The End of DRM ?

This forum is for the general discussion of Music.

The End of DRM ?

Postby TaranT » Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:11 am

Record Labels Contemplate Unrestricted Digital Music

CANNES, France, Jan. 22 — As even digital music revenue growth falters because of rampant file-sharing by consumers, the major record labels are moving closer to releasing music on the Internet with no copying restrictions — a step they once vowed never to take.

Executives of several technology companies meeting here at Midem, the annual global trade fair for the music industry, said over the weekend that at least one of the four major record companies could move toward the sale of unrestricted digital files in the MP3 format within months.

Most independent record labels already sell tracks digitally compressed in the MP3 format, which can be downloaded, e-mailed or copied to computers, cellphones, portable music players and compact discs without limit.

The independents see providing songs in MP3 partly as a way of generating publicity that could lead to future sales.

For the major recording companies, however, selling in the MP3 format would be a capitulation to the power of the Internet, which has destroyed their control over the worldwide distribution of music.

source, NY Times
TaranT
 
Joined: 16 May 2001

Postby Otohiko » Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:15 am

All I can say is, I wish?

Maybe they'll get a clue from the independents and start offering better distribution for better / more niche varieties of music which in the long run could get them the loyalty, praise and cash of customers?

And let's not forget treating artists better. Assuming they're ready to surrender to consumers, they should be willing to open up a re-evaluation of how to approach artists and creative rights.
Otohiko
 
Joined: 05 May 2003

Postby R-A-N-M-A » Tue Jan 23, 2007 6:25 pm

So ends the days of millionaire record execs. However so ends the days of artists ever making a cent off of anything other than touring.
- New Banner in the Works -

Still Johnny Fish
User avatar
R-A-N-M-A
 
Joined: 18 Aug 2002
Location: General Music Forum

Postby Willen » Fri Jan 26, 2007 7:49 am

Bah, I'd wish that they'd use AAC or FLAC (like Pearl Jam does for their bootlegs). Either alone or as an alternative to MP3s.

Of course, this would mean a big shakeup of the entire music recording industry. Big established artists who have a large fanbase can easily make a decent living off legitimate downloads and touring in addition to traditional CD sales. Newer artists may have a harder time since they are the ones who are usually at the mercy of the recording labels for promotion of their music.

Ultimately, what would really revive the music industry is not disposing of DRM or even expanding online purchasing of music. It's making music that is worth listening to. :|
Having trouble playing back videos? I recommend: Image
User avatar
Willen
Now in Hi-Def!
 
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Location: SOS-Dan HQ
Status: Melancholy

Postby Mr. Anobe » Fri Jan 26, 2007 11:35 am

R-A-N-M-A wrote:So ends the days of artists ever making a cent off of anything other than touring.

Not exactly, it was already "ended" when the recording industry starts suing fans just by downloading music...a long time ago. So, it's pretty much "dead" to them, so to speak. Besides, these DRMs is pretty much weak that anybody with a decent program(s) can bypass them so easily, and it's not even funny.
A.k.a- "The Anime>Observer" 8-)
The Lone Anime Ranger...off duty

*sigh*..."It's not easy being an Anime Fan."
User avatar
Mr. Anobe
 
Joined: 15 Dec 2005
Location: Canada

Postby Daniel_BMS » Mon Jan 29, 2007 4:31 am

The music industry has a lot of thinking to do. They no longer make most of their sales off of CD's anymore so they are exploring every creative option they can find.

Mr. Anobe wrote:Besides, these DRMs is pretty much weak that anybody with a decent program(s) can bypass them so easily, and it's not even funny.


I've been meaning to research that. OK if I download a U2 music video from iTunes how do I copy that as an unrestricted mpeg?
Daniel_BMS
 
Joined: 26 Nov 2004

Postby TaranT » Wed Feb 07, 2007 2:29 am

Apple: Record Labels Should Drop DRM

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Apple Inc. indicated it would open its iTunes store to other portable players besides its ubiquitous iPod if the world's major record labels abandoned the anti-piracy technology that serves as the industry's security blanket.

Steve Jobs, Apple's chief executive, made the case for abolishing the protections known as "Digital Rights Management," or DRM, in an open letter posted Tuesday on the Cupertino-based company's Web site. He also explained why Apple had decided against licensing its own DRM technology, known as "FairPlay," as an alternative method for making iTunes accessible to all portable players....

source
TaranT
 
Joined: 16 May 2001

Postby CelticWhisper » Fri Feb 09, 2007 11:04 pm

Daniel_BMS wrote:The music industry has a lot of thinking to do. They no longer make most of their sales off of CD's anymore so they are exploring every creative option they can find.

