Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Sony Your Rights Online

Sony Announces DRM-Free Music at Amazon 293

sehlat brings us a New York Times report that Sony has agreed to start selling DRM-free music from Amazon's MP3 store. This comes days after Sony revealed plans for physical MusicPass cards that would allow DRM-free access to a small portion of Sony's library. Now that all four major record labels are on board with Amazon, some are expecting Apple to make moves away from DRM as well. From the NYTimes: "Sony's partnership with Amazon.com also underscores the music industry's gathering effort to nurture an online rival to Apple, which has sold more than three billion songs through its iTunes store. Most music purchased on iTunes can be played only on Apple devices, and Apple insists on selling all single tracks for 99 cents. Amazon, which sells tracks for anywhere from 89 cents to over a dollar, offers the pricing variability the labels want."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sony Announces DRM-Free Music at Amazon

Comments Filter:
  • Free market (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SpectreBlofeld ( 886224 ) on Friday January 11, 2008 @04:50AM (#21996516)
    Those of you who feel that the free market has no recourse against the large corporation and cartel, take note - this is the voting power of your dollar at work. Or, the lack of the dollar thereof, specifically.

    It didn't take dismantling of the RIAA, court-ordered cessation of their ridiculous lawsuits, or legislative intervention to protect the consumer - it took your disillusionment with the industry and unwillingness to part with hard-earned cash to pay for crippled formats and less freedom with the content you purchased.

    The next step will be the determining factor in the future of media sales. Will you buy MP3s, unrestricted, for a reasonable price? Or will you continue to download it for free via Limewire?

    Option A will reinforce a reasonable business model that will benefit the industry, the artist, and you.

    Option B will reverse the progress that has been made.

    Choose wisely, Indiana Jones...
  • It also took Apple (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Per Abrahamsen ( 1397 ) on Friday January 11, 2008 @05:07AM (#21996588) Homepage
    Apple had become too powerful and arrogant, so basically the labels had become more scared of Apple than of the consumers.
  • by rucs_hack ( 784150 ) on Friday January 11, 2008 @05:10AM (#21996608)
    No-ones doubting that Apple was first, but for Sony to do this is a big thing indeed. They're a dinosour, and one of the worst DRM offenders (just having DRM isn't as bad as those darn silly rootkits), so if they have finally got the message, that's a sign of good things to come.

    Personally I'm of the mind that iTunes tracks have always been DRM free though, since you are allowed to burn them to CD. If you just want to use the iPod alone, there's no need. This in built burn to cd option hasn't been the case for other DRM schemes that I know of.

    Try as I might, I can't hear any difference to a track I've burned to CD and encoded as mp3. Aac has its advantages (aside from the drm everyone mutters about), I do like the bookmark feature.
  • Re:Free market (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Moonpie Madness ( 764217 ) on Friday January 11, 2008 @05:11AM (#21996612)
    Such a great point.

    But some will believe that music isn't worth their money, but is worth the effort to torrent. they will claim that they are just not willing to reward the awful quality of music with their money, rather than complaining about money.

    Or, of ocurse, they will claim that the formats you can buy just aren't good enough. They will want lossless.

    But, like you say, if sales of music don't pick up, and piracy doesn't decline, some in the industry will exclaim that DRM must return. Not sure that this affects the pirates very much.

    Pirates: at least remove all the tags, etc, so it's not too obvious that files you share came from DRM-free stores.
  • US only (Score:5, Insightful)

    by A1kmm ( 218902 ) on Friday January 11, 2008 @05:12AM (#21996624)
    Unfortunately, they didn't think to also drop their geographic restrictions, so this is only available to their US users. I can only presume that they got pressure from the music industry to do this, because they think they can get more out of people in their own countries. Of course, it really just means that overseas Linux users will either download the files illegally or they just won't listen to big 4 music at all.
  • Re:Free market (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tkrotchko ( 124118 ) * on Friday January 11, 2008 @05:18AM (#21996646) Homepage
    I've already purchased from Amazon, but I won't buy from iTMS for a few reasons:

    1) Amazon has more attractive prices (generally $8 for a CD)

    2) It's in MP3. I think non-DRM's AAC files are fine, but MP3's are more desirable.

    3) Amazon just downloads the stuff to your hard drive. It feels just like a purchase.

