I'd say the mistake was the music labels and not Apple's, it's the labels that wanted DRM in place. We should perhaps be thankful there is an 'upgrade' at all, I'm sure the labels would love to have everyone just pay full price again!
Adam
· 11 months ago
Wait, what is the process of unDRMification? Is it going to be like converting unprotected songs to MP3s? Except they pop-up a window with a charge?
Pat
· 11 months ago
Yes, you can burn the songs to a CD and import them back into iTunes, but the quality of the tracks will deteriorate. Can yoou explain how a digital copy deteriorates. You can select any level of compression for you CDs when imported into Itunes including lossless. The digital copy will still be no better then the original, but it will not introduce additional loss from the original.
Jared
· 11 months ago
hmmmm.. I don't know about that. Doesn't put a smile on my face.
Mojo Yugen
· 11 months ago
I'd say the mistake was the consumers who thought buying DRM'd tracks was ever a good idea.
Seamus McCauley
· 11 months ago
Whose mistake? You bought the thing!
rommy
· 11 months ago
i'd hardly call it a mistake. drm has been in existence as long as there has been digital content and it's a way of minimizing piracy and legitimizing distribution, something that eliminating DRM won't exactly resolve. frankly, i don't share my music enough to care about un-DRMed music and I'm curious as to why anyone would need un-DRMed music if not for the purposes of distributing it to their friends.
Paddy
· 11 months ago
What annoys me is that I have to do all my DRM-d tracks at once, or none of them - I can't choose what I want to upgrade. That's a total of 500 songs bought over 4 years or so, with an upgrade cost of £59.90, or $90.
Adam
· 11 months ago
@rommy
Some people buy other MP3 players, which can only read MP3s. If a non-iPod owner wants to stay legal, they need un-DRMed music.
brindle
· 11 months ago
You do realize that apple is also charging you less (the $.69 price) for the de-drm'd music?? For some of us, who don't buy the stuff popular enough to get over $.99, that's a great deal.
Norton Ewart
· 11 months ago
I'm pleased. I've never loved DRM, but preferred it over "no iTunes". Now I c-DRM my files, and use them on other devices if I want to.
jhunterj
· 11 months ago
If you think their DRM offering was a mistake, why did you buy it? It's no good for producers to blame consumers for not buying, but it's also no good for consumers to blame producers for selling.
The Macdaddy
· 11 months ago
Don't forget you get a new non DRM file at 256K opposed to the old 128K. I think they did the same thing when EMI went DRM free no?
flo
· 11 months ago
@Adam no it doesn't convert the old file, it downloads a new file for everything.
Also, I noticed this can get quite costly ... itunes currently tells me that upgrading all possible titles to drm free woul be in the 100+ € range ... and yeah I would have to do all at once it seems ... also I couldn't care less about 256 kbs, I'd just like the undrmed stuff.
Doug Petrosky
· 11 months ago
You were happy to purchase 128bit DRM encoded files with the limitations that were put on them. It hardly seems excessive for Apple or the labels to ask you to pay a small fee to get NEW 256bit DRM free songs. Nobody made a mistake here. It is reasonable for businesses to be cautious about how they enter new distribution models and the early adopters always pay a premium (and also reap the early benefits).
Leon
· 11 months ago
Thank you for you post. I tried Free Music Downloader before ,it can help you download free music/a> .
Cam
· 11 months ago
you're paying for the higher bit-rate and bandwidth
ecc1977
· 11 months ago
Jeff Byrnes is absolutely right: this policy has been in place for a while with iTunes Plus. The only thing that's changed is that now almost every song is available in an iTunes Plus version.
What does suck is that I spent $50 on iTunes music on Monday night and that I'm still going to get charged that $0.30 upgrade fee. If only I'd waited... But yeah, I'm a bonehead.
Paddy
· 11 months ago
Jeff, I get that - I've been gradually upgrading purchases since the introduction of iTunes Plus. However, I'm not sure I want to upgrade all of my remaining DRM'd music, and I'd certainly rather not do it all at once. I don't see why the system has to be so inflexible.
Buster B
· 11 months ago
So wait a minute - let's assume for a moment that all the music I purchased legally from iTunes will now sell DRM free for $0.69 (which is probably my reality). Someone please tell me how me paying $1.29 for a $0.69 song is even in the same city as the ballpark of "fair"?