Mr. Anobe wrote:Besides, these DRMs is pretty much weak that anybody with a decent program(s) can bypass them so easily, and it's not even funny.


I've been meaning to research that. OK if I download a U2 music video from iTunes how do I copy that as an unrestricted mpeg?


Well, the long way would be to use something like Snapz or Camtasia and record the screen while the video is playing. A crude workaround at best.

Thing about circumventing DRM is that so far, with the exception of DVD CSS, all the hacks have been workarounds or implementation exploits. Nobody has actually successfully broken the encryption applied to the files yet, as it is pretty strong. What they do is wait for a vulnerability during the decryption and playback process. The principle is that if you can see or hear it, you can copy it, because at some point it has to be decrypted and converted to analog. It's at that point that the circumvention (also known as Fair Use Enforcement) tools do their work, operating on the exposed analog stream.

Also, the notion that the end of DRM is the end of musicians being able to make money on CD sales is pure BS. It may be the end of musicians backed by big record companies being able to profit from sales, but plenty of independent record labels and services like eMusic, Magnatune, or Audio Lunchbox already have much more equitable deals struck with their musicians.

Of course, the major record companies (Sony, EMI, Warner, Universal, BMG) are going to blame piracy and use any justification possible for jacking up prices the same way they always have. To a lot of folks (mostly the technically-inclined a la Slashdot) it doesn't matter, since they/I/we just avoid the corporate stuff anyway and support the indies. But not the West Indies. Okay, okay, I'm sorry, stop throwing tomatoes at me. The last time I even considered touching, let alone buying something from one of the big labels was when I wanted to do an AMV for an Evanescence song after that whole legal debacle. Just to spite them and send a nice, big, digital middle finger their way. Wouldn't have posted it here, as I didn't want the site to get taken down and torrent trackers are better for wide distribution anyway, but...yeah. And I don't even like Evanescence.

So anyway, I welcome the end of DRM. It's a broken technology-you can't give someone a ciphertext and a key and expect them to only be able to decrypt on your terms. It flat-out doesn't work. DRM only hurts the paying customers as pirates will always find ways around it anyway. Getting rid of it is good for competition, good for the customer, good for everyone but the rich corporate fat-cat who may have to settle for only 2 BMWs this year instead of 3. Cry me a river, Mitch Bainwol. We won't be crying with you.
Thou shalt not take orders from strangers on the Internet.

Thou shalt use whatever resources thou deemest appropriate to make thy AMVs.
CelticWhisper
 
Joined: 06 Jun 2003

Postby downwithpants » Sat Feb 10, 2007 2:04 am

EMI in talks to sell unprotected MP3s
i was unconvinced on why labels would want to sell downloads without DRM, but in this article its suggested that mp3 sales would increase and DRM doesn't help anyways because its so easily circumvented.

i might be more inclined to buy an mp3 without DRM than a DRMed download, but i still prefer buying CDs.
maskandlayer()|My Guide to WMM 2.x
a-m-v.org Last.fm|<a href="http://www.frappr.com/animemusicvideosdotorg">Animemusicvideos.org Frappr</a>|<a href="http://tinyurl.com/2lryta"> Editors and fans against the misattribution of AMVs</a>
User avatar
downwithpants
BIG PICTURE person
 
Joined: 03 Dec 2002
Location: storrs, ct
Status: out of service

Postby Tono_Fyr » Sat Feb 10, 2007 3:04 am

Willen wrote:Bah, I'd wish that they'd use AAC or FLAC (like Pearl Jam does for their bootlegs). Either alone or as an alternative to MP3s.

Of course, this would mean a big shakeup of the entire music recording industry. Big established artists who have a large fanbase can easily make a decent living off legitimate downloads and touring in addition to traditional CD sales. Newer artists may have a harder time since they are the ones who are usually at the mercy of the recording labels for promotion of their music.

Ultimately, what would really revive the music industry is not disposing of DRM or even expanding online purchasing of music. It's making music that is worth listening to. :|


The point is that the smaller, newer artists would be on better footing. They'd be more likely to be heard, and there's a higher chance of them actually getting around. Hence why most independent musicians will put their stuff online for free, only to just get their names out there, and get people listening to their music.

I know I plan on having whatever I end up recording with a band (whenever that finally happens) on the internet as a means for mass promotion with a tiny budget.
User avatar
Tono_Fyr
 
Joined: 05 Jun 2004
Location: Savannah, Georgia

Postby Zero1 » Sun Feb 25, 2007 5:37 am

It's only the beginning. The beginning of the end.
User avatar
Zero1
 
Joined: 02 Jan 2004
Location: Sheffield, United Kingdom

Postby Kalium » Sun Feb 25, 2007 10:04 am

I don't want the labels to stop using DRM.

