« Avast, ye statuette | Main | Blanket licenses, XM-Sirius and other tidbits »

Another look at Apple and DRM

Long before Steve Jobs penned his anti-DRM screed, lots of people were telling the major record companies that slapping electronic locks onto 99-cent downloads was a dumb idea. The ranks include David Pakman of eMusic and Dave Goldberg, a soon-to-be-ex-Yahoo VP who has been questioning the use of DRM for more than three years. I remember Goldberg talking at the Jupiter Plug-in conference in July 2003 about the pointlessness of imposing DRM on one version of a product (downloads) but not another (CDs). Right then, right now.

Anyway, when I asked Apple what to make of the timing of Jobs' statement, the company said there was no real trigger other than the criticism Apple was getting in Europe about its non-interoperable DRM. Two sources in the online music biz, however, suggest that Jobs might have been influenced by something a bit closer to home. Last year, RealNetworks (the company behind the Rhapsody subscription service) came up with a proposal for switching to MP3s and circulated it among the major labels. In response to that, or maybe just motivated by its need for a cash infusion, EMI started offering online music stores the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to pay the label an extra lump sum in exchange for the right to sell MP3s. The money was described as a way to reimburse EMI for the increase in piracy that was sure to come once it abandoned DRM. Not surprisingly, that proposal didn't go over well with executives at the online stores, whose margins are thin enough already. So EMI came back with a more acceptable offer, asking for an advance against future royalties.

The deal was apparently not offered to Apple, however; evidently, EMI wanted to build up momentum among the also-rans before making Jobs and offer he might otherwise refuse. Before EMI could sign on the dotted line with the likes of RealNetworks and Napster, however, Jobs dropped his DRM bombshell. Go straight to the head of the parade, Steve! Then the Wall Street Journal reported EMI's MP3 overtures, and suddenly the record company wasn't in such a hurry to announce its initiative.

Meanwhile, a survey by Jupiter Research found that more than 60% of European music executives believed that DRM was hurting sales. I'm guessing that the ones who don't are all at the C-level, plus the general counsel's offices. The irony of the whole thing is that one of the reasons the labels have soured on DRM is the incompatibilities caused by multiple proprietary sets of electronic locks -- most notably Apple's, which deter the tens of millions of iPod-toting music fans from shopping at stores other than iTunes or signing up for subscription music services (Apple doesn't offer one). So whaddya say, major labels? How about an experiment with 99-cent MP3s? You can start small -- say, Scandinavia.

Comments

I smell tragedy coming if EMI sells the farm in unencrypted form. This is reminiscent of the iTunes blunder, where the majors dismantled a functional revenue model (ten-song bundling) in exchange for a partial solution. That partial solution cost millions of dollars and thousands of jobs.

Unleashing an unencrypted catalog only makes sense in a compulsory license world. If the ISPs are collecting a music toll from all their subscribers then indeed, releasing music in clear-text form is a good thing. But until that happens, shoving out MP3s amounts to an end-game hail mary that signals the end to the music industry.

My question: will the drum-beat for compulsory licensing out-drone that for MP3 stores before it's too late?

The comment that the major labels made a blunder when they "dismantled a functional revenue model (ten-song bundling)" shows both the arrogant attitude of the labels toward their desired customers and the fundamental inabililty to grasp the changes that technology has brought.

It may have been functional revenue model to bundle one good song with nine crappy ones, but it sure doesn't treat customers with respect. Consumers will be happy to buy whole albums when they are good. I do it on iTunes frequently.

It wasn't iTunes, moreover, that brought the end to this (horrible) revenue model, it was technological change. Illegal downloading operations, you see, do not impose any sort of bundling requirement. Like it or not, the labels are competing with illegal downloading, the more they try to put restrictions on the way we buy and use music, they more they discourage sales of their music. If iTunes had been forced sell music as album-only, the result would be clear: fewer songs would have been sold and more of them would have been downloaded illegally.

Think about this alternative as a way to confirm that the old revenue model is gone. What if iTunes were to sell music as album-only but with no DRM? Would the labels go for that? Apparently not, even though that is the exact counterpart to selling CDs. Why? Because the ability to get illegal music for free so easily has changed the game. It is a lot harder to force people to buy crap these days.

The labels win when consumers desire their product relative to the alternative. DRM is a move in the wrong direction. Illegal copies will always be available. DRM only punishes the people who pay for their music.

Post a comment

If you are under 13 years of age you may read this message board, but you may not participate.
Here are the full legal terms you agree to by using this comment form.

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until they've been approved.

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In





ADVERTISEMENT


Our Blogger

Times editorial writer Jon Healey pens opinion pieces about a variety of business issues, and blogs about technologies that are changing the entertainment industry's business model.

Search this blog

All LA Times Blogs

All The Rage
All Things Trojan
Babylon & Beyond
Bit Player
Blue Notes - Dodgers
Booster Shots
Bottleneck
Daily Dish
Daily Mirror
Daily Travel & Deals
Dish Rag
Emerald City
Extended Play
Gold Derby
Homeroom
Homicide Report
Jacket Copy
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar Blog
L.A. Land
L.A. Now
L.A. Unleashed
La Plaza
Lakers
Money & Co.
Movable Buffet
Opinion L.A.
Pardon Our Dust
Readers' Representative Journal
Show Tracker
Soundboard
Top of the Ticket
Up to Speed
Varsity Times Insider
Web Scout
What's Bruin

Now Playing

Where I've Been Lately


ADVERTISEMENT


ADVERTISEMENT