What is Digg?95 Comments
- LeeVal, on 10/12/2007, -10/+47Steve Jobs can't drop DRM can he, It's the copyright holders choice?
- TheUngod, on 10/12/2007, -3/+29The letter read that he drop it from Indy labels that wish it, not from all of them.
- geoken, on 10/12/2007, -1/+22"The group plans to keep the petition open until April 1, when it will be sent to Jobs along with a jester hat."
- kelly, on 10/12/2007, -5/+24The problem is that many people still don't understand DRM. They'll download some songs that have it and some without. Many will inevitably get confused as they somehow managed to move music to other players and computers without having to jump through the hoops and may try the same with DRM songs, run into the inevitable problems then assume that they're simply doing something wrong and then equate their frustrations with Apple's software.
It's ***very*** important that Apple keep the service consistent even if that means keeping DRMd music throughout.
I, like Steve Jobs and everyone else here want DRM gone, but for the health of Apple's business model, it needs to be all there or all gone. This idea of a mixed environment of DRM and non-DRMd music is ultimately bad for the end user. - miniboss, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20There's an easy way to see if Jobs truly is behind what he said or if he was just playing the media and the consumers into thinking he's a hero. Remove DRM from the indie music on iTunes for bands that don't want it. If he's really behind this movement then we shouldve seen DRM-free indie music already on itunes...
- kelly, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18stevemax,
no, hes not. He may be the largest shareholder of Disney (Pixar was acquired) and even on the board of directors for Disney... but ultimately its not his decision to make. - stardeo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15Even if DRM wasn't dropped wholesale from all iTunes music, it would be nice to see Apple revisit the idea of opening doors to more independent artists and labels; Apple allowing artists or labels who don't want DRM to offer music without it. It would add complexity to the system, but it could be like "Clean" and "Explicit" songs, a little tag next to the song name that is "DRM" and "No DRM."
Finding sources of music that don't have DRM could be a way of showing the big labels that music will still sell if you offer it to people! If it's available and easy, many people will choose it! - monahmat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12Link to the letter and pettition: http://www.defectivebydesign.org/actions/open_letter/steve_jobs
- uranium, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11where can one sign this petition?
- jragon, on 10/12/2007, -6/+15Indeed. It's more complex than "Steve owns stock in Disney! No more DRM on Pixar films!" or "Just unlock selected tunes in the iTunes store!"
Look, he's already stated that Apple will switch over when the labels let him. Unless you think he's lying (and plenty do, but they're wrong) pressure the labels. They're the ones that can make a difference. - TheUngod, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Dumbass...what's the first rule of usenet?
- kelly, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Magnus,
Files are massive,
Are too long to download for most consumers
Not much difference for most consumers
Requires more bandwidth to distribute
Eats up batteries
Makes the iPod's large cache irrelivant - jragon, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12@petronski
He's not saying the user is too stupid to figure it out, he's pointing out that consistency is a huge element in a good UI, and he's right.
Think about why the iPod scroll-wheel succeeded. It was well designed and easy to figure out. It wasn't done because Apple didn't think people could figure out a D-pad, it was done because it was even easier and better.
Also, he who argues for the brilliance of the average user, you misspelled ignorant. - Travelsonic, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10berwiki,
"DRM is a business model, the FSF is not a business model. "
Strawman
"You can quote all the reasons you want, but the majority of people in favor of eliminating DRM simply want to steal more songs/movies/software without breaking a sweat. "
Look buddy:
- Those who wish to pirate, and only pirate are usually the savy ones who can break DRM - it's a non-issue for them.
-There are legitimate reasons to hate DRM, like when it interferes with legitimate usages... though if you are only buying the RIAA's mantra and bad logic you will of course fail to see this.
"I really don't understand this generation, we've had forms of intellectual property and copyright laws since the founding of the country.
(and we've done pretty well so far)"
I don't understand your generation, the generalize-and-slander-all-we-want-about-a-group-even -when-it-isn't-everybody-involved. Kettle called, he wants black varnish.
"Intellectual property" as a whole is a very recent thing.... trademark, patent, and copyrights have been around for a while, but only recently did idiots who think to lump it up in one confusing name showed up. TM, Copyright and Patent in some way, shape, or form has existed before the founding of this country specificly, but the only relevance is in your strawman/generalization against all who are opposed to DRM. - zaren, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8It'd be nice if Jobs had the sole word in this.
