RIAA to Apple: use more DRM

iTunes currently sells FairPlay DRM music.

After Steve Jobs urged the record labels to release music without DRM yesterday, the RIAA has responded back - by thanking Steve for his offer of additional DRM!

Yesterday, we reported that Jobs had written an open letter suggesting that DRM wasn't working and that music should be sold online without restriction. He apparently came to this conclusion after deciding that licensing FairPlay, his DRM technology currently used on iTunes, would make it so insecure as to be useless - not a good thing for the consumer or the record industry.

In a complete shocker, the RIAA is behaving like an idiot and took Jobs rather out of context, responding this morning by saying that:

"Apple's offer to license FairPlay to other technology companies is a welcome breakthrough and would be a real victory for fans, artists and labels," which clearly isn't what Jobs meant by:

"The second alternative is for Apple to license its FairPlay DRM technology to current and future competitors with the goal of achieving interoperability between different company’s players and music stores. On the surface, this seems like a good idea since it might offer customers increased choice now and in the future. And Apple might benefit by charging a small licensing fee for its FairPlay DRM.

However, when we look a bit deeper, problems begin to emerge. The most serious problem is that licensing a DRM involves disclosing some of its secrets to many people in many companies, and history tells us that inevitably these secrets will leak. The Internet has made such leaks far more damaging, since a single leak can be spread worldwide in less than a minute. Such leaks can rapidly result in software programs available as free downloads on the Internet which will disable the DRM protection so that formerly protected songs can be played on unauthorized players."


So, well done the RIAA for making themselves look even more like ignorant idiots only out for number one. The good news is that this response clearly indicates that the vehemence of Jobs' open letter has taken them by surprise.

Of course, this could all be one big power play - the renegotiation rights for iTunes' and the labels are coming up soon, and whilst the industry is keen to get more money from Apple, possibly even a cut of iPod sales, this is perhaps Apple tipping its hand in a bid to keep the deal at least the same, and possibly better.

What are your thoughts on licensing FairPlay DRM? Let us know over in the forums.
Quote DougEdey 8th February 2007, 11:24
As DVD John says:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DVD John
Let’s look at the real world outside the Reality Distortion Field:

# Microsoft’s Windows Media DRM 10 (marketing name PlaysForSure) has not had more security breaches than FairPlay despite the fact that it has been licensed to dozens of companies.
# Microsoft’s decision to make the Zune DRM a closed system was a business decision and had nothing to do with DRM security. PlaysForSure is still in the market place and will be for the foreseeable future. Content owners are still authorizing content to be sold with PlaysForSure. In fact, WalMart launched a new movie download store (don’t click the link if you’re using Firefox unless you’re into abstract art) using PlaysForSure today.

I don't know why he supports a unified DRM though, he should be supporting no DRM!
Quote _DTM2000_ 8th February 2007, 11:37
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougEdey
I don't know why he supports a unified DRM though, he should be supporting no DRM!
My guess would be because he cracked FairPlay making iTunes downloads work on any player and he's now trying to sell his method to hardware manufacturers. So if Apple stops using FairPlay, DVD John's new product is worthless.

On the subject of the RIAA, I'm speechless. I expected them to reply with "No thanks Steve, we'll stick with DRM" but this is just crazy talk. They really do live in their own very strange little world.
Quote Fod 8th February 2007, 12:29
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougEdey
As DVD John says:
I don't know why he supports a unified DRM though, he should be supporting no DRM!

I dont necessariy categorically disagree with DRM. I can see why it is used and i can appreciate the need for it. At the end of the day people are going to move their music and movies about illegally, and understandably record companies want to control that.

Unfortunately, the way its currently implemented is really, really broken. It's too restrictive and confuses most consumers to the point where they just think it;s all evil and run screaming.

Don't get me wrong - i'm all for blanket licensing and freely distributable music and all that jazz, but until that happens I don't think we should be all two faced about the matter, campaigning against DRM just because we don't like the fact they'll sue us if we break the law.
Quote Firehed 8th February 2007, 13:37
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougEdey
As DVD John says:



I don't know why he supports a unified DRM though, he should be supporting no DRM!
You might also take note that nobody cares to crack WMP10/PFS DRM because it doesn't have enough of the marketshare. Not having been cracked has nothing to do with crackability.

Jobs isn't stupid. He knows how DRM works, and its flaws. AFAIK, there's still a workaround for the current iTunes7 DRM, and I wouldn't be overly surprised if FairUse4WM still works too. Part of this is that since you can always find a CD-rip of higher quality on... err... those sites, so why bother in the first place? I've downloaded music that I purchased through iTunes to get a higher-quality DRM-free copy, and it's easier than looking for some sketchy workaround. I just wish he'd be upfront about it, saying "as long as people can hear music, piracy will still exist, so just give it up and stop pissing off customers"
Quote airchie 8th February 2007, 15:10
The way I see it, Copyrights are unenforcable.
Big brother can't monitor what you listen to 24/7 and as such can't say with any accuracy that what you're listening to is copyrighted and if you have the right to listen to it.

All DRM is doing is trying to enforce the unenforcable and as such, is confusing the generally law-abiding citizens and pushing them towards the very thing that the RIAA et al are trying to stop, piracy.

Let me think, should I pay for a low quality recording that I can only play in one player or illegally download a high-quality recording that I can listen to wherever, whenever and on whatever I choose for free?

Until legally downloaded music is as usable as pirated music, DRM, the RIAA etc don't stand a snowball's chance in hell of stopping piracy.

I just wish there was some way to open the eyes of whoever it is within these organisations who makes these decisions, so we could all move on and just enjoy the melodies...
Quote johnarama 8th February 2007, 15:23
DRM is a joke...any kid can turn a song with DRM into an mp3. Labels need to lower prices of albums/songs and sell direct to consumers. The middle man is slowly dying; this is good because frankly, when I went to Tower Records, the heavy metal selection there was just pathetic. Brick and Mortar is dead, and so should be the middleman's cut of the pie.

The music model is changing rapidly, and consumers and small/medium artists are going to be the winners.
Quote DXR_13KE 8th February 2007, 17:48
i got to bit, looked at the news, cried WTF!
the RIAA are utterly mad if they think they will survive for long.
Quote Tyinsar 8th February 2007, 18:25
Apple: "We can't open our DRM because it will be cracked"
RIAA: "Try it, we dare you. PS: we know your call for dropping DRM isn't sincere"

:) Actually it's kind of funny to see the RIAA call Apple's bluff.
Quote David_Fitzy 9th February 2007, 01:41
It's the same old story;

RIAA/MPAA: "Stronger DRM, More DRM, High Prices"
Enthusiasts: "Simpler DRM, No DRM, Fair Prices"
Joe Average: "My song doesn't work?"
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.