[GWHH]

NEW YORK – Apple's iTunes Store isn't the only one that has adjusted prices for its digital song downloads recently: Changes are showing up at Amazon's and Wal-Mart's online music stores, too.

Apple Inc., the dominant digital music retailer on the Internet, shifted Tuesday from selling all songs for 99 cents apiece to a tiered pricing model where songs cost 69 cents, 99 cents and $1.29 each. Recording companies are choosing the prices.

Cupertino, Calif.-based Apple also eliminated the copy-protection technology that limited users' abilities to copy and play songs on devices other than Apple's own iPods.

On the same day Apple made its changes, Bentonville, Ark.-based Wal-Mart Stores Inc.'s online music store began selling tunes for $1.24, 94 cents and 64 cents apiece. Previously, they cost 74 cents and 94 cents apiece.

In an e-mail, Walmart.com spokesman Ravi Jariwala said the pricing adjustments are "reflective of new costs set by the music industry."

Elsewhere on the Web, Seattle-based online retailer Amazon.com Inc. is also selling individual song downloads for as much as $1.29. Most songs currently cost $1.29, 99 cents, 89 cents or 69 cents each. Amazon did not say when it began selling songs for $1.29; when the store first opened in September 2007, songs sold for 89 cents and 99 cents.

Wal-Mart and Amazon downloads had already been free of copy protection.

[David C. Matthews]

Apple hasn't dropped the copyright to those songs… those copyrights still belong to the label/artist/whoever.

What Apple has done is removed the digital-rights management (DRM) from the music files they sell.  There are now no technological barriers to sharing and distributing those songs.

But doing so in a way that violates the copyright holders' rights is still illegal.

Personally, I never had any problem with the DRM in the music I bought from the iTunes Store.  But then, I was buying those songs for my own enjoyment, not to distribute them to those who were unwilling to pay for them.

[Tonus]

I'm glad to see this change.  Not because it may facilitate pirating of songs, but because DRM can penalize a legitimate owner when it's handled poorly.  Example– I used the MusicMatch service for about a year and purchased and downloaded dozens of songs.  When I decided to terminate my subscription to the service, my songs would no longer play (I'd get an error due to DRM) and I could no longer load them onto my MP3 player (which I discovered too late).  While it had been nice to be able to listen to and download "unlimited" music for $14 a month, any goodwill I had towards that service and subscription-based services in general evaporated after that happened.

After that I started purchasing my MP3s through Amazon.com.  No DRM, no subscription, no nasty surprises.  I've been pleased as punch with Amazon and their system for purchasing music.

The sad truth is that for people like me, DRM makes me not want to buy music.  I understand the concerns of the recording industry regarding theft, but making me suffer for being a loyal paying customer is simply counterproductive.  I pay 89 or 99 cents per song from Amazon and that's just fine.  They are raising prices soon (as per the article above) and that's just fine.  I love being able to pay a couple of dollars for only the songs I want and not paying $12 or $16 for two songs I like and 11 songs I won't ever listen to again.  And I no longer worry that I'll be cut off from the music I paid for.  DRM cannot go away soon enough.

[stmercy2020]

Tonus, me lad, you've hit the nail on the head.  DRM has had both good and bad points to it.  In general, I actually support it; I just wish there were some way to make it a bit more user friendly.  I've had similar problems with DRM because of upgrading my computer after a system crash.  When the system crashes, sometimes you lose all your DRM data.  Not the files themselves, which I keep on external hard drives, just the key that allows your computer to open them and play them.  The first time that happened to me, several years ago, I contacted the distributor (actually Awefilms, in this case) and they worked very graciously with me to get it all sorted out.  Since my most recent crash, I haven't even bothered.  Not because Awefilms' staff wouldn't help (in my experience, they've never been anything but professional and helpful); really just because it was such a royal pain in the keister.

Apple removing the DRM is a step towards making the material more accesible, but I'm not convinced it's a step in the right direction.  Better would be to get Microsoft to come up with a way for users to renew licenses when they lose their data or change devices…

[Author]

Posts