DefectiveByDesign, a branch of the Free Software Foundation that opposes the use of DRM software, has begun an online petition urging Apple chief executive Steve Jobs to remove protections from the iTunes Music Store. The group claims that the technology deliberately cripples software and limits the rights of consumers. It filed its petition in response to an open letter from Jobs published in February. Launched on March 6th, the petition reached its initial goal of 1,000 signatures in about five hours. The group plans to keep the petition open until April 1st, when it will be sent to Jobs along with a jester's hat.
Jobs said in the letter that Apple would remove its FairPlay DRM software from iTunes were it not for tight restrictions imposed by the major record labels. Apple opposes releasing the technology and claims that doing so will enable applications that remove the DRM and leave Apple open to litigation. DefectiveByDesign's Open Letter to Steve Jobs demands that the Apple co-founder make good on his promise by removing FairPlay from iTunes songs by independent artists. It also asks Jobs to use his influence as Disney's largest stockholder to remove DRM from the film company's music and movie offerings.
"As the largest purveyor of digital rights management [DRM] protected music, Apple carries a large part of the responsibility for the situation in which consumers now find themselves. ... You can set the ethical example and be the first 'major' to drop DRM. You can set the example in the region of video and movies. You have the direct power to do this," reads the petition.
View: The Petition
News source: vnunet.com
Jobs said in the letter that Apple would remove its FairPlay DRM software from iTunes were it not for tight restrictions imposed by the major record labels. Apple opposes releasing the technology and claims that doing so will enable applications that remove the DRM and leave Apple open to litigation. DefectiveByDesign's Open Letter to Steve Jobs demands that the Apple co-founder make good on his promise by removing FairPlay from iTunes songs by independent artists. It also asks Jobs to use his influence as Disney's largest stockholder to remove DRM from the film company's music and movie offerings.
"As the largest purveyor of digital rights management [DRM] protected music, Apple carries a large part of the responsibility for the situation in which consumers now find themselves. ... You can set the ethical example and be the first 'major' to drop DRM. You can set the example in the region of video and movies. You have the direct power to do this," reads the petition.
View: The Petition News source: vnunet.com
You don't have to own an iPod to be able to make purchases in the iTunes Store.
You don't have to own an iPod to be able to make purchases in the iTunes Store.
But you have to won an iPod to play back the music on a media device.
For me, until there is DRM-free FLAC (or some other free lossless encoded) music, I'll stick to purchasing CD's.
This is going to end well.
I thought independent artists don't have record companies?
Why would an Internet petition be any less effective or of less worth than a comparable non-Internet petition? Both serve the same purpose and in the end hold the names of current, previous, and/or potential customers. Any reasonably smart company would want to listen intently to what their customers demands are.
How are they petitioning the wrong entity? Even if they were asking Apple to drop the DRM on all their music, which they aren't, they would still be talking to the right entity. Just like WalMart has the power to tell suppliers how they will package, ship, and market their products; Apple has the authority to squeeze the record labels. I remember the record companies demanding Apple allow tiered pricing in iTunes and Apple refused; iTunes doesn't have tiered pricing today. When a company has a monopoly in the distribution channel they have an immense amount of control over the producers as they are the gateway to the customer. It is business not rocket science...
I thought independent artists don't have record companies?
Independent artists tend to be recorded by non-mainstream recording companies, and the artist itself normally writes and composes their own music, and retains the exclusive rights over their own creation. When they mean 'independent' they mean they own all their own IP.
Compare that to mainstream where by Britney Spears and the like own none of their music; they're simply a pretty face (or in the case of Britney, ugly face) for a corporation; they have no talent apart from being a grade a exibitionist.
I thought independent artists don't have record companies?
Independent artists tend to be recorded by non-mainstream recording companies, and the artist itself normally writes and composes their own music, and retains the exclusive rights over their own creation. When they mean 'independent' they mean they own all their own IP.
Compare that to mainstream where by Britney Spears and the like own none of their music; they're simply a pretty face (or in the case of Britney, ugly face) for a corporation; they have no talent apart from being a grade a exibitionist.
amen brother
If he really wanted to sell DRM-free stuff he would have sold the short movies made by his own company (before it was sold to DSNY) without DRM.
and uses a lot of power
LOL.
Yeah he's a major player in it, but in all honesty he can't just end it with a snap of his fingers like they seem to think he can.
It's all controlled by the record labels. He removes DRM from iTunes music and watch how fast those record labels leave iTunes.
Last edited by NightmarE D on 10 Mar 2007 - 03:07
we love you steve jobs! w00t!!!!
If I were Jobs, would *I* let go of DRM?
Not a chance. I know what's feeding my bottom line.
