Microsoft Set to Unlock EMI Songs, Too 171
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 .. (Score:5, Funny)
A MS Strategic Meeting (Score:5, Funny)
1. What has Apple been doing this month?
2. What has Google been doing this month?
3. Are there other interesting things to copy?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What are we doing today, Monkeyboy? (Score:2)
Just like they invented the GUI (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But seriously, Apple paid for a tour, but there's pretty much no evidence to support the theory that Apple bought a license to Xerox's IP. Apple never mentioned a license when Xerox sued them and it would have been a key piece of evidence in Apple's favor.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:not only that .. (Score:5, Insightful)
Claiming this is Apple "innovation" is as ridiculous as claiming this is Microsoft "innovation". Give credit where credit is due - bravo EMI.
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft: Me Too!!!!
Splendid! (Score:2, Funny)
Price comparison (Score:3, Informative)
Some facts to accompany your quip:
Coldplay's album "X&Y" is an EMI release.
Full album from iTunes Store = $11.99
Full album from Amazon = $11.97 + S&H
Full album from Best Buy = $13.99 in store
Full album from Caiman via Amazon Used & New = $11.93 with shipping
Sure iTunes isn't the absolute cheapest way to get it, but the tradeoff of price/convenience seems reasonable to me. Get it within minutes from iTunes, or pay $2.00 more and pick it up at Best Buy, or save $0.06 and get it in a few
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Actually, when you factor in the shipping and handling, iTunes is the cheapest place to buy it.
Hmmm. That felt good.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B0006L16N8/ ref=dp_olp_2/102-5677357-7273756 [amazon.com]
you will realize that the used and new price intentionally included the shipping in the price quote.
Re:Price comparison (Score:4, Insightful)
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... (Score:4, Insightful)
I think not.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple did not convince EMI to drop DRM.
EMI convinced Apple to drop DRM on its tunes.
Apple then decided to charge extra for the convenience, by coupling it with a higher bitrate.
Re:So the question is... (Score:5, Informative)
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! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I agree, although I would be more inclined to say that, like the vast majority of Microsoft products, it will always blow chunks. Worse, because Microsoft is kow-towing to the media companies, it will probably always be more restricted than competitive products.
It has nothing significant to offer over iPods, let alone 90% of the more recent non-Apple players.
Dead on. As a "recent non-Apple player" owner, I have a SanDisk San
Re: (Score:2)
To store 30-80 times more music on your device and not actually need to manage it separately?
I hate having to use itunes, and will ditch it as soon as foo_pod starts working reliably again, but its definitely the easiest way for your average person to deal with moving a small segment of thei
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
That's completely untrue.
Word blew chunks until 6.0
Re: (Score:2)
RIP DRM? (Score:2)
Part of me wants to continue boycotting their stuff anyway, as punishment for years of bad behavior
Here's what I see... (Score:5, Interesting)
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... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
.wma in iTunes (Score:2)
I've never needed to try this, because I haven't used .wma in a long time, but I'm pretty sure that iTunes will convert non-DRM'ed .wma's to AAC or mp3, possibly even without any user interaction if you try to put them on the iPod. Can anybody verify that?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I wish it were just windows users but I see people thinking it's sane on the mac as well, hey mac people were known to burn the drm'd aac to disk and re-rip to remove he drm.
Personally I'll only buy music off the ne when it comes in lossless format. And then I can convert/compress for my player and still get a decent sound.
The number of people who find 128 kbps mp3 resonable still kind of sc
Re:.wma in iTunes (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
A) I was just addressing the fact that the quote I referenced labeled wma as iPod-incompatible. I wasn't really discussing quality, but whether it is possible to use wma files with an iPod.
B) If I'm listening to music on my iPod, it's usually in the car, or in some other somewhat noisy public place. The amount of background noise usually degrades the quality of the sound I hear anywa
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.apple.com/itunes/hottips/ [apple.com]
Of course if you start with a lossy WMA you'll presumably get the usual additional loss of quality in transcoding to another lossy format This is a similar quality penalty to what you get when circumventing Apple's DRM via the 'burn to CD and re-encode route', but a bit more convenient, and possibly starting from a higher quality file if MS follows Apple in making its DRM-free stuff high bitrate.
