iTunes Stops Playing Those Mind Games, Sells Lennon Solo Stuff

I remember back when I was just out of high school I applied for a job at a record store. On the application was a question: What are ten bands/artists that you think deserve more recognition? I tried my best to fill the list with obscure, intelligent choices to show my prowess as a discerning audiophile, but I was laughed at when I went in for my interview because riding atop my A-list of brilliant underground jazz artists and indie-sceners was the Beatles. I remember the guy's face now- "you think the Beatles should be more popular?!" Um, yeah, why shouldn't they be? Looking back at the decades of legal disputes that have kept a new generation from exposure to the Beatles and their solo work, I still feel the same.

That's why I was happy to come upon an article in the Journal Star today reporting that iTunes, which has been slowly but surely warming itself up to the release of Beatle's material owned by the EMI label and Capitol records, has just made available 16 of John Lennon's post-Beatles solo albums. I for one am happy to see it- even though my Lennon/Beatles collection already overfloweth, to say the least- and think it's really about time. It's a shame that the work of one of the most influential and prolific artists of the last century, one of those few individuals who actually had a hand on the hammer that hewed out the genre that is now modern popular music and helped it to be regarded as a serious art form, has been plagued with such difficulty in the release of his music (with the Beatles and solo) through any legitimate, legal digital music provider. I guess there's also a certain amount of sentimentality too, thinking that John Lennon is not alive to negotiate his music's release on his own terms.

It should be said though, that despite the catchy title of this post, EMI has surely had a healthy hand in keeping the Fab 4 from the ears of a new generation who listen and live online, and so have the Beatles for that matter. It took decades for the royalty disputes between EMI and the remaining members of the band + Yoko (via Apple Corps) to be resolved (a $59 million resolution, from what I understand) and the feud between Apple Corps and Apple Inc. over trademark infringement has only recently come to an end. All friends now? Who knows, but all this law-suiting has kept many music lovers literally licking their lips for nearly two decades anticipating this turn.

I guess to many, of course, the real news was when Steve Jobs announced that iTunes would carry music by the Beatles earlier this year. I realize too that Yoko Ono already released a remastered collection of John Lennon's work to many online music stores like Napster and MSN Music, but that too was a long time coming. Anyway, iTunes is the largest online music store and they should be carrying the work of music giants like the Beatles and John Lennon. So, this is indeed news.

Oh yeah, and just for good measure, here's "Mind Games" from Lennon's "Walls and Bridges" album to help you celebrate!

Apple Get's its Sh*t Together and Dumps DRM

Boom!

Here's some pretty sweet news:

Mr. Steve Jobs has just announced that Apple will join up with EMI to offer the entire EMI catalog on iTunes music store....

DRM free!

The announcement was made today and the new 'free tunes' will be available for download in May. The new music prices will increase 30% to $1.29 per song, but the quality offered will be upped to 256 kbs in AAC format. Interestingly, iTunes will continue to offer the DRM music as well at $.99 per track, giving music listeners a choice. (not sure about the thinking on this, but whatever...)

So the price goes up, but the quality's better and there's no DRM to contend with. The hike in coinage that it will take to buy the DRM-free music from iTunes has another benefit too, as it will give a more even advantage to smaller distributors.

Another cool little tidbit is that (as near as I can tell) full albums will remain the same price (!) and you can 'upgrade' any previously purchased iTunes DRM music in your library by simply paying the $.30 difference. That's cool. Also from what I understand DRM videos can be stripped of their DRM for free.

Apparently, back in February, Steve Jobs actually sent out an open letter to record companies encouraging them to dump DRM restrictions. Mr. Jobs stated in the letter that the only reason iTunes implemented DRM in the first place was because the major music labels wouldn't distribute music through iTunes Music Store without the DRM restrictions in place.

I know that this won't mean anything at all to many people who get their music from eMusic or elsewhere, but the fact is that this is a huge (although inevitable) step forward for the world of music. As long as the concept doesn't bomb (and why would it?), then everyone else will very quickly jump on-board and the DRM monster will be effectively slain.

Great work, Apple!

P.S.- In case you're wondering (and why wouldn't you be?) The Beatles' music, which EMI owns the rights to, will still not be released along with the rest of their catalog as of yet.

***********Dr. Confusion jumping in here********
I think this is great news. But, I worry. I'm worried that, in pricing the DRM free tracks higher, the sales will be lower. So, in the future both Apple and EMI can say "Look at the figures...there's no demand for DRM-free music." If they priced the non and the with DRM tracks the same, the ideological argument would trounce the economic for doing away with DRM. If feels weird, a a little bit galling to have to pay to remove the noose you didn't ask for. Like, how unrefined brown rice costs more than processed rice. Knamean? There's less labor involved in the process so why do I have to pay more? On the whole, this is a very encouraging sign!


****a Myku Update*****
Yes, indeed, it is a backwards way of doing things. I can only imagine that it's because they're (for some reason) trying to "phase out" DRM instead of doing away with it altogether. I truly hope that it doesn't backfire, but for some reason, I don't think it will. Maybe because there's such an overwhelming populace of people who want DRM to die. We'll see what happens. I think, though, that the new DRM-free tunes are of a higher bit-rate than those currently available on iTunes Music Store.

Another Apple update here too: I just read that iTunes Music Store will now give you credit towards the purchase of a full album if you've previously purchased tracks from that album. They'll just subtract what you've already paid from the album cost. I think that's really sweet.