Craig
· 11 months ago
I'm not paying the upgrade fee to get the DRM removed, I'm paying (by choice) to upgrade the quality of the track (256K instead of 128K), which is worth $0.30 per track to me.
leeah
· 11 months ago
I paid for the DRM'd tracks for 99 cents each. I've been upgrading my trades to iTunes Plus as they became available, but if the whole site is now DRM-free, why aren't the prices reflective?
For example, I now need to pay an extra 40 cents(Cdn) to have the DRM removed. Meanwhile, someone can come onto iTunes today and purchase that same song, DRM-free, for the original 99 cents.
So... by downloading my music legally and being a loyal iTunes customer for x amount of years, I'm being asked $1.39 for something other people can now get for .99 - and Apple is calling that a special deal.
flo
· 11 months ago
@replies ... I know that it has been like this for the iTunes Plus from EMI etc all along, and I'm not saying if I would have had to make that decision that I wouldn't have possibly done it the same way, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. Especially that it doesn't allow you to upgrade gradually is annoying. So please, if you are an Apple rep, say so, otherwise stop acting like I insulted your loved ones or something, Apple doesn't need your help, and I never stated anything wrong, just personal opinion.
George
· 11 months ago
People complaining that it is our mistake for choosing Apple DRM songs are just being didiculous, iTunes in my opinion is a vastly superior product than say Napster, which up until relatively recently use to be illegal. And on topic, the fact that apple are charging for this so called 'priveledge' is ridiculous... I understand that some people may want to upgrade the quality of their music. Why not make this a seperate package? The Quality Upgrade, and the free DRM Removal Upgrade. This is just music companies/apple wanting to make a quick buck. So much for customer loyalty, LimeWire isn't looking too bad now.
Jonna
· 11 months ago
Which is why I always bought from Amazon.com instead of iTunes anyway!
@SCHEFF you say they're mp3s, but they're not. If they were they could be played by almost anything, but itunes protected files can't. So basically you wouldn't need the drm removed for sharing the files (especially cause your account info- rmation remains in the file even w/o drm) but to play them with anything other than an ipod/iphone or itunes or apple tv. That's reason enough imho.
mjtomlin
· 11 months ago
Wait! What? You bought DRM'ed music and thought at some point in time that they would magically be stripped of that DRM for free? Welcome to the world of the RIAA. Were you ever offered an upgrade path to move from cassette to CD? So it would be better for Apple to not offer this upgrade path at all? Leaving you with the alternative of either stealing it off a bit torrent site, or repurchasing the song DRM-free from Amazon at full price? Ask all those people who were given the shaft buy the various other online music sites that went down and took their DRM'ed music with them; don't you think they would've loved a way to upgrade all that music for a fraction of the cost rather than not being able to play it at all? The .30 isn't just for removing the DRM from the music, it's also for providing you with a higher quality encoded file. Most people who already purchase music off iTunes don't need to have DRM-free versions, because more than likely they stay within the iPod+iTunes ecosystem. The upgrade path provided is basically a way for people to take their music with them to non-FairPlay device, if they choose to do so.
Am I gonna upgrade my library? Hell no! I don't see any reason to fork over that money. At least not yet.
Screen Sleuth
· 11 months ago
Ridiculous...but of course, many will pay. Thankfully, I didn't really bother with iTunes.
Boylin
· 11 months ago
I would guess that a single download from iTunes costs Apple roughly 30 cents. Converting a song involves a new download, therefore the charge. I will bet you're getting the higher quality file as well. With the large number of songs already in customer's hands it would be incredible for Apple to tie up their servers downloading millions of songs free.
flo
· 11 months ago
@Boylin in what dreamland are you living? maybe if you transfer the song to mars and back ... no way 30 cents are actual costs. That does not mean I think apple is wrong from a business perspective, like I said before, but still ppl feel the need to explain apple's actions or try to "educate" me on their economic views, which is kinda ridiculous. @mjtomlin And the same ppl that don't need drm-free music according to you can hear the difference between 128 kbps and 256? right. Also you're just implying stuff that suits your view, no one said they "thought at some point in time that they (the music files) would magically be stripped of that DRM for free"
pixelbud
· 11 months ago
Try blaming THE RECORDING INDUSTRY instead of Apple. They are the people that pressured for 6 years to get pricing to change. They are the people that INSISTED on DRM. And THEY are the people that want to make money each and every time their songs are sold even if the format changes. DRM track vs. Non-DRM track is like saying why can't I get that CD free since I own the Cassette Tape. Geez.
