Originally published on December 28 – bumped and updated
Tuesday, January 8: Last month, Warner Music Group, one of the four major record labels, offered Amazon’s digital music download store a 2.9 million-track, DRM-free catalog of music, which left Sony BMG as the DRM hold out. EMI and Universal ditched DRM awhile back.
“[I]t’s only a matter of time before Sony does, too,” I wrote.
Last week, Sony announced it would offer some DRM-free tracks. Freeing the music is good, of course, but…Despite Move to MP3s, DRM Will Haunt Record Labels. I’ve got at least a few hundred tracks in the WMA format and locked down with DRM. Converting them to MP3s reduces sound quality. Unless someone creates a program that allows high quality conversion, those tracks with “haunt” me, and I’m forever chained to two digital music players if I want to listen (with high quality sound) to all the music I own. Woe is me (or is it I?). 
Only in a country where citizens to have so much leisure time is this considered a problem. 
In other news, online music service Napster will begin selling digital music in the universal MP3 format (as opposed to non-universal WMA).
Later…Forgot to mention this. Remember the Washington Post Gets It Wrong /RIAA post? Reporter Marc Fisher misrepresented a brief in an illegal file sharing case. He said the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) claimed that ripping a CD to your hard drive was illegal. The RIAA claimed no such thing. Storing those ripped files in a file sharing network folder where others have access is illegal. That’s why the defendant is being sued.
For those who care, the newspaper finally issued a correction (emphasis added):
“A Dec. 30 Style & Arts column incorrectly said that the recording industry ‘maintains that it is illegal for someone who has legally purchased a CD to transfer that music into his computer.’ In a copyright-infringement lawsuit, the industry’s lawyer argued that the actions of an Arizona man, the defendant, were illegal because the songs were located in a ’shared folder’ on his computer for distribution on a peer-to-peer network.”
Better late than, as they say, never. I’m scheduled to appear on NPR tomorrow around 1:30 p.m. EST. This might be one of the topics.
—————————————————————————
The term “digital rights management” means little to people who aren’t downloading and/or trying to transfer digital music, but to those of us who are, it’s a pain in the butt.
As I mentioned in Death to DRM, digital rights management technology was designed to reduce piracy. Users are prevented from copying music files, even those obtained legitimately, to other MP3 devices or computers. But more music companies are unlocking digital music files, giving users the freedom to copy and transfer at will.
DRM, I’m happy to report, is dressed in funeral garb, poised to take the six feet plunge. Warner Music Group, which owns such labels as Atlantic Records, home of “bad boy” Sean “Diddy” Combs, Red Hot Chili Peppers, and Madonna, announced this week that it will offer its 2.9 million-track catalog exclusively to Amazon free of DRM and in the universal MP3 format. Read more about it at Google News.
That leaves Sony BMG as the last record company holdout among the four major labels. EMI and Universal have already given up the DRM ghost, and it’s only a matter of time before Sony does, too. Online music services such as Rhapsody – which I like for its large catalog of music, 25-songs-per-month full (and free) sampling feature, and obscure-to-me recommendations – unfortunately offers files loaded with DRM. So does iTunes.
It’s unclear whether Warner has plans to offer DRM-free digital files to other music services, including iTunes, in the future. As you may know, iTunes sells songs from certain Warner artists.
Apple’s iPod is pretty much running things in the MP3 player department, and iTunes isn’t doing half bad, either. Last summer the service saw its three billionth download. As fond as I am of my iPod (it’s not his fault – he didn’t do anything wrong), I don’t like iTunes. Songs on iTunes are locked down tight with Apple’s own version of DRM, although it recently began offering some music files in the universal MP3 format (as opposed to MP4 format, which Apple uses) and without DRM (which means non-iPod owners can buy music from iTunes). If Sony offers online music services its DRM-free catalog, all the major record labels will be DRM-free. Will iTunes be far behind? These companies are out to break Apple’s digital download monopoly, and getting in the DRM-free bed with the likes of Amazon (still in beta!), behemoth that she is, is a smart start.
So, what does this news – and the tech-speak – mean for the average person? Well, I don’t know if the average person has more than one MP3 player (as I do) or regularly burns MP3s to CDs (which I don’t). But if you do one or both, buying, downloading, listening, copying, and transferring music just got easier. One day, all the music will be “free.” And as we Americans know, freedom is good.
Update: Commenter and blogger Nicole makes a point:
A note about iTunes and DRM, Steve Jobs has made it clear that iTunes only places DRM on the music files because it is required by the record companies themselves. As soon as someone would let him, he took DRM off music. Apple won’t be far behind. In your post you make it seem as if Apple wants to put DRM on their music downloads, which they don’t.
For more info see Steve Jobs Thoughts on Music.