No, really. DRM is stupid. It's killing them. It's slow suicide on their part. I want to be there, laughing, as they go down in flames and I dance on the ashes before scattering them to the four winds.

So no, I don't want them to stop with the DRM. I want them to die with DRM.
User avatar
Kalium
Sir Bugsalot
 
Joined: 03 Oct 2003
Location: Plymouth, Michigan

Postby x_rex30 » Mon Feb 26, 2007 1:59 pm

I use to buy music from the iTunes music store because it was easy to convert the music to other formats using JHymn. They've updated it so much to destroy all abilty to convert the music and get rid of the DRM that I stopped buying from them completely. So I'm really loving his attempts to get rid of it.

http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/

they have a feedback section and I think everyone at this site should send feedback on this.

http://www.apple.com/contact/

I sent this too them

My dream is to buy single songs DRM Free

http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/

I read this and have to say DRM free would have me buying more music from the Itunes store. I use to buy from the store because I could convert the music to other formats so I can make remixes and make it work on other players but since they kept updating it to make it so I'm stuck with only using it with itunes and the ipod I've stopped downloading from the store completely. Now I'm forced to buy CDs so I have more flexibility. I would rather download individual songs DRM free than buying DRM free CDs.

Hope my input counts.
User avatar
x_rex30
 
Joined: 10 Apr 2001

Postby x_rex30 » Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:01 pm

Just incase the link goes down or something, here's the letter Jobs wrote

Steve Jobs
February 6, 2007

With the stunning global success of Apple’s iPod music player and iTunes online music store, some have called for Apple to “open” the digital rights management (DRM) system that Apple uses to protect its music against theft, so that music purchased from iTunes can be played on digital devices purchased from other companies, and protected music purchased from other online music stores can play on iPods. Let’s examine the current situation and how we got here, then look at three possible alternatives for the future.

To begin, it is useful to remember that all iPods play music that is free of any DRM and encoded in “open” licensable formats such as MP3 and AAC. iPod users can and do acquire their music from many sources, including CDs they own. Music on CDs can be easily imported into the freely-downloadable iTunes jukebox software which runs on both Macs and Windows PCs, and is automatically encoded into the open AAC or MP3 formats without any DRM. This music can be played on iPods or any other music players that play these open formats.

The rub comes from the music Apple sells on its online iTunes Store. Since Apple does not own or control any music itself, it must license the rights to distribute music from others, primarily the “big four” music companies: Universal, Sony BMG, Warner and EMI. These four companies control the distribution of over 70% of the world’s music. When Apple approached these companies to license their music to distribute legally over the Internet, they were extremely cautious and required Apple to protect their music from being illegally copied. The solution was to create a DRM system, which envelopes each song purchased from the iTunes store in special and secret software so that it cannot be played on unauthorized devices.

Apple was able to negotiate landmark usage rights at the time, which include allowing users to play their DRM protected music on up to 5 computers and on an unlimited number of iPods. Obtaining such rights from the music companies was unprecedented at the time, and even today is unmatched by most other digital music services. However, a key provision of our agreements with the music companies is that if our DRM system is compromised and their music becomes playable on unauthorized devices, we have only a small number of weeks to fix the problem or they can withdraw their entire music catalog from our iTunes store.

To prevent illegal copies, DRM systems must allow only authorized devices to play the protected music. If a copy of a DRM protected song is posted on the Internet, it should not be able to play on a downloader’s computer or portable music device. To achieve this, a DRM system employs secrets. There is no theory of protecting content other than keeping secrets. In other words, even if one uses the most sophisticated cryptographic locks to protect the actual music, one must still “hide” the keys which unlock the music on the user’s computer or portable music player. No one has ever implemented a DRM system that does not depend on such secrets for its operation.

The problem, of course, is that there are many smart people in the world, some with a lot of time on their hands, who love to discover such secrets and publish a way for everyone to get free (and stolen) music. They are often successful in doing just that, so any company trying to protect content using a DRM must frequently update it with new and harder to discover secrets. It is a cat-and-mouse game. Apple’s DRM system is called FairPlay. While we have had a few breaches in FairPlay, we have been able to successfully repair them through updating the iTunes store software, the iTunes jukebox software and software in the iPods themselves. So far we have met our commitments to the music companies to protect their music, and we have given users the most liberal usage rights available in the industry for legally downloaded music.

With this background, let’s now explore three different alternatives for the future.

The first alternative is to continue on the current course, with each manufacturer competing freely with their own “top to bottom” proprietary systems for selling, playing and protecting music. It is a very competitive market, with major global companies making large investments to develop new music players and online music stores. 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.

