Now that the music industry has finally accepted (kind of) that customers are not thieves and that we can in fact be trusted with MP3’s of there most treasured artists (with some exceptions, Beetles,etc). This helps us all play music on any device we own or any device I we may chose to buy in the future. I am wondering when this kind of discussion will happen with our videos, I know this is a more complicated discussion but I believe it is one that should be taken on.

If I pay for Showtime movies through my cable box why can I not have access to play that same movie on other devices I own. Our DVRs let us retain the information for as long as we like. The distributor and producer is paid using my subscription. There needs to be a more meaningful connection between the producers of the content, various distributers, and me as a consumer.

I recently stopped my subscription to Starz on Cable as I realized that as a Netflix customer I had access to Starz as part of Netflix instant streaming (through Xbox). For several weeks, however, I was paying for Starz content twice. The same goes for the major broadcast networks, why would I ever pay for an episode of Lost for my Zune when I know that I can have it on DVR forever, or simply catch up on an episode on the ABC site itself. More importantly my avid TV watching has paid for the distribution of this program via advertising. Heck you can double dip in advertising on the other distribution formats (streaming or downloads) I really do not mind ;)

Either way I believe we need to start an honest discussion about video subscriptions and the end users ability and right to watch video content in any format on any device they desire.

I have derided the Zune Pass in the past as a DRM trap and simply not the way that I wish to consume music. However, I have been enjoying the recent 2 week free promotion and I must say it really encourages you to discover and download a metric tonne of music for one low price ($14.99). I have probably doubled my music collection in less than a week.

I am not ready to purchase the Zune Pass on a monthly basis but I think everyone who has a Zune should consider getting a pass once a year, sampling all the music you can, and then purchasing the MP3 equivalent at the Zune Market Place, Walmart or my personal favorite Napster.

Ultimately renting music with the Zune Pass is not sustainable but it can provide you with a much needed view into music you have not heard before. As if to remind me of the failings of DRM I received an email for Walmart Music as follows:

...Walmart will be shutting down our digital rights management system that supports protected songs and albums purchased from our site.

If you have purchased protected WMA music files from our site prior to Feb 2008, we strongly recommend that you back up your songs by burning them to a recordable audio CD. By backing up your songs, you will be able to access them from any personal computer...

Beginning October 9, we will no longer be able to assist with digital rights management issues for protected WMA files purchased from Walmart.com. If you do not back up your files before this date, you will no longer be able to transfer your songs to other computers or access your songs after changing or reinstalling your operating system or in the event of a system crash. Your music and video collections will still play on the originally authorized computer.

MSN music was the first major DRM bastion to fall now Walmart. Hopefully we shall see a day when we worry about DRM no more.

I complained several months ago about expiration of DRM under MSN music, as a result I refuse DRM music at every turn. There appears to be an about face on the original notification. 

On April 22, Microsoft notified you that as of August 31st, 2008, we would be changing the level of support for music purchased from MSN Music, and while your existing purchased music would continue to play, you would no longer be able to authorize new PCs and devices to play that music.

After careful consideration, Microsoft has decided to continue to support the authorization of new computers and devices and delivery of new license keys for MSN Music customers through at least the end of 2011, after which we will evaluate how much this functionality is still being used and what steps should be taken next to support our customers. This means you will continue to be able to listen to your purchased music and transfer your music to new PCs and devices beyond the previously announced August 31, 2008 date.

Microsoft continues to recommend that you back up your music on CD or hard drive along with other important data.

Sincerely,

MSN Music team

I am not willing to bet (with my money) that the Zune experiment will continue to work. I am officially out of the DRM business.

I got this mail from MSN Music this morning, and it confirmed to me that DRM is simply not for me. I will happily pay a premium to either get MP3s directly or continue purchasing CDs that I can subsequently rip to MP3.

...I am writing to let you know that as of August 31, 2008, Microsoft will change the level of support to be offered for music purchased directly from MSN Music prior to November 14, 2006. As of August 31, 2008, we will no longer be able to support the retrieval of license keys for the songs you purchased from MSN Music or the authorization of additional computers. License keys already obtained as of August 31, 2008 will continue to allow you to listen to songs on all the computers that you previously authorized for service.

We wanted to send out this notification well in advance to remind you to backup your music and to provide you sufficient time to confirm license keys for the songs you've purchased from MSN Music.

... If you intend to transfer a previously downloaded song to a new computer (or an existing computer with a new operating system, such as an upgrade from Windows XP to Windows Vista) within the maximum allowed limit of 5 computers, please do so before August 31, 2008. You will need to obtain a license key for each of your songs downloaded from MSN Music on any new computer, and you must do so before August 31, 2008. If you attempt to transfer your songs to additional computers after August 31, 2008, those songs will not successfully play.

If you have additional questions about this process or any other questions about playing your music, please visit MSN Music online help for more information or feel free to contact our Technical Support representatives for assistance, prior to the August 31, 2007 date...

Sincerely,
Rob Bennett
General Manager, MSN Entertainment & Video Services

I do not download or share music illegally, but I do want to make sure that the music I am getting does not hold me hostage. Thankfully I spent at best about $40 on MSN Music and I have subsequently replaced most of that with MP3 counterparts. I was holding out hope that Microsoft would do the right thing here and offer people who had purchased MSN Music the opportunity to download the same songs under the Zune's DRM program, no such luck!

