Jeff,
I’m interested in knowing what you think about NBC Universal deciding to go with Microsoft since Apple won’t prevent people from playing “illegally” obtained media on the ipod.
Why should you care that the recording industry is “treating Apple unfairly”? Because once the recording industry breaks the power of the iTunes Music Store, they’re going right back to selling only DRM crippled music and trying to make you pay $3.99 for the latest hit song. Or, insist that you can only get a particular song by buying the whole album for $19.95.
Look at the agreement that NBC signed with Microsoft for the Zune Music Service: Microsoft will now add a feature to the Zune that will actually search the media on your Zune for pirated content.
As far as the entertainment industry is concerned, we are a bunch of thieving varmints who refuse to pay “reasonable” prices for their wares. What’s a reasonable price for the entertainment industry? Look at the cost of ring tones: Three bucks for a 20 second snippet of song which expires after three or four months.
Aw pity poor Jeff who gets a bare fraction of slashdot’s readership, and they don’t even have advertising links masquerading as content 
Anyway… what you forgot to mention in bringing up Malda’s comment is that the original iPod really was lame. After all, you then go on to agree with him:
“A quick peek at the first iPod ad provides a little context to how rough that first generation really was”
Now you can say that later versions were better and that they made the iPod something to desire, but the initial one… wasn’t as good as it could have been, especially when compared to its peers. The first version of a lot of things are simply precursors to later, more successful versions: Windows v1 (and 2); NT v3.51, .NET 1.0, the list can go on for ever.
LLBLGen Rulez!!
Jeff,
What is incredibly ironic is that Amazon is creating the same type of DRM lock-in with the Kindle and kindle books. The Kindle DRM format is an offshoot of the MobiPocket DRM (Amazon recently bought Mobipocket.) I can not buy Kindle ebooks for my Sony reader.
I also recently read from an Astek representative that they are working on a book reader and Mobipocket will only license there DRM reader if that is the only reader that ships on the device. Astek also wants to support the eReader format.
If Jeff Bezos really wants ebooks to become ubiquitious they would just have Kindle use the normal Mobipocket DRMed files. They would also license the Mobipocket DRM to reader vendors without an exclusivity requirement.
The bottom line is Amazon isn’t about DRM free, and fair use for their customers… they are about making money. Selling DRM free music is the best way to do that, because it is an alternative to iTunes MS. But, obviously creating a closed DRM system in the Kindle and also Unbox is the best way to make money there.
The bottom line is, as a consumer of digital media I just want to be able to use the music, movies and ebooks that I buy, without encumbrances and on any device I own now, or may own in the future. I also want to have the right to transfer ownership (sell) that digital media the same way I can sell my used books, my used CDs, and my used DVDs. If I don’t have the freedom to use and sell stuff then they price should be radically lower!!!
BOb
Apple is sort of half way between an electronics/computing company and a fashion company. I don’t think any other brand name in the industry gains the same kind of brand loyalty… but to get to the point you pay for the Apple name, despite that fact that you can get a smaller MP3 player, with higher capacity, better audio quality and higher reliability for less… well I don’t know that for sure, I’ll be honest, but its very much the impression I get. I can buy a PDA and addons for less than an iPod or iPhone which does /more/ than the iPhone.
Because I am a geek, and I know this from experience and actually care about what my technology does, I have a dimmer view of Apple than the next guy. Who, in reality, probably has more reasonable criteria on what his technology should do for him, like “not being the cheap ass version”. 
–DRM anyway. I’m certainly not a fan.
Further DRM is futile. If you can watch/listen to the media you can steal it and pirate it by inference, regardless as to the protection used. Microphones, camcorders, home electronics kits… the possibilities are endless.
The possibilities for protection on the other hand are exactly zero.
Making it hard is good enough for 90% of people at least…
Man, does anyone else find it amusing to see Apple fan-children (for the politically sensitive among us) frothing at the mouth about how unfair this issue is to Apple and then trying to claim impartiality?
We can argue about whether or not Apple wanted to sell the music DRM-free and whether or not the labels have it in for Apple, but as a consumer, I think that competition in the marketplace is always good.
Apple is still a massive corporation whose sole purpose is the making of profits, as it is with any other. Don’t let the EULA quotes forbidding you from creating WMDs with your copy of iTunes fool you.
It seems to me that if one company can sell DRM music for a set prices, other companies should get to sell it for the same price.
We can all agree that the record industry is evil right? So then their plan to align themselves with Amazon must also be inherinetly evil, even if we don’t see it at first blush.
All we need is a few major pop artists moving to Magnatune, to start an avalanche, and the labels will be calling their time with DRM and Apple the good old days.
