Music Execs Say Apple's DRM Hurting Industry

EMB Numbers writes "C-Net says last year saw a 131 percent jump in digital sales, but overall the industry still saw about a 4 percent decline in revenue. Some executives at this week's Digital Music Forum East conference lashed out at Jobs, blaming Apple and its CEO for their troubles. The impression at the conference was that Jobs' call three weeks ago for DRM-free music was anything but sincere. As the article puts it, 'Apple has maintained a stranglehold on the digital music industry by locking up iTunes music with DRM ... and "it's causing everybody else who is participating in the marketplace — the other service providers, the labels, the users — a lot of pain. If they could simply open it up, everybody would love them.""

Comments

I can agree with that

[L4m3rthanyou]

I don't necessarily agree with the motives of the music execs, but they have a point. Jobs' essay was a load of bull. Has Apple EVER strived for openness or interoperability? hell no. In fact, they go out of their way to make their products incompatible with competitors.

They only allow windows on their systems because it allows them to shove their hardware down more throats. They have nothing to gain by opening their DRM. Apple will hold their current position with itunes until the music industry finds a way to force them to change... and when that happens Apple will still get the credit for it.

Now watch as I get modded down by a bunch of ifanboys who want to have manbabies with Steve Jobs...

Wow

[ThousandStars]

Seldom have I seen so disingenuous statements. If the music industry wants to end Apple's alleged "stranglehold," they can do it tomorrow by licensing their catalogs without DRM. The industry brought Apple's domination through its initial demand that DRM be mandatory, and now they're unhappy because they succeeded in that endeavor.

Watching the music industry squirm is like watching FOX news -- war is peace, freedom is slavery.

Re:So who wants it then?

[elrous0]

Well, as for the indie artists and studios, the reason THEY have it is because our big hero, Steve Jobs, FORCES them to put DRM on their music before they can sell it on iTunes. Gotta protect that iTunes/iPod monopoly, you know!

-Eric

Re:Bullshit

[Pojut]

Question for you:

If jobs truly felt this way, why did he wait so long to say so?

I call bullshit and PR stunt.

Re:Bullshit

[Pojut]

It just seems strange that he feels this passionate about it, yet hardly has mentioned it.

If he is serios, then I am all for it.

In my eyes, he is a sneakier Bill Gates. He is still a man that is about profit profit profit. For some reason, fabois seem to fail to see this.

Hell, even microsoft fanbois admit that Gates is full of shit...apple fanbois seem to act like little children who get pissed when someone calls them ugly.

Personally? I'm rooting for the guy in a garage that will eventually take out both of them.

Re:So who wants it then?

[elrous0]

Sorry, I forgot how fucking stupid Apple consumers are. You're right, anyone stupid enough to use an Apple product cannot be trusted with something as complex as understanding DRM.

Hey, that's probably a good argument for not letting build their own systems too. If they were smart enough to build their own system, they would be smart enough to want a PC.

-Eric

Re:WHY apple DRM is GOOD for you and BAD for indus

[superbus1929]

I think you're advocating a monopoly on the music industry and not even realizing it, honestly. I might have misunderstood the intention of your insight, but what you're essentially saying is that Apple is the only company that can be trusted with both DRM and keeping prices down. A monopoly does the exact opposite; Apple has shown in the past that it is willing to abuse it's DRM laws, and if they're the only game in town, I would expect those prices to go up (new albums have already gone up a few bucks on iTunes, it's starting already. And I buy a lot of my music on iTunes).

Furthermore, the iPod does not have the best record known to man when it comes to being a reliable piece of hardware. They have stated, more or less, that the expected life expectancy of an iPod is a year, no more; anymore than that, and you're essentially crap out of luck, I hope you enjoy buying your new unit. There are portable units that have better reliability records, such as the Creative Zen; personally, I'd rather keep the competition in there, instead of allowing Apple to sit on it's laurels.

Come to think of it, I only BOUGHT an iPod last week instead of a Zen for two reasons: 1) because I started with iTunes music, and therefore, it's iPod or I'm out of luck, but most important, I bought iTunes because 2) All the other legit music services have their own WMA based DRM, and if the Zune has proven anything, it's only that DRM is an absolute nightmare with it, with the way they essentially told everyone that prior music bought with Yahoo, Napster and everyone else was worthless, and had to be bought again. It's the lesser of the two evils, by far. But getting rid of what little competition iTunes and the iPod has is not wise. That's what is being advocated with your comment (unless my interpretation is incorrect), and it will do much more to hurt the average user than help.