Ballmer Says iPod Users are Thieves

A 'music thief' (apparently) writes "According to Steve Ballmer, CEO of Microsoft: "The most common format of music on an iPod is 'stolen'." He appears convinced Microsoft will lead the way in Digital Rights Management and also believes Microsoft will steal a march on Apple in making the digital home a reality because Apple "doesn't have the volumes". "There is no way that you can get there with Apple. The critical mass has to come from the PC, or a next-generation video device," he said."

Comments

He doesn't get it

[bblazer]

Since I got my iPod and used a decent music service iTunes, there have been no 'shared' music on my player. Balmer thinks that Apple cant get the job done - can he say iPod for Windows? As long as Apple continues to make accessories for other OS'es, they will have no problem competing.

Quickie Slashdot Poll...

[turnstyle]

Ok, Slashdotters!

1) Roughly what percent of your music collection is unauthorized files from P2P like Kazaa, FTP, etc.?

2) Roughly what percent of your music collection comes from sources like iTunes Music Store, eMusic, etc?

3) Roughly what percent of your music collection comes from shareable sources like Creative Commons-licensed music?

4) Roughly what percent of your music collection comes from rips of your own CDs?

5) Roughly what percent of your music collection comes from rips of friends' CDs?

(and what am I missing?)

Re:Quickie Slashdot Poll...

[cbiltcliffe]

6) Roughly what percent of your music collection comes from P2P services, but you own the original on vinyl, 8-track, reel-to-reel, or some other modern, high-tech recording medium.

For me, about 90%.

Re:Quickie Slashdot Poll...

[sixteenraisins]

From TFA:

However, Ballmer conceded it isn't going to be an easy battle to win. "Most people still steal music," he said.

Most people steal music? This informal poll might suggest a different story.

I'd love to know what numbers he's using to arrive at his assertation that "most people" still steal music. I seem to remember reading that many people have stopped downloading music from P2P sources - they don't "still steal music," do they?

I don't know, it sounds like he's making a blanket statement to support his position without telling us how he intends to back his statement up. Perhaps he doesn't intend to?

Re:Quickie Slashdot Poll...

[log0n]

ipod 10gb

1. 0% (seriously)
2. 25%
3. ~ 5%
4. ~ 70%
5. 0%

I have no idea how many songs are on my ipod atm, but it's usually pretty close to full.

I can't remember the last time I downloaded an mp3 (not counting iTMS)... definitely not within the last 3 years.

My views on piracy basically shifted once I got a real/steady job (~ 3? year ago) and was able to afford buying what I wanted. When I had no money (college), I didn't really have any respect for intellectual property (as opposed to tangible/physical property), things that I could get easily on the internet, etc.. I needed/wanted things, but I just didn't have the cash. Now that I can afford to buy things, my pride actually grows because I enjoy knowing that *now* I can buy things; I don't *need* to pirate to get what I want. It's a sense of satisfaction knowing that I have solved my problems of once not having money, to now having money.

Some people are just cheap, or just like to steal for the sake of stealing. But a lot of people who do steal do so not because they are thieves but because they just don't have the finances to get what they want. Nowadays, ultimately a thief is a thief, but intentions are what differentiate a criminal from a normal person.

$.02, FWIW, IMO, etc

Re:Quickie Slashdot Poll...

[Baki]

Hmm, I think it is not very fair to change ones view and respect IP only when one has enough money.

I have never respected IP, and still do not even though I could easily afford anything that I need (earn about $150k a year). It is a matter of principle to me:

First, the current "IP" companies are mostly immoral entities that want to retain their business models and priviledges at any price, even if that involves changing/buying laws and by that destroying our democracy.

More importantly and philosophically, the concept of Intellectual Property is a perversion to me that is contrary to human nature and civilization. Civilization and art was built by copying and impoving on ideas (only really seldomly by revolutionary novelties). Imagine the classical composers having been forbidden to "borrow" each others themes and ideas, or painters to get sewed when joining a new style such as impressionism.

The concept is absurd and sickening.

Up till 1900 the lack of IP has never prevented progress and inventions. After 1900: we don't know. IP proponents keep brainwashing us that without IP there would be no innovation, but who is to tell? I simply don't believe it when looking at 2000 years of civilization before 1900.

Also the software industry itself has been highly succesful and profitable even without patents and with quite weak copyright protection. One might even argue that only now, where IP is being introduced in the software industry, things have deteriorated.

Re:Ballmer and FUD? Who would have thought?!

[hype7]

I don't understand the "corporate America" distinction.

it has to do with the fact that the RIAA wants DRM, and the user doesn't. so Ballmer's looking after the corporate interests ahead of the user interests.

What's funny is that he doesn't realise that new entertainment formats are mostly demand driven. People don't like div-x (the old one, where you had to "connect" to get movies), people don't use it. Same with DVD-A and SACD. Invariably, formats with draconian restrictions on them don't work. And although he wants to label people thieves, there's a very good reason why the iPod is popular, and MS's DRM isn't. The irony is Ballmer himself points it out in the article - "My 12-year-old at home doesn't want to hear that he can't put all the music that he wants in all of the places that he would like it". This isn't about stealing, it's about fair use. 12 year olds just want to do whatever they want to do with their music - like the rest of us. If stolen, free music is the only way we can get there, then so be it. Why pay for restrictions, when freedom is quite literally free?