I couldn’t care less about whether my music has DRM or not. I get it via iTunes and can play it at home just fine. I can put it on my iPod and listen to it while I’m out and about (walking around, in my car, whatever). If I needed to burn it to a CD, I could, but other than for backup purposes, I don’t see a need in my own life. If it is a quality issue, well that can be solved via a better quality audio file, but the quality has been fine for my old ears. I guess my point is that DRM, at least for me, hasn’t presented itself as a problem. Of course, I don’t tend to “share” my music with the world, so I don’t see the need to burn multiple copies of my music. Perhaps I’m just in the minority of folks that are satisfied with the product/service that Apple is producing. Just my thoughts.
Hefty
Malda’s comments were appropriate to the genneration 1 ipod as technically inferior and I don’t think you can say apple was doing something ‘right’ as in correct tech, but maybe ‘right’ as in effective marketing.
But more importantly, isn’t the DRM issue itself another slashdotty one? Is that average ipod user (the one who bought the so called ‘lame’ product) concerned about drm vs non drm? Do they even know the difference before purchace or do they buy the easy integrated Itunes tune in the same way they choose the inferior genneration 1 ipod over the nomad.
Funny thing is that Microsoft would get roasted for providing a proprietary solution that was incompatible with the rest of the market.
Seems convenient that by selecting a format that uses DRM that you also end up locking the content to your own player.
Yes I know it’s possible to convert the songs but most folks won’t bother with that.
Microsoft gets accused of behaving like the Borg but Apple gets hailed as an innovator for behaving the same way…
This entire conversation is academic to me because I have never bought music in the form of single songs online. I borrow a CD from my local library, rip it and listen to my music. Why are so many people willing to shell out $1.00 for a single song? Yes, there are usually a few klingers on any CD, but I still conceive of the CD as a complete work of art. After all, who would want to listen to ‘Back in the USSR’ without having it followed by ‘Dear Prudence?’
Jeff,
Are you really naive enough to believe that the record companies are the enemies of DRM, and, therefore, are your friends? Really?
This whole Amazon thing is temporary benevolence designed to break Apple because Jobs will not play ball with respect to pricing models. If Apple agreed tomorrow to allow tiered pricing structures and album-only sales, do you actually believe that the Amazon DRM-free stunt would last any longer than the length of the current contract? In fact, I would not be surprised to find that there was a clause in the agreement allowing the record companies to require the implementation of DRM immediately at any time. The Amazon iTMS-killer would disappear in a flash.
I have no particular level of love for Apple on this issue. They’re a one-hundred billion dollar-plus company and I’m just a guy who likes music who’s struggling to get by. But I am astute enough to see the Amazon store for what it is.
Jeff,
it’s not only DRM. Even non-DRM protected songs bought on iTMS are useless on other players because they are AAC encoded: and guess what, Apple won’t license AAC to other vendors nor will ever support unprotected WMA directly on their *Pods (iTunes converting from WMA to AAC is silly because of quality degradation and the fact that is moving from a “locked” format to a different “locked” one).
UnDRM’d MP3 is the way to go, even though the usual radical suspects (OS fanatics) are strongly campaigning against in favor of “open formats” (see playogg.org, another outstanding achievement of sillyness). Support Amazon, free music (as in free speech) 
Apple is not the largest retailer of music. They don’t sell music. They sell licenses. If they sold music, then the doctrine of first sale would apply, and they wouldn’t be able to restrict you from doing things like reselling it, donating it to a library, etc.
Personally, I don’t care for the iPod interface. I have a hell of a time trying to select items. Whenever I move my thumb from the wheel to the select button, the selection moves up or down one item. It also bothers the heck out of me that I can’t turn it off. At least give me a true stop button in addition to pause.
I’m still with CDs. No Sony ones though. Mostly indies purchased from CD Baby. If I want lossy compression, I’ll do it myself. But I like liner notes and artwork. I like to be able to hold the things I own in my hand.
Sorry for the double post. Please delete one.
Here’s another take on issues that should be considered in this whole back and forth on content licensing and DRM:
"Contracting Away Fair Use Rights: Amazon’s MP3 Store, Lucasfilms and Blanket Licensing"
http://iplitigator.huschblackwell.com/2007/10/articles/fair-use/contracting-away-fair-use-rights-amazons-mp3-store-lucasfilms-and-blanket-licensing/
“…it’s not only DRM. Even non-DRM protected songs bought on iTMS are useless on other players because they are AAC encoded: and guess what, Apple won’t license AAC to other vendors…”
Nope. FUD. http://www.vialicensing.com/licensing/MPEG4_fees.cfm?product=MPEG-4AAC
I have no doubts that if Apple were allowed dump DRM, they would do so in a flash
Really? Odd, then, how OS X requires specific hardware to run. That’s one bit of DRM they seem quite willing to carry forward.
That’s apples and oranges. There’s a difference between looking at operating systems/software and data. Does Apple put DRM on .txt files? Or .jpegs saved on your Mac’s hard drive? It would be hard to argue that the fact that Apple doesn’t make iTunes able to put music on competing music players as some sort of embrace of DRM. If that makes sense.