Problem is, he's under contractual agreement to Big Media to take what they give him and sell it with DRM. He can't just say "Screw it, MP3s for everyone!" without calling down an metric ass-load of heat.
It's not like all these other yokels calling on him to stick to his word are gonna get anywhere with it, since his word wasn't "I'm going to strip the DRM!", it was "We oughta strip the DRM!". Big difference.
He's using his position to try to entice change that he can't legally force on the industry. - h0ly, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Why? Do you enjoy DRM'ed products?
- noseeme, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Ahah... Not going to happen.
- Novagenesis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7@kelly
"The problem is that many people still don't understand DRM."
Amen... My mother subscribes to audible, and has a few itunes songs... She doesn't quite "get" it... I often get calls asking for help when she tries to move a song onto her work computer from home, or even putting audiobooks on her two ipods (which, btw, she can't, because the Audible license is 3/1).
She always assumes the DRM-encoded files are like the mp3s I make out of her music cds...then BAM, failure. Since the US government decriminalized any form of "piracy" she'd be guilty of (trading between your own computers, making backups, and trading a few songs with her son fall under fair use), she just can't bring herself to understand it.
I on the other hand understand DRM. I understand how a hiccup on the part of iTunes can crash an authorization and cause me to waste another on an account... I've already tossed an account (and all purchased music in it) from trying to get files playing in Linux... Companies -LOVE- if you have to buy from them multiple times, but what it comes down to is, nobody realizes how DRM sucks until the first time it happens to them.
I'm glad I never spent -money- on the DRM movies that come with iTunes... I'm not allowed to burn them to dvd, which means they're only compatible with computers, appleTV, and an iPod...yay - Speed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Actually, iTunes is a small portion of music sales. Most music sales are still by CDs (huge majority)
- prockcore, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Except some labels have already dropped DRM. Barenaked Ladies' label sells non-DRMed albums on emusic and on their own website.
So why hasn't Apple complied in a heart beat? (BNL's music is still DRMed on iTS). - mcflynnthm, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5RTFA:
"In its response to the Apple document, titled "An Open Letter to Steve Jobs, " DefectiveByDesign asks the CEO to make good on his promise by removing FairPlay from iTunes songs by independent artists..."
Not everyone. Just allow artists/labels (independents) the ability to opt out of DRMing their music. - rightmindx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I'm sorry, I don't follow your line of reasoning. If you rip a CD or buy your music from eMusic or some other DRM-free retailer and then import it into iTunes you have already "mixed" DRM and Non-DRM files together. If the iTMS were to sell DRM-free tracks in addition to DRMed tracks and could include a small color-coded tag or something else unobtrusive that shows up in a column when you are browsing your library, wouldn't that do more to indicate to the user which files can be freely moved than what exists right now?
- insanelygreat, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9The Free Software Foundation's inability to grasp the situation at hand is incredible.
- rightmindx, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Yes but there are many small and independent music labels that would be more than happy to sell their music through the iTMS without DRM... why not offer that as an option to them?
- aristotle0dude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@aa3000: Because there is no financial incentive to do so? iTMS took a while to break even.
- jonshipman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@willistg
Contact CD Baby about it, they are the intermediary between you and the retailers. If I sold a CD and heard Wal-mart charging 9.99 instead of the 14.99 for it, I can't go to walmart and complain about a devaluing of my art. - OutlawSamurai, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Neither the iPod or iTunes necessitate DRM in and of themselves. If you said, "That's why I don't use the iTunes Music Store," now that would be perfectly logical.
- MacParrot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@kelly
While I agree with what you say about a uniform experience with iTunes, I can't see any reason why Apple couldn't open a separate section of the store for non-DRMed audio files. Leave the RIAA dregs where they belong and let those copyright holders who will allow it sell their music without DRM. It might be interesting to see the difference in sales between the two categories. - actorboy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5And your kind are the reason DRM was invented. Same reason honest people have to live with bars on their windows. Thanks for that.
- scabbers, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Lossless is a pain in the ass.
- kelly, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3rightmindx,
I really like that idea. Apple could color code tracks that are DRM-free as well as those that are without.
It can't be subtle though, and it can't be something that only occurs at the buying process. - etandrib, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4If my mom can't do it without help the technology isn't there yet.
- actorboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Do they also know the details of the contract Apple has with the large music companies? I would not be surprised to find out that DRM for every label is stipulated to "even" the playing field. "Yeah, we'll make up 95% of your online store, but here's how you have to run it."