It makes me laugh, the 12-y-o son of the man running the most powerful IT company in the world gets it, but Ballmer himself doesn't.

Which oddly enough is a theme repeated in the second article - his vision for the digital home - which involves "converged devices that integrate video, audio and computer technology". He's pretty much ripped off Steve Jobs' digital hub strategy from two years ago... and then he goes on to say: "There is no way that you can get there with Apple."

Sorry Steve, the only organisation you can be guaranteed to not get there with is Microsoft. It makes poor copies of good products, labels consumers who want freedom "thieves", and calls out organisations who innovate as not being good enough.

-- james

Consumers want too much

[Wansu]

... according to Ballmer.

"My 12-year-old at home doesn't want to hear that he can't put all the music that he wants in all of the places that he would like it,"

I don't want to hear that either.

The most common format of music on my WinXP box...

[intheory]

...is stolen.

So what if "[you've] had DRM in Windows for years" Microsoft? Windows did anything but halt the 13.6 million Napster users "stealing" music, et cetera.

Steve Ballmer is a Douchebag

[Greyfox]

But we already knew that. No one's going to buy his intentionaally crippled device, and we've already seen repeatedly just how well copy protection works in the commercial market. Microsoft will try to ram their device down the throat of the marketplace with their usual tactic (Sell as a loss-leader until no competition is left, then dramatically raise prices) but people have already had a taste of actually being able to choose how they want to do things, so I don't believe it will work this time around.

So Steve, STFU and GTFO. The reflected light from your forehead is blinding us.

Ha

[Sheepdot]

I don't know if Ballmer has been paying attention.

My roommate is a die-hard Microsoft fan. I don't just mean he uses Windows over Linux, either. I mean he will get compromised because of a failed update, have to reformat and reinstall, and he *still* favors MS. Why? Because of usability. Linux does not cater towards him and it certainly doesn't offer the gameplay. Mozilla/Firefox, despite what I try to tell him about security, is laughable. After all, why should he use a browser that takes 4 seconds to load a 2 second page?

Now, despite all of that, he uses iTunes. Why? Because where other "free software" fails, Apple does not. They provide a method for him to get what he needs when he needs it. And not only that, but he pays money hand over fist for services/music through iTunes.

So my question to Ballmer would have to be: If you've lost even your fanbois to Apple, who also has DRM, how exactly do you intend to actually gain a foothold in this market?

On a perfectly safe side note, the percentage of my "stolen" music collection used to be 100% MP3, now it's 80% MP3. Any MS representative want to take a guess as to what the other format is for my stolen music?

You know, I'm tired...

[ceeam]

If musicians (whoever they are) think that modern technology rips them off, they are always free to go back to old-fashioned ways, like, you know - going in wagons here and there and people will throw them money in their hats. Hard to steal that, right?

Dang, what makes them believe that they are entitled to millions and care-free lives by making a couple of template "songs" about fucks and drugs?

F- Him

[nurb432]

They are really pissing me off with all this 'thief' crap.

Just because you have an MP3 does not mean you are a thief. just because you bought an OS-less PC doesn't mean you are a thief. Just because I own a soldering iron and am an EE doesnt mean I'm some 'evil hacker'..

I have 25GB on my 4G Ipod and not ONE song isn't from a CD I own.. I have several PC's, and NONE run some sort of pirated Microsoft OS.. Either I own a license, or its running a 'free' OS...

I'm sick and tired of being accused of something I'm not, and then getting legislation passed that restricts my activities, and increases their market share/profit. ( generic statement, this applies to most any 'media' industry )

To hell with them all. See how little of my money they continue to get from me..

The real failure

[niall2]

Here is the difference between a success and a failure. Its the same one as thinking raising cigartte taxes will make people stop smoking and installing light rail will make people stop driving. When you are working in a free society, success comes from giving people what they want, not telling them what they want.

Look at MS. People wanted web browsers. They made IE. People wanted a media player, they got one bundled that did a good job of streaming video. They wanted a mailer, the got one. Yes now that there are problems with them people are moving to Mozilla based products, but this is a failure of Microsoft. They didn't give the people what they wanted (they don't want to have to be security experts to be able to browse the web).

People want to be able to have digital media with as few strings attached as can be so they don't have to become DRM gurus to listen to their jams in the car. This is where Windows Media player fails and the iPod/iTunes succeeds. Jobs thought about what the customers wanted and then did all he could to give it to them, putting in just enough DRM to keep the RIAA happy.

So the Windows folks can think they will win by putting in as much monopolistic protection as possible for MS and the RIAA/MPAA but it will fail. It will fail for the same reasons that all the other media stores and players have to date. They didn't give peole what they wanted.