I just noticed that Amazons MP3 beta program has received a much need endorsement from Warner Brothers (WB). They are now able to sell DRM free music from select artists in the WB catalogue.

So far this beta program allows you to purchase whole albums and some artists are available for individual MP3 downloads. I suspect WB has realized that the cash cow was escaping and people (or maybe just me) want a little flexibility, I simply do not want to by tied in to any one vendor and their DRM monopoly.

I would hope that sales of DRM free music gives life back to the idea that DRM, and specifically the contrasting methods of DRM, constitute the worst path the music industry can take. We will look back at multiple and non-compatible DRM formats with the same disdain we reserve for the MiniDisc.

I do wonder why Universal Music and now WB have decided to exclude the biggest digital music distributor (Apple) from the loop for its non-DRM music?!? Is this a collective show of strength from a weakening music industry? Or are they simply angling for a better deal with the 900lb gorilla?

Technorati Profile

This morning I was sent some news about our company which apparently was extremely sensitive. As I was reviewing the document I was given the option of installing the Windows Rights Management software. Curious about where this was going I clicked next and completed the installation.

Apparently what I just agreed to was the Information Rights management of Office 2003. This apparently allows granular control of Office related files and emails.

Using IRM in Office 2003

IRM in Office 2003 relies upon Windows Rights Management Services to provide core functionality. Nonetheless, IRM is fully integrated into Office 2003 applications, and it is a simple and natural extension of the content creation and collaboration process with which users are already familiar.

Consumption – The recipient opens the document or file as usual. Behind the scenes the application communicates with the RMS server to determine if the recipient has been given rights to access the file. RMS validates the user and issues a use license. The application renders the file and enforces the rights.

IRM in Outlook 2003 E-mail Messages

IRM can be used in Microsoft Office Outlook® 2003 to prevent e-mail forwarding, copying, editing or printing. Protected messages are automatically encrypted during transit, and when rights are assigned to the message by the sender, Outlook 2003 disables the restricted commands. Office 2003 documents attached to protected messages are automatically protected as well.

The document in question was detailing information on future mergers and acquisition. My curious nature got the better of me this time ... never again. I actually printed the attached document, and now I wonder if big brother now knows there is a rogue copy in the wild.

The Apple\EMI press conference announcing DRM-less music is a big one, and we should all take note of whether the rest of the industry is going to follow suit. Now they are suggesting that this DRM-less music is premium content and have increased the fidelity of the files sold and will be selling them at $1.29. You can upgrade DRMed music for $0.30 a pop.

As I suggested in a previous post music with DRM needs to cost less, I was personally hoping for a greater revolt i.e. songs sold for much less than 99 cents each. With US CD sales down 20% this year the record labels will be scrambling to get a better foothold in the downloads market. I still think Pandora's box is already open and I doubt whether it will possible to control the music industry in the same way again, file sharing is just too easy!

"We lie loudest when we lie to ourselves." - Eric Hoffer

I have blogged multiple times about my concerns and desires for the music in my personal collection, and the continual frustration I have with music and DRM as a whole. With the music industry at arms length from its consumers, and the consumers getting their musical fix elsewhere (P2P), I think I am finally starting to absorb and comprehend the full scope of the problem. With the music industry sales down across the board, and digital music sales are up, but not enough to cover the spiral, we are forced to ask what the problem is.

I do no believe it is the concept of DRM, nor is it the poor selection of online music that is at issue. I think it is a simple problem of PRICE! I think with the advent of digital music, the very medium that music travels upon has devalued the content more than the music industry is willing to accept. I honestly believe that the music industry is trying to protect what was 10 years ago a very expensive collective of music. However, without the need for a CD we the consumer cannot get our heads around why it still costs so much for downloads.

I know what your thinking $1 for a song is nothing, and I agree in principle, I just believe that in today's world of XXCOPY and FTP $1 is inappropriate. If the market were truly allowed to determine the price as opposed to the years of price gouging and fixing, IMHO, the cost of music would be in the order of 10-15 cents per song and that is for a song without DRM. With DRM I think it should be closer to 5 cents. That is right! if your DRM is designed to lock me in to using a particular device I should pay less for the music I am listening to.

When consumers were forced to deal with Poly Vinyl Acetate, tapes and even CDs the inconvenience of duplicating music was still great enough to need an industry to churn out copies of music for our convenience. That is no longer the case, all the world needs now is one copy and it so easy to make that available to millions of people and  I could use my vinyl, tapes and cd in any player I wanted.

I know, I know the artist has rights to his music, and as a musician myself I really believe that, but, I also believe the market should determine the price not just the supplier. It is a shame because it seems like it would take the bread right out of artists mouth, and in many respects that is true, but this is a capitalist society with "free" markets, and it is by definition fueled by supply and demand. If our technology has increased the supply the cost should fall. Trust me this phenomenon we are seeing with the music industry would happen to any other product that could be made this readily available. Do not feel too sorry for the artist, there still is no substitute for a live show, if they have the skill and musicianship ;)

The music industry is going to have to get use to the fact that music sales will continue to decrease until music is sold for what it is worth!

"Without struggle, there is no progress." - Fredrick Douglas