quote>She said Microsoft has been talking with EMI and other record labels “for some time now” about offering unprotected music on its Zune players in an effort to meet the needs of its customers. It would be interesting to discover if Apple knew about these discussions and wanted to one-up Microsoft - or if Microsoft was in fact on the verge of implementing this soon and pushed up their debut as a result of Apples massive postive publicity.

What are the implications of this shift to DRM-free music on Zune users’ ability to squirt songs to each other? I’d be very surprised if a new firmware update isn’t released that blocks DRM-free songs from being shared. Users are going to be very unhappy with the hidden bait-and-switch that Redmond has in store once it follows Apple’s move.

There’s something so tragic about Microsoft Zune press releases. ‘Oooh, oooh, us too!’

Don’t forget about the Social.

EMI made the decision to sell DRM-free songs. Just because Apple sent a press release before Microsoft did doesn’t make Apple the innovator. All Apple did was post a whiny editorial about how DRM was bad while continuing to attach DRM even to music licensed under a Creative Commons license and available from the artist directly in MP3 format.

That’s not accurate, Jason. As I understand it, this EMI and Apple deal is exclusive to iTunes; it is thus because Apple moved first. Full stop. Ain’t a question of press release timing.

That said, from the perspective of the many rabid Zune enthusiasts, this is a very exciting press release about future plans that might happen at an indeterminate time. The social is still welcoming, warm, and brownish.

To clarify: that exclusivity is not permanent — I haven’t found an exact number for how long the deal is but it’s been estimated to be 6-12 months

I maintain that this is a press release war, not Microsoft playing catch-up. Microsoft claims in the article you cite that they’ve been talking to EMI “for some time now.” According to a notoriously inaccurate blog that claims to have interviewed an EMI representative, it was EMI and not Apple who “moved first.” “EMI approached Apple about DRM free tracks, not the other way around.” The article doesn’t state that EMI approached Apple first; EMI could have been talking to Microsoft too, but that’s not as appealing to post on a blog.

I really don’t care who’s first to issue a press release or even first to release an exciting product. The iPod wasn’t the first MP3 player to hit store shelves, after all. As long as we’re moving towards a future where I don’t have to be locked in to any specific platform or player, I’ll be happy.

Here’s betting ‘DRM-free’ will not mean ‘DRM-free’…

I could be wrong, but I thinkit is very likely that those premium ACC tracks will in fact be tied to their purchasers… by ITMS name.

Some people will call that ‘watermaked’ tracks… but in fact —should that be the case—, that would just be another way of assigning ‘rights’ (license ownership), and thus, DRM.

I guess, we’ll have to wait and see…

Best, TFS

http://tfserna.ngsec.com/2007/04/02/will-drm-free-tracks-mean-drm-free-tracks/

well put, merlin.. exactly how I felt about it.

Jeanne Meyer, the Senior VP of Corporate Communications at EMI, they approached Apple, not the other way around.

Source: http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/home-entertainment/apple-playing-second-fiddle-drm-free-tracks-were-emis-grand-idea-249008.php

You should read the press release from EMI last Monday:

http://www.emigroup.com/Press/2007/press18.htm

“EMI is introducing a new wholesale price for premium single track downloads, while maintaining the existing wholesale price for complete albums. EMI expects that consumers will be able to purchase higher quality DRM-free downloads from a variety of digital music stores within the coming weeks, with each retailer choosing whether to sell downloads in AAC, WMA, MP3 or other unprotected formats of their choice.”

EMI seems to think that other retailers will be launching this at about the same time that iTunes is. They may be offering it to Apple first, but “within the coming weeks” suggests to me far less than 6 to 12 months.

One other thing from the press release, though, that may be disheartening to Zuners is that subscription plans and “squirting” will continue to be DRM exclusive. It makes sense, really, but anybody execting that the $15 a months will get them DRM free tracks is in for a surprise.

Yeah, Merlin, it’s not an exclusive deal. The quote at the article you linked to is an analyst saying he EXPECTED it to be exclusive for 6 to 12 mos., but that it’s actually not exclusive at all.

And yet, it doesn’t seem that Microsoft has set a time frame for when they will start to sell DRM-free songs.

