A number of sites are reporting that the new DRM free iTunes files are carrying personal information such as the buyers email address are encoded within the file such as your email address (Link to Privacy Concerns Surface Following iTunes Plus Launch — Digital Music News).

Although having some form of deterrent to file sharing is understandable (although I’d suggest futile – you just need to watch the people behind hymn, CSS etc can quickly defeat a changed encryption). But something like an email address will upset the privacy lobby.  Which I understand and fully support after all your email address is effectively half the key into your iTunes account.  Apple could have so easily run a key system so that they could identify the original purchaser of a file, but no one else can.

The naive, may argue that if you don’t share your files, you’ve nothing to worry about. But it is probably those very naive people who don’t realise that their personal LAN with wireless have no security settings (or have managed to put some protection in place but don’t realise someone who knows what they’re doing can still break in without too much effort) on it and wide open for the casual person to help themselves to your nice DRM free music among other things and dump onto the web.

Of course having information like email addresses in the file does make it easy for the RIAA to find someone to accuse and exploit people’s naivety to get themselves a ‘collar’.  It does raise the question that if the RIAA where to do such an action are they breaching the Digital Millennium Copyright Act?

The concern I have with this is although Apple is removing DRM, these actions aren’t going to win the support of the anti DRM critics, and in the case of iTunes – there is still no a win for the interoperability argument. Which ultimately may kill the the momentum for DRM free thinking in the future.

 It would appear that Peter Gabriel as got involved in edging the electronic frontier forward again when it comes to music.  et was heavily involved in the development of OD2.  OD2 was later sold and now Peter is getting behind a DRM free music service called we7 (he does have a perchance for unconventional names).

we7 manages to ensure artists still earn revenues whilst music becomes free by prepending adverts to the MP3 download, the revenue from the advert then contributes to the artists fee.  It seems to be very much like the audio equivalent to Salon.com’s business model.  This does suggest that each download should generate about nearly £1 (~ $2) worth of advertising revenue – that seems like an awful lot to me.

But as a model to get hold of music to try before you buy in a manner that suits the consumer it seems like a great idea.  You also get the option to buy the music advert free if you like it.

The catalogue at we7 is currently very small – but does try to cover a broad range of genres from hip-hop to jazz with household names e.g. Coolio, Dave Matthews etc.  As a registered member I hope to see good developments and will hopefully have reason to blog more about it in the future.

 According to Digital Music News (article here) Amazon are readying an music download offering that will integrate with the existing store (rather than an independent entity like iTunes etc).  The really exciting part is that the downloads will be in MP3 – no DRM!  According to the article the will happen regardless of whether or not the majors want to participate.

This of course is all good news for the indie labels who have been selling DRM free content, so shouldn’t have too much trouble striking agreements with Amazon. This can only apply further pressure to the majors to drop the DRM position.  At the same time eMusic aren’t going to be happy as it is likely to eclipse their presence on the web for selling DRM free content.

 The noise and protest about the change in royalties for web broadcasts is picking up, check out Link to News: Higher Music Royalty Rates — KCRW | 89.9FM and Save The Streams.

 There has been an going debate about how much webcacts should be charged in royalty fees to match with public & commerical radio.  Well it would seem that some decisions have been announced on the subject.  The daft thing is that with the possible exception of the very big players (ClearChannel et al), the rates will kill the small indy stations accounding to Radio & Internet News Letter (article – Link to RAIN: Radio And Internet Newsletter).   If these figures are correct, and they seem viable then it appears that the RIAA have scored an own goal as they’ll end up putting a lot of indie stations out of business which doesn’t do the music industry an favours.