Blogger commentary:
Recent reviews and posts:
- Review of Net, Blogs and Rock ‘n’ Roll
- Review of This Is Your Brain on Music
- David Byrne On Digital Age Music Distribution
- Stop, Thief! Before You Rip That CD…
- Old Fogie Embraces New Medium…
{ 14 comments }
actually, iTunes DRM free ones are also in AAC format (.MP4). A universal format that is often considered the successor to MP4. AAC/MP4 is not a proprietary format to Apple. Wikipedia and other sites have alot of information about the different formats.
Thanks for commenting kaekae. I read about the AAC coding and that MP4 is not an Apple-owned format. Lest anyone get the wrong impression, I’ll update the post to reflect that.
A note about iTunes and DRM, Steve Jobs has made it clear that iTunes only places DRM on the music files because it is required by the record companies themselves. As soon as someone would let him, he took DRM off music. Apple won’t be far behind. In your post you make it seem as if Apple wants to put DRM on their music downloads, which they don’t.
For more info see Steve Jobs Thoughts on Music.
One problem with Sony has been that they’ve wanted you to use their online store, called Connect, and download from there. (I have a Walkman and their SoundStage software, which tends to harp on the place.) But Connect is now dead – Sony gave it up – and copying non-DRMed MP3 files to the Walkman presents no problems.
I have not been particularly vexed by Apple’s DRM, though I’ve not had to put it to any severe tests. (Any track I wanted to use elsewhere, I burned to a CD using iTunes and then ripped with another product, usually Audiograbber.)
Interestingly, my iTunes installation on my work box has about 2400 tracks, though the majority of them came from my own collection (I have literally a wall full of LPs), and there are more purchases from Amazon than from Apple. (Amazon’s downloader will actually install tracks into iTunes, a stroke of near-genius.)
Seems we’re going back to the future– the 50’s– where a hit song didn’t mean that you (or your coke dealer) could retire, where the money was made in performances–and where how you looked mattered less than how well you played.
Not a bad thing after all.
One reason I hesitate on shifting everything to MP3 or what have you is the loss of audio fidelity. But when I do rip, I go for the highest rate to minimize the loss. Still doesn’t sound as good as analog or a high quality CD.
Anyhoo, Rolling Stone has a good series on The Death of High Fidelity, which I think is a must-read for the serious music lover.
All these devastating sound quality losses people claim to get when they don’t rip at the highest mp3 level? I call bull. I sincerely doubt 95% of the population can hear a significant difference between 96 or 128 and 192 mp3 or mp4s unless they have the hearing of a dog.
T,
You can hear the difference on hi-fi equipment. Listening to them on iPods or in the car appears, emphasis on appears, to be unaffected. Read the RS article, do some tests then report back.
As long Ipods hold a commanding market share Amazon’s music service does not stand a chance to over take iTunes. The average Ipod user has no clue about DRM (never will) unless they want to get a new MP3 player from another manufacturer besides Apple. Which a sales person will explain the problems with converting ones music files, the average user will stick to current brand they have.
Apple beat everyone to the market with a usable MP3 player and music service for the novice. They are are now at the point of maintaining customer loyalty. This is why you see iTune gift cards everywhere. This format war (DRM) is about marketing and perceived ease of use. Apple has a big stake in DRM just as the record companies do. Just think back to the VHS vs BetaMax wars it is never about quality more so about amount of content and consumer perceived ease of use. I do not want to call the DRM issue overblown. But, it only impacts a small fraction of music listeners. If your a true audiophile DRM was never an issue to begin with.
Apple’s DRM isn’t even all that effective. It just took me one trip through Google to find tools that will use iTunes to read the unencrypted (but NOT decoded) AAC out of the FairPlay locked container and put it into an unlocked file. I’m not going to disclose much more because this might violate the US’s DMCA, and I don’t want to encourage anyone.
I’ve read about those unlocking tools. What about the sound quality, though?
If you are listening to music via headphones sound quality is irrelevant. Just buy some nice earbuds and call it a day. You have to think about it for a second, you having music played less than a half inch from your ear canal. An example is listening to music in the bathroom due to echos it sounds bad this is caused by bad acoustics. MP3’s rather they are DRM or not is compressed and has frequency’s removed this equals poor sound quality but great for sound less than an inch from your ear. If you want true high quality music played on your MP3 player find one that supports FLAC spend about 100 plus dollars on earbuds and now you have true quality music via your MP3 player, but odds are your ears will not know the difference, but you will feel better.
If you play MP3’s over a high quality home stereo (audiophile) you will notice the difference in sound quality. If you are using a mid to low quality home stereo equipment you can’t hear the difference.
Itunes seems to be ahead of the competition once again
http://www.tuaw.com/2008/01/08/rumour-fox-to-include-itunes-files-with-dvds-starting-15th-jan/
With technology it is never the best product, it is the first to market with a usable product.
Thanks to Andy and Uncle Ruckus. I only listen to mp3s on my Ipod so that explains why I couldn’t hear the difference.
Comments on this entry are closed.