All the latest UK technology news, reviews and analysis
|
|
|
01 Jun 2006
The market dominance of Apple's iPod music player is causing ever more restrictive digital rights management (DRM) technologies, argued Cory Doctorow, a fellow with the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Makers of portable devices have different reasons to embrace DRM, Doctorow said in a keynote presentation at the Red Hat Summit in Nashville.
He pointed out that Apple is looking to prevent users switching from iPods to competing devices by making sure that music from the iTunes music store plays only on the iPod.
"Apple [turns] every iTune you buy into a 99 cent price tag on switching from Apple to a competitor's product," Doctorow told delegates.
"If you start with an iPod and you want to move to a Creative product and you have spent $50 on music, that's a $50 investment that you abandon."
Using content to lock in consumers is even more important because such devices have an average life span of 18 months.
In a commodity market for portable media players, Apple has no guarantee that after such a time it will still have the best and/or most popular products, Doctorow added.
Apple's competitors meanwhile are pushing for even more restrictive DRM in an effort to entice content owners such as movie studios and record labels to sign exclusive content licensing deals.
By offering to further tighten DRM restrictions, such companies are playing to the content industry's fears of new technologies and piracy.
They also bank on the content owners' troublesome relationship with Apple which has shown little willingness to raise download prices.
Latest stories from Web
Related articles
Related jobs
Poll
What is the most important IT priority for your company this year?
Connect with V3.co.uk
This paper focuses on a series of best practices and techniques for development teams looking to improve their software development processes
Why good data management at all levels is essential in the modern business (video, 6mins)
SOFTWARE ENGINEER - BERKS - to £34k plus package WAREHOUSE...
We currently have a position for a Senior Project Manager...
JAVA DEVELOPER TRANSPORT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS / TMS...
We are looking for an experienced Software Business Analyst...
Keep up to date with the latest products, services and technologies from the world's leading IT companies. IThound.com brings you over 2,000 white papers, case studies and analyst reports.
Do you agree?
Inconvenient-yes, restrictive-no
I am growing weary of hearing complaints that Apple's DRM does not allow music purchased from the iTunes store to be played on players other than iPods. iTunes runs on both Macs and PCs. So purchased music can be played on up to 5 authorized desktop or portable computers owned by the music purchaser. As for portable devices, as I understand it, Apple's DRM allows one to burn digital downloads purchased from the iTunes store onto a CD that plays on any CD player. This means one can easily redigitize and import the music on the CD for use on any other MP3 player. Consider DRM's offered by other vendor. How many computers do these DRMS allow to play the purchased music. Do they allow backups to be made which can be played on any CD player? All in all, Apple's DRM rather unrestrictive. The other DRMs are far, far worse and this is not Apple's fault. Let's try to keep things in perspective.
Posted by: James Downward 02 Jun 2006
This was a Keynote???
This guy needs to learn something about the product he slams before making a fool of himself during a keynote. Those itunes songs can be transfered to a Creative player by burning them to cd and importing them back as an mp3. He really needs to get his facts straight - oh wait he is from EFF ahhhhh that explains it liberials don't need facts , when questions they simply cry they are beening oppressed.
Posted by: Jay Cottrill 02 Jun 2006
EFF, Yes - Comments-Incorrect Facts
First, I applaud the EFF and their efforts and in principle, I agree that DRM is shabby business but it's simply WRONG information. tahnks to Apple, every digital audio track purchased online can be DRM -free with burning and re-importing. He is abolsutely WRONG to say that users are locked into the ipod. It's that simple. I agree in principle that DRM is bad but his example is incorrect.
Posted by: jbelkin 02 Jun 2006
Doctorow wrong on this
Cory Doctorow is obviously VERY misinformed, to the point that I have to question whether or not his misinformation is being sponsored by an Apple competitor. Had he spent any time with iTunes, an iPod, a CD burner, and a player from Creative or anyone else, he would have been able to confirm that Apple's DRM does indeed allow music content to be transferred to other devices. Giving him further airplay on this without noting that fact strikes me as somewhat irresponsible.
