In a letter titled, Thoughts on Music, posted on Apple’s website, Steve Jobs proposes ways to address his firm's current DRM issues. Apple has attracted unwanted attention, especially in Europe, regarding the FairPlay DRM in iTunes and the iPod. With his statements, Jobs pulls the big four music labels (Universal, Sony BMG, Warner and EMI) directly into Apple's circle of controversy.

Jobs raises and addresses three approaches to Apple's DRM dilemma. Keep in mind that to Jobs, the problem is that:

…some have called for Apple to “open” the [DRM] system...Apple uses to protect its music...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.

aka, according to Jobs, the music labels should solve Apple’s DRM PR problems. I guess when you're the deer in headlights, just find another deer to take your place.

So, which of Jobs' proposals is preferable?

Because music labels have considered releasing songs without DRM (with price adjustments) on non-iTunes services since Apple will not raise prices, and given the insight by some that non-DRM offerings may proliferate as a balancing mechanism to DRM in response to market forces, the market may simply make DRM a less worrisome issue.

Interestingly, and to the disappointment of DRM critics, Jobs does not argue that DRM creates lock-in for consumers, stifles innovation, lessens consumer “freedom” nor shrinks the public domain. This is positive, but I'm cautious at complimenting Jobs since he avoids a key issue: why Apple cannot waive some rights under the DMCA to allow others to reverse engineer FairPlay so that iTunes songs can play on non-iPod devices. That would solve much of the controversy. Non-Apple DRMd songs can already play on the iPod as the result of reverse engineering.

posted by Noel Le @ 7:04 AM | DRM & Watermarks, etc.

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | Post a Comment(0)