REVOLUTION! STEVE JOBS CALLED RECORD LABELS TO CANCEL DRM (digital rights management)
Steve Jobs
February 6, 2007
Along with the staggering global success of the Apple iPod music player and iTunes online music store, some individuals have begun to urge Apple to "open" a digital rights management (DRM) system, which Apple uses to protect music from theft to allow music acquired in iTunes could be played on other digital devices from other companies, as well as protected music purchased from other online music stores could be played on iPod. Let's examine the current situation and how we got to it, and then look at three possible alternatives in the future.
For a start, it's helpful to remember that all iPods can play music that is free of any DRM and encoded in “open” licensed formats, such as MP3 and AAC. IPod users can (and do) get music from various sources, including CDs they own. Music CDs can be imported using the free downloadable iTunes program, which exists for Mac and for Windows PCs, and the music is automatically encoded in open AAC or MP3 formats without any DRM. This music can be played on an iPod or on any other music player that supports these open formats.
')
Friction is caused by the music that Apple sells in its online iTunes Store. Since Apple does not own and control music, companies have to license the rights to distribute music from others, primarily from the “big four” music companies: Universal, Sony BMG, Warner and EMI. These four companies control the distribution of more than 70% of the world's music. When Apple offered these companies license music that they own to sell it legally via the Internet, these companies were extremely careful and demanded that Apple protect their music from illegal copying. The solution was to create a DRM system that introduces special and secret software to each song sold on the iTunes Store so that this music cannot be played on an unauthorized device.
Apple was able to bargain for the rights to use music in that period, which include the ability for the user to play their music, which is protected by DRM, on 5 computers and on an unlimited number of iPods. Obtaining permission for such opportunities from music companies had no precedents at that time, and even today exceeds what is allowed in other online music services. However, the key point of our agreement with music companies is that if our DRM system is hacked and their music becomes available for playing on unauthorized devices, we have literally a few weeks to fix the problem, otherwise they can withdraw all of their music from our iTunes store.
To prevent illegal copies, DRM systems should only allow authorized devices to play protected music. If a copy of a DRM protected song appears on the Internet, it should not be played on the computer where it was downloaded or on a portable music device. To accomplish this, the DRM system contains secrets. There is no conspiracy to protect content other than keeping secrets. In other words, even if someone uses the most sophisticated cryptographic system to protect music, he still has to “hide” the keys that open the music on the user's computer or on a portable music player. No one has yet invented a DRM system that does not depend on such secrets for its operation.
The problem, of course, is that there are so many very smart people in the world, some of whom have too much free time, who like to find such secrets and publish a way for everyone to get free (and stolen) music. They are often successful solely in this, so any company that tries to protect content using the DRM system should update it frequently, adding new secrets that are difficult to discover. This is a cat and mouse game. The DRM system Apple uses is called FairPlay (fair play). And although we had a few FairPlay hacks, we were able to successfully restore them using the iTunes store software update, iTunes software for playing music and software on the iPod. Until now, we have fulfilled our promises to music companies to protect their music, and we gave users the most liberal rights to use music that exist in this industry for legally deflated music.
With this introduction, let's explore three different options for the future.
The first option is to continue the current direction when each producer competes with its own “top-to-bottom” system for selling, playing and protecting music. This is a very competitive market in which large companies invest heavily in the development of new music players and online music stores. Apple, Microsoft and Sony all compete with their systems. Music purchased from the Zune store, owned by Microsoft, is played only on Zune players; music purchased from the Sony Connect store is played only on Sony players; and music purchased from the Apple iTunes Store is played only on iPods. This is the current state of affairs in the industry, and users are served fairly well, with a constant stream of innovative products and a large selection.
Some may argue that once having bought music in one of the closed music stores, the buyer is forever tied to the use of music players from only one company. Or, if they buy a certain player, they are tied to buying music only in the music store of this company. Is it true? Let's take a look at the data on the iPod and iTunes Store - these are the most popular products in this area and we have accurate data on them. Until the end of 2006, customers purchased a total of 90 million iPods and 2 billion songs on the iTunes Store. On average, these are 22 purchased songs from the iTunes Store for every iPod sold.