    All that said, CD's are more desirable, and if purchased used are a better value (they can be legally resold). But the Amazon model is the first electronic system to be interesting enough for me to pay money for it.
  • DRM killed itself. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by wvmarle ( 1070040 ) on Friday January 11, 2008 @05:24AM (#21996678)
    I argued it before here [slashdot.org] that DRM is a dead end, killing itself by limiting it's own market. And apparently this is really happening, and happening so much that it's starting to cut in profits.
    Apple has more or less a stranglehold now on the market, and the labels demanding DRM on their music help Apple maintaining this stranglehold, and block e.g. Amazon from selling music that plays on the iPod. After all, when they must use DRM, they can not use Apple's DRM, and thus the market for Amazon and the rest is limited to the non-iPod market. And that market of course is small, and no serious competition for Apple.
    The only way out for the labels, the only way to break Apple's hold including the demands of one price for all songs, is to drop the DRM requirement. And finally they do so - it started of course with some iTunes-plus songs, and then one after another the labels realised that they themselves are locked in by DRM as much, if not more so, than the consumers. Even "rootkit" Sony BMG apparently finally realised that.
    Now the only thing I can hope for is some real competition. US$ 0.99 (HK$ 7.7) for a single song is imho way too expensive. For that price I can buy complete movies (legal, mind you - old ones, but still, a complete movie, on VCD, sometimes go for HK$10 for two). A new movie on VCD costs here HK$ 40-50, a DVD costs about HK$ 90-120, a music CD costs HK$ 70-100 for local artists and HK$ 110-150 for overseas artists. This for legal copies, not the cheap illegal import from China.
    So now finally the labels have cut the DRM from the songs, allowing Amazon and presumably soon other vendors, maybe Microsoft or Yahoo, to sell songs without DRM. Amazon is now selling a lot at prices lower than iTunes, this will likely attract customers away from iTunes. iTunes is getting competition, and may be forced to lower their prices. iTunes may also decide to give up on their DRM, the lock-in is broken up by the supply side and there is no need for them to put on the DRM. After all adding DRM costs money: it takes computer cycles, requiring more computer power; it requires extra logic on their chips or software in the iPods, etc. DRM less media is cheaper, even if only marginally so.
    So will Apple give up on their DRM? Sure. I'm really sure they will. Maybe not anytime soon, but as soon as Amazon et. al. get some traction, they will. As soon as there comes a real competitor to the iPod, they will do as well just to keep there store going.
  • Reasonable pricing (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Walles ( 99143 ) <johan.walles@gma[ ]com ['il.' in gap]> on Friday January 11, 2008 @05:51AM (#21996794)
    Will you buy MP3s, unrestricted, for a reasonable price?

    Of course, but remember that the definition of "reasonable" is that the price is something both seller and buyer will agree on.

    Until the current pricing has proven to actually be reasonable, nobody knows if we're there yet. The "reasonable" price for a song could very well be $0.01 per song, and then the current uncrippling of extremely over-priced songs wouldn't prove anything.

  • by allcar ( 1111567 ) on Friday January 11, 2008 @05:58AM (#21996824)

    Personally I'm of the mind that iTunes tracks have always been DRM free though, since you are allowed to burn them to CD.

    Sorry, but that's nonsense. The fact that it is possible to burn to an inconvenient physical format an then rip to a DRM free format does not make iTunes DRM free. There is an inevitable loss of quality in this time-consuming process. I cannot play the original file on anything but iTunes or an iPod. That is DRM and it does not equate to consumer choice. Happily, Apple will now be forced to get rid of DRM - in the US, at least.
    I have no problem with AAC - it's a good format and it can be played by Rockbox, but the DRM is not acceptable. I will never buy restricted media.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 11, 2008 @06:09AM (#21996896)
    Does anybody seriously believe that Apple wants to have DRM on iTunes ? Of course not - after all it was Steve Jobs who penned the open, anti-DRM letter in the first place.

    What the record companies are attempting to do here is break iTunes' monopoly on music downloads. They see the way to do this as supplying another retailer with a superior product (ie. DRM-free music) whist still insisting that iTunes sells DRM'ed tracks. They are then hoping that people will move over to Amazon's system, killing iTunes, whereupon they will then either declare DRM-free a failed experiment and re-lock the music, or force you to download entire albums only, or set variable pricing, or any other nefarious scheme they have dreamt up.

