[Macworld]

Post your comments for DRM-free Apple rumors still just sound and fury here

[doglesby]

If I were Jobs, I'd be pushing the labels to lower rates or allow DRM-free music. I'd offer them that choice. After all, that technology costs Apple to implement and maintain. What's the worst that can happen, the labels choose C ("screw you guys, I'm going home") and the iTunes Music Store fails? Not likely, since the TV, movies, music videos, and podcasts would still be going strong. Besides, Apple doesn't need the iTunes Music Store, all those other stores are selling iPod-compatible tunes. I think it's a good time for that play. Of course, I don't have to answer to shareholders.
Like you said, the timing is entirely implausible. It's not like people are doing their Christmas shopping on iTunes. That announcement makes more sense post-Christmas as people are spending their gift certificates.

[natmusak]

"Even that’s going to be a hard sell for the old guard of record labels—remember, this is an industry that came up with the marvelous business strategy of suing their customers. They’re going to find the argument of going DRM-free to combat piracy counter-intuitive at best."
...But they've already gone DRM-free everywhere else. They're just colluding against Apple to regain some control (which, as you note, ain't happening). It's so hypocritical of these labels to have required DRM in the first place when millions of CDs are sold everyday with no DRM at all!! Hopefully they'll finally give up this moronic charade in 2009.

[nmpike]

iTunes has lost a lot of business from me personally... in the last two weeks I've bought several complete albums (Nickelback's entire catalog, Simple Plan and many others), and I used Walmart.com. They use a high bit rate encoding and use CBR (constant bit rate), there is no DRM, and they are cheaper than iTunes.
With that being said, I always check iTunes FIRST to see if it is available in iTunes Plus, as I prefer AAC to MP3 any day of the year.
Walmart could easily overtake iTunes if they did it right...
1) Walmart needs to offer EXPLICIT versions of albums.. I won't buy an edited version of an album, and Walmart's catalog is mostly edited.
2) They need an easier to use download mechanism (similar to what amazon.com has)
If they would do these two things, they would have a superior product to iTunes...
If they did some marketing (I had to hear of Walmart.com's downloads through Macworld!), they could overtake iTunes...
Imagine this - buy an iPod at Walmart (which MANY people do), and with that iPod, Walmart gives away 10 free songs from Walmart.com (they can do it for Zune, Samsung, etc also).
That gets the buyers aware of the service.... then the cheaper price... Walmart could throw up a banner in their stores advertising how to buy music online, making it cheaper than any other...
It would only be a matter of time before they overtake iTunes.... the problem is nobody knows about Walmart... when someone buys an iPod, the first thing they do is get iTunes... if Walmart crammed 10 free songs in the bag with the http://mp3.walmart.com address, it would be a matter of time before they would take over...
Yes, I love Walmart....

[natmusak]

@ nmpike,
But is it possible to get a refund on your soul? :b

[DougAdams]

If you want to know what most people think about DRM, ask yer Mom. I did. And my Mom said, "I don't know. But how come all my email has a blue dot next to it?"

[maryba03]

I'm going to continue to buy USED CDs and occasionally a new cd with the right coupon (Thanks Borders Rewards). And I am not buying iTune Store Music until they start selling music with at la higher quality. I can clearly hear the difference between 128 and 256 kbps.
I believe artists should be getting a much bigger cut of the pie, period.
IMHO there is major collusion between the large record labels to stifle the iTunes Store competitiveness by these special deals that allow some companies to sell at a lower price with DRM free, higher quality.
As for Walmart, I really don't think I need the Best of Alan O'Day or the Essential Green Jello, I think Green Jelly now (don't worry if you have never heard of these artists). And they do provide free downloads when you buy certain CDs, so they must have a reason they don't with the iPod

[Tipadoo]

It is highly unlikely that I will ever download a music file with DRM attached. AND, it is impossible I will ever download anything, shop at or ever consider WALMART, AKA "EVIL CORPORATION". But I will and have downloaded DRM free tracks. It's hard to get around the greedy record companies but, like the folks posting before me, I'll buy used and occasionally new cd's. I may be part of a minority on this issue, but I think I can handle it. I'll live.