- reverb, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Uh. Apple doesn't own the rights to ANY of that content. Shouldn't FSF be talking to, I dunno, the content owners? Oh wait, it's the FSF. Illogical is their middle name.
- michaelGregoire, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Cheap??? At .99 per song?? Are you high?
- willistg, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6I'd like to formally voice my opposition to drm on my music that is sold on itunes via CD Baby(for the benefit of those posting who are implying that DRM is what the content creators want). No one asked me (the content creator) whether my "art" should be protected with their ***** or any other ***** that keeps people from enjoying the music they want to. I am opposed to it in all forms.
So there you go one example of an "artist" who opposes DRM, but has to live with their stuff being "protected" without their consent.
I think it is reasonable to take a look at all the stuff that is available (drm free) on emusic.com AND itunes, and assume that those artists(or the labels at least), probably feel the same way as me otherwise their music would not be on emusic.
- kelly, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2macparrot,
I don't like the multiple stores idea as it creates "division within the ranks."
Apple is not about to let their personal objections to DRM affect the buying experience for consumers. However, rightmindx had a good idea suggesting that all DRM'd songs and non-DRM'd should be color coated differently. I really like that idea. Apple could color code tracks that are DRM-free as well as those that are without.
As i mentioned in my comment to him, It can't be subtle though, and it can't be something that only occurs at the buying process. - HappyScrappy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Read it AGAIN.
The EFF is asking Apple to drop all DRM. How are they to do that if only the independent artists would remain?
I swear, it's like talking to a wall. Some people just can't seem to get it. - TheUngod, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6All you people saying "Jobs can't do it on his own" etc. need to reed the original letter. They didn't say remove all DRM by any means. Defectivebydesign is a very intelligent organization, they research things well, and know how this all works.
- crimson117, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2No, Steve Jobs couldn't just decide one day that U2's catalog on iTunes would no longer be sold with DRM. But there are many artists who release material on the internet without DRM already, and would jump at the chance to be featured on iTunes.
And the hope is that eventually other artists, perhaps even U2, would find that DRM wasn't helping their sales, so they'll switch to a no-DRM sales model as well! - serpicolugnut, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7"Defectivebydesign" is a very intellligent organization"
I'm sorry, but that's opinion and not a fact. I'd say their lack of ability to grasp the facts in this shows that they are quite un-intelligent and driven by pure ideology.
Jobs can not just order the record companies (for which he is only the distrubutor of content) to drop DRM. They own the content, they set the rules under which it must be distributed. Apple merely creates the technology that adheres to their rules. If Defective By Design wants to achieve some real action, they should be lobbying the record companies to drop the DRM, not Apple. Apple has already publicly stated that if the labels would be willing to drop it, Apple would comply in a heart beat. - dodzpoz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Jobs opened the door, why don't he pass it ?
- rightmindx, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Apple wouldn't be the first legitimate online music retailer to sell DRM-free music anyway. emusic and amiestreet both sell songs in DRM-free Mp3 format.
- tech42er, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Perhaps, he's _genuinely_ ignorant?
- HairyPoter, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3what kind of lamer make a petiton like that? Steve Jobs do not owns the media, he is just a reseller. Who owns the media, demands that it is sold with DRM and will not sell it without DRM. So, Steve Jobs has nothing to do with this petition. The petition should be pointed at those morons in hollywood.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3he can't sell music without drm, sony would break his legs
- tech42er, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Independent artists who don't want their music DRMed?
- willistg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@jonshipman
thanks, the solution would be for me to deny myself revenue and take my stuff off of itunes. Just as it would be silly to deny the potential reach of walmart. The point is it's not the artist necessarily that wants this crap. And there should be a choice so those artists that want the drm can have it, and those that don't want it can distribute without it.
I know of no artist, particularly that I would consider worth listening to, who has publicly supported DRM, it's suits and lawyers that want it.
It's funny I remember Lars back in the Napster days saying something to the effect of he opposed napster because artists should be able to decide how their stuff is distributed. Seems these same arguments apply to the very thing that we are told is meant to prevent piracy. .... a literal worm hole of irony. - clickmyface, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yes, because the labels writing themselves a letter somehow makes sense to you there?
- dreamcore, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1EFF? WTF?
The EFF is a little busy trying to get REAL ID repealed
to be overly concerned
with how Apple sells or doesn't sell their indie selections... -
Show 51 - 93 of 93 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is