« Five Things About Me: A Game of Blog-Tag | Main | Bikes Against Bush update »
February 7, 2007
Steve Jobs takes a stand against DRM
Apple has probably benefited the most from DRM systems with their tightly controlled FairPlay DRM and iTunes-iPod lock-in, so its very surprising that Apple CEO, Steve Jobs, has assumed an anti-DRM stance in his recent article on the Apple website, Thoughts on Music.
Jobs basically lays out three possible futures:
1. Stay the course and continue with the "walled garden" scenarios.
2. Apple could license their FairPlay DRM technology so that other online music stores/services could sell DRM protected music for the iPod (Jobs claims Apple cannot support this scenario as it would compromise the effectiveness of FairPlay).
3. Abolish DRM.
Jobs throws his support behind Option 3, and blames the Big Four music publishers (Universal, Sony BMG, Warner, EMI) for requiring Apple to protect digital downloads with DRM, even though iTunes represents a small portion of music purchases while the much larger market of CD sales are sold without any DRM protection.
Overall, I agree with Steve Jobs. DRM is a fundamentally flawed technology and it is not what consumers actually want because, as it currently exists, it leads to lock-in and ultimately prevents consumer choice. Personally, I purchase music from eMusic because it is the only online retailer that offers music without DRM protection, so I can play the music I've legally purchased on just about any device. The only problem with eMusic is its lack of selection as they only carry a catalog of independents. Still, eMusic is the number two online music store behind iTunes since its the only other music store that supports the iPod -- even with its lack of selection.
But, there is another scenario that Jobs doesn't mention -- what is stopping Apple from supporting Microsoft's PlaysForSure DRM on the iPod so that iPod owners can use competitive online music stores that sell DRM protected music (Yahoo, Rhapsody, Napster, etc)?
If this were the case, then consumers would actually have a real choice -- the other music retailers offer much more competitive prices than the iTunes Store, and currently it is possible to play the purchased music on most other MP3 players. The only thing that prevents consumers from using these services is the simple fact that the purchased music is not compatible with the iPod, which leads the MP3 device market by a long shot.
So why was this option left out of Steve Jobs article? It could be a solution that gives consumers the choice and freedom they want in selecting both media devices and online music stores/services, while also satisfying the needs of Big Four music publishers who require some assurance of copy protection.
Is there something I'm missing? Please leave a comment and let me know.
Posted by jkinberg at February 7, 2007 10:36 AM
Comments
This comment was posted to the videoblogging email list by Michael Meiser.
Josh, I disagree with your 4th option, it's no more viable and in fact pretty much the same option as #2.
The only thing is apple will be on the recieving end of microsoft's inablility to support it's DRM across a wide array of device... as is CLEARLY the case with playsforsure and the fact that microsoft has completely ditched playsforsure for a new proprietary drm on their Zune... it's all shit for shits sake. Wether it's apple's DRM or Microsofts is hardly the point. I thought Steve addressed that when he pointed out Microsoft's failure with plays for sure.
I DO however have a HUGE point.
Why does Steve Jobs need the major label's permission to sell non-DRM music!? Apple is in a perfect position to start selling non-drm mp3's from major independent labels to prove the model... the exact same way emusic is! Surely there have been many viable labels that have come to apple with big enough independant arts who want to sell non-drm mp3's.
Steve needs to put HIS money where his mouth is.
I have a forth coming post on this.
An open letter is an act in futility, a final straw... the act of the little guy down in the trenches... I find it rather off that someone who has so much power and resources feels compelled to publish an open letter.
Steve jobs needs to offer those who want it the opportunity to by non-drm music.. . surely the labels cannot and have not made their contracts on selling OTHERS musicians music non-drm... such would clearly be anti-competitive behavior.
Steve jobs has no-one to blame for the perpetuation of DRM but himself.
I'd also like to point out he's the head of pixar... and has he tried selling pixar movies without drm.
All this said and clearly 2007 might well be the death of drm on mainstream music at least.
It's my belief that it may perpetuate for some time in niche markets... such as HQ proprietary markets... like ... Blueray... and HDDVD... which will never be mainstream... and only ever have tiny market share, because they're so damn closed.
It's quite simple... the center of the marketplace *must remain open*, to be competitive. And law must remain within the capacity of human choice. The minute law is dictated by technology it divorces itself from the fine balance required to for humanity to function. There is no doubt we're in a prohibition era... an era of lawlessness caused by a seperation between law and reason. law mus remain in the realm of reason and human choice. Black markets such as P2P filesharing or so called darknets are a symptom... as is steve jobs monopoly over music... they are symptoms of society out of balance. At the center of that imbalance is intellectual propery law... copyrights, patents and trademarks which are incompatible with a culture that has in just a few short years completely shifted into the digital paradigm. In the digital realm everything is a copy and everythingnis copyable.
Anyway, Steve jobs is not saying anything we haven't already been saying for 5 or more years... there's nothing new there, but he is saying it from a powerful position of authority. I don't think there's anyone else who could claim such authority on the subject.
And again, Finally, he had better get off his lazy butt and start offering non-drm music from independant labels who want it. He's a brilliant idiot! He has the means they're just so obvious he has yet
to grasp them.
-Mike
http://mmeiser.com/blog
Posted by: Josh at February 7, 2007 6:46 PM
I am the Founder of 
