The Perl Journal May 2003
Apple Computer has sent word that it would like to be music to your ears. The company is talking, of course, about the launch of Music Store, its online music-purchase service initially for Mac users via Apple's free iTunes jukebox software. Apple isn't the first outfit to offer such a service, yet the music industry must be watching this endeavor very closely since the service represents a mass-market test balloon for the sort of Digital Rights Management (DRM) the music industry wants.
Here's how it works: Music you download through Apple's service comes in the form of a 128-kpbs Advanced Audio Codec (AAC) file. (More on AAC at http://www .vialicensing.com/products/mpeg4aac/standard.html.) You are authorized to play this file on three Macs simultaneously. You can deauthorize the files on one machine, and authorize them on a new one when you upgrade your computer. You can download these songs to an unlimited number of iPods (Apple's popular digital media player). You can burn these files to standard audio CDs (up to 10 times for a single playlist). You can even stream them to other computers.
Given the impasse that has developed over DRM between the music industry (who wants control over copying) and the users (who have gotten used to being able to do pretty much whatever they want with MP3s), it seems that Apple has struck a compromise that, on the surface, seems reasonable for both parties. And perhaps if nothing else, Apple is to be applauded for trying. But there's an aspect of this DRM scheme that is sticking in the craw of more than a few of Apple's potential customers—the authorization process.
Each authorization on a new Mac requires communication with Apple's servers. For their DRM to work, authorization records need to be kept in a central location. In the short term, that might not be a problem. But fast-forward five years. Customers who have made a sizable investment in music are now dependent on the continued existence (and efficient functioning) of Apple's authorization service for the future viability of their music files. The music is held hostage by the whims of a single third party. If Apple goes under, or even bails out of the music business, the purchaser's music can't be moved to new machines. What about those CDs you can burn? Sure, you can reencode from those, producing files unencumbered by DRM, but those files will be lower quality than the originals you purchased.
That's not to say we don't all face risks when we purchase content on any media. Vinyl and cassette buyers had to repurchase their music on CD when the format changed. We're not guaranteed future compatibility. But there are key differences between these scenarios: You can still buy turntables and cassette decks. And those format shifts were industry-wide, and weren't controlled by any one party.
The DRM scheme Apple is using changes the agreement between music seller and music buyer in a fundamental way. Instead of purchasing a product, music buyers are paying for something that is somewhere between a product and a service—part of the payment is for the music itself, and part is for the continued authorization service. Whether Apple succeeds in its music endeavor, and whether the music industry gets the kind of DRM it wants, depends on whether buyers are willing to accept this change.
Kevin Carlson
Executive Editor
The Perl Journal