Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple To Grant All Labels DRM-Free Distribution

Posted by kdawson on from the you-asked-for-it dept.

SexCaptain writes "MacRumors.com reveals a letter circulated by Apple to all producers of content for the iTunes Store, announcing that from May onward they can sell their music at higher quality and free of DRM. Hopefully this opens the doors for labels like Netwerk. This is a big step in the right direction, although it's unclear exactly what Apple means by 'higher quality,' and there is no mention of price changes. (Apple charges $0.30 more per song for DRM-free content from EMI and encodes it at 256K.) Quoting from the letter: 'Many of you have reached out to iTunes to find out how you can make your songs available higher quality and DRM-free," Apple wrote in the communication. "Starting next month, iTunes will begin offering higher-quality, DRM-free music and DRM-free music videos to all customers."

2 of 410 comments (clear)

  1. Re:ITunes Producer now uses Apple Lossless by QuantumG · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Yes, unless you're a fucktard who can't see that getting 100% of your computing experience from a single company that doesn't even identify itself as a software company is always going to result in software poverty.. obviously.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  2. Re:Is Apple going to extend that grant? by Jherek+Carnelian · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Music is special, and it does not necessarily tell a story.
    I didn't say music tells a story, if I had I would have said, "Music is no more 'special' than all the other variety of forms of story telling, including movies."

    My point was that telling stories to ourselves and to others is as commonplace and important to our regular lives as is music, it is just manifested in different ways.

    Nevertheless, the fact that they codified the Serial Copy Management System in 1992 so that you could only make first-generation copies is indicative of the acceptability and widespread practice of format-shifting. I maintain that most people consider it their fair right to move their music to other formats if they want.
    Seems like a backwards argument to me - that they codified SCMS means that, in the eyes of the law, music must be especially restricted compared to all other forms of content - just as the rental restrictions on music are also above and beyond anything for other forms of content.