Posted by: Joe Bush 01 Jun 2006
Record compnies want DRM, not Apple
Mr. Doctorow seems to think that it was Apple who wanted DRMs in music downloads. It was, of course, the Record Companies who insisted on the DRMs. Apple took the hand it was dealt & made the best of it. Extemely successfully. If the Record Companies get Micro$oft to implement their "Variable Pricing" scheme, we all know exactly what will happen. The price of a download of most popular songs the most popular songs will skyrocket, probably to about $2.00 or more. The majority of songs will stay at $0.99 & the least downloaded 10% of songs will cost $0.69. The artists will get next to nothing from the increase & the Record Companies will make even bigger bucks on downloads than they do now. All with even more restrictive DRM than Apple.
Posted by: Phil Holmer 01 Jun 2006
Silly little man
Doctorow is quoted as saying: "Apple is looking to prevent users switching from iPods to competing devices by making sure that music from the iTunes music store plays only on the iPod." Wrong. Apple complied with music publishers demands to encrypt songs sold online with digital rights management software that prevents consumers from unlimited copying and redistribution on free peer-to-peer networks. All other Windows-only music stores have made the same deal with publishers. The difference is Apple uses their own DRM, and Windows stores use an even more restrictive DRM licensed from Microsoft. Apple doesn't make any profit worth mentioning from selling music, but it does want to sell hardware by making a smooth, seemless interaction between iPod, iTunes software, and consumers music collections, whether from ripped CDs, previously collected MP3s, or iTMS online music purchases. It works so well the iPod is the best selling music player of all time. Is Doctorow really concerned about those poor consumers who can't load an iPod with online purchases from Windows-only music stores that have encrypted their songs with Microsoft DRM? I doubt it. Consumers of all ages are grown up to understand that if you buy an iPod from Apple, you can load it with your MP3s, and songs you buy from the iTMS, and this is just fine. If buying music from another online music store is your top priority, then just get a different MP3 player.
Posted by: Robertinnj 01 Jun 2006
You must be kidding
Apple's dominance in this area is what has kept prices in check and will continue to keep DRM restrictions in check. It is in Apple's best interest that DRM stay out of the way of consumers so it is in their best interest to fight against increased restrictions. Also, the theory that Apple uses DRM to lock users in is a bit of a Wild ass guess. If you do the math, the average iPod owner has less than a $25 investment in DRM protected music, not exactly a lock in, nor has leaving music behind been a lockin in the past. Do you think people avoided CD players because of their investment in cassettes? Did the DVD player suffer because of the installed base of Tapes? This is just stupid. The MP3 player is one of the first devices that inherited the previous generation of music and the vast majority of music on mp3 players comes from those CD's. Apple uses it's own DRM because it has it's own DRM and doesn't want to pay Microsoft to license WMA because remember Apple would not only have to pay a license for each iPod, but also for each Mac and possibily for each copy of iTunes that has been downloaded for windows. If you are going to buy DRM music, Fairplay is probably the safest format to purchase and backing Apple is probably the best way to combat the content providers.
Posted by: Doug Petrosky 01 Jun 2006
EFF doesn't have a workable alternative
Cory and the EFF have no solution. They don't want any DRM (DRM is bad/flawed/etc.), and yet they recognize the need to have some sort of protection/coverage for artists/labels (they're also anti-piracy) - so what's the answer? It's also funny they say that, for example, Apple's DRM (which is the most open/flexible one in terms of user rights of any DRM solution) locks a user into iPod because of the purchased music, but right after states DRM offers no protection and a user can easily remove it. If they can easily remove, then it seems to me they're NOT locked in. It's also funny that I'm now starting to see "Plays for Sure" (which uses Microsoft's proprietary WMA-based DRM) is the 'open' alternative, because it's supported on players from all the also-rans. I'd like to see DRM go away too - but we have no viable alternative technology at the moment.
Posted by: Tom L 01 Jun 2006
Hogwash
If I bought a Creative MP3 player, I'd rip all my iTunes music to MP3s and play them there. There's no lock in. Just FUD.
Posted by: Hogwasher 01 Jun 2006
iPod dominante for a reason
Why are people always complaining about Apple dominating the MP3 market and that it's a closed platform. How can that be? You can use it on a Mac or PC. The majority of the competion won't even run on my Mac. So you guys tell me, which one is a closed system? Can I run the new MTV/MS store on my Mac? Nope. So how come my PC using friends are using the iPod and iTunes on their PC. Because it's an open system. That's why. So why is everyone complaining. The consumers are deciding what they want and now they are starting to realise what Mac users have always talked about. The whole user experience.! It's the Apple way. Hardware and software working hand in hand. It's that simple.
Posted by: No one special1 01 Jun 2006