A couple of comments on Apple’s DRM from interesting sources. First up, the chairman of the British Phonographic Industry, which is roughly equivalent to America’s Recording Industry Association of America. Peter Jamieson took the somewhat surprising step of addressing the House of Commons select committee on culture, media, and sport to make it clear that British citizens who ripped tracks from their CDs to MP3 would not be targeted unless they were distributing those copies to other people (would that our own RIAA were so enlightened).
He then went on to take Apple to task for its proprietary DRM, stating that iTunes’s market dominance was “not particularly healthy” and he “would advocate that Apple opts for interoperability.” Earlier this week, Norway’s government challenged Apple to remove its DRM or face fines Consumer Ombudsman claimed that iTunes’s terms of service may run counter to Norwegian consumer law.
Closer to home, former RIAA chairman Hilary Rosen commented in a blog post that the iPod’s proprietary DRM “bugs” her, and went on to add “Speaking of DRM, it is time to rethink that strategy as well………”—the surprisingly large number of periods indicating either rethinking, or Rosen falling asleep at the keyboard.
My opinion? I’m not sure that the proprietary nature of Apple’s DRM is the problem here, so much as the draconian restrictions of DRM in general. Apple’s FairPlay comes under fire because it’s the most prominent; some might even argue that it’s the most prominent because it’s among the least restrictive. A fact that may not go unnoticed by both the RIAA and BPI.
Update: As Macworld Senior Editor Peter Cohen points out below, my explanation of the Norway situation was potentially misleading. Reworded as per his suggestion.
Just a note -- Norway did not tell Apple to change its DRM; that ruling is still to come, pending a response from Apple.
Instead, it appears that the Consumer Ombudsman is presently taking issue with Apple's terms of service for the iTunes Music Store, which it says as presently worded run against Norwegian consumer law.
It's interesting to me that the majority of the anti-DRM noise is coming from government and industry figures and not from consumers, who appear to continue to be happy to gobble up iPods and shop at the iTunes Music Store. If the current DRM situation is so bad for consumers, why are consumers so happy? Also interesting is that any ruling forcing Apple to open or relax its DRM compatibility will be to the advantage of the only other viable DRM around -- Microsoft's. And all these EU countries rattling their sabres at Apple are already suing Microsoft for abuse of market power on the OS -- indeed, forcing the company to remove WMP (and its DRM) from Windows. Do these people even understand what their own opinion is?
"If the current DRM situation is so bad for consumers, why are consumers so happy?"
Two reasons I can presently think of:
1) Most consumers do not know much about DRM and actually most consumers do not buy music off the iTMS. As more people buy from the iTMS people will begin to understand DRM and only then react to it.
2) At the moment Apple is making great products and most people do not want to switch away from iPods. What happens when Apple inevitably declines (even if it decades away, maybe when Steve Jobs leaves)? Many people will only then realise that they don't actually own their music as it won't play on other devices. I believe that this is a specific point being raised in Norway.