EMI will give Who's music away????

Reviewing the numerous headlines: EMI drops DRM...
it begs too question when does the other shoe drop?

Non-DRM songs cost more ($1.29), but provide the higher
quality of content. Did they take a page from the Telcom
industry when they first announced: "Your phone calls are free!"

As anticipated numerous sites host a wide array of feedback.
Good, who cares, what's the point, an even a suggestion the
next step would be adding a surcharge to your cable bill to
encourage downloads. Through it all (2) things stand out:

1) Apple Corp which owns Beatles,
does not sign on too this.
2) EMI statement, we listen to
our consumers requests.

It maybe early, an I'm just guessing, if I signed on with
EMI as an artist am I just wavering my Right(s) to have
DRM on my content to protect it from piracy? Does
my percentage change depending upon which format
they download? Just cannot help too think the newest
databases or P2Ps will now explode with content, to
the point artist(s) are now going to concentrate on the
business vs music. Release a couple songs then go
so far as too making a CD only available at LIVE
Concerts, $12.00 a CD still has good profit.

EMI listens their customers at the expense of the artist.
Too listen to them they believe $0.99 is to much.
More downloads means consumers will be
wanting large capacity players which is really what
Apple is looking for. Again at the expense of the artist.

David Bowie, Elvis Costello, Korn an let's not forget
the greatest Rock Band Rolling Stones, why have we
not heard from them. I'm sure Nashville is on the
phone, the Colonel rolled over in his grave hearing
just the possibility Elvis is FREE......oh that's right
EMI will only do that with lesser talent,
calling it market exposer...

DRM - Musicians have Rights.

Digitial Rights Management (DRM) has received a lot
of attention as of recently due in fact too Apple an
Steve Jobs making noteworthly comments DRM
should be dropped altogether.

Reviewing the numerous sites/blogs/wires with reaction
generates the feeling something is lost in the process.
Where did the concept that all music should be FREE
come from?

iTunes takes the lead, frankly because no-one else
actually can. The concept is simple - single source
to support one player. Then the world cries foul.
Why, because they believe companies services
are suppose to serve their needs, please.

Apple as a company is only protecting their valued
market share which includes NOT supporting or
giving value to competitors. The double-edged
sword of having an iPod becomes blurred when
a purchase from iTunes is limited in use. As a
consumer I made that choice PRIOR.

A European source started broadcasting 70% of their
customer service calls we're related too DRM issues.
Actually, the streams sold would ONLY work on iPods.
The source was quick to blame DRM issues, not a hint
of self-responsibility, by the end of the day reports had
twisted this to read source drops DRM from music files.
Then stated MP3 files grew 40% over the last 2 months,
how do you evaluate growth on something that is FREE
an no value except to the user.

The same people crying fool over iTunes were sitting on the
sidelines yesterday when MIT dropped SAE because of
DRM issues. Simply put, SAE maintains one the worlds
largest FREE data-bases for engineers, SAE hijacked the
DRM principals, claiming ownership too the files, submitted
FREEly by users. Obviously, an ill-fated attempt to create
subscriptions which creates PROFIT is the purpose of
any service.

DRM is suppose to protect the rights of the author or
creator of the content. The author/creator now has the
option to decide how they want said content distributed.
If profit is the motivating factor we must respect that choice
and choose whether to participate or not.

Apple has created the business model most Top
companies are jealous of, service without supporting
3rd party intervention. {Duplication manufactures
attempt this same effort by selling "aurthorized" media}
The simple answer - you want quality you have to pay.
In any other business, content distributed is controlled
by Copy Right laws. DRM is the basic tool that enforces
this process. Too separate musicians from this process
is just plain wrong. They have a right too make a living
from their hard work. Music is a lighting rod, no other
business sector on this plant would survive if the
same principles applied to musicians were adopted.