3 ms·

2009. That’s when the DRM was removed. 10 years ago.

by lancewiggs 7y ago

epanchin 7y ago
A good lesson for anyone considering user unfriendly features.
- coldtea 7y ago
  Nobody "considered" them, it was what the music industry demanded at the time. In fact, as far as major services (e.g. major distributor and not some niche music market with "indie" artists only) iTunes was the one that spearheaded the un-DRM of music (with Steve Jobs' call to end music DRM: https://betanews.com/2007/02/06/apple-s-steve-jobs-calls-for-end-of-drm/ https://betanews.com/2007/02/06/apple-s-steve-jobs-calls-for... ).
  - ubercow13 7y ago
    The music industry considered them, then
    - chupasaurus 7y ago
      Let's throw away marketing/PR part from what labels try to act and we'll see a simple fact: these parasites should be dead like 10 years ago. Almost all of the profits for musicians in digital era are made by concerts and merchandise, individuals could make some through direct sells and Patreon. Major labels charge 70-90% of the income and exclusive copyright for masters, which is a bit overpriced service.
  - serf 7y ago
    >In fact, as far as major services... of which at that time there were only 2 or 3. Why did Jobs do this? Countries in the EU were demanding that he do so if he wanted to sell product there. Jobs was not interested in dropping DRM until the countries started bitching. Norway banned the iPod due to the iTunes walled garden creating captive audiences without opportunity for choice in media vendor (due to incompatibilities with competition services) and France started slinging similar threats. It all seems so altruistic in hind-sight, but really he (Jobs) was being pressured by the nation-states, and he had the opportunity to look like a pioneer by dropping DRM (an endeavor that Apple felt pretty keen about with FairPlay) -- making the competition look petty and selfish for having DRM, while simultaneously satisfying the desires of the nations with markets that he wanted to compete within. The whole story is in that link you included. I got a different vibe from the article than you did, I think.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]

2009. That’s when the DRM was removed. 10 years ago.

epanchin 7y ago

A good lesson for anyone considering user unfriendly features.

coldtea 7y ago
Nobody "considered" them, it was what the music industry demanded at the time. In fact, as far as major services (e.g. major distributor and not some niche music market with "indie" artists only) iTunes was the one that spearheaded the un-DRM of music (with Steve Jobs' call to end music DRM: https://betanews.com/2007/02/06/apple-s-steve-jobs-calls-for-end-of-drm/ https://betanews.com/2007/02/06/apple-s-steve-jobs-calls-for... ).
- ubercow13 7y ago
  The music industry considered them, then
  - chupasaurus 7y ago
    Let's throw away marketing/PR part from what labels try to act and we'll see a simple fact: these parasites should be dead like 10 years ago. Almost all of the profits for musicians in digital era are made by concerts and merchandise, individuals could make some through direct sells and Patreon. Major labels charge 70-90% of the income and exclusive copyright for masters, which is a bit overpriced service.
- serf 7y ago
  >In fact, as far as major services... of which at that time there were only 2 or 3. Why did Jobs do this? Countries in the EU were demanding that he do so if he wanted to sell product there. Jobs was not interested in dropping DRM until the countries started bitching. Norway banned the iPod due to the iTunes walled garden creating captive audiences without opportunity for choice in media vendor (due to incompatibilities with competition services) and France started slinging similar threats. It all seems so altruistic in hind-sight, but really he (Jobs) was being pressured by the nation-states, and he had the opportunity to look like a pioneer by dropping DRM (an endeavor that Apple felt pretty keen about with FairPlay) -- making the competition look petty and selfish for having DRM, while simultaneously satisfying the desires of the nations with markets that he wanted to compete within. The whole story is in that link you included. I got a different vibe from the article than you did, I think.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]