Some have argued that once a consumer purchases a body of music from one of the proprietary music stores, they are forever locked into only using music players from that one company. Or, if they buy a specific player, they are locked into buying music only from that company’s music store. Is this true? Let’s look at the data for iPods and the iTunes store – they are the industry’s most popular products and we have accurate data for them. Through the end of 2006, customers purchased a total of 90 million iPods and 2 billion songs from the iTunes store. On average, that’s 22 songs purchased from the iTunes store for each iPod ever sold.

Today’s most popular iPod holds 1000 songs, and research tells us that the average iPod is nearly full. This means that only 22 out of 1000 songs, or under 3% of the music on the average iPod, is purchased from the iTunes store and protected with a DRM. The remaining 97% of the music is unprotected and playable on any player that can play the open formats. It’s hard to believe that just 3% of the music on the average iPod is enough to lock users into buying only iPods in the future. And since 97% of the music on the average iPod was not purchased from the iTunes store, iPod users are clearly not locked into the iTunes store to acquire their music.

The second alternative is for Apple to license its FairPlay DRM technology to current and future competitors with the goal of achieving interoperability between different company’s players and music stores. On the surface, this seems like a good idea since it might offer customers increased choice now and in the future. And Apple might benefit by charging a small licensing fee for its FairPlay DRM. However, when we look a bit deeper, problems begin to emerge. The most serious problem is that licensing a DRM involves disclosing some of its secrets to many people in many companies, and history tells us that inevitably these secrets will leak. The Internet has made such leaks far more damaging, since a single leak can be spread worldwide in less than a minute. Such leaks can rapidly result in software programs available as free downloads on the Internet which will disable the DRM protection so that formerly protected songs can be played on unauthorized players.

An equally serious problem is how to quickly repair the damage caused by such a leak. A successful repair will likely involve enhancing the music store software, the music jukebox software, and the software in the players with new secrets, then transferring this updated software into the tens (or hundreds) of millions of Macs, Windows PCs and players already in use. This must all be done quickly and in a very coordinated way. Such an undertaking is very difficult when just one company controls all of the pieces. It is near impossible if multiple companies control separate pieces of the puzzle, and all of them must quickly act in concert to repair the damage from a leak.

Apple has concluded that if it licenses FairPlay to others, it can no longer guarantee to protect the music it licenses from the big four music companies. Perhaps this same conclusion contributed to Microsoft’s recent decision to switch their emphasis from an “open” model of licensing their DRM to others to a “closed” model of offering a proprietary music store, proprietary jukebox software and proprietary players.

The third alternative is to abolish DRMs entirely. Imagine a world where every online store sells DRM-free music encoded in open licensable formats. In such a world, any player can play music purchased from any store, and any store can sell music which is playable on all players. This is clearly the best alternative for consumers, and Apple would embrace it in a heartbeat. If the big four music companies would license Apple their music without the requirement that it be protected with a DRM, we would switch to selling only DRM-free music on our iTunes store. Every iPod ever made will play this DRM-free music.

Why would the big four music companies agree to let Apple and others distribute their music without using DRM systems to protect it? The simplest answer is because DRMs haven’t worked, and may never work, to halt music piracy. Though the big four music companies require that all their music sold online be protected with DRMs, these same music companies continue to sell billions of CDs a year which contain completely unprotected music. That’s right! No DRM system was ever developed for the CD, so all the music distributed on CDs can be easily uploaded to the Internet, then (illegally) downloaded and played on any computer or player.

In 2006, under 2 billion DRM-protected songs were sold worldwide by online stores, while over 20 billion songs were sold completely DRM-free and unprotected on CDs by the music companies themselves. The music companies sell the vast majority of their music DRM-free, and show no signs of changing this behavior, since the overwhelming majority of their revenues depend on selling CDs which must play in CD players that support no DRM system.

So if the music companies are selling over 90 percent of their music DRM-free, what benefits do they get from selling the remaining small percentage of their music encumbered with a DRM system? There appear to be none. If anything, the technical expertise and overhead required to create, operate and update a DRM system has limited the number of participants selling DRM protected music. If such requirements were removed, the music industry might experience an influx of new companies willing to invest in innovative new stores and players. This can only be seen as a positive by the music companies.

Much of the concern over DRM systems has arisen in European countries. 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.
User avatar
x_rex30
 
Joined: 10 Apr 2001

Postby Kalium » Mon Feb 26, 2007 4:38 pm

Jobs is frequently full of it. Without DRM, iTMS would be toast, and probably iPods with it.
User avatar
Kalium
Sir Bugsalot
 
Joined: 03 Oct 2003
Location: Plymouth, Michigan

Next

Return to Music Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest