AfterDawn: News

Music downloaders willing to pay more for DRM-free downloads?

According to a new poll on tech site Pocket-Lint.co.uk, many music downloaders would consider paying extra per music track download if it included no Digital Rights Management (DRM) protection. In 62% of respondents confirmed they would pay more for DRM-less downloads when asked, "Will you pay extra for DRM free music?". About 38% said they wouldn't pay extra for the downloads.

EMI and Apple Inc. are currently experimenting with DRM-less downloading through iTunes, although the downloads cost more for the added benefits. Without DRM, users that download the tracks can store it on a lot more players instead of just iPods and can use the file like they use any other. The iTunes offering followed an open letter from Steve Jobs that questioned the benefits of DRM and urged the industry to take steps to drop it.



A question that must be asked however is whether consumers should view DRM-less downloads as "new" and somehow "superior" to before. Does the lack of DRM make the music sound any better? Considering the music industry has been selling unprotected CDs but still enforcing restrictions on downloads of the same music, should consumers consider nothing less than DRM-less downloads without the price hike?

Of course, the benefits of removing DRM from tracks are obvious, but if unprotected CDs are truly the source of MP3 files that are shared millions of times daily, then why not ease up on the growing market and just remove the DRM without putting up the price?

Source:
Pocket-Lint.co.uk

Written by: James Delahunty @ 14 Apr 2007 18:47

• Previous article

• Wi-Fi iPod rumors re-kindle

• Next article

• EU wont join China WTO piracy complaint

• 4 comments

• limelight

  Quote:Of course, the benefits of removing DRM from tracks are obvious, but if unprotected CDs are truly the source of MP3 files that are shared millions of times daily, then why not ease up on the growing market and just remove the DRM without putting up the price? CD technology is 15+ years old. The consumer is happy with it, but the RIAA cant enforce a sure-fire copy protection on old hardware without making drastic changes that could affect playback on thousands of players. Since downloading music is still new, the RIAA can control what gets sent where at all times, at least thats what they think.
  
  So its all about control. The RIAA wants as much money as it can get, because one cent loss is too much for the devil to forget about.

  14.4.2007 19:26 #1

• pigfister

  the price system needs to be looked at under tight scrutiny unless the artist will receive %100 of the difference in cost but i bet the artist gets no extra income from the increased price for DRM less music. who are the RIAA protecting, the artists or record company proffits??

  15.4.2007 02:37 #2

• borhan9

  I think they should not put or remove DRM on tracks that are 10 years and older. It would just be better that way. New tracks can have them until they are ten or five years old. Give it a time period.

  16.4.2007 20:10 #3

• es350jc

  There is a company called Media Rightd Technologies (MRT), located in Santa Cruz, California which has come up with a technology, called Secure X1, which eliminates all types of Internet piracy of copyrighted material. Most importantly, the Secure X1 technology can completely stop the copying of streaming audio files which is currently the biggest problem. A bill was recently introduced in the US Senate called "The Perform Act," which will require MRT's type of technology on avery web site that contains music or video. The mission statement of MRT is to "save the arts." Eliminating Internet piracy will go a long way to accomplishing that goal.

  19.4.2007 15:59 #4