Microsoft Set to Unlock EMI Songs, Too

linumax writes "Microsoft has stated that it may be close to reaching a deal with EMI to sell songs without anti-piracy protection via the Zune platform. This, from comments made by head of marketing for Zune Jason Reindorp. They come hard on the heels of EMI's announcement that a deal with Apple to sell songs without DRM protection through the iTunes Music Store has been struck. Mr Reindorp said: 'We've been saying for a while that we are aware that consumers want to have unprotected content. This does open things up a little bit. It potentially makes the competition more of a device-to-device or service-to-service basis, and will force the various services to really innovate.'"

not only that ..

Not only that but they innovated the idea before Apple ever did !!

A MS Strategic Meeting

Hi, i'd like to welcome you all to our monthly bussiness strategy meeting. The agenda of this months meeting is basically the same as last month:
1. What has Apple been doing this month?
2. What has Google been doing this month?
3. Are there other interesting things to copy?

Just like they invented the GUI

Apple was the first company that ever offered DRM-free downloads, right?

Re:not only that ..

Not only that but they innovated the idea before Apple ever did !!

Claiming this is Apple "innovation" is as ridiculous as claiming this is Microsoft "innovation". Give credit where credit is due - bravo EMI.

Splendid!

Now, let's hope the albums cost less than the current store CDs, given the reduced material and sales costs. I'm sure that's what will happen, right?

Re:Price comparison

Sure iTunes isn't the absolute cheapest way to get it, but the tradeoff of price/convenience seems reasonable to me.

I would have thought that until recently, but now I appreciate having:

1) lossless sound encoding on my good audio equipment
2) a physical backup, also lossless
3) an asset that can be re-sold when I no longer want it.

The way I look at it, with a CD I get all three of the above, and it costs no more than a lossy data file from iTunes that can't be re-sold.

So the question is...

would they have do so even if Apple didn't convince EMI to drop DRM?

I think not.

Re:So the question is...

would they have do so even if Apple didn't convince EMI to drop DRM?

Did Apple ever claim they convinced EMI to drop DRM? EMI claims they approached Apple with this idea [gizmodo.com].

Remember, EMI and Yahoo Music have been testing the waters with DRM-free MP3s and WMAs since at least July with music by Jessica Simpson, Jesse McCartney, Norah Jones, and Relient K. Steve's bold open letter was posted one month ago.

Time to ... Wait!

Like all Microsoft products, it will blow chunks until 3.0 so keep waiting. It has nothing significant to offer over iPods, let alone 90% of the more recent non-Apple players. This just isn't all that important in the world of music hardware...

RIP DRM?

Man, I hope so. That makes two very important gadget co.s and one major label...

Part of me wants to continue boycotting their stuff anyway, as punishment for years of bad behavior

Here's what I see...

So there are a few directions this could take, here's the ones i can think of:
1) They unlock certain songs, and shortly thereafter, claim these songs are now more-heavily pirated, and use it for justification to sell more DRM to recording agencies
2) Same as #1, except they claim the songs are not selling better, and declare that DRM isn't an obstruction
3) they still include some kind of DRM but call it something else
4) They've actually seen the light, and are now going to try to innovate instead of regulate.
Did I miss any?
P.S. I don't have a lot of confidence in 4).

Re:Here's what I see...

5) They release the tracks as unprotected (but iPod-incompatible) WMA and find they don't sell any better, then claim that consumers aren't really interested in DRM-free tracks.

Re:.wma in iTunes

I think you're missing something. Not everyone can really hear the difference. It may be obvious to you, but not to everyone else. Just be happy you have good hearing. Or feel cursed because only you and a few other % of the population qualify as "audiophiles" that would notice.

no thanks to MS

It probably goes without saying, but this isn't some initiative on MS' part. It's riding Jobs' coattails, crying "me too!, me too!", as if MS is some kind of crusader for consumers' rights around music and DRM.

Interesting how MS plays this as "opening up" things for the consumer. We'll see. I wonder how much progress MS has really made unencumbering consumers' music.

• have they opened up the wireless sharing at all (ahem, "squirting")
• have the at least allowed for non-drm music to be shared indefinitely?

I don't hold my breath waiting for MS to do anything for me. I cringe they are jumping on this as a potential PR windfall for them and their Zune. Fortunately, the Zune was pretty much issued DOA, and this doesn't make a whit of difference.

Re:no thanks to MS

Interesting how MS plays this as "opening up" things for the consumer. We'll see. I wonder how much progress MS has really made unencumbering consumers' music.

