply
Brady J. Frey said 11:47AM on 2-08-2007
Is it just me or does it seem like on these posts we get trolls from record companies and the like all the time? I find their style of writing to be corporate obvious, and always missing the point.
Licensing DRM is not cost beneficial, it obviously has not been for Microsoft. Let it go, you lost, and keep losing interested buyers. This and the movie industry; the only company reliant on consumers who openly try and attack consumers on every front.
Reply
'Slugger said 12:44PM on 2-08-2007
NEW SOLUTION FOR APPLE!!!!
Now that they have the the Apple Corps. Apple Inc thing all worked out...
Apple now has "rights" to sell music. For EVERY iTunes sale -- consumer can buy and have shipped the retail CD at a reduced price (probably plus shipping and handling) and the user gets the instant gratification, RIAA gets back some CD sales, Apple makes more money to bottom line -- investors get richer ROI and the EU can tackle the music oligopoly that is the RIAA for their continued stupidity in sticking to DRM!
So the postal services around the world can expect an additional million mailings; technologists can sell a "burn a single" on demand with a shipping process, ECOMMERCE LIVES! And everyone benefits that cares to.
Simple solution now.
PS -- I could see Apple now selling singles, albums and "load your iPod here" through ALL their retail stores. You buy the music there, download to the iPod in your pocket, or buy a new one, and you can purchase the DRM Free version burned, and stamped, right there, or have the retail version shipped to you.
AWESOME!!! Now... how do I make a few bucks off of this?
Reply
Jon said 12:45PM on 2-08-2007
I bought a Radiohead CD a few months ago and it crashed iTunes whenever I tried to play it. A bit of research revealed that it had been constructed so that it would not play on a computer. I took it back to Best Buy and they said "it's been opened, so tough luck" despite me pointing out that there was no mention on the back of the CD that it would not work on a computer.
So I looked on legal download sites, and they were not selling Radiohead songs. In the end, I ended up downloading them illegally. The RIAA's ridiculous anti-piracy scheme had prevented me from using a CD I had purchased, so they were actually encouraging me to pirate the music. I think more respect for the consumer and less paranoia about DRM will result in decreased piracy.
Reply
Bruce said 1:07PM on 2-08-2007
I don't understand why people are making such a big deal about not being able to play iTunes songs on a Zune, or other player. All this talk about DRM restricting my rights is BULL. I have an old Ford, I bought headers for it, new carb, new air intake, and now the engine wears out and I want a new engine, but I cant simply pick any engine and use it with my existing parts. Things are made to work with certain parts, its the way things have always been, and it will continue like this for a while. I cant take an old record and play it on a CD player. I can't take my OS X version of Photoshop and run it on a PC if I choose to switch to vista (not that I would want to).
We live in a free market, well most of us. If you do not like the RIAA dont buy RIAA music, and don't steal it too, because that doesn't give them the message that you don't like them, it just makes them think you are cheap. If you don't like the rules a certain band's label sets, tell the band, and dont buy their CD. The consumer needs to use the power they have, not try to pass laws, and force corporations to do something that is opposite of the market demand.
And read a book by Milton Friedman. It could do a lot of people who have a probem with DRM some good.
Reply
Rubbinz said 3:44PM on 2-08-2007
No Company, or person, should be forced to 'license' any of their creations, period.
I was planning to go out to Target tonight to pick up a couple CDs (I don't buy anything with DRM, sorry Apple/Steve) I've been eyeballing. But due to this RIAA response to Steve, I will now download these CDs in lossless FLAC. That is my response to the RIAA and others that want to force Apple to license their works.
Reply
VanillaSpice said 7:03PM on 2-08-2007
The fact is, the record companies do not like the fact that Apple successfully negotiated SOME fair use rights for buyers (burn 5 times, unlimited iPods, etc) and they now want people to avoid the iTS and use one of the newer stores that don't grant those rights.
We know already that if FairPlay is licensed, there is a good chance that the DRM will be cracked. We know already that if FairPlay is cracked, then the record companies will be allowed to remove their songs from the iTS.
So, surprise surprise, we now have the record companies (using their tool, the RIAA) advocating for FairPlay to be licensed. Gee, I wonder why?
cs0875 - you seem to think MS made a 'great business decision' but you have misconstrued their DRM as being one licensed system. It is not - it is many incompatible licensed systems. People who bought songs under Plays4Sure can't use them on a Zune ... is that a great business decision?
Jon - you are entitled to a full refund on any disc that will not play on a computer, if it is not mentioned on the outside packaging. Opened or not. My advice is to try and return it again and let them know you will be seeing a consumer lawyer if they don't provide a refund, and that you'll be letting people know that Best Buy sells defective merchandise.
Remember, the "copy-protection" is actually data corruption, so the item is simply not fit for sale. Without that warning that it won't play on a computer, the item is also incorrectly labelled, because you have a reasonable expectation that a standard CD will play on a computer, so you can return it because it does not meet the specifications it claims.
Also, the copy-protection schemes on these CDs utilise a method that overloads the error-correction systems. This means a small scratch, not a problem usually for CDs, can cause gaps or a lowering of quality. Again, it means the item is not of merchandisable quality. You have every right to return the disc and obtain a full (cash, not store credit) refund.
Reply