Slashdot Mirror


Sony BMG Dropping DRM

Lally Singh writes "BusinessWeek is reporting that Sony BMG is planning on dropping DRM from their music. Salon's Machinest had an interesting take on this; 'Actually, what's happened is quite ironic. It was the industry's own DRM mandates that tied many music-lovers in to Apple's music storefront (we all had iPods, and the only way to buy digital music for the iPod was from Apple). Now Apple's become too powerful for the labels. They need an alternative distribution channel — they want to get music to our iPods, but they don't want to go through Apple to do it. The only way to do that is to offer retailers like Amazon the chance to sell songs as plain, unrestricted MP3s, which are iPoddable.'"

11 of 295 comments (clear)

  1. Re:this should be nice by larry+bagina · · Score: 3, Informative

    rumor has it, iTunes will support DVD ripping (for 20th century FOX movies) as part of the FOX movie rental deal. It might be announced at MacWorld later this month.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  2. Re:Powerful? by Sciros · · Score: 2, Informative

    The article goes on to explain that this has to do with price control. As by far the leading distributor of online music, Apple can maintain a $.99 price point for all songs. The record labels want variable pricing (more than $.99 for some songs, presumably, and hopefully something like $.01 for things like Britney Spears's new crap but that's too optimistic) and by striking contracts with Amazon and other distributors they might be able to put some pressure on Apple in this regard.

    --
    I like basketball!!1!
  3. Re:That crackling sound you hear.. by greg1104 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The change of heart only happening after Christmas may have been because the holiday sales of CDs this year sucked, down 20%.

  4. An interesting artifact from the fossil record by earlymon · · Score: 5, Informative
    From http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/

    Apple, Microsoft and Sony all compete with proprietary systems. Music purchased from Microsoft's Zune store will only play on Zune players; music purchased from Sony's Connect store will only play on Sony's players; and music purchased from Apple's iTunes store will only play on iPods. This is the current state of affairs in the industry, and customers are being well served with a continuing stream of innovative products and a wide variety of choices. and also

    Perhaps those unhappy with the current situation should redirect their energies towards persuading the music companies to sell their music DRM-free. For Europeans, two and a half of the big four music companies are located right in their backyard. The largest, Universal, is 100% owned by Vivendi, a French company. EMI is a British company, and Sony BMG is 50% owned by Bertelsmann, a German company. Convincing them to license their music to Apple and others DRM-free will create a truly interoperable music marketplace. Apple will embrace this wholeheartedly. That's from 11 months ago - so please, no sympathy for Sony's actions in this.
    --
    Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
  5. Re:this should be nice by mrchaotica · · Score: 2, Informative

    If someone would be willing to use an "unauthorized" patch, then why don't they just use Handbrake now? It's no more illegal, and just as easy!

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  6. Re:Fucked by their own dick.. by mrchaotica · · Score: 2, Informative

    Memory Stick - fucking crap

    Yep. Memory Stick is why I wouldn't buy Sony electronics before the rootkit/DRM/etc.; the rootkit/DRM/etc. is why I'll continue to boycott them even for products that don't have Memory Stick readers.

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  7. Mistake..weakening itunes by Danathar · · Score: 4, Informative

    Everybody talks as if Apple dies or thrives on Itunes sales.

    WRONG!

    Most analysts agree and Apple has all but confirmed they make almost NO money on the itunes store. Rather it's just a vehicle to sell more hardware (ipods, iphones, isomethings). Geeks like devices that have lots of options, and we like to crap on the ipod due lack of this or that feature. Normal non-geeks have been buying the ipod and associated devices due to other reasons other than for the the online itunes store. The idea if itunes goes away the ipod will vanish into oblivion is crazy. If Amazon gets bigger than itunes and Apple can still make a player that sells better than the others it's a win-win situation for them.

  8. Re:I still want AAC by STrinity · · Score: 3, Informative

    Amazon uses VBR with the average song being between 196 and 256kbps. At that quality an MP3 is indistinguishable from a CD even on high-end speakers. The only advantage of AAC is that it can achieve those rates with smaller file sizes. Since the vast majority of files sold by Apple are ony 128kbps with DRM, there's no contest here.

    --
    Les Miserables Volume 1 now up with my reading of
  9. Re:this should be nice by Sancho · · Score: 2, Informative

    More likely, Fox will include "iTunes" versions of movies on their DVDs which can be imported. They'll probably use the same encryption that downloaded movies use to prevent them from being used in a non-authorized manner.

  10. Re:I still want AAC - AAC vs. MP3 by domatic · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm curious. What makes LAME "crappy"? I don't know about low-bitrates like 128kbit and lower but I've done alt-preset-extreme VBRs with it for years and those mp3s sound as good as anything else I've heard. Even with decent amps and speakers, they sound about as good as the CDs I made them from. I'll grant the filesize is a tad large but all the music I've been collecting for 18 odd years still fits under 20GB.

  11. Horribly uneconomic production? by tepples · · Score: 2, Informative

    but what happens if your favorite action films cost $50 million to make If a film takes $50 million to tell a story, then a lot of Slashdot users would call the film horribly uneconomic at telling this story.

    No more magical Hollywood special effects. There exist a lot of moviegoers who would say good riddance.

    You're not going to see Lord of the Rings get produced under a Creative Commons license. That's more the Tolkien estate's decision than Hollywood's. Besides, I'm not going to live to see a film adaptation The Lord of the Rings with Tom Bombadil's scenes or without inane jokes at the Dwarves' expense get produced under any license.

    Even if the whole business isn't "respectable" by your standards, you obviously respect their work enough to watch it. No. I watch movies because I'm paid to. In my case, the people who pay my rent will stop paying my rent if I do not accompany them to theaters.