Steve Jobs Announces (some) DRM-free iTunes

Fjan11 writes "Steve Jobs just announced that starting next month on you can buy higher quality 256Kbps AAC encoded DRM-free versions of iTunes songs for $1.29. Upgrades to songs you've already bought will be available at the $0.30 price difference. Currently EMI is the only publisher participating, accounting for about 20% of the songs available." There's also reports from Reuters and ABC News. The deal excludes the Beatles. You can also read the official press release from Apple if you still think this a late joke; this story confirms earlier speculation.

Comments

Good job everyone!

[AchiIIe]

If you were one of the thousands of bloggers/netcitizens demanding DRM free music, give yourself a hand. This is a win for us.

Re:Good job everyone!

[sgant]

no pleasing some people. If they offered it at the same price, they'd still complain that not ALL the music on iTunes is DRM free. Once they do that, then they'd complain about the .99 cents saying it's too much.

If Apple gave away the music for free in FLAC or Apple Lossless people would STILL complain ("these files are too big...etc etc").

Again, no pleasing some people. Even though you could buy the full album at the higher bitrate AND it being DRM free AND it's still cheaper than buying the physical CD. pfft....

Re:Good job everyone!

[CaptMoroni]

20 years of watching the man, as well as many other technology CEOs + 6 years of working for him. He is passionate about some things amd music is one of them. He manages his brand (meaning the brand of "Steve Jobs") even more carefully than he manages the Apple brand, and I can tell you that he cares deeply about music and that he would NEVER write a public letter to the industry as a cheap bit of marketing hype. The fact that, within weeks of that letter, Apple has taken today's step of releasing DRM free music in a higher bit rate and in an open standard format provides hard evidence that he wasn't blowing smoke.

Re:Good job everyone!

[ncc74656]

Jobs didn't want that, though. He didn't want universally compatible music, he wanted ipod-and-only-ipod compatible music, which is why these new higher priced songs are only offered in AAC. It allows him to keep leveraging his near-monopoly between itunes and ipods in the same manner that Apple-DRM-Protected files did.

Was I only imagining that my Palm Tungsten T was playing AAC audio (downloaded from the iTunes Music Store and decrypted with the software available at the time)? Is the other poster who said the Zune can play AAC audio BSing us all?

Maybe it's just that Apple wants to offer a better product. AAC delivers better audio quality at a given bitrate than MP3, and it's supported by a wider variety of hardware and software than you think. Just because it doesn't work with your no-name fresh-off-the-boat $30 player doesn't mean it sucks. I ripped my CD collection into 192-kbps AAC (with K3B and FAAC, not with iTunes), and everything plays on my Linux boxen, my Mac, my iPod, and my Treo (would still work on the Tungsten if I could find it) without issue.

Re:Good job everyone!

[PyroMosh]

Now the question is what will happen going forward, when AmErIcAnIdOl62614 logs on to ITMS, and sees the following choice:

Artist                Title            DRM Price          DRM-free Price
Justin Timberlake      Something        $.99(click here)   $1.29(click here)
Justin Timberlake      Some Song        $.99(click here)   $1.29(click here)

Where is the average joe and jane six pack going to click?

cojones

[suzerain]

Man, say what you want about Steve Jobs. He's got a famous temper, he doesn't compromise, he likes closed systems, etc. and so on. But one thing he definitely has is balls, and sometimes we can benefit from it.

So, he apparently finally has convinced one label to drop the DRM, and yes, he's charging more for the content, but he goes and ups the bitrate, just so the content from the non-participating labels looks like shit in comparison. That takes some cojones, and I gotta say, I admire him for that. Could it possibly be that DRM will become one of those horrible memories from the past that we can all suppress? Time will tell, but at least today, I say this is relatively good news.

And, you know..."fuck the RIAA" goes without saying.

Re:Alright Slashdot...

[CaptnMArk]

It would be better to have a

[ ] search for DRM crippled songs

checkbox.

WaterMarking

[tecker]

Another advantage of the higher bitrates is the ability to slip in watermarking. Thanks to perfect digital replication the instant this appeared on P2P they could trace the file back to the person that purchased the media.

Think about it. Apple has not released the details of the tracks other then "256kb aac" w/o DRM. They don't say that it will be delayed downloading (rather then the buy, download, listen now) could be "Thanks for purchasing. Your music will arrive shortly in you library and purchased media areas." Then about 5 minutes later the track downloads. And seeing how apple doesn't allow for a redownloading (i think) they simply add the watermarking into the database and delete the track.

EMI find a DRM free version of the music on the internet (Coldplay-Clocks.m4a) and downloads it from people. They compare the watermark, it comes back to you, you get sued like no other on the planet as an example.

(the old tired method of this but):
1) Announce DRM Free media
2) Release DRM free media w/ Watermarking
3) Download version from internet
4) Link watermarking to individual
5) SUE THE PANTS OFF OF THEM!!!
6) ??? (Repeat?)
7) Profit somehow.

Its a possibility. Don't just celebrate yet. I've got a feeling this wont be with out some strings

Structure first

[SuperKendall]

Would you care to explain how having DRM-free indy bands' tracks on iTMS would have made such negotiation with major labels somehow more difficult?

Why certainly.

Having indie labels sell DRM free music first, would have had a different structure than the current deal. Apple needed a way to figure out how to move forward with DRM free music in a way that labels would accept - so they had to work through negotiations with EMI to see how the could arrange pricing and quality options in a way that would appeal to them. Once that framework was laid, then other indie labels could get the same deal, only now there is a single clear option for DRM free music going forward and also a clear path for other larger labels to follow down a road that one has already found to be acceptable. It took a little longer but now everything is simpler both for the consumer, and the music studio large and small.

How many contracts with giant paranoid music studios have YOU managed, Mr. backseat negotiator?

I'll pay to avoid the B&Ms, thanks.

[Kadin2048]

Do they realize that an entire album, which I can purchase at a brick-and-mortar or an online retailer, will now be cheaper. I can rip that CD using Apple Lossless encoding. Maybe I'm missing the point???

True, but it's worth a significant amount of money to me (and I expect a lot of other people besides) to not have to go anywhere near a shopping mall or other B&M retailer.

Going out to a store, round-trip, is probably an hour of my time, not to mention gas for the car, and is just a giant hassle. It means fighting for a parking space, and then getting into the store, and finding what I want, and waiting in line behind a bunch of teeny-boppers while some stoned clerk plods along through the checkout procedure. I can feel my blood-pressure going up just thinking about it. That's not how I want to spend one of my few free hours after work or on the weekends, thanks much.

If Apple charges a slight premium to allow me to buy DRM-free music from the comfort of my own home, where I can decide to buy something and have it on my computer to listen to, through my stereo, while drinking my beer, in five minutes -- that's value added.

Apple's real competition, at least for me, isn't B&M stores, it's online stores that sell physical CDs, particularly used ones (Half.com). There, it becomes a trade-off between how much I want to pay, and how long I want to wait. Although waiting in a line in a store gives me the urge to stab people, I'm not normally enough of an impulse-buyer to mind waiting a few days for a $4 CD. I could see buying particular tracks that I want to listen to right now from iTunes at $1.30/each, but it's probably not going to be the primary source of my music.

When Reporters Set Agendas

[bananaendian]

Michael Gartenberg wrote:

"Had another funny call with a media outlet this morning. When I called them back on the Apple/EMI news, first question was. "Do you think this is a bad thing for Apple and EMI." When I said "no, it's a good thing", they said "thanks for calling but we only want to talk to someone who thinks this is a bad thing."