Today, the most popular iPod can store 1000 songs, and studies show that, on average, iPod is packed to capacity. This means that only 22 out of 1000 songs, or less than 3% of music on an average iPod, are purchased from the iTunes Store and are protected by DRM. The remaining 97% of music is unprotected and can be played on any player that can play open formats. It's hard to believe that only 3% of the music on an average iPod is enough to chain the user to buy only iPods in the future. And since 97% of the music on the average iPod was not purchased from the iTunes Store, iPod users are definitely not tied to the iTunes Store to get music.
The second alternative for Apple is to license its DRM FairPlay technology to existing and future competitors in order to achieve interaction between players and online stores of different companies. On the surface, it looks like a good idea, because it can provide users with more choices now and in the future. And Apple could also benefit from this by getting royalties for its FairPlay DRM. However, when we take a deeper look, problems begin to arise. The most serious problem is that licensing DRM requires some secrets to be revealed to many people in many companies, and history teaches us that this will inevitably lead to a leak of secrets. Thanks to the Internet, the harm from such leaks is increasing, since a single leak can be spread around the world in less than a minute. Such leaks can quickly lead to programs that can be downloaded for free on the Internet and which can disable DRM protection so that previously protected songs can be played on unauthorized devices.
An equally serious problem is how to quickly repair the damage caused by such a leak. Successful recovery may require improvement of store software, playback software, and software in players with new secrets, and then transfer of this updated software to dozens (or hundreds) of millions of Macs, Windows PCs and players that are already in use. And all this must be done quickly and in a coordinated way. To turn this is very difficult when only one company controls all the sites. It is almost impossible when many companies control individual areas, and all of them must act quickly in order to repair damage caused by a leak.
Apple concluded that if it licenses FairPlay to others, it can no longer guarantee the protection of music that it licenses from the “big four” music companies. Probably the same conclusion was made at Microsoft, since they also decided to switch their efforts from the “open” licensing model of their DRM to others to the “closed” model of their own music store, their own organizer of the music collection and their own player.
The third option is to completely get rid of DRM. Imagine a world where every music store sells music without DRM, encoded in an openly licensed format. In such a world, any player can play music purchased from any store, and any store sells music that can be played on any player. This is definitely the best alternative for users, and Apple would accept it at once. If the Big Four agreed to license Apple their music without the requirement of protecting it with DRM, we would switch to selling only DRM-free music from our iTunes Store. And every iPod that has ever been released will be able to play this music without DRM.
Why might the Big Four music companies agree to allow Apple and others to sell their music without using DRM systems to protect it? The easiest answer is because DRM systems have not helped, and it is possible that they will never help stop musical piracy. Although these 4 companies require that all their music sold online be protected by DRM systems, the same music companies continue to sell billions of CDs each year that contain completely unprotected music. Yes it is! The DRM system was never designed for CDs, so all the music that is sold on a CD can be easily downloaded to the Internet, and then (illegally) downloaded and played on any computer or player.
In 2006, less than 2 billion DRM-protected songs were sold online by stores, while more than 20 billion songs were sold completely DRM-free and unprotected on CDs by the same music companies. Music companies sell most of their music without DRM, and it doesn't look like they are going to change this behavior, since most of their income depends on selling CDs that should be played on CD programers that do not support any DRM system.
So if music companies sell more than 90% of their music without DRM, what benefits do they get from selling the remaining few percent of their music to a DRM-burdened system? It seems that no. The technical skills and additional resources that are required to create, operate, and update a DRM system limit the number of players in the DRM-protected music market. If these requirements were removed, the music industry may experience an influx of new companies that are ready to invest in innovative new stores and players. This can be rated solely as positive by music companies.
Basically, doubts about the DRM systems arose in European countries. Perhaps those who are unhappy with the current situation should redirect their efforts towards persuading music companies to sell music without DRM protection. Europeans, two and a half of these four large companies are located right in your yard. The largest, Universal, is 100% owned by Vivendi, a French company. EMI is a British company, and Sony BMG is 50% owned by Bertelsmann, a German company. If you convince them to license their music to Apple and others without DRM protection, this will create a truly interoperable music market. And Apple will welcome such changes wholeheartedly.