Somedude
· 11 months ago
Anyone who ever actually paid for DRM-ed non-MP3 music is an idiot, and this just proves that point in spades.
Buster B
· 11 months ago
@ pixelbud : That is a flawed analogy, at best. Purchasing cassettes instead of CDs is a freely made, voluntary choice. The choice in the iTunes situation is quite involuntary. The reality is 95% of the human beings on Earth cannot hear the difference in quality between 256 and 128 encoding. Myself, since I can't hear the difference I don't want the larger file sizes. To pay to remove something I didn't order which doesn't affect the usability of the music is preposterous.
And please don't start with "I can hear the difference", because for the vast majority of the public it just isn't true. In a double-blind, scientific manner we would probably prove no matter how much you think you can, you can't.
pixelbud
· 11 months ago
@Buster: I hope 100% of human beings on Earth had a choice when clicking " Buy Song " in the iTunes Music Store. They had a choice. They could either buy a DRM-track or buy a CD. They chose a DRM-track. I am not talking about bit-rate. You are paying for an upgrade to your library for DRM-free music per track and they are throwing in a bitrate change to a higher quality. You are paying to CHOOSE to upgrade your library. If you are happy with it, then keep it in its DRM format. I don't share my music. If you aren't happy with DRM then why did you CHOOSE to BUY it period? You did order it. You clicked, " Buy Song. "
Mike
· 11 months ago
drm was forced on apple by record companies, and it was something apple was willing to accept in order to establish the itunes store as a "best in class" type services and as a bonus, leverage it w/ the ipod.
the upgrade is likely an all or nothing situation in order to get rid of the drm forever and not have to support or deal with it anymore. remember that apple likes to kill old tech by forcing users to upgrade. i don't see why this is any different.
as for the fee... that's kind of lame. i understand paying for the better file and that is fine to have an upgrade option. i already own copies of the songs, however, and have fair use rights to them. why not enable me to remove the drm at the lower quality for free (w/o having burning a disc and ripping the tracks). this could have been a simple app that would run on the local machine, authenticate the user with the itunes store, and then process all the drm files.
-mike
Jeff
· 11 months ago
It would be a lot easier to read this page if that darn tummy stickout/suckin ad stopped coming up!
Doug Petrosky
· 11 months ago
Come on people! Who really cares? You bought what you bought. If you are happy with it, keep it!
If you want the benefits of the "plus" tracks it will cost you about $0.30 each, if you don't it costs you nothing.
Nobody forced you to buy initially! And nobody will force you to purchase the plus tracks.
There is a cost associated with upgrading the music and a value to many people so why wouldn't it cost money!!!
Jeremy
· 11 months ago
Was the DRM really that restrictive? Was being able to play a song ONLY on five computers really so bad? Who was burning more than seven CDs off a single playlist? And if you are trying to use an MP3 player other than an iPod/iPhone, why are you using iTunes anyway?
There was actually a funny "news" article on this topic... "People with six or more computers rejoice over iTunes DRM changes" :)
@pixelbud : I do not want my library "upgraded". I want the DRM gone, and forcing me to pay $1.29 for a song that I would pay $0.69 for normally is unfair in anyone's book. What doesn't change no matter what is Apple's specious argument that I am receiving value, for in reality I am the one giving up the value. I place no value on a 256-bit encoded song higher than a 128-bit encoded song.
All I want is the exact same value that people can receive today, which is at $0.69 or $0.99 I have a DRM-free song. Paying for the privilege of having a DRM-free track is the embodiment of the argument Apple itself was using to gain leverage with the music industry lo these many years - if you go above X price point, people will turn to piracy. Well, I never did and now I feel like the world's biggest patsy for being honest all these years.
I don't want anything special, I just want what the next guy in line is going to get, which is a $0.99 DRM-free song. And since I have already paid the $0.99, I just want the DRM gone. Is that such a tough concept to grasp?
Doug Petrosky
· 11 months ago
@Buster B: Then don't upgrade your library and you got what you paid for. As for having what you paid for enhanced to what others who purchase it today could get, that's a flawed argument because those people didn't get the use of that music for the past few months/years as you have.
It was your choice to purchase when you purchased. Should Apple rebate me $5 when a $9.99 movie gets discounted to $4.99?