Of course if MS is serious about selling music to anyone except
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
so in the case of 2, what would we have to complain about? *If* people don't care and don't preferentially buy DRM-free, do you expect major labels to remove DRM restrictions despite the fact they would have proven that the market wasn't interested? They aren't sitting up in their offices working out how to make Slashdot-ters happy, y'know.
And even more telling, option 4 seems to define the word 'innovate' as 'do exactly what we want
Re: (Score:2)
Would this really matter? Microsoft might not get better sales, but I would bet some money that Apple's sales will increase when they're offering higher-quality DRM-free songs. Unfortunately for Microsoft, what happens with iTMS is going to matter much more that what happens with MS.
It's going to be pretty funny to watch what happens to WMA now as people drop DRM. Will Microsoft miss the boat by
no thanks to MS (Score:3, Interesting)
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.
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 (Score:4, Insightful)
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 (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
First, ability to cherry pick and buy songs that you like is something that is not a product available on physical media such as CDs. Second iTunes does allow you to put tunes on a physical medium such as an iPod or a burned CD if you choose to do so.
Of course, this does not impress you because of the 20+ KHz frequencies that you can so clearly hear are getting cut out on the 256Kb AAC. And that makes you really upset....
Re: (Score:2)
As much as I didn't like how Apple did things, they did it a lot better and with very few restrictions in comparison. I really don't believe Steve Job's stated reasoning for not wanting to licence "FairPlay" either, people have mana
Re: (Score:2)
Not for the past year or so. The iTunes 6-7 AES-based scheme is unbroken, much to my dismay (of being able to buy stuff from iTunes and use it on my devices without taking a quality hit).
There's an attack against Windows to intercept the data stream, but that's not actually an encryption break.
Re:no thanks to MS (Score:5, Informative)
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:All Devices and Platforms (Score:2)
"EMI's new DRM-free products will enable full interoperability of digital music across all devices and platforms."
EMI does not have a retail online music store where you can buy digital music for all devices and platforms. They sell to wholesalers like Apple who chose just one format which is in compatible with almost any player which is a member of the Plays for Sure camp including almost all Janis and MTP format players and most DVD players and car MP3 CD players.
EMI is supporting all devices and platfor
Re:no thanks to MS (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
This is especially funny as MS response to Steve Jobs' open letter about selling DRM-free music was basically that doing this would be irresponsible and that Microsoft is always adamant about protecting IP. A month later, they themselves announce that they too are going to do the self-proclaimed "irresponsible" thing, that is selling music without DRM.
Re: (Score:2)
Nor is this Steve Jobs idea. You think Steve Jobs cares about consumer rights? Do they let you run OS-X on commodity hardware? Do they license their DRM? These are the masters of lock-in.
Yahoo has been pushing the labels to sell unlocked content for years (mind you, maybe I'm naive to think that was anything more then PR). iTunes got it first because iTunes has all t
Re: (Score:2)
Accuracy of title? (Score:2, Insightful)
Still, I don't think it's fair to c
What about what ol' BG said (Score:5, Insightful)
Just for the record (Score:5, Informative)
If I'm not mistaken
But you are [techcrunch.com] (well, at least the real picture is a bit more muddled)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Or you can sit around and complain about microsoft, thus making sure no one knows how wrong Apple is and, as usual, continue to accomplish nothing but whine and moan.
Indeed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not holding my breath too much on any of the other DRM stuff. It isn't likely that MS would reverse a position on anything that didn't already have some viable competition involved. MS has been able to push the DRM from the aspect that they control the access users have and decided to create a business model out of that control.
Since when? (Score:5, Insightful)
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? (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Now that the eight Zune owners in the world... (Score:4, Funny)
DRM on Wireless transfers? (Score:2)
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 (Score:5, Interesting)
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?