Translation from alexmak.livejournal.com
February 6, 2007
Along with the staggering global success of the Apple iPod music player and iTunes online music store, some individuals have begun to urge Apple to "open" a digital rights management (DRM) system, which Apple uses to protect music from theft to allow music acquired in iTunes could be played on other digital devices from other companies, as well as protected music purchased from other online music stores could be played on iPod. Let's examine the current situation and how we got to it, and then look at three possible alternatives in the future.
For a start, it's helpful to remember that all iPods can play music that is free of any DRM and encoded in “open” licensed formats, such as MP3 and AAC. IPod users can (and do) get music from various sources, including CDs they own. Music CDs can be imported using the free downloadable iTunes program, which exists for Mac and for Windows PCs, and the music is automatically encoded in open AAC or MP3 formats without any DRM. This music can be played on an iPod or on any other music player that supports these open formats.
')
Friction is caused by the music that Apple sells in its online iTunes Store. Since Apple does not own and control music, companies have to license the rights to distribute music from others, primarily from the “big four” music companies: Universal, Sony BMG, Warner and EMI. These four companies control the distribution of more than 70% of the world's music. When Apple offered these companies license music that they own to sell it legally via the Internet, these companies were extremely careful and demanded that Apple protect their music from illegal copying. The solution was to create a DRM system that introduces special and secret software to each song sold on the iTunes Store so that this music cannot be played on an unauthorized device.
Apple was able to bargain for the rights to use music in that period, which include the ability for the user to play their music, which is protected by DRM, on 5 computers and on an unlimited number of iPods. Obtaining permission for such opportunities from music companies had no precedents at that time, and even today exceeds what is allowed in other online music services. However, the key point of our agreement with music companies is that if our DRM system is hacked and their music becomes available for playing on unauthorized devices, we have literally a few weeks to fix the problem, otherwise they can withdraw all of their music from our iTunes store.
To prevent illegal copies, DRM systems should only allow authorized devices to play protected music. If a copy of a DRM protected song appears on the Internet, it should not be played on the computer where it was downloaded or on a portable music device. To accomplish this, the DRM system contains secrets. There is no conspiracy to protect content other than keeping secrets. In other words, even if someone uses the most sophisticated cryptographic system to protect music, he still has to “hide” the keys that open the music on the user's computer or on a portable music player. No one has yet invented a DRM system that does not depend on such secrets for its operation.
The problem, of course, is that there are so many very smart people in the world, some of whom have too much free time, who like to find such secrets and publish a way for everyone to get free (and stolen) music. They are often successful solely in this, so any company that tries to protect content using the DRM system should update it frequently, adding new secrets that are difficult to discover. This is a cat and mouse game. The DRM system Apple uses is called FairPlay (fair play). And although we had a few FairPlay hacks, we were able to successfully restore them using the iTunes store software update, iTunes software for playing music and software on the iPod. Until now, we have fulfilled our promises to music companies to protect their music, and we gave users the most liberal rights to use music that exist in this industry for legally deflated music.
With this introduction, let's explore three different options for the future.
The first option is to continue the current direction when each producer competes with its own “top-to-bottom” system for selling, playing and protecting music. This is a very competitive market in which large companies invest heavily in the development of new music players and online music stores. Apple, Microsoft and Sony all compete with their systems. Music purchased from the Zune store, owned by Microsoft, is played only on Zune players; music purchased from the Sony Connect store is played only on Sony players; and music purchased from the Apple iTunes Store is played only on iPods. This is the current state of affairs in the industry, and users are served fairly well, with a constant stream of innovative products and a large selection.
Some may argue that once having bought music in one of the closed music stores, the buyer is forever tied to the use of music players from only one company. Or, if they buy a certain player, they are tied to buying music only in the music store of this company. Is it true? Let's take a look at the data on the iPod and iTunes Store - these are the most popular products in this area and we have accurate data on them. Until the end of 2006, customers purchased a total of 90 million iPods and 2 billion songs on the iTunes Store. On average, these are 22 purchased songs from the iTunes Store for every iPod sold.