Now Apple is going to charge up to $1.29 for new releases and at a later date those new releases will drop down to $.99 or even $.69. Is that fair to those people who purchased the tracks for $1.29?
Worse yet! If you purchased any new releases over the past few years should Apple bill you for the extra .30 because now that is what they are worth?
You paid what you felt was a fair price for music. You are being given a way to purchase music with additional rights and enhanced quality for $.30. If it is worth it, pay it! If it is not, enjoy the music you have! OH! and good news! future purchases will be higher quality and have fewer restrictions.
Dave
· 11 months ago
These new DRM policies are ridiculous. Charging us for what should be standard.
Sounds good.However,I'm wondering how many songs will be priced $1.29 and the amount of music priced $0.69.
Also,I do hope Apple gives more options on upgrading my original purchases. I have 800 pieces of music in my itunes library,and I'm counting the money that will cost if I update all of them! $0.3*800=$240...
I'll just wait for Apple to carry out more actions.
daisy
· 9 months ago
Sounds good.However,I'm wondering how many songs will be priced $1.29 and the amount of music priced $0.69.
Also,I do hope Apple gives more options on upgrading my original purchases. I have 800 pieces of music in my itunes library,and I'm counting the money that will cost if I update all of them! $0.3*800=$240...
I'll just wait for Apple to carry out more actions.
Damon Allen Davison
· 7 months ago
Apart from being DRM-free, the new format is also encoded at a higher bitrate, so the thirty cents should also be improving the sound quality, which I think was rubbish and still is. None of the major retailers are offering lossless compression on their downloads, but some innovators like Boomkat are indeed offering downloads in FLAC format. I'd like to see Apple offer FLACs or at least their somewhat redundant Apple Lossless Audio Codec (ALAC). Amazon definitely should be selling FLACs in addition to MP3s.
I should point out that smaller labels are forced to play the game when a retailer is as big as iTunes, although DRM in the iTunes store was probably the wish of the major labels at the beginning. None of the labels I work with were ever asked their opinion and are certainly not out to stick it to customer by double charging them for the same release in a different format.
All Comments
We should perhaps be thankful there is an 'upgrade' at all, I'm sure the labels would love to have everyone just pay full price again!
has been digital content and it's a way of minimizing piracy and legitimizing
distribution, something that eliminating DRM won't exactly resolve. frankly,
i don't share my music enough to care about un-DRMed music and I'm curious as
to why anyone would need un-DRMed music if not for the purposes of distributing
it to their friends.
Some people buy other MP3 players, which can only read MP3s. If a non-iPod owner wants to stay legal, they need un-DRMed music.
For some of us, who don't buy the stuff popular enough to get over $.99, that's a great deal.
no?
Also, I noticed this can get quite costly ... itunes currently tells me that
upgrading all possible titles to drm free woul be in the 100+ € range ... and
yeah I would have to do all at once it seems ... also I couldn't care less about
256 kbs, I'd just like the undrmed stuff.
I tried Free Music Downloader before ,it can help you download free music/a> .
What does suck is that I spent $50 on iTunes music on Monday night and that I'm still going to get charged that $0.30 upgrade fee. If only I'd waited... But yeah, I'm a bonehead.
For example, I now need to pay an extra 40 cents(Cdn) to have the DRM removed. Meanwhile, someone can come onto iTunes today and purchase that same song, DRM-free, for the original 99 cents.
So... by downloading my music legally and being a loyal iTunes customer for x amount of years, I'm being asked $1.39 for something other people can now get for .99 - and Apple is calling that a special deal.
all along, and I'm not saying if I would have had to make that decision that I wouldn't have possibly done it the same way, but that doesn't mean I have to like it.
Especially that it doesn't allow you to upgrade gradually is annoying. So please,
if you are an Apple rep, say so, otherwise stop acting like I insulted
your loved ones or something, Apple doesn't need your help, and I never stated anything wrong, just personal opinion.
http://modemlooper.com/itunes-new-pricing-strut...
by almost anything, but itunes protected files can't. So basically you wouldn't
need the drm removed for sharing the files (especially cause your account info-
rmation remains in the file even w/o drm) but to play them with anything other
than an ipod/iphone or itunes or apple tv. That's reason enough imho.
