So.. I all ready paid 99 cents for it, and even if the song is now 69 cents, I have to pay 30 cents to remove the DRM?
And still have it in AAC format, which next to nothing other than the iPod plays? Sounds like a BS deal to me.

The hell? Why do I have to pay them to remove something they never should have put in place on my purchase in the first place?

Does this mean I can put their music on my non-iPod? Or no?

95%+ of people using itunes doent know what DRM really is, means or care about it.

They just want to buy a song and use it on their iPod. As long as it still works, they really dont care.

So I get to pay an extra $121.00 to really own music that I already payed for?

I generally like Apple and iTunes, but wanting people to pay to remove DRM is ridiculous.

Apple is *not* removing DRM from the tracks it sells. Every track will still be wrapped in Fairplay and there will still be identifying information in that Fairplay wrapper. It's just moving to the honor system rather than enforcing a limit via software.

Instead of paying to remove DRM, how about iTunes customers just go on BitTorrent and redownload all the shit they already bought for free?

You don't just get the DRM removed, you get the higher-bitrate song. So, you're just "buying up" to the next quality tier.

Wait it out a couple years, they will remove it for free.
This was always the plan for DRM with the itunes store. The DRM was to 'train' consumers in the right behavior (of legally buying the music) at a time when Napster was huge (and most of us were just stealing). Now that the cash is coming in by the truckload, we are evidently all trained.

Ok, I'm confused. What would be the benefit of paying the $0.30 on a song?

Or I could burn my purchased songs on a cd, then upload them back on my computer. Or I can live with it and not care.

I'll go with live with it and not care.

Most of my music I get from library cds.

Is Apple trying to make iTunes irrelevant? I can buy MP3s from a lot of sources and they work everywhere. Why would I pay for AAC content?

Or you could join [Emusic.com] or one of the other services that sells legal mp3s that are unencumbered by DRM.

Wow, that's total crap. Paying for the privilege to use the product you PAID FOR the way you want. Hmm.

I get my music from Amazon. I never have to deal with this BS with them.

Man, good thing I avoided the whole mess that is the iTunes music store to start with.

@calquist: Well, besides having legal rights to do almost anything you want with the song and allow you to play it on anything that supports aac (not just Apple's players that support Fairplay DRM), you can also download a higher quality version of it. If you don't really care about any of that, nothing changes and you can keep on living happily with your purchases as you already have been without having to pay 30 cents more.

@Brain.wav: Right-click song in iTunes, select "convert selection to MP3". Problem solved.

But yeah, it does suck to have to pay them to remove their crappy DRM.

@Brain.wav: Sorry, but AAC is a standard format which many devices can play, even the Zune.

Paying 30¢ for the privilege of doing so is entirely up to you.

@morganlh85: As long as your device supports the AAC format, which most newer devices do.

I really, REALLY doubt it costs 30 cents for apple to remove the DRM. This is stupid. If they're going to charge, they should charge like two or three cents, if that. The actual cost of doing this is next to nothing.

This (the .30 more option) isn't any different than what they've been doing. Since they started iTunes Plus you've been able to upgrade. So it is not new. What is new is that more will be drm free and the different prices. I think its good, drm sucks.

I fell into this itunes trap in 2003 when they first came out. I've always been an early adopter and thought that legal downloadable music was exactly what I wanted (which it was). I knew the DRM smelled bad, but I was willing to overlook that at the time. As time went by I became more and more frustrated at itunes. Year after year they ruined the player and added more and more crap making the player irrelevant. Finally I had enough with itunes last year and I went online got a converter and ripped out all the DRM in one fall swoop. Then I converted all the music to mp3 and switched to windows media player. I've never been happier wtih my arrangement. All my music works on any portable player and I can tell itunes to fo guck them selves. I'll never buy from itunes or apple again!

Amazon mp3 downloads rock. Windows media works great (plus streams all my music to my PS3 in my living room *goodbye crappy non working airtunes*. If it was still in AAC I could not enjoy this feature). Eat a d!ck apple.

*side note: I used to be an apple fanboy. I got over that real quick.

that's what i have always bought CDs and ripped them myself, screw using anything like itunes or windows media rip them for me

@Belabras: By which, you mean pay Apple to remove something that the record labels forced on you (and Apple)?

I think the point of forcing to pay for the "upgrade" to the DRM-free files is to actually prevent people from doing it en masse. Imagine if everyone who purchased music from them in the past all decided to upgrade their libraries all at once, what that would do to Apple's servers.