Today, the most popular iPod can store 1000 songs, and studies show that, on average, iPod is packed to capacity. This means that only 22 out of 1000 songs, or less than 3% of music on an average iPod, are purchased from the iTunes Store and are protected by DRM. The remaining 97% of music is unprotected and can be played on any player that can play open formats. It's hard to believe that only 3% of the music on an average iPod is enough to chain the user to buy only iPods in the future. And since 97% of the music on the average iPod was not purchased from the iTunes Store, iPod users are definitely not tied to the iTunes Store to get music.
The second alternative for Apple is to license its DRM FairPlay technology to existing and future competitors in order to achieve interaction between players and online stores of different companies. On the surface, it looks like a good idea, because it can provide users with more choices now and in the future. And Apple could also benefit from this by getting royalties for its FairPlay DRM. However, when we take a deeper look, problems begin to arise. The most serious problem is that licensing DRM requires some secrets to be revealed to many people in many companies, and history teaches us that this will inevitably lead to a leak of secrets. Thanks to the Internet, the harm from such leaks is increasing, since a single leak can be spread around the world in less than a minute. Such leaks can quickly lead to programs that can be downloaded for free on the Internet and which can disable DRM protection so that previously protected songs can be played on unauthorized devices.
An equally serious problem is how to quickly repair the damage caused by such a leak. Successful recovery may require improvement of store software, playback software, and software in players with new secrets, and then transfer of this updated software to dozens (or hundreds) of millions of Macs, Windows PCs and players that are already in use. And all this must be done quickly and in a coordinated way. To turn this is very difficult when only one company controls all the sites. It is almost impossible when many companies control individual areas, and all of them must act quickly in order to repair damage caused by a leak.
Apple concluded that if it licenses FairPlay to others, it can no longer guarantee the protection of music that it licenses from the “big four” music companies. Probably the same conclusion was made at Microsoft, since they also decided to switch their efforts from the “open” licensing model of their DRM to others to the “closed” model of their own music store, their own organizer of the music collection and their own player.
The third option is to completely get rid of DRM. Imagine a world where every music store sells music without DRM, encoded in an openly licensed format. In such a world, any player can play music purchased from any store, and any store sells music that can be played on any player. This is definitely the best alternative for users, and Apple would accept it at once. If the Big Four agreed to license Apple their music without the requirement of protecting it with DRM, we would switch to selling only DRM-free music from our iTunes Store. And every iPod that has ever been released will be able to play this music without DRM.
Why might the Big Four music companies agree to allow Apple and others to sell their music without using DRM systems to protect it? The easiest answer is because DRM systems have not helped, and it is possible that they will never help stop musical piracy. Although these 4 companies require that all their music sold online be protected by DRM systems, the same music companies continue to sell billions of CDs each year that contain completely unprotected music. Yes it is! The DRM system was never designed for CDs, so all the music that is sold on a CD can be easily downloaded to the Internet, and then (illegally) downloaded and played on any computer or player.
In 2006, less than 2 billion DRM-protected songs were sold online by stores, while more than 20 billion songs were sold completely DRM-free and unprotected on CDs by the same music companies. Music companies sell most of their music without DRM, and it doesn't look like they are going to change this behavior, since most of their income depends on selling CDs that should be played on CD programers that do not support any DRM system.
So if music companies sell more than 90% of their music without DRM, what benefits do they get from selling the remaining few percent of their music to a DRM-burdened system? It seems that no. The technical skills and additional resources that are required to create, operate, and update a DRM system limit the number of players in the DRM-protected music market. If these requirements were removed, the music industry may experience an influx of new companies that are ready to invest in innovative new stores and players. This can be rated solely as positive by music companies.
Basically, doubts about the DRM systems arose in European countries. Perhaps those who are unhappy with the current situation should redirect their efforts towards persuading music companies to sell music without DRM protection. Europeans, two and a half of these four large companies are located right in your yard. The largest, Universal, is 100% owned by Vivendi, a French company. EMI is a British company, and Sony BMG is 50% owned by Bertelsmann, a German company. If you convince them to license their music to Apple and others without DRM protection, this will create a truly interoperable music market. And Apple will welcome such changes wholeheartedly.
Translation from alexmak.livejournal.com
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/3028/
All Articles