…only about 3 percent of songs on any given iPod were purchased from the iTunes store. The rest were ripped from CDs that have no copy-protection technology and can be freely shared between computers and other MP3 players, he said.
"Why would the big four music companies agree to let Apple and others distribute their music without using DRM systems to protect it? The simplest answer is because DRMs haven't worked, and may never work, to halt music piracy," Jobs wrote.
Jobs didn't acknowledge this, but even FairPlay has its limitations, McQuivey said. A song bought from iTunes and burned onto a CD, then ripped back onto a computer, loses its DRM protection in the process. Most people don't want to take all those steps, but it illustrates the elusive nature of DRM protections, he said.
Jason Reindorp, marketing director for Microsoft's Zune unit, said that Jobs' call for the "abolition" of DRM without any apparent consideration of the complex balance between what consumers want versus the rights of the content owners "seems to be kind of irresponsible" as well as an about-face.
"DRM is not necessarily the bad guy," Reindorp said, noting that the value of protected content is determined by how the technology is applied and which business models are employed in distributing content. "DRM enables a lot of cool scenarios like subscription music. If you didn't have DRM, those wouldn't be possible."
Another benefit of DRM is that songwriters and publishers can track the sales of their work and not have to depend on compensation coming back to them through the record labels, McGuire said.
Many record company executives are unlikely to be thrilled by the letter, McGuire said. However, there's also the possibility that others within the record industry who have been calling for a change could seize upon the letter as evidence that the current system is broken. The New York Times reported in January that music industry executives at Midem, an annual industry conference, were openly discussing the sale of DRM-free music via the MP3 format.
Getting consumers to buy music online
Record executives are coming to the sinking realisation that while digital music growth is still fairly strong, it's not growing fast enough to offset plummeting sales of CDs, RealNetwork's Sheeran said. Something needs to be done to get consumers interested in buying music online, he said, and labels appear to be caught between the old ways of doing business and the new reality of the Digital Age.
"That's where the interesting negotiations happen, what happens within the labels," McGuire said. But it is also likely that negotiations are under way between Apple and the record companies for an extension to their iTunes licensing deal, and Jobs' letter could be positioning Apple for the next round of talks, he said.
A representative for EMI Group noted that the company has been experimenting with MP3 files for sale through outlets such as Yahoo Music, featuring songs from artists such as Norah Jones and Relient K. But he declined to comment beyond that, when asked if EMI was planning to sell more songs without DRM in the MP3 format.
"The lack of operability between a proliferating range of digital platforms and devices is increasingly becoming an issue for music consumers. EMI has been engaging with our various partners to find a solution," the company said later on in a statement.
Other record labels are likely to make similar overtures with DRM-free music, but it's going to be very, very hard for the recording industry to walk away from all the legal arguments it has used justifying DRM and lawsuits filed against file-sharing teenagers, McQuivey said.
A Sony BMG representative had no immediate comment on Jobs' letter, and representatives for Warner Music and Universal could not be reached for comment.
CNET News.com's Ina Fried contributed to this report.





Talkback
Maybe Saint Steve could lead by example and sell those tracks that do not need DRM without it, and clearly mark the difference.
... it may be a condition of the big four that no non-DRM'd music be sold in the same store. Certainly, if I were Universal, the last thing I'd want is a superior product showing mine up - and when it comes to iTunes, the labels set the rules.
I don't know of any mixed DRM and non-DRM online music shop; it's all or nothing (I vote for nothing, which is why Rupert Goodwins shops exclusively at bleep.com. Unpaid advert.)
I will ask Apple whether they've considered this, but as Apple never answer our questions I can only recommend that you don't wait underwater.
Apple could release their DRM code to MP3 makers in confidence to allow them to use their music, but they don't...now they say this? I'm not against DRM per se, but when it restricts you to a certain player, then yes. They could really lead by example by letting other users use their technology.
I did wonder about this (out loud) until someone pointed out wippits.com. They are UK based and quite above board. Their service clearly lists the tracks that are and are not DRMed.
Sadly I can't get all the tracks I want there .. in fact none of them. They simply aren't big enough.
I also wonder if this would be deemed a restriction to trade. Would a requirement of this kind even be legal?
I think there might be some technical issues with this in that the DRM gets slipped on at purchase. So I don't think giving it to other MP3 makers would help. Unless you are referring to MP3 player makers and I think Steve touched on that in his letter in that the more people who know about the keys to the Fairplay kingdom the more chance they have of being stolen. Broken DRM is probably worse than no DRM.
That said Apple have licensed Fairplay to other companies. Actually other company to be strictly correct - I think the Motorola ROKR had a full iTunes player so Apple can do this.
I was referring to the MP3 player manufacturers. I personally refuse to get an Ipod as if I end up downloading a number of iTunes, and then wish to upgrade my Ipod in the future to a different brand, then I will have to repurchase all my MP3s. DRM is extremely good for Apple as it ties you in to their hardware/software.
Apple's DRM is hardly a lock-in. The point is that if you buy from the store you can write the files to an Audio CD and there is no lock in. I don't think Apple could get away with such "open" DRM if they were starting today. OK the quality might not be as good... It is infected with DRM... A list of any other excuses why you wouldn't personally buy from the store. But are you the target market? Mr and Mrs Smith who buy from the store to get a track they want NOW probably don't need to worry about the lock in.
Put it this way. Buying a "Plays for Sure" device is now looking a bit sick now as Microsoft have come out with yet another DRM format and this time it is lock in all the way baby. Apart from the lock in with the three squirts for three days (and is it three plays?) But people have discovered the fact that certain songs aren't even allowed to be squirted at all. Nobody mentioned THAT at purchase.
Worse than that - all your OPEN music which you transfer to the device - The Zune - gets coated in a thick layer of DRM - even if you wrote the bloody song yourself.