The problem with alot of these petitions to remove DRM or save the whales or end logging in the rainforest etc., is that they fail to address the business needs of the company in question. Most consumers tend to only think of themselves, what's comfy and convenient for them.
Tell Jobs how Apple can concretely benefit tfrom the removal of DRM - how he can reap *greater* profits, and he'd probably be all over the idea. Otherwise, start a company yourself, put your blood, sweat and tears into it, find a business model that makes you a ton of $$$ and makes investors happy as pigs in ****, and THEN we'll see how quick you'll be to give in to similar petitions.
If you read the petition, you'll see that it is no more than alot of one-sided bluster - an attack, a long-winded accusation. There's nothing worse than a scolding nag. Nowhere is there mention of how exactly this will benefit Apple's bottom-line, how this will maintain shareholder confidence. No one seems to care about what Apple's concerns are. Read the following excerpt:
As someone who has imposed a DRM scheme on millions of people and made millions of dollars doing so, it is time for you to take a stand against DRM as unethical and as a threat to our freedoms.
Are you kidding me?? I had to read that twice to make sure those two sentences actually appeared together!
Yep. Apple HAS made millions of dollars with DRM. Now show Apple how it can continue to do so without it. If you can't, then all you are is another ignorant consumer with an over-inflated sense of entitlement. You'd be better off waiting for the legal community to make a decision, if one is even warranted.
Cheers.
yeah good post LTD but illz55 pls dont blow sunshine up his ass,
Ok, time for everyone to roll out the stories about how they only pirate music and movies so they can "try out" new things, and that they actually then go and buy all these songs and movies they pirated. Also add to that the stories people have about how they wouldn't normally buy a particular song or movie, so it doesn't matter if they pirate it. Or that they "can't afford" to pay for their music or movies, even though they just bought a $400 graphics card. I'm a big fan of fairy tales, so I'd love to hear some more.
The petition wont accomplish anything in the end of the day unfortunatly.
It's not the consumers concerns on how they do it.
This quote pretty much sums up the problem with DRM:
It's not overinflated. It is and should be our entitlement to enjoy the media that we have purchased on any and all types of devices without the need to worry about compatibility.
Again, It's not the consumers job to figure this out. If Apple is as "innovative" as you and other people say then they can find a way without DRM. You need to get your nose out between Jobs's butt cheeks and smell what's really wrong with DRM.
How is it necessary? It isn't necessary in any way. That's gotta be the corniest quote yet.
Last edited by bibutteryboy on 10 Mar 2007 - 13:07
Fair enough, fair enough. Your agument is that DRM is simply worng and unethical, despite it being such a successful business model for Apple. But that's exactly the issue - this "evil" DRM in its current incarnation, is incredibly successful, meaning that the whole ipod+itunes+itunes store lock-in scheme is generating incredible revenue for Apple.
If it so unethical, so evil, why hasn't DRM killed the ipod and the itunes store? People are buying into DRM. There is consent.
Is it because they really have no choice in the matter? OR . . . is it because the average consumer might not care about the DRM lock-in scheme (as deployed by Apple) as much as you'd like them to?
Is it because they really have no choice in the matter? OR . . . is it because the average consumer might not care about the DRM lock-in scheme (as deployed by Apple) as much as you'd like them to?
It has nothing to do with people not caring. It's the fact that most of the people are using ipod and itunes already and don't even know what the hell DRM is. At some point in time, people will want a change from the ipod and look to purchase something else. What's going to happen when all of your itunes songs won't convert or are more of a pain in the ass to convert to play on different players? It will happen at some point in time.
This isn't about Apple per sey, it's more about DRM in general.
WHY would anyone stick up for a company that promotes this?
by the way. I never said it was unethical. Just a shi*tty way to screw the consumer
And don't be fooled with "wma" or "lossless" are better that any mp3, a good ripped mp3 can be too good like the original .wav
And don't be fooled with "wma" or "lossless" are better that any mp3, a good ripped mp3 can be too good like the original .wav
Then obviously you have the worlds worse hearing because there is a definate different between the quality of lossless (FLAC, Monkey Audio etc) and Lossy (OGG, WMA, MP3)
We all know the only reason iTunes is this successful is because Jobs agreed to DRM so the music lables would jump on board. And they did and this phenomena happened and now iPod + iTunes is the market leader. This would not have happened without DRM so Jobs can't say they he is against it.
Now that he leads the digital player and music sales market he might try to use his position to force the music labels out of DRM. "Either drop DRM or iTunes will drop you" and this could succeed... but it could also back-fire.
But let's get out of that reality distortion field. Jobs couldn't hate DRM, its what made iTunes a success.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.