Intellectual Property Law

A win for end users: Apple (finally) goes DRM-free

By jbroses

On January 6th, Apple announced that it will offer music from all four major music labels (Universal, BMG, Warner Bros. and EMI) for the first time as DRM-free downloads.  This is a huge step for iTunes, finally catching up with the method Amazon MP3 has used since its inception.  This represents a policy shift towards allowing users to freely transfer songs between their computers and mp3 players, something previously made extremely difficult and awkward by Apple?s DRM scheme.  Though iTunes allowed authorization of up to 5 computers to play content purchased from its iTunes Store, this always seemed like an artificial and arbitrary restriction to place on its users (not to mention the fact that DRM protected content couldn?t be played on other mp3 players).  Apple of course was well within their legal rights to negotiate licensing however they pleased and to implement their DRM scheme, but this decision marks a clear statement that it was a failed policy as a business decision.

Even though iTunes clearly maintains the content advantage over Amazon MP3 (10 million songs versus only 6 million), I will continue to use Amazon MP3 exclusively, and recommend my friends do the same, both because of the universality of the mp3 format, and my general disdain for Apple products (don’t get me started on the pathetic quality of iTunes as a music player/manager).

More generally, this marks a business trend towards a new method of dissuading piracy: Give users the autonomy to view and use content in the way they please, and they will be more likely to legitimately purchase copyrighted material, and less likely to resort to illegal copying and dissemination.  This move by Apple, along with the free streaming video content offered by Hulu (a collaboration between NBC, Fox, MGM, Sony, Warner Bros. and more), and most other major networks making their shows available streaming for free on their websites, represents a win for end users, freed from arbitrary and cumbersome restrictions on the use and enjoyment of the growing variety of digital content becoming available on the web.

Full post as published by BC Law Intell. Prop. & Tech. Forum on January 25, 2009 (boomark / email).