Am I gonna upgrade my library? Hell no! I don't see any reason to fork over that money. At least not yet.
with iTunes.
download, therefore the charge. I will bet you're getting the higher quality file as well. With the large number of songs
already in customer's hands it would be incredible for Apple to tie up their servers downloading millions of songs free.
and back ... no way 30 cents are actual costs. That does not mean I think apple
is wrong from a business perspective, like I said before, but still ppl feel the
need to explain apple's actions or try to "educate" me on their economic views, which is kinda ridiculous.
@mjtomlin And the same ppl that don't need drm-free music according to you can hear the difference
between 128 kbps and 256? right. Also you're just implying stuff that suits your
view, no one said they "thought at some point in time that they (the music files) would magically be stripped of that DRM for free"
And please don't start with "I can hear the difference", because for the vast majority of the public it just isn't true. In a double-blind, scientific manner we would probably prove no matter how much you think you can, you can't.
the upgrade is likely an all or nothing situation in order to get rid of the drm forever and not have to support or deal with it anymore. remember that apple likes to kill old tech by forcing users to upgrade. i don't see why this is any different.
as for the fee... that's kind of lame. i understand paying for the better file and that is fine to have an upgrade option. i already own copies of the songs, however, and have fair use rights to them. why not enable me to remove the drm at the lower quality for free (w/o having burning a disc and ripping the tracks). this could have been a simple app that would run on the local machine, authenticate the user with the itunes store, and then process all the drm files.
-mike
If you want the benefits of the "plus" tracks it will cost you about $0.30 each, if you don't it costs you nothing.
Nobody forced you to buy initially! And nobody will force you to purchase the plus tracks.
There is a cost associated with upgrading the music and a value to many people so why wouldn't it cost money!!!
There was actually a funny "news" article on this topic... "People with six or more computers rejoice over iTunes DRM changes" :)
http://www.maccomedy.com/people-with-six-or-mor...
All I want is the exact same value that people can receive today, which is at $0.69 or $0.99 I have a DRM-free song. Paying for the privilege of having a DRM-free track is the embodiment of the argument Apple itself was using to gain leverage with the music industry lo these many years - if you go above X price point, people will turn to piracy. Well, I never did and now I feel like the world's biggest patsy for being honest all these years.
I don't want anything special, I just want what the next guy in line is going to get, which is a $0.99 DRM-free song. And since I have already paid the $0.99, I just want the DRM gone. Is that such a tough concept to grasp?
Then don't upgrade your library and you got what you paid for. As for having what you paid for enhanced to what others who purchase it today could get, that's a flawed argument because those people didn't get the use of that music for the past few months/years as you have.
It was your choice to purchase when you purchased. Should Apple rebate me $5 when a $9.99 movie gets discounted to $4.99?
Now Apple is going to charge up to $1.29 for new releases and at a later date those new releases will drop down to $.99 or even $.69. Is that fair to those people who purchased the tracks for $1.29?
Worse yet! If you purchased any new releases over the past few years should Apple bill you for the extra .30 because now that is what they are worth?
You paid what you felt was a fair price for music. You are being given a way to purchase music with additional rights and enhanced quality for $.30. If it is worth it, pay it! If it is not, enjoy the music you have! OH! and good news! future purchases will be higher quality and have fewer restrictions.
http://blog.musicdetour.com/archives/198
this webinar.com its a big help for me.Thank you for sending it to me.
help me.
http://www.flash-on-tv.com/media-converter.html...
Also,I do hope Apple gives more options on upgrading my original purchases. I have 800 pieces of music in my itunes library,and I'm counting the money that will cost if I update all of them!
$0.3*800=$240...
luckily,a media converter is much economical.So,I still use software to help me:
http://www.flash-on-tv.com/media-converter.html...
I'll just wait for Apple to carry out more actions.
Also,I do hope Apple gives more options on upgrading my original purchases. I have 800 pieces of music in my itunes library,and I'm counting the money that will cost if I update all of them!
$0.3*800=$240...
luckily,a media converter is much economical.So,I still use software to help me:
http://www.flash-on-tv.com/media-converter.html...
I'll just wait for Apple to carry out more actions.
I should point out that smaller labels are forced to play the game when a retailer is as big as iTunes, although DRM in the iTunes store was probably the wish of the major labels at the beginning. None of the labels I work with were ever asked their opinion and are certainly not out to stick it to customer by double charging them for the same release in a different format.