Re: (Score:2)
Translation: because I can find them for free now, and I've convinced myself I'm entitled.
If I can buy uncrippled, high quality media files, I will
No, you won't.
But. At $.50/song and $5.00/album, I'd buy 100 albums today.
At $.50/song you'll set the bar at $.25.
Re: (Score:2)
Weird, because I have. Back before emusic changed their terms of service, I subscribed. I think maybe they've changed them again, but it doesn't matter: they've proven they can't be trusted to honor a deal.
Nope. There are people like that. I'm not one of them. I'd actually like the artists I enjoy to get paid. And I'd sign a contract to back that up. $500 now, $50/month for a year. I've been waiting for it for years. If I just wanted free stuff, I wouldn't have waited. I'd have i
Re: (Score:2)
I also had an emusic account and canceled because it took forever to find stuff. Then they sent me a teaser re-instroduction and simply following their link to learn more signed me up. Nitwits. Canceled again, of course.
Re: (Score:2)
Disgusting.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Just The Price Of Higher Prices (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, even the Zune supports AAC. It's more the _next_ format then Apple's format.
Re: (Score:2)
converting to other formats like MP3 is a hassle most consumers would prefer not to be bothered with.
That may be true, since if you have no reason to convert to MP3, then why bother? However, it wouldn't be hard to convert DRM-free AAC files purchased from iTunes to MP3. iTunes has the functionality built in. Basically, you could select your whole library and click on "convert to MP3". A little while later (depending on how big your library is) you'd have all your music converted into MP3.
Someone tag this "Me too!" (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
That's an excellent analogy. I also know individuals who act like that and they always remind me of the liar guy that used to be on Saturday Night Live... the one who ended almost every sentence with "Yeah, that's the ticket". My first reaction is to
Re: (Score:2)
How, by making money on it? It's not as if Netscape invented the browser.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a hard time respecting someone that forcefully argues that selling DRM-free music is irresponsible and naive, just to turn around next month to claim that the wanted to sell DRM-free music for quite some time.
Good News but DRM is not "protection" (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
It reads like a press release from Microsoft, and without having RTFA, I can't say whether or not it actually is.
Re: (Score:2)
No surprise (Score:2)
The truth is, were Linux accessible to the masses, Windows would be free.
Zune Wireless (Score:3, Interesting)
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.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Almost there (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I was skeptical of "off" formats for a long time, sticking with MP3 for its playability and widespread compatibility. Once I discovered RockBox, though, along with Cog and Foobar2000 (th
what about the mandatory DRM? (Score:2)
Great deal - get DRM free music from EMI. Put it on your zune - *bang*, DRM added. Another MS shoot-yourself-in-the-foot moment.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't own a Zune, but I know they don't let you access files on it as a removable drive, and I don't know if they let you get files back off of it in the Zune software (I know iTunes doesn't let you get media back off of the iPod, but I hadn't heard either way on the Zune). So if the music gets put on the Zune, the only way to get it off is through the wireless sharing... If you can't get the music off of it, then it really doesn't m
Re: (Score:2)
Whoops! Big problems for Microsoft (Score:2)
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 (Score:2)
Appologies to Mr Montoya
A new race is beginning (Score:2)
No one is "copying" anyone here... (Score:2, Informative)
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 sig
Oh please (Score:2)
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?
EMI breaking Apple's lock on online music (Score:2)
It's a method for the music industry to force competition between online music vendors, thus increasing EMI's profits.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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,
Re: (Score:2)
Ogg Vorbis is better sounding than AAC or MP3 at the same bitrate, has a better tagging scheme, is free, open-source, and not patent-encumbered. There is no royalty per song, per encoder, or per decoder.
Many people have no problem playing Ogg Vorbis and ripping CDs into Ogg Vorbis. My iRiver H320 player is loaded with Ogg Vorbis music and works great.
Re: (Score:2)
I will quite happily take any openly published format, and avoid any proprietary one. I would quite happily accept audio files in vorbis format, and convert them if necessary to play on another device.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)