> And the worse thing is that they only get away with it because the competition is worse.
youtube-dl is their competition, and using it is as easy as shooting fish in a barrel.
DRM sucks. Don't sponsor it.
youtube-dl is their competition, and using it is as easy as shooting fish in a barrel.
DRM sucks. Don't sponsor it.
They still DRM Apple Music (which you could argue is selling music, but as a service), and files which had DRM when you bought them, and movies, it seems.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204146
Movies have DRM. Blame that on the studios But Apple, Amazon, Google, Vudu and a couple of the other digital movie services participate in Movies Anywhere with most of the studios. You buy a movie from one place and it is automatically considered purchased from the other stores.
Movies have always had copy protection - even back in the analog days with Macrovision.
More generally, consumer copying technology was never really "supposed" to exist. It's often been said that "copyright was supposed to regulate publishers, not consumers", which I agree with. But the flipside of this was "consumers weren't supposed to become casual publishers", which is what the AHRA, DMCA 1201, and DRM as a whole was/is trying to achieve. But that's largely failed, and we live in the world where everyone is a publisher all the time, which is why everyone has to be regulated like a publisher all the time.
[0] See RIAA v. Diamond Multimedia
This was originally posted on the front page of Apple back in 2007.
https://macdailynews.com/2007/02/06/apple_ceo_steve_jobs_pos...
The article you linked adds it's own commentary which has aged like milk. Jobs wasn't so much opposed to DRM in general, as much as he just didn't like it on music. This probably has more to do with the fact that Apple was not a music label[0], and thus he was predisposed to look at music solely as a consumer[1]. When it comes to things Apple does publish[2], such as software, they are extremely protective of it.
[0] And legally, cannot, because of numerous trademark lawsuits with Apple Records, the record label of The Beatles
[1] "They don't want to rent their music" https://www.theverge.com/2015/6/8/8744963/steve-jobs-jesus-p...
[2] "Publishing" in this case means funding the creation, marketing, and physical manufacturing of some creative work. This is primarily what a music label does, and is part of the reason why they take so much from artists.
Spotify makes around $3 million a quarter in profit.
https://www.barrons.com/articles/spotify-has-finally-found-a...
Also you can't turn off the Apple Music ads anymore, or at least the setting claiming to turn them off just resets itself after a few hours.
As of 1998 and the DMCA, it is a federal crime in the USA to sell a VCR without Macrovision.