Apple announces DRM-free music
Am I the only person that doesn't care one bit about Digital Rights Management (DRM)?
Today Apple and EMI announced that they would be offering songs on the iTunes Music Store [iTMS] that do not contain any sort of DRM.
Mac News Network reports:
The Cupertino-based company will make individual AAC format tracks available from EMI artists at twice the sound quality of existing downloads and without any [DRM]. Pricing will be $1.29/€1.29/£0.99; however, iTunes will continue to offer consumers the ability to pay $0.99/€0.99/£0.79 for standard sound quality tracks with DRM still applied. Complete albums from EMI Music artists purchased on the iTunes Store will automatically be sold at the higher sound quality and DRM-free, with no change in the price. The new higher-quality, DRM-free songs will be available in May.
I suppose this is good. Though it opens the door to more expensive, single tracks on iTMS in the future.
I don't get why everyone has such a problem with DRM. While I am one of those people that doesn't like being dictated to what I can or cannot do I go into buying DRM'd music knowing that I can only use it with a specific player or specific software. If I were not OK with this, then I would avoid buying that product. But I don't have a problem with this, and obviously a LOT of other people do not either. I am one of the millions of people that loves iTunes, and loves their iPods.
So who are the people that dislike DRM? Why do you dislike it?
Maybe I need a little enlightenment. Maybe I am just not picky when it comes to my purchases from iTunes. Of all things, I would rather see higher quality video on iTMS than I would to have non-DRM music and videos.
3 comments:
My qualm with DRM is basically that the labels are penalising their legitimate customers. As someone who's never pirated music software or movies, I'm angry that every time I buy something such as a DVD or iTunes purchase that I'm being locked in to something.
It's a sorry state of affairs when all the majors can do is penalise their (clearly fewer) legitimate customers, but it's surely not the right thing to do.
"The Best way to combat illegal file sharing is to make legal music purchasing easier"
And making it 256kbps is certainly a sweetener to a DRM-free deal. Too bad it's gonna cost me a fair bit to 'upgrade' my entire collection. Thankfully I think we can rest assured that the other 3 won't immediately get on board, so the cost can be spread out over the next year....!
It seems wrong that EMI and Apple are charging more to buy DRM-free songs when we should already have access to such files every time we make a legal purchase, as Nik said. At the same time, I like that someone is finally getting on this freedom train and selling tracks without as many restrictions at a higher quality.
I don't know whether to feel indignant for being charged more for something I deserved in the first place or to start looking under couch cushions for loose change.
I'm with Adam, in that I hardly notice copy protection restrictions, except in principle. But I'm wondering -- Is this a result of the EU complaining that Apple shouldn't sell songs that only play on the iPod?
I see what you're both saying. I do find it ridiculous to penalize legit customers, but I guess I haven't experienced that since I am not trying to do anything with my music or videos besides using them in the ways that the DRM allows.
I am not sure yet if I will upgrade my music. I currently don't have a problem with the quality of the tracks I have purchased. But, I am no audiophile or music connoisseur like Liz.
Post a Comment