    If you believe that the record companies have 'caved in' or are doing this out of the goodness of their own hearts, then you really need to develop a healthy sense of cynicism, and quickly ! The record companies are actually being incredibly anti-competitive here, allowing one sales channel access to a superior product that they deny to another.

    iTunes has been a massively positive force for music downloads - it offers a-la carte choice and fixed-price downloads. It's extremely easy to use, and, well, just works. The record companies were handed a 'get out of jail free' card for internet downloads, something they hadn't been able to figure out themselves, and all they can do in return is attempt to bring down the very system that saved their necks. I think this says something about their mentalities.

    The thing is, I don't think this will change anything. The average consumer values convenience over DRM, and nothing is as easy to use as iTunes. Eventually the record companies will have painted themselves into a corner, or will face a legal challenge from Apple, and all have to offer DRM-free on iTunes. Either that or Apple will do deals directly with the artists (lets' hope) and leave these backstabbing, money-grubbing bastards out in the cold.
  • by zootm ( 850416 ) on Friday January 11, 2008 @06:10AM (#21996910)

    There was a number of online stores with DRM-free catalogs prior to Apple's involvement, and the DRM removal on iTunes was at the request of EMI, not the other way around.

  • Re:Free market (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Humm ( 48472 ) on Friday January 11, 2008 @06:12AM (#21996926)

    Option A will reinforce a reasonable business model that will benefit the industry, the artist, and you.

    Option B will reverse the progress that has been made.

    I'm not sure that I agree on this. Yes, major labels selling DRM-free music is probably a reasonable business model. But I'm not convinced that Option B is the regression you make it out to be. There is other progress to be made as well. DRM-free music solves a number of problems related to the restrictions on using your music. It doesn't address the problem that strong copyright poses for remixing/producing in a read-write culture (in Larry Lessigs words).

    Illegal downloading by a large portion of society may well force politicians to rethink copyright. I'm not saying it necessarily will - only that it could. I live in Sweden, and in the months leading up to our last election, there was a lot of talk about illegal downloading. Several of the major political parties expressed the view that making an activity so many were engaging in illegal, was absurd and could threaten people's respect for the law.

    All I'm saying is, if people continue to download their music from p2p services, it's not necessarily all bad news. That said, having all major labels offer DRM-free music is very good news, though, and I hope they are rewarded for it.

  • by lucas teh geek ( 714343 ) on Friday January 11, 2008 @06:13AM (#21996932)

    and itunes sells a few drm free tracks.
    ... and who do you think the cause of that is? Apple, run by Jobs who has publicly stated he would love to drop drm, or the labels, who are using drm-free as a bargaining chip to try and force apple into variable price (read: most songs will cost more, some will remain the same, 1 will become cheaper).
  • Re:Free market (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Cadallin ( 863437 ) on Friday January 11, 2008 @06:22AM (#21996982)
    Your interpretation is extremely slanted. As others have noted, this is a precautionary measure by an enormously powerful Cartel to shut an up and comer out of the market. Whether it works or not is still very much up in the air, but in either way it demonstrates nothing about the power of the free market. This market (music owned by mainstream publishers and more generally music still under copyright) is not a free market to begin with.

    As for choosing wisely lest we lose progress, What Progress? Copyright still lasts for an Unconstitutionally long time (which is effectively unlimited), and artists are still be badly exploited by massive corporations. There is no progress to be lost, except the continued erosion of sales of music owned by the big cartel. The decline of their revenue is the REAL progress. Once the power of big media is eroded to the point of making re-regulating media and telecommunications in a reasonable way, then we will have made a grand achievement.

  • Re:Free market (Score:4, Insightful)

    by WK2 ( 1072560 ) on Friday January 11, 2008 @07:06AM (#21997158) Homepage

    Will you buy MP3s, unrestricted, for a reasonable price?

    I think it is a good move on Sony's part to release DRM-free music. But it is too soon to start buying their stuff. They are still Sony. Don't forget the Blu-Ray DRM. With the region codes they intend to spring if they win the format war. And don't forget the rootkit fiasco. As I understand it, Sony continues to plant trojans on their CDs, they just don't contain rootkits anymore. Yes, definitely too soon.

