It's been a full five days since Steve Jobs let loose his "Thoughts on Music" and bloggers and longtime journalists, alike, went completely nuts. Almost immediately after the fire hose of hosannahs hit the Web, we asked:
What about the indie labels and the 30 percent of music that is uncontrolled by the the major labels?
That is, why not give rights holders the right to choose whether they want their music wrapped in DRM or not? After all there are several labels, like Nettwerk, who have been saying would choose to be DRM-free given the chance.
I asked the same question on a leading digital music email list and didn't much of an answer. Only that Apple probably wouldn't do it because it might confuse consumers who didn't think DRM existed in the first place. But. then, if this was the leading consideration, I don't think Jobs would have penned that mini-manifesto. I halfway expected someone to say that all iTunes deals were created equal, but never heard that.
I did get another response saying that insiders say that iTunes could technically make this feasible in less than two weeks if the will was there to do it.
Two days later, Michael Robertson, the founder of MP3.com, wrote his own vision piece in response to Jobs and led his recommendations with:
1) Start selling some content in MP3 format in the iTunes store.
It's my understanding that Apple has a license from certain content providers that allow tracks to be sold in the MP3 format, like the CDBaby catalog. While the major labels might be insisting on DRM files, that isn't the case with many indie labels and other music providers. Making those songs available for purchase in the consumer friendly MP3 format would mean that some songs from the iTunes store would be compatible on every MP3 player. The big criticism of the iTunes store, which has spurned possible government action, is the fact that purchases only play on iPods. By selling MP3s in the iTunes store, files become interoperable with any player. It will be a minority of files, but according to your letter, major labels control only 70% of music distributed. Therefore, if a significant percentage of the remainder are made available in MP3 format, this would have an impact.
I'm sure that Apple could also work out a deal with artists delivered by the digital music indie distributor IODA. Via its "Rightsholder Dashboard", IODA allows artists and labels to "review licensing deals, check and modify catalog information, manage account information, access sales reports and approve and authorize digital distribution of their catalog."
So, this blog item confused me today when the suggestion was an either/or iTunes. The author suggests a Web 2.0-like iTunes where anyone can upload music, form communities and live in DRM-free happiness. He writes:
,,,allow these independent producers to create communities around that music. Free and open user ratings and reviews of the content, just like the commercial stuff that’s in the iTunes Store. The good stuff will be rewarded and bubble to the top, while the crap will languish at the bottom of the bit barrel, just as it should be.
Um, this was MP3.com in 1999, sir. The only thing that was probably missing then was RSS.
The generally all-knowing Om Malik responded with:
Intriguing idea, but one wonders if it makes sense for Apple & Co. to start off just with the indie labels instead of all artists.
Huh? I am totally confused? Why does it need to be one or the other? Why can't we have music that is wrapped in FairPlay AND tracks that are not?
Perhaps there is a misperception that indie music doesn't currently exist on iTunes. One of the commentators on GigaOm, suggests that an iTunes with only bands like Boards of Canada would die. Probably so. But, you can get every Boards of Canada album on iTunes this very minute. You can get indies ranging from Le Tigre to Fugazi to the Hieroglyphics there. The long tail is alive and swinging on iTunes. It would be great to see it swing in the direction that it wants.
Maybe that would get EMI into the same boat with the indies.
BTW, I'm not necessarily anti-DRM. Just pro-choice. I think an interoperable DRM system that provided Creative Commons-like choices and authenticated at the individual level and not the device might be an interesting market-driven option. We just don't have that yet.
Comments