By Jo Best, 2 September 2005 11:38
NEWS The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has put the issue of DRM (digital rights management) in online music under the microscope - and has found the key digital song shops seriously wanting.
Apple, Microsoft, Napster and Real have all left consumers hamstrung with the DRM on their services, according to the EFF, and have couched the restrictions in marketing spin.
Microsoft's Plays for Sure initiative - where the Redmond giant promises compatibility between services and devices bearing the Microsoft sticker - comes in for criticism for not necessarily 'playing for sure'.
"What happens if you later want to switch to a WMA-incompatible iPod or a superior device that Microsoft won't license? You'll have to rebuy your music collection. Unlike MP3s, you can't easily convert DRM-crippled music to a different format. Likewise, if you switch music stores, you might have to buy a new set of compatible devices. And if the time comes that stores and devices no longer support your DRM, you're entirely out of luck."
Apple, Microsoft and Napster all sell tracks with the ability to change buyers' usage rights at any time. For example, at the time of purchase, a user may be permitted to burn an album to CD seven times. DRM permits an online music service to reduce that number at any point with no input or comeback from the buyer.
Apple has used DRM in this way, dropping the number of burns permitted for iTunes downloads from 10 to seven.
The report also notes that despite Real's frustration over being locked out of iPod compatibility and subsequent efforts to crack the Mac maker's DRM, its DRM behaviour is less than ideal for consumers.
"Real's 'Freedom of Choice' campaign says that consumers should be able to play their music using the device of their choice," the report said. "That's what you want but it's not what you'll get from Real or any other service that sells songs wrapped in DRM.
"Real's customers are chained to the narrow set of software and devices licensed to unlock Real's proprietary DRM or Microsoft's Windows Media Audio (WMA) DRM. Want to stream music throughout your home with Creative's Sound Blaster Wireless Music? Too bad. Can't do it with music from Real."
The report also raps Napster over the knuckles: "Napster 2.0 and many services like it provide celestial music jukeboxes but you better bring a sack of quarters. Using DRM, they charge extra for many traditionally free uses of your music... Napster 2.0 is divided up into three services. They all share one thing: complicated, restrictive DRM."
Comments
There are 7 comments. Join the discussion
1. Dennis McDonald
According to some of the reports I've read, "breaking" the DRM to, say, play a copy protected CD on a PC may actually be "illegal."
If this had been the case back in the 1960's, would it have been illegal back then to put those little yellow plastic discs with a hole in the center into a 45rpm phonograph record to make it playable on a 12" turntable? (I assume that many of the people reading this will not know what I am talking about.)
2. anonymous
It may be time consuming but more and more people are working round DRM to stop incompatability issues. On most WMA downloads simply burning a legitimate CD copy and then ripping that back as an MP3 file unlocks the DRM and means whilst the DRM WMA version is restricted your MP3 version is not. I want to buy legal music but whilst my WMA downloads have to be converted to MP3 to play on my Ipod what choice do I have? The music industry needs to step in and work with the technology companies to come up with fully compatible and legal alternative so that those who want to support a legal music industry can.
3. John Horvatic
And who's fault is it for having DRM in the first place. The record companies that's who. So you shouldn't blame the stores for DRM. You should blame the record companies who want this restriction in the first place.
4. anonymous
The real culprit here is the greediness of the record companies. DRM wouldn't be needed if the price was reasonable enough so that it was a hassle to go anywhere other than a legitimate source. Attesting to the greediness are the rumors of the record companies wanting to "adjust" the pricing of iTunes Music Store product. What it also comes down to is that the copyright laws are too antiquated to apply to today's technology; it needs to be drastically altered!
5. anonymous
Wrong blame. Record companies require DRM for these online sites to sell the music. Go after the RIAA if you want to make a difference. Apple, Microsoft, etc. have no choice and anything you say has no affect.
6. Simon
I am with Anonymous on this, the whole area is a complete mess. Whilst I'm an Apple and iPod user, I won't buy tracks from iTunes but instead go out and buy the CDs and rip them myself - that way I know I won't be stuffed at some point in the future with a load of tracks I've paid for but can't use.
Mind you, a lot of the stuff I listen to ("old" and/or obscure) doesn't appear on itms anyway !
7. David Howe
I also buy CD's (over 1600 at last count) and rip them to my iPod. The interesting thing is that you don't really own the music there either as you are permitted with the so called "fair use" clause to be able to make a single copy for your own use. Expect the DRM monster to expand beyond the experiments being conducted now. The greed of the record companies and their RIAA stooges is amazing...If enough artists stop signing with the dinosaur labels then somehting ight change...until then SSDD.