What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
The camera starts rolling on Best Buy holiday campaign. view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - A behind the scenes look at one employee’s singing debut.
162 Comments
- autoy, on 10/12/2007, -30/+134They refuse to get it. It's not Apple's DRM, it's the BIG4's DRM.
- noahhoward, on 10/12/2007, -4/+83The recording industry wants them to open up? What universe ar eyou from. You're on earth, the RIAA is the bad guy here.
- SomeJoe, on 10/12/2007, -10/+68Someone in Norway didn't RTFA.
- scottstevenson, on 10/12/2007, -7/+50@tofagerl: "The music still comes from iTunes, with DRM. If the subcontractors won't let iTunes sell the music without DRM, that's too bad for iTunes"
I don quite get the point here. Apple cannot legally sell DRM-free music from the record labels. Therefore, it can either sell DRM music from those labels, or none of that music at all. This isn't a disaster for Apple since people will still buy iPods (which is the part Apple actually makes money on, not the music), but it is a serious blow to the consumer because they lose the *option* to buy from iTunes.
Apple cannot un-DRM the music because they don't own it. Assuming the goal is to change the restrictions on the music, the lawsuit should be aimed at the record companies. Outlawing the iTunes store in Norway does no good for anyone at all. - colincornaby, on 10/12/2007, -4/+43He said he'd remove it if the record companies let him. If the record companies tell him Apple can remove the DRM and Apple still doesn't, you've got a case. Until them, you can't accuse Steve of not dealing with DRM. The ball is in the record companies' court.
- noreturn, on 10/12/2007, -15/+45It really is staggering how much they, as you put it, "refuse to get it." It's like whining because some digital camera only uses their proprietary battery, or a particular printer only uses specific printer cartridges. Boo ***** hoo. Go buy the CD from a real store.
- noahhoward, on 10/12/2007, -10/+36If thats the way it is it's going to be pretty quiet in Norway, DRM comes with the music, not with the store.
- monkeyrun, on 10/12/2007, -6/+28Good God, Norway.
Please, just bring on the lawsuit.
I'd love to see how it ends. - vhold, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19Norway - 4,640,219 people.
Los Angeles - 3,844,829 people.
So.. Norway is in between our 1st and 2nd biggest cities. That's probably not something to entirely scoff at, especially if it sets off a chain reaction in the EU. Also it raises awareness of DRM. I think that widespread DRM adoption is fueled by ignorance of DRM. - FunkyWitDaSysTm, on 10/12/2007, -8/+26should be "norway responds to what they assumed was said in Jobs' open letter"
- chrisworden, on 10/12/2007, -8/+25If Apple abandons DRM and legal downloads from the Big 4, they will lose a key selling point of the iPod. Another corporation like Microsoft will step in with their music store, saying "if you want to use legal music on an iPod, you have to go out and buy the CD first!" That would be a huge reason to buy a Zune instead of an iPod.
I think that Norway is doing a good job to raise questions about a flawed system, (although they seem very dense about the actual issues). But we should probably be glad that it's Apple who is the leader in this field, because they at least *seem* reluctant about DRM, instead of purporting it as some kind of "music genuine advantage". - 3rnesto, on 10/12/2007, -10/+26Just buy CDs.
- Maverick18x, on 10/12/2007, -3/+19@jmichaelg "Not true. You're ignoring "they can license the DRM to competitors" option in which case all mp3 players would share the same DRM."
Did you not read the letter? Jobs describes exactly why Apple CAN'T license their DRM to competitors. DRM is very much a cat-and-mouse game. Apple promised the RIAA that they'd stay on top of that game and do so in a timely manner (a window of a few weeks). Their current integrated business model allows them to do that. But, "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."
Another company might initiate the breach, but Apple still holds all the responsibility. Under the current terms of their contracts licensing the FairPlay DRM is more or less not an option -- definitely not a smart move. Apple's options right now are to put their entire iTunes store at risk, or to put the Norway market for their iTunes store at risk. What they've done makes perfect sense. - superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18Your mistake is not understanding that Apple would make even MORE money without DRM. Apple understands this, which is why Jobs wrote the letter. DRM free online music means far higher music sales, which in turn means far higher iPod sales (and for iPods with larger capacities). Apple makes hardly anything on the music store, but has great margins on iPods.
Your conversation is quite accurate though, I'm sure they've had that one already. All Jobs can do then is use DRM as a vise to say "every year, I control more and more of the online distribution of media while physical distribution shrinks. At some point, I will be the sole means to reach 90% of consumers. If you are comfortable with that, then by all means I'll leave the DRM on." - HappyScrappy, on 10/12/2007, -7/+21Torgeir Waterhouse, how about reading it again and understanding it and acting on it.
Apple cannot get a license to see this content without DRM. So iTunes can't sell it without DRM.
It's your move. If you made it the law that the labels must offer the content without DRM, then you will have put the ball back in Jobs' court.
So why not do it? If you're serious about your job as consumer advocate and you believe that DRM is anti-consumer, then make your move for the consumer. - eddyc, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15WTF? , 'my continents corporations could beat up your continents corporations' , what a novel take on the article, bravo
- MikeD, on 10/12/2007, -9/+20I have two things to say.
First, if you have been following the news from Europe, France and Germany are watching Norway and Apple closely. They are thinking the same way if Norway is successful against Apple. France tried it once before, but the have grown new balls now the Norway and Germany are doing something or thinking about DRM and interoperability.
This can really put a crimp in Apples bottom line. France and Germany are two of the biggest buyers of "i" stuff outside the US.
The next thing we have to do is look back at business history.
Not long ago we went through what is known as the burst of the Internet bubble. The innovation, development, marketing and support of the iPod and iTunes can be looked at as it's own bubble.
Apple is on a societal fence. While they promised DRM to the big 4 in return for content, society is now demanding DRM free music and interoperability. The business model is Apple's alone. The contrived this business model. From the hardware to the software and to the contracts and agreements to obtain content. They alone approached the music industry with the idea and the promise to protect the music rights.
If the business model fails for any reason, acts of God, network breakdown, bad investment, supplier issues, governmental issues, any reason at all, it's all on Apple. Apple looses.
It could be said that not knowing what the market and societal pressures would be like in the future back when the first iPod and iTunes were release may have brought this problem on. But, this is not the first product that has had this problem in our economic history.
Now, Apple is damned if Norway wins. You can count on the fact that if they do, France and Germany will get on board, then the whole of the EU. Apples will loose millions in sales. So will the record companies. But they may be swayed at that point to open up DRM, and therefore interoperability, to save the market. Guess what. Apple will loose millions in sales.
Buy the shear design of the business model created for iTunes and the iPod, it was doomed to fail at some point.
DRM, proprietary dependence, supplier, and government issues. All working against Apple. Maybe there is more than one reason it is now called Apple, Inc. and that the iPhone and Apple TV are two of the new innovations. Does Steve see this problem too? Is he trying to position Apple in different markets as a defensive move for the company should anything happen?
In Apple's defense, they are "the little engine that could". But this ain't a hill. It's a mountain. - aamir2, on 10/12/2007, -6/+15Exactly,
Steve says: "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. Its 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."
Waterhouse says: [Steve Jobs] also goes on to turn the whole issue on its head by stating iPod owners are not locked into [the] iTunes Music Store - the issue our complaint [addresses] is of course the opposite, iTunes Music Store customers are locked to the iPod."
Huh! Mr. Waterhouse would have been well advised to read the open letter, sleep on it, read it again in the morning, and hopefully after understanding it the second time round, fashioned an appropriate response. Instead he seems to have rushed into making utterly senseless statements. - muikano, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13The reason why Jobs wrote this letter is because he is utterly brilliant. Instead of ignoring Norway, he's meeting that challenge face on. He takes away Norway's moral reason to do battle with Ipod.
By putting the choice for DRM on the Big 4's doorstep, it puts a spotlight on the other DRM, Norway isn't banning. Also, Norway hasn't refuted the locking in argument Jobs used. The piracy elephant Norway won't talk about.
It is absolute genius, that Jobs post is. Other countries that follow Norway's example can't take the DRM moral high ground argument because of Jobs' well worded explanations.
That's why Norway had to react with an interview even though, it was an open letter and not directed at Norway in particular.
Utterly genius. - henrikakselsen, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11I'm completely stunned by the numbers of people who doesn't get the Norwegian consumer councils point here. The council doesn't mind that music is being sold with DRM, the problem is that iTunes Store customers can't use other players than iPod to play their legally bought music (of course, they can, but not without a lot of hassle).
This just shows the brilliance of Jobs who managed to shift the focus from Apple to the record companies, bypassing the the issue, and makes Apple look like the cool underdog yet again.
I own 3 macs and a Nano 2gen, and love apple-products, but in this case it's almost scare to see the reality distortion field in action. - DigitAl56K, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14"They refuse to get it. It's not Apple's DRM, it's the BIG4's DRM."
They get it just fine: There is DRM, and they don't want the DRM. - akh1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9@rpelayo
Norway is not part of the EU. - superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Well if Norway wins, very soon Apple will indeed have to shut down ITMS in Norway - which means people will be back to downloading stuff illegally again. How does that benefit anyone? That's exactly why Norway should also turn things around by explicity passing a law stating that all digital media must be sold DRM free. That gets rid even of DRM around physical CD's.
If Norway means what they say, then passing such a law would have the effect they desire IF music companies wanted any profit at all from online music sales in Norway. - mediaphile, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9@miked:
You seem to be Euro-centric, so I'll assume that English is not your primary language, and forgo the grammar Nazi in me that wants to tear your ***** up.
That said, I think you're over-estimating the problems facing Apple, and their role in the problem. The reason Apple has DRM is because it's the only way they'd be allowed to license the music from the record companies. They may have constructed the specific form of DRM that the iTunes music store employs, but Apple is not the only online retailer to employ DRM in the sale of music. You forget--the iTunes music store was not the first to sell music online, and not the first to force DRM on to the consumer. Without the same guarantees that the music licenses would be sold intact, the record companies would not have entered into a partnership with Apple.
Under the same logic, Microsoft's PlayForSure should be held to the same scrutiny; as far as I know, I can't play a song from Napster or Yahoo! Music on an iPod. I fail to see how this issue rests solely on Apple's shoulders.
And while Apple does stand to lose revenue with the loss of the European iTunes store market, I doubt this will factor heavily on their net profits. Their music store is secondary to their iPod sales, and people will continue to buy iPods whether they can buy music through iTunes or not. And until their store is completely shut down in Europe, plenty of people will continue to buy music through iTunes whether their government agrees with Apple's policies or not. - jaydj, on 10/12/2007, -20/+28Torgier isn't saying that he wants Apple to make the music DRM free, only that the framework should be opened to other music players and competitors. If Stevie can get the record companies on board to do non-DRM (highly unlikely) great. Otherwise, everyone (Apple, Sony, MS) needs to open up the proprietary DRM to competitors.
- angusware, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13So why can't I use my iPod with Windows Media Player? Or the Zune software? of course it's locked into just using it on iTunes, I don't complain that my bathtub isn't compatable with my mouth. Some things are made for other things, and others are not.
And the record companies are *****. It doesn't suprise me that Apple can't do anyting about it. - vhold, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13"They refuse to get it. It's not Apple's DRM, it's the BIG4's DRM."
That's strange. Apple implements the DRM. Apple ensures the DRM's security. Apple sells the product containing the DRM. Apple sells the music constrained by the DRM. Seems like it's their DRM.
Sure, they may have did it to please the Big4. Apparently Norway thinks that's crap and would rather have no Big4 music service then one that's locked. - tperlmutter, on 10/12/2009, -6/+13And Norway's response is summed up as, "We, Norway, don't like this very much, but don't want to spend any effort solving it by going to the source of the problem, we'd rather someone else do that for us. That and we don't like Mr. Job's big words and phrases. They confuse us".
- deadbeatpoet, on 10/12/2007, -8/+15I'm losing faith in you geeks. Norway has merely figured out a way rhetorically challenge the concept of DRM, and Steve provided a brilliant counterpoint, placing the onus on the Big 4. However... forget Norway for a second... Apple makes more money because of DRM. I am NOT in favor DRM, but you have to be stupid not to see that Apple is in bed with big media! Apple created a DRM system FOR them! That's not easy, or cheap! It was an investment. Ask anyone in the Apple retail stores, they'll tell you, getting people from using the iTunes store (via the iPod) to using other Apple products IS. THE. POINT. Would they sell DRM free music? Of course. Will they take steps to convince big media to relinquish DRM? Well, the next time they negotiate a contract, it might go something like this:
Steve Jobs: "Hi guys. Will you please let us sell your stuff without all this DRM nonsense? You've heard all the arguments..."
Media Execs: "No."
Steve Jobs: "We might lose the Norway market. Others will follow. You know that."
Media Execs: "No."
Steve Jobs: "This can cut off all the digital distribution channels that pay you in that market. This will hurt your bottom line, but probably not for a few years."
Media Execs: "Hmm... No."
Steve Jobs: "Okay! Let's move on..." - tzon, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9and don't forget to add that European recording labels bear much of the blame for requiring DRM in the first place.
- MacParrot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I dugg you down for the stupid fanboy bit. It's old and tired.
- oookye, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Considering how you can pretty much get any music off the internet illegally one way or another, the 4 major music companies don't realize the people who purchase music off the iTunes store are those who wish to support the artists. I can almost guarantee at least 80% of the people purchasing songs from the iTunes store is capable of downloading music illegally, they just choose not to. The existence of DRM is, in my opinion, a negative impact on the sales of songs in the iTunes music store - just because of DRM itself.
my 2 cents. - babble, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10> Job's claim that licensing DRM to his competitors is too complicated smells of RDF to me. There's nothing to prevent Apple from
> having a distribution method that would push patches out to licensees as needed. If the licensees screwed up, that wouldn't affect
> Apple's relationship with the music companies.
Contradicted by Steve in the open letter; Apple bears the responsibility for plugging leaks in FairPlay under its current agreement with the labels. Not third parties, Apple. Apple has concluded that they can't effectively manage their DRM in a multiple licensee scenario. If that was Apple's *sole* position, I'd be more willing to go with your critique here, but that's not the only thing Apple is saying.
Apple is ready and willing to sell DRM-free music, which would solve everybody's problem except for possibly the record labels' fear of piracy (but even that is something of a strawman; as Steve pointed out in his open letter, the labels are still selling billions of songs a year on DRM-free audio CD's). Obviously selling DRM-free music - which the labels are already doing - solves more problems than continuing to beat the dead horse of FairPlay licensing. Apple wants it, consumers want it, the anti-DRM crowd want it...it's a better answer. - mhinckley, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7"Job$" ... good one. You're very angry and I stopped drinking koolaid years ago...long before iPods. Your analogy is flawed because legally-binding contracts that require DRM restrictions placed on property by the companies who distribute them is not, shall we say, genocide? It's smart business, even though 99.9% of "us" don't agree with or enjoy having our music governed by the "Big 4."
- Murdats, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I think the point of this is that distributors are at fault for agreeing to distribute this stuff, if they didnt agree to contracts that impede consumer rights then the consumers would win
and I would blame a car dealership for selling unsafe cars, they are the people who purchased them to resell them and apparently have no qualms about making money off of endangering people, its the same issue. manufactures can make as much crap as they want, but if the distributors maintain consumers rights then none of it gets into their hands - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11" If Europe thinks it's so much better why aren't there European companies that make Consumer products for Europeans that are better then Apple's iPod/iTunes, Microsoft/Zune or Sony?"
Cause they are to busy smoking le cigarettes and taking le naps. - felchdonkey, on 10/12/2007, -8/+13Sure is easy to make grandiose statements when you're a Norwegian politician, as opposed to a businessman who has to deal with the real world.
- Psych77, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Can the DVDs be played on DVD players made by any manufacturer? Why yes... That's the difference.
- KoZo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Hell, in my country, we buy iPods because 1. it's cool 2. it's simple to use 3. it just works.
No one buys it for the iTMS. - rpelayo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6vhold, what you forget is that Norway is one of 25 European countries in the European Union. If Norway pass such a law, then other European countries may well jump on the bandwagon. That's 350 million people as oppossed to the US 270 million. Now you're talking a much more worrying scenario for the labels.
That said, right now France and Germany are the two main countries looking at whats happening in Norway, and say what they like, they won't end up doing anything. Of the Big 4, Universal is a 100% French owned company, and I believe Bertlesmann is also 100% owned German company. We may not be as corporate driven as the US, but we are enough that these two companies will make damn sure their governments don't do anything other than blow hot air about all of this. - etjazz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@henrikakselsen
Thank you. Most of the diggers are indeed missing the point. The Norwegian Consumer Council is simply pointing out to Apple that if it wants to do business in Norway, they'll have to follow Norwegian law. Apple has 3 solutions.
(1) Sell files without DRM,
(2) license their DRM so other producers can make competing mp3 players or
(3) abandon the Norwegian iTunes marked. - rockphotog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4You have missed the point. You can play DVD on "any" DVD player, but you can only play your iTunes DRM-music on iPods. THAT is the point in this case, not about DRM or not. It's about the consumers freedom to choose how he/she wants to use a legally bought product.
- borntobedown, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Yeah, somehow he missed the part about DRM being a very complex system that needs to be proprietary in order to protect from being hacked. And why does all the responsibility fall on Apple again?
- WeeBull, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I doubt he has one. Scandinavians all tend to speak superb english.
If you ever go there, it's almost impossible to learn their language because nobody will speak it to you. - Jugalator, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6"They refuse to get it. It's not Apple's DRM, it's the BIG4's DRM."
FairPlay is Apple's DRM, but it's there due to requirements set by the "Big 4". However, who set these requirements doesn't matter to Norway, which makes sense to me at least. The problem is -- it doesn't matter who the DRM is from or why -- the net result is that the product may violate Norwegian laws, because it do use DRM from someone for some reason. This will affect Apple since they are among the companies providing DRM crippled media. - jackmaninov, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7If this is the case, then the law should be changed to somehow be able to travel "up the chain" of contracts to the company that's actually breaching consumer rights.
Otherwise, why couldn't some consumer unfriendly company simply set up a shell company that would sell something in breach of the Norwegian law that simply goes out of business each time the government sues it or whatever? - monkeyrun, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Norway doesn't really give a damn about consumer rights either.
No where in Norway's complaint is against Apple's DRM, or DRM in general.
Norway couldn't care less if Apple's DRM only allow users to play the song 3 times and self destruct, they just want it to be playable on other players. - GregR, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@nilsth 33 minutes ago
I don't anyone is complaining about them enforcing laws, it's just that the laws and the enforcement of them has the wrong focus. That said, it'd be nice if the governments in other countries (e.g. Canada and US etc) were as focused on looking out for the citizens rather than the interests of big business. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8I don't see what's wrong with Waterhouse's reponse, and I have the distinct impression that Apple fanboys are rushing needlessly to Apple's "defense" because they've misread it.
Jobs tried to throw the ball into the European governments' court, by saying "the DRM comes from the music producers, not from us, talk to them". Waterhouse is just putting the ball back in Apple's court by saying "that's your problem, *you* talk to them." And he's right, in Norway at least, it *is* Apple's problem. The government doesn't have any reason to care whether Apple can sell music in Norway or not, so why should it intercede with the labels? - Bachtn, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6I agree with Jobs 100%. I admire Apple that it was able to make a landmark deal with the labels and bring the least restrictive DRM music to the masses. I don't think this could have been done if Apple insisted on DRM free music from the beginning. Now that it has some leverage because of the success of itunes, it can lead the way to a free DRM world. I don't think Jobs ever really used DRM as a lock for iTunes/iPods as some have insinuated, because there was never a practical lock in the first place. The DRM was just to keep the Labels happy, but it was weak and Jobs knew it never worked.
Whats the difference with buying songs from itunes store and burning it to CD than driving to a Wallmart and buying a CD. Just because you buy songs from itunes dosen't mean you are LOCK to iPod. You don't even need an iPod to buy song on itunes. Just listen to it on your computer or burn to a CD and transfer to any format you want. Its the convinience of being about to discover and download in the comfort of your home is what makes itunes secessful. This arguement of itunes/ipod lock is weak. -
Show 51 - 100 of 162 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