Most people don't really care all that much, and probably won't bother.

This is a big win for consumers. Apple was required by the labels to DRM all tracks when iTunes launched.

Now that battle appears to have been won and there are some technical details to take care of.

If you're not happy with your DRM tracks or the encoding, you can pony up the $0.30 per and be happy. If it's never made a big deal to you, status quo!

Don't make me wave my cane at you and tell me how much you remind me of all of the bellyachers in the late 80s who complained and whined and stomped that they were now going to have to spend $x replacing all of their beautiful albums (or cassettes!) with those new-fangled CDs. "But I already bought that album! I shouldn't have to pay more now that the technology has changed!"

@Hank Scorpio: you think its 30 cents per song to protect their servers?? Um, no. Its 30 cents per song because then they make money.

Yeah, I'm going to continue only music shopping at Amazon & eMusic, who both took the DRM-free MP3 approach from the beginning. When Apple decides to play nice with everyone else and license their stupid DRM.. then we'll talk.

@downwithmonstercable: It's not next to nothing - you get a completely new file that has to be downloaded from their servers, costing them bandwidth.

Facts, people: DRM was imposed on iTunes by the Recording Industry, and Apple has been fighting to remove it ever since. They generously removed it from Amazon and everyone else, but required Apple to continue with it to try to break Apple's hold on the downloadable music industry and force Apple to raise prices and sell album only. Clearly a compromise has been reached, with tiered pricing and the dropping of DRM. AAC is a higher quality format than MP3 at a smaller file size, and can be played anywhere. If you don't like it, you can burn it to a CD and play it anywhere, or re-import in a different format. You have always had that option.

Now you have the option to pay $0.30 to upgrade the song to a higher quality (256 kbps) with no DRM. No one is requiring it, and the file you have is fine. Your not "paying for the privilege to use the product you PAID FOR" - you already use it, and can continue to for as long as you want. IF you want to upgrade, you may. It's not unreasonable to pay for an upgrade.

So quick to comment without even a little research.

@Hank Scorpio: Hm.. looks like you're right.

@xwildebeestx: Conversion usually entails a re-compression. AAC is lossy like MP3, so even if you use the same bitrate (or higher), you'll still be losing data.
That being said, Hank's pointing out of my error about AAC's compatibility makes that complaint a moot point.

The $.30 is to remove DRM from PREVIOUSLY bought tracks. New tracks that have the iTunes Plus tag on it have DRM removed, period. No extra money.

@JustThatGuy3: I'm skeptical that most consumers notice a difference between a 128kbps song and a 256kbps version. Or am I mistaken?

@Hank Scorpio:
If they were worried about their servers they would just provide a tool for download that removed the DRM.

This is a money grab, pure and simple.

@Hank Scorpio: That would be next to nothing. It certainly doesn't cost them 30 cents for someone to download a 5 meg file from their server. It's fractions of a cent.

@Belabras: Or, you could have purchased the CD or non-DRM'ed mp3 from another source (like Amazon, etc.) No one forced you to buy it from iTunes. You knew, or should have known it was there when you bought it.

Personally, I don't mind paying for the better quality and non-DRM'ed upgrade from iTunes. As long as they let me CHOOSE which tracks/albums I want to upgrade (right now it's an all-or-nothing proposition, which is unacceptable.)

@JustThatGuy3: I think that's something people forget, you're getting a higher quality song (from a bitrate standpoint).

As to the DRM- like it not, its there, and so if you want more freedom with your music, then you'll need to pay for it. Should it be there? No. But that's what you're dealing with and I doubt the labels are going to change that anytime soon. The good news is that going forward, you can pay a bit extra and have it be "yours."

To all of the people complaining about this: remember, you are also getting a higher bitrate version of the file, replacing the original.

I think the point of charging ¢ per song is to prevent everyone who's ever purchased music from iTunes rushing in all at once to upgrade their libraries. Imagine what that would do to Apple's servers.

It's entirely up to you if you want to pay to be able to play your existing files on something other than your iPod. Most people don't care, and likely, won't bother.

And, also, stop blaming Apple for DRM in the first place. It wasn't them, they never wanted it - it was the record companies. Remember, Apple jumped at the chance to sell DRM free music when EMI allowed them to. The other companies were just holding out for variable pricing, which Apple didn't want to allow. They finally compromised on that issue, which is why both DRM-free