MP3.com founder to Jobs: open up iTunes and iPods. Do you agree?

Summary: Michael Robertson, who founded MP3.com, knows a few things about selling downloaded music over the Internet.

Michael Robertson, who founded MP3.com, knows a few things about selling downloaded music over the Internet.

As such, Michael has the cred to challenge Apple CEO Steve Jobs when Steve says that Digital Rights Management is outmoded and that the major music labels need to be more open-minded about technology and security for downloading and multiple-device compatibility for their digital tracks.

Now Michael fires off a post directly in front of Steve and Apple's bow. Essentially, what Mike is saying to Steve is that it isn't totally convincing for Steve to preach openness unless he, Steve JObs of famously proprietary Apple, adapts an open model himself.

"My vision is that customers should be able to mix and match the type of computer, music software, retail option and music devices they want to use," Michael writes on his blog. "No single company is the best in every product category so consumer choice ensures the best music experience. Here are some immediate actions Apple could take to help push the industry in that direction."

Next, Michael offers Steve a four-step roadmap on what he ought to do to push Apple in "that direction." Let's take a look at that roadmap now.

1) Start selling some content in MP3 format in the iTunes store.

It's my understanding that Apple has a license from certain content providers that allow tracks to be sold in the MP3 format, like the CDBaby catalog. While the major labels might be insisting on DRM files, that isn't the case with many indie labels and other music providers. Making those songs available for purchase in the consumer friendly MP3 format would mean that some songs from the iTunes store would be compatible on every MP3 player. The big criticism of the iTunes store, which has spurned possible government action, is the fact that purchases only play on iPods. By selling MP3s in the iTunes store, files become interoperable with any player. It will be a minority of files, but according to your letter, major labels control only 70% of music distributed. Therefore, if a significant percentage of the remainder are made available in MP3 format, this would have an impact.

2) Publish the database format for iPods so other music software can be used.

Files stored on iPods are done so in a proprietary database structure that Apple does not reveal. The only software that can reliably move files to/from the iPod is iTunes. Thus, iPod owners are forced to use iTunes software exclusively. There are many good media managers available that I'm sure people would like to have work with their iPods. By publishing the database structure for iPods these music managers to interact with iPods. This would not mean licensing the DRM that wraps each music file, so it should not affect security in any way.

3) Open the doors for iTunes software to work seamlessly with other stores.

Today the iTunes software is tied solely to your iTunes store. These two platforms converse over the net with a secret language. It's not complicated, but it's also not public. So iTunes customers are tied only to your store and iPods only work seamlessly with that store. There is a growing list of great online music stores which sell MP3 tracks such as eClassical, Magnatune, Broadjam and Wippit. By revealing the language or API that your store uses, other stores could use that same technology. Meaning, they could sell songs that load directly into iTunes software and from there sync to iPods.

4) Make iTunes software for Linux.

I talked to you a few years ago about making iTunes work on Linux. Apple made the leap to Microsoft Windows by releasing iTunes for that platform. Porting iTunes to Linux would be a relatively easy job and give people more flexibility in their choice of operating system. A Linux company I founded called Linspire would even do the engineering for free if engineering resources were an issue.

I hope you'll consider taking these actions - none of which require approval of the music industry, nor require you to license your Fairplay DRM technology that you see as problematic. All of these actions will demonstrate that you want a world where consumers have options as to where they buy and play their music; not to mention, you'll be putting Apple's leadership where your pen is.

Those are instigatory words. Still, I wonder if Steve Jobs has it in him to follow even some of that device, and treat digital playback as, more or less, an open platform. I have my doubts.

                                                     [poll id=38] 

Topic: Apple

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

11 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Linux is welcome, but MP3 is an aging format

    The statement of sticking with MP3 sales of music I don't agree with. MP3 is a format that is showing its age and their are plenty of music codecs out there that have better sound quality with higher compression ratios. AAC, .OGG, even .WMA. Sticking with MP3 only prolongs this aging standard.

    I also disagree with opening iTunes up to other players. The iTunes /iPod combination is a package in and of itself. Should should any company feel the need to open up its software or store to rival products? There are plenty of options around people to get music elsewhere, and iPod users are not locked into iTunes.

    I think iTunes however should definitely open up the option of the artists/labels being able to choose whether they want fairplay on their tracks or not. There is no reason why a label cannot choose to do so with their own music, and a Linux distribution of iTunes would be a welcome sight as well.
    msupert@...
    • However

      MP3 is the common denominator across portable music players, so to supply in MP3 provides you with the widest target audience possible. There is no technical reason why the customer shouldn't be offered a choice formats based on their personal requirements.

      If you disagree with opening iTunes up to other players do you also think that now MS has released Zune it should lock Mediaplayer down to only sync with that device?

      Opening iTunes would not damage the iTunes/iPod package but it would allow Apple to potentially increase their footprint in the marketplace.

      I personally would be quite happy for Jobs and co to lock tie all of their products together and lock everyone out. That way it would be easy to have nothing to do with any of them, however all of Michael Robertson's points are sensible and well thought through.
      nmh
  • dump mp3, let's go unlocked WMA Pro

    Seems like many people don't understand that WMA can be non-drm'd
    sagec
    • Too limited

      Do recent versions of WMA work on Linux boxes? I know they don't work on Macs. How about instead a more open format like AAC (already supported by WMP and the Zune)?
      tic swayback
  • I think he's confused

    The iPod can certainly be used without iTunes:
    http://mp3.about.com/b/a/240496.htm
    tic swayback
  • 2 isn't valid

    Unless he's talking about strictly moving files from the computer to the iPod, or vice versa. Another music manager wouldn't be able to play the files, and really, what's the point to having another music manager if you can't do that?

    3 isn't all that valid either. Preferably, there'd be one login for a certain store, but for those to integrate with itunes music store, they'd have to have 2 logins, one for apple which also has the credit card number on file. With 2 being invalid, this isn't valid either since users can't play the songs they bought without the DRM code and key. Still need iTunes.

    Of course, it's probably a linear set of steps, where 2 requires 1, in which case, nothing is valid, because they'd only be able to buy 30% of the songs available. That'd be a crappy store.
    Voodoo187
    • poop

      "major labels control only 70% of music distributed..." that 30% of the songs statement sounds dumb now :P

      sure, open up the indie labels to no DRM and see how they fare. it could pressure the major labels into not requiring DRM.
      Voodoo187
      • Indies

        Not sure I get what's being said here, but here's more info. First off, Indie labels are responsible for 30% of music sales, but 80% of music released:
        http://www.wired.com/news/columns/0,72634-0.html?tw=wn_index_2

        ---sure, open up the indie labels to no DRM and see how they fare. it could pressure the major labels into not requiring DRM.---

        This has been happening for a long time now, through outlets like eMusic and Magnatune, which sell indie material as downloads with no DRM. It would be nice to see the same thing happen on iTunes, with the non-DRMed material clearly tagged. Regardless, if you read the linked article above, the indies are seriously gaining in power, bad news for the corporate fatcats.
        tic swayback
        • yup, that's why my statement was dumb

          30% of music sales isn't 30% of music... I noticed the word "distributed" in there ...

          I would love to see apple not DRM up those songs, depending on the Label's wishes (a possibility).
          Voodoo187
          • Sales is what counts

            You know the thing that brings in the money, the reason people sell stuff, makes the world go around etc.

            I think 99% of musicians would rather sell 1000 albums at ?/$ 10 than a million at nothing
            mrjonno
  • Open Source Alternatives for iTunes

    http://www.osalt.com/itunes

    open source alternatives to iTunes that will sync with iPod
    progresskills