Here’s a question: if this isn’t an iTunes-exclusive deal, why did EMI hold a press conference with Apple?

My guess is a combination of 1) Apple wanted some cred, 2) EMI values iTunes more than all the other digital retailers combined and 3) Bringing Apple to the announcement gives EMI better press coverage and bigger sales.

With that said, Jobs’ letter from February helped lay the groundwork for EMI going DRM-free. That’s where Apple’s leadership has really come into play.

“Both Zuner owners!”

Come on, don’t let quibbling about DRM and press releases and the like make you miss the fact that THAT was a funny line!

Well said, Merlin!

This is good for everyone. Although it seems like they’re just trying to play catch-up, it’s still good for consumers.

Merlin-

The “both Zune owners” quip was sour grapes on your part. I’m an iPod owner but if I were to need a new player the Zune is the only other model I’d even consider. It’s got decent software, a good interface, a beautiful screen that is larger than the iPod video that I have, and it plays unprotected AAC tracks.

As to “both Zune owners” the Zune as a product was rapidly brought to market (less than I year I believe) and placed second in US sales for last Christmas. Are you (and all of the other people making the same quip) thinking they would have surpassed Apple in a couple months?

Even if they never do surpass Apple the Zune is a good alternative to the iPod and Apple lock-in. I’d take that any day.

Jason

Include me in the camp of disappointed readers that the points you’re arguing are invalid, Merlin. It’s very much not an exclusive deal and EMI is the “innovator” here, not Apple. Of course I do agree that it’s exciting for iPod and Zune owners alike - I work for MSFT and have had an iPod since 1st gen.

(BTW using Firefox on Mac, the font size in this text entry box is so minuscule I can barely see it)

emusic.com sells drm free tracks since 2001. Apple is innnovative… my ass

You know, I used to be a big fan of this site. It had a lot of compelling content and great tips. But no longer. As a Zune owner, I find Merlin’s comments both offensive and snide.

For those of you thinking MS is just playing catchup, I think there is no possible way that MS could have pulled off a detailed agreement and contract with EMI and the others so soon after Apple’s announcement. It was probably all a matter of timing. Instead, rather than celebrating the fact that DRM is rapidly disappearing from the marketplace as a whole, there are snide and rude comments about alternative platforms. It’s really sad, uncalled for, and extremely unprofessional.

Apple really found a way to get the positive press out of EMI’s announcement. That was probably why Steve released his “memo.” He definitely knows how to get the attention drawn his way.

As for the issue at hand, I have read some good commentary on the announcement by Shelly Palmer on media 3.0. He doesn’t think DRM is really a big issue — it’s licensing, for personal use and User-Generated Content. The music industry is missing out on a huge revenue stream, and has to find a way to capitalize on it.

• Jason

Wow, such Apple bias here :)

This isn’t a case of Apple “innovating” and Microsoft being a copycat. Many of the technology companies - aside from Apple and Microsoft, Real Networks and Yahoo! Music were both instrumental in fighting DRM. And most labels recognize the trouble with DRM - in most cases it seems to be decisions and strategy from the corporate parents. In fact, Gates railed against DRM months before Jobs’ manifesto, and EMI had been considering releasing in MP3 (i.e., DRM-free) format for awhile.

(http://slashstar.com/blogs/tim/archive/2007/01/30/sometimes-piracy-isn-t-about-getting-it-for-free.aspx)

If anything, it is simply the fact that Apple has significant marketshare for purchased music (as opposed to subscription and streaming) and obviously has a lot of influence (looking at their deals within the music industry and now with cellphones).

The mere fact that Apple was lucky (or powerful) enough to be the first to get this doesn’t mean they are the ones “innovating”.

And as for whether these will be “really” DRM-free - I have no problem at all with watermarking. In fact, as I wrote, I think shame as DRM is an ideal deterrent that discourages casual sharing and has the same effect on “real” piracy (i.e., none).

(http://slashstar.com/blogs/tim/archive/2007/02/28/streamburst-offers-innovative-drm-for-video.aspx)

[ Oh, and in the interest of disclosure, I am Windows user but an iPod diehard, and a shareholder of both companies ]