Apple, EMI to Sell Unprotected Songs Online

[Ignacio Upton]

Source: SmartMoney.com

By Jessica Hodgson

Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

LONDON -(Dow Jones)- Apple Inc. (AAPL) and EMI Group PLC (EMI.LN), Monday unveiled a plan to sell digital music in unprotected formats in a bid to buoy sales of digital music.

The announcement marks a major strategy shift both for Apple, whose iTunes Web site accounts for around 80% of legal music downloads, and for EMI, one of the world's four largest music companies, whose major artists include the Beatles, Norah Jones and Joss Stone.

"By providing DRM-free downloads, we aim to address the lack of interoperability which is frustrating for many music fans. We believe that offering consumers the opportunity to buy higher quality tracks and listen to them on the device or platform of their choice will boost sales of digital music," said Eric Nicoli, chief executive of EMI in a statement Monday.

"Selling digital music DRM-free is the right step forward for the music industry," said Steve Jobs, Apple's CEO.

Read more: http://www.smartmoney.com/bn/ON/index.cfm?story=ON-20070402-000284-0855

---

Wahoo! Unfortunately, it sucks that the Beatles won't have their catalogue available yet.

[originalpckelly]

1. I think this shows Jobs to be more interested in the product...

than the company. You'd never see Microsoft do this.

[swimmernsecretsea]

2. Unprotected songs?

Does that mean they don't wear a condom?

[Ignacio Upton]

5. ROFL!

:rofl:

[LifeDuringWartime]

3. a positive step

I was hoping they would be available in the Apple Lossless or FLAC formats, but 256k AAC is a lot better than the current 128k. I hope the other labels will follow.

[Ignacio Upton]

4. Yeah, but $1.29 is still a bit too high for one song

Hopefully, EMI will lower the price in the future, but knowing the track record of major labels in this area, I don't think it will happen unless consumers force it to. Still, breaking away from the DRM shackles is a positive step.

[brentspeak]

6. Just great. Lossy, poor-sounding digital files instead of well-mastered CDs (ie. lossless)

[Ignacio Upton]

8. I don't think many people notice or care about the difference

It's similar to the format war in the 1980's between VHS and Betamax for the VCR: Betamax had better picture quality, but VHS was more convenient, in that the tapes could hold entire movies, while Betamax tapes couldn't, due to being limited in how much space they could hold. Consumers will go for what's convenient if there is not enough of a noticeable difference for them. As long as they're not getting ripped off with really shitty mp3's (and the format that will be sold is in AAC, which is the standard for itunes downloads) then I don't think that consumers will worry.

[Solon]

10. They could use a Lossless format if they wanted to...

Like FLAC or something.

[Ignacio Upton]

11. Wouldn't it take longer to download the songs then

I thought the reason why mp3's were invented was because their compression made them quicker to download. Maybe FLAC could become the standard once dialup becomes totally extinct, but that will still take a couple more years.

[Solon]

12. True the files are slightly larger...

However, compression is still close to 2:1, for audiophiles, this could be an option while buying the music. For example, you can choose to download a loosy MP3 or, if you want, FLAC encoded files. If you buy one, you can choose to download the same song in the other format at no charge later on if you change your mind.

ON EDIT: I forgot, they are using unprotected AAC, not MP3, though AAC is similar, it is still slightly better quality(depending on encoder), than MP3s.

[ramapo]

7. Checkout Emusic

Plain MP3s. Less expensive. Caters to indy, jazz, blues, etc. Lots of great stuff but don't bother if you're looking for the latest mainstream stuff because it probably isn't there. Plenty of old releases. I have a couple hundred CDs full of MP3 downloads from Emusic although a lot of it was from when it was still unlimited DLs per month.

[Ignacio Upton]

9. I wonder if EMI will sign on with Emusic?

Unless there is a song from an RIAA artist that I REALLY want (and that number is small) then I'm going to avoid buying RIAA music.

[slj0101]

14. I love e-music.

You're right, though, it doesn't really cater to mainstream tastes (which is fine by me). My only gripe about them is the occasional incomplete album.

[IChing]

13. Good Analysis of What the Apple/EMI Deal Actually Means

Done? Good. Here are the details:
EMI is the studio involved
$1.29 per track
256 kbps AAC DRM free
for 30 cents users can upgrade their old songs from EMI to DRM free songs


This is quite an important event for both music lovers and Apple. There will be many side effects of this move that we will see in the near future. Here are some of my observations on the matter.
Freedom—How this is a boon for users
Looking at this from the consumer standpoint, this is almost a deal with no downsides (notice I said almost, but I’ll get to that in a sec). The biggest draw, of course, is the lack of DRM. Now you can play your music on any device and share it with anyone you want. And, if that wasn’t enough, this deal is retroactive, meaning you can upgrade all of your old songs if you just pay the difference in price. How sweet is that? >>>>snip

http://www.applematters.com/index.php/section/comments/apple-to-sell-drm-music-say-it-aint-so/