  • by grege1 ( 1065244 ) on Friday January 11, 2008 @07:09AM (#21997174)
    If I want an old sixties song, it is not worth 99c. No wonder Limewire flourishes. Old music should be more like 10c a track, then piracy can be combated. Apples rigid 99c rule has been a big impediment to the uptake of digital sales. And the music needs to be at a higher bit rate. 128kbs became popular when everyone used dialup. I would prefer 320, the very least 256. If I am paying for a track I want some audio quality. Apple do not own aac, it is a part of mpeg, the other music players can use it if they want, once it is free of DRM. But, again at a higher bit rate. my ten cents worth :)
  • by 91degrees ( 207121 ) on Friday January 11, 2008 @07:10AM (#21997180) Journal
    Does anybody seriously believe that Apple wants to have DRM on iTunes ?

    Yes. It locks iTunes to the iPod, and so they mutually support each other giving apple the monopoly. Speaking out against it didn't mean Jobs didn't like it. Just that he realised that if Apple didn't allow DRM free music on iTunes, it would mean competitors would be able to offer a better product. Apple had to make a concession here.
  • by grolaw ( 670747 ) on Friday January 11, 2008 @09:04AM (#21997692) Journal
    Never, never, never trust these idiots. Don't run the risk that they will include some additional "content" but call it something other than DRM.

    They will never have my business again. They proved themselves untrustworthy and only fools ask to be taken twice.
  • by zotz ( 3951 ) on Friday January 11, 2008 @09:04AM (#21997694) Homepage Journal
    "iTunes is getting competition, and may be forced to lower their prices. iTunes may also decide to give up on their DRM, the lock-in is broken up by the supply side and there is no need for them to put on the DRM."

    Does iTunes' present contract allow them to lower the prices?

    Does iTunes' present contract allow them to drop the DRM?

    all the best,

    drew
  • by Luscious868 ( 679143 ) on Friday January 11, 2008 @09:43AM (#21998022)

    Does anybody seriously believe that Apple wants to have DRM on iTunes ? Of course not - after all it was Steve Jobs who penned the open, anti-DRM letter in the first place.

    I certainly do. Having DRM directly benefits Apple. You're locked into the iPod. If your iPod dies and you've bought a ton of music from the iTMS and you're faced burning it all to CD and re-riping it then, likely, having to import all of your music into some Media Library Management software that is compatible with a new MP3 player what are you more likely to do? Buy a new MP3 player and deal with all of that crap or buy a new iPod?

  • by intheshelter ( 906917 ) on Friday January 11, 2008 @09:52AM (#21998106)
    Are you kidding me? Apple was the only thing between you and the RIAA's desire to force you to subscription pricing or $3.99 digital singles, or forcing you to buy the WHOLE digital album!! The only reason there is a viable digital market right now is that Apple "gets it". They created a store that was very easy to use, and they were the only vendor who stood up to the RIAA and other media companies. Apple worked hard to create a viable digital market, store, and portable devices, and they knew the media companies demands would result in disaster so they resisted.

    Apple is not a saint by any stretch, but I think your analysis is way off. Rather than arrogant they were smart enough to create a market the way consumers wanted it to be and they tried hard to protect that market from disastrous media company meddling. Now the media companies are once again trying to screw up the digital market by excluding the one partner who made the market viable. I don't think Jobs is perfect, but he's a hell of a lot smarter than the media rubes and he'll have an answer for them. I for one howpe the rumor of Apple creating its own record label is true. They need to shake up big media's control and corrupt business practices.

    As for the Amazon thing. I welcome any DRM free tracks. That's a positive step. But beware of the media companies motives. If they manage to break Apple I have no doubt that DRM will be back in a big way because the RIAA does not care about consumer needs one bit.
  • by Technician ( 215283 ) on Friday January 11, 2008 @11:31AM (#21999456)
    but amazon only sells drm free tracks - and itunes sells a few drm free tracks.

    True, but Amaxon is selling tracks in the universal format. Apple is not. Tracks from Amazon will play in by son's iPod, my daughter's Creative Zen, my Coby MP3 player, and in my living room DVD player. Itunes tracks on the other hand will play on my Son's Ipod and a couple computers and nowhere else. The choice of music vendors is simply a matter of compatibility for many. DRM is a compatibility issue. So is formats other than MP3.

Software production is assumed to be a line function, but it is run like a staff function. -- Paul Licker

Working...