[dreyfus]

I have to disagree on the conclusions in the article:
1. I definitely upgraded two Neil Young albums (Harvest and After the Goldrush) to iTunes Plus less than 24 hours ago (they are distributed by Warner and WEA respectively) - so, clearly neither independent nor EMI. Whatever it is – something is going on.
2. The situation as it exists in the US (iTunes with DRM and Amazon without) will have quite some legal implications in most of Europe and as we all know: Amazon is already expanding. They went to the UK (rather poor consumer and anti-competition legislation there) - as soon as they want to hit France, Scandinavia or Germany, record labels will be told to either offer the same goods for all, or pay considerable fines. US and UK iTunes users will benefit from this pressure, as record labels are unlikely to give these audiences the barely advertisable gift of discrimination.
I expect more and more iTunes Plus titles to appear slowly, and maybe a formal announcement for Macworld.

[Wondercow]

@nmpike
Why on Earth would you want CBR files?!

[natmusak]

@ dreyfus,
I found The Velvet Underground's "Loaded," recorded on Atlantic Records (which is owned by UMG) in the "Upgrade My Album" section as well, so I wonder if this will just continue with little fanfare and by the time we get to Macworld, Jobs will say "well, if you haven't noticed by now, ALL iTunes music is now available in iTunes Plus form. Ta da!" :D

[Steve_S]

>Much as a vocal minority of consumers hate DRM and refuse to buy songs laden with it, they’re still a minority: your average consumer doesn’t know DRM from ERA.
That's the unfortunate reality... People could force the change by boycotting DRM based products. Sadly, the average consumer doesn't know what DRM is much less know why they shouldn't support it. Of course, the same holds true for computers. Most people who buy a PC have no practical knowledge of Macs, or Linux, etc.
As the article mentions, Apple isn't in a hurry to change anything. As long as Apple is #1, they have no incentive to force change. Neither do the labels.

[Dan Moren]

dreyfus said:

I have to disagree on the conclusions in the article:

1. I definitely upgraded two Neil Young albums (Harvest and After the Goldrush) to iTunes Plus less than 24 hours ago (they are distributed by Warner and WEA respectively) - so, clearly neither independent nor EMI. Whatever it is – something is going on.

I've been hearing these rumors of other labels' songs showing up as DRM-free in fits and spurts, though I've yet to run into it myself.

Quote

I expect more and more iTunes Plus titles to appear slowly, and maybe a formal announcement for Macworld.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that iTunes won't go all DRM-free, whether at Expo or some other time. But in all honesty, I expected them to make that move a year ago and it never happened. It simply seems to me there's no impetus that we know about at this point?of course, who knows what else Steve knows, right?

As regards the international situation, I don't know the full implications of the legalities in those countries. There are several European countries both in and out of the EU that have taken issue with various aspects of iTunes, but little progress has seemingly been made on that front to date.

[dreyfus]

@Dan Moren
Well, it is not Apple's decision - it's the music industries' decision. And they wanted Apple to loose market share, so they could deal with companies that are more easily guided and dictate pricing and conditions... So, they gave the stuff DRM-free and cheaper to Amazon, while a lot of big name musicians decided to kiss the RI good-bye. We all know what happened.
1. Apple became the number 1 music retailer (not Internet music retailer) in the US; people decided they like a good shopping experience and the great iTunes infrastructure a lot better than DRM-free and cheap.
2. The RI is faced with two additional problems: they cannot treat different resellers fundamentally different in some countries (this will limit Amazons international growth, unless the RI will offer the same goods to Apple and local resellers), several countries throughout the EU push for guaranteed interoperability as part of fair use in the law. So, while they can not make DRM itself illegal, they can establish consumer rights that make existing DRM incompatible with the law. The only way out then is to give up DRM and let everybody resell it. They can watermark the stuff if they want, but there is not much else left for them (and it may be less than 10 years for the movie industry to be forced to join the club).
I think Apple played that very well. Instead of surrendering to the RI's demands, they waited for the mountain to come to the prophet.
Personally I do not really care if the tracks have DRM or not – if I could choose between 128 kbps DRM-free and 256 kbps with FairPlay - I would choose the latter. Looking at the sales numbers, almost 100% do not care for one or the other. I want more iTunes Plus content for the higher bitrate, there is no competition in the MP3-Player/phone market that would make me consider anything else than Apple – so DRM is no issue for me.