Even for Apple and EMI this isn't opening things up for anyone. It's charging more for the same fucking shit you would get from a CD while approaching or even surpassing the cost of the physical media while not having the physical media to keep or uncompressed and high quality audio.

I'm tired of this entire EMI thing. I'm not fucking impressed at all.

Re:no thanks to MS

DRM-free albums (not individual songs) will still be $9.99 in iTMS. If you can always get major release CDs for less than that, you must have a relative who works for EMI or something. Sure, maybe it's technically lower quality - but I know I sure as hell can't tell the difference between 256 kbs and a CD (which I'd just rip anyhow).

Re:no thanks to MS

It probably goes without saying, but this isn't some initiative on MS' part. It's riding Jobs' coattails, crying "me too!, me too!", as if MS is some kind of crusader for consumers' rights around music and DRM.

I think you need to go back and read EMI's announcement [emigroup.com]. Some relevant quotes (emphasis added):

"From today, EMI's retailers will be offered downloads of tracks and albums in the DRM-free audio format of their choice in a variety of bit rates up to CD quality."

"EMI's new DRM-free products will enable full interoperability of digital music across all devices and platforms."

"Apple's iTunes Store (www.itunes.com) is the first online music store to receive EMI's new premium downloads."

EMI had always planned to make its catalog available to anyone that wants it, not just through iTunes and not just AAC files. The only exclusivity Apple ever had was in making the co-announcement.

Re:no thanks to MS

Actually, it's not even Apple's initiative. It's EMI's.

In interviews after the announcement EMI said it was them, not Apple, that initiated the push for DRM-free music. They had already experimented with smaller versions of the program in the past. Internal tests said their own employees preferred the option to buy DRM-free tunes.

I wouldn't be surprised if the timeline was: discussed it with Steve Jobs sometime in 2006, they were close to inking a deal, Jobs publishes his "Thoughts on Music", EMI and Apple push the new initiative. Jobs looks like a visionary, EMI looks like a marketplace innovator.

In other words, how Jobs usually plans things: to make it look most appealing marketwise.

Accuracy of title?

What about "squirting" device-to-device? I didn't see anything about this in the article, but then again I didn't read it very carefully (this is /., after all...) I can only assume that because the Zune DRM-izes just about every song on your device when sharing, even those that you recorded yourself, EMI songs will probably still suffer from the 3-days/3-plays restriction...though I suppose MS could just argue that lifting the restriction would just encourage piracy.

Still, I don't think it's fair to call this DRM-free until all the digital rights management restrictions have been lifted.

What about what ol' BG said

If I'm not mistaken, Bill Gates has paraded around in recent times saying that "customers want [DRM]"? It's ok to say you're wrong, Bill.

Just for the record

If I'm not mistaken

But you are [techcrunch.com] (well, at least the real picture is a bit more muddled)

Gates said that no one is satisfied with the current state of DRM, which "causes too much pain for legitmate buyers" while trying to distinguish between legal and illegal uses. He says no one has done it right, yet. There are "huge problems" with DRM, he says, and "we need more flexible models, such as the ability to "buy an artist out for life" (not sure what he means). He also criticized DRM schemes that try to install intelligence in each copy so that it is device specific.

His short term advice: "People should just buy a cd and rip it. You are legal then."

Indeed

Of course they're aware that that's what consumers want. I think it's also pretty obvious that they don't like it, though, because it goes against their traditional strategy of vendor lockin.

Since when?

'We've been saying for a while that we are aware that consumers want to have unprotected content.'

Since when? As far as I know, what they are trying is to provide the ultimate protection to content, from the file format [microsoft.com] to the media player software [microsoft.com] to the output hardware [microsoft.com].

Re:Since when?

Is this the same Jason Reindorp who said, "Mr. Jobs's call for unrestricted music sales was "irresponsible, or at the very least naïve," (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/07/technology/07mu sic.html?pagewanted=2&ei=5070&en=82b92ed0fed4782b& ex=1176004800 [nytimes.com])?
This is just Microsoft spin at its quickest.
(Although he did also say, ""the stars were already aligning" to loosen the restrictions." (Ibid). Nothing like CYA.

Now that the eight Zune owners in the world...

...are done rejoicing, can we appropriately tag this article as irrelevant and slownewsday?

DRM on Wireless transfers?

I'm curious... Does this mean that EMI is dropping the DRM requirement on wireless Zune to Zune transfers as well? Without that insipid "3 day, 3 play" DRM rule, the wireless song transfer option on the Zune just became a hell of a lot more useful!

Of course, it would also make it a hell of a lot easier to pirate songs as well. Something tells me that the RIAA would never let this happen :(

Cool! Next step: price

I went from buying about 10 CDs/month a few years ago to about 0 CDs/month because of RIAA tactics, the fact that buying spinning metal media discs is silly these days, and that the price was ridiculous. So I've got about 650 of those things in a closet, about the same bumber I had five years ago.

If I can buy uncrippled, high quality media files, I will. ~256K VBR mp3 is about the lowest I'll consider. Yes, I can hear the difference, consistently. Apple's 256K AAC should meet this spec, though I haven't listened to much AAC.

Now, it's time to optimize the price. I'm aware that the actual costs of distribution over the net is very low, and I don't care about marketing costs, because virtually nothing I listen to is marketed at all. I don't like being ripped off. $1/song is still a ripoff, but for uncrippled content I'll probably buy a few albums I've been wanting, just to encourage them.

But. At $.50/song and $5.00/album, I'd buy 100 albums today. I've got a five year backlog to catch up on. Probably be good for another 10/month, too.

Come on, music labels. Talk to your artists, see who's willing to experiment with the prices. Healthy industries with real competition experiment with prices to find the most profitable price points. You're pricing like a monopoly, but you're forgetting that we do have alternatives: Free legal music, free illegal music, boycott, video, games, books, etc. I suspect you'd make a lot more money if you weren't so greedy, scared, contemptuous and contemptible. Why not find out?

Just The Price Of Higher Prices

I think that this is just more evidence that Apple's success with iTunes with respect to market share really put the record companies over a barrel. They've wanted to raise the price of tracks from 99 cents for a long time now, but apparently didn't have the leverage over Apple to make them do it. Without higher per track prices on iTunes, there was no way they could get it at any competitors, who were already at a huge disadvantage anyway.

So when Jobs started talking about removing DRM, probably not just a coincidence, it set the stage for EMI to offer DRM free tracks, but at a higher price per track. It looks as if stripping DRM was the price of raising the price per track. Perhaps the record companies are realizing that removing DRM is the only way in the near term of loosening Apple's grip on the digital music market. Of course it is interesting to note that the DRM-less tracks from iTunes will be in AAC format which, while other players can support it, will tend to keep most people in the iPod fold since converting to other formats like MP3 is a hassle most consumers would prefer not to be bothered with. So I would look for growth in the number of AAC supporting players.

Someone tag this "Me too!"

Every time someone does something cool, Microsoft always has to chime in. It's like the annoying little brother who is always following you around; whenever you say anything, he always says "Me too!" and then goes on to explain how what he did is even better. For anyone who didn't have a younger sibling growing up, it's hard to overstate the annoyance factor.

Netscape revolutionizes the Web -- MS creates free Internet Explorer. OSX introduces Expose, the Dock, and Widgets -- four years later Vista "innovates" with duplicate features. Apple rakes in millions with the iPod -- Microsoft creates poo-colored, squirting Zune. Google goes IPO -- MS announces "all-new, improved, better-than-ever" MSN search. Apple announces DRM-free music -- you guessed it: Me too! Me too! Me too!

I don't hate Microsoft (though sometimes it seems like they work awfully hard to make people hate them) but I'm not buying their "We want to eliminate DRM too" PR either. Microsoft's media file format, software, hardware player, and store are all strong arguments that that's a load of monkey excrement.

Good News but DRM is not "protection"

Microsoft has hinted that it may be close to reaching a deal with EMI to sell songs without anti-piracy protection via its Zune platform.

Surely nobody still thinks that digital restrictions management provides "anti-piracy protection"? It's about control.
Even the MPAA knows that current DRM encourages piracy [freshdv.com] by making paid-for music more of a hassle.

No surprise

Microsoft in various media statements, has declared that if there is going to be piracy, they want it to be done on their platforms, and TO their platforms. Anything that keeps marketshare from competitors is a good thing, as far as they are concerned.

The truth is, were Linux accessible to the masses, Windows would be free.

Patent unprotected content!

Then require DRM to ensure that this innovation protecting market driven idea is fully implemented.

Zune Wireless

One interesting way this could play out is taking the Zune's wireless sharing abilities from a sort of novelty "That's kinda neat" feature to something actually marketable (not to mention a legal quagmire for Microsoft). They sell unprotected music, with 0 DRM, and then people start sharing songs between Zunes like crazy. I had a Zune for a while, and loved it, it's actually a great little device. If MS would make a few tweaks to it's usability and features, it would really be a great product. It's already better than an iPod (imho) of what it can do, usability, and features. The real question, however, is if Microsoft is just changing to adapt to what is really becoming a truly consumer driven market, or if they're actually trying to go after Apple's complete dominance of the MP3 device market. Either way, should make for an interesting show.

I can't help but wonder when the first RIAA lawsuit is brought forth against Apple or MS for "Enabling Filesharing" by "Failing to protect copyrighted content". And then going after the HDD manufacturers for making access to the files so easy.

this is amazing news!

I'm having a hard time believing it, but apparently it's true....

Yes, I guess they are still selling Zunes.

Way to go, Metoosoft!

And thank you for advancing the cause of DRM-free music by paying that $1-per-Zune ransom to the music companies and pushing your proprietary WMV format.

The Me Too Argument

What did you want Microsoft to do when Apple made this announcement? Simply ignore it, and turn more people away from the Zune platform? They're doing what they have to in order to stay current with their competitors, which is what the Zune is all about. I know this is "me too", but can you blame them for wanting to stay a competitive force (however small they may be) to Apple?

Almost there

Give us lossless FLAK or WAVs and I'm sold. Enough of this lossy compression crap.

Major Mistake

I think that this is a major mistake by EMI, Apple and Microsoft (particularly MS) as it has the possibility of seriously damaging relationships with vendors, manufacturers, RIAA and possible the MPAA, let alone US Government and the lobby group.

So much money and technology has been invested in DRM by major corporations to prevent piracy that this may lead to major problems and ethical considerations as well as corporate trust in MS.

I most certainly hope that MS knows what it is doing and not just a knee jerk reaction!

what about the mandatory DRM?

Wasn't the zune the device that added DRM to anything you put on it? Or was it just when you "shared" it (that 3-days, 3-plays thing)?

Great deal - get DRM free music from EMI. Put it on your zune - *bang*, DRM added. Another MS shoot-yourself-in-the-foot moment.

Whoops! Big problems for Microsoft

Uh...

How does this move work with their monthly subscription service that is heavily dependent upon DRM? What prevents these people from paying $15, downloading the noncopy-protected songs, then simply dropping their subscription? Their songs will still play.

It was one of the main reasons Apple gave for not wanting to follow the subscription model.

This is just on the back of a rumor that Microsoft is planning to give out either a discounted or free Zune with a paid subscription to the Zune Market.

Microsoft just loves that word

"...innovate" They keep using that word, I do not think it means what they think it means...

Appologies to Mr Montoya

A new race is beginning

This will turn into a new race of online content distribution innovation apparently. Whoever jumps in the bandwagon will get miles ahead of their competition, who miss it will be forgotten.

No one is "copying" anyone here...

This might get modded "Redundant," but I've seen so many arguments below about who copied whose idea, who's pretending to innovate, who is good, and who is evil, that I thought it would be helpful to point out:

EMI approached Apple. [macrumors.com]

They also said they would be fine with other stores doing it. Chances are pretty high that they also approached Microsoft, probably simultaneously, and that the details just took longer to hammer out and MS didn't want Apple to take all of the credit. Note the "may be close to signing a deal" language -- it takes a long time for big companies to get a deal signed.

-snarkbot

p.s. It is possible MS saw Apple doing it before they considered it, but that's a pretty damned quick turnaround time for a deal like this.

Oh please

"'We've been saying for a while that we are aware that consumers want to have unprotected content"

then why the hell do you have DRM at all?
I no to sell music they may need it for contractual reasons, but why is there OS loaded with that crap?

whoop de shit

This from the company that spoke loud and clear "all you little music fans are thieves - THIEVES!" when they rolled over and cut MCA-Univsersal a cut on the sale of every Zune.

Oh! Now customers don't want DRM! Think they'll recind the profit-sharing deal?

Uhhhhhhh - nope.

EMI breaking Apple's lock on online music

Interestingly, it's possible that getting rid of DRM makes it possible for EMI (and the rest of the music industry) to break Apple's lock on the online music industry.
It's a method for the music industry to force competition between online music vendors, thus increasing EMI's profits.

Re:In MP3?

While i do object to microsoft's use of a proprietary format even for DRM free music... I don't object to Apple's, since AAC is a standard format, the only non standard component Apple used was the DRM, without that AAC is simply a newer and improved version of MP3.
If your player doesnt support it, there's nothing to stop you converting the file, although you will suffer a slight drop in quality due to transcoding and MP3 being an inferior format. Alternatively, you can wait for more players to support AAC, or buy an ipod which already does.

Re:catchup

They have already, but in certain circles it just won't be recognized. Everybody builds on the prior art of others, but that fact is ignored for any company in competition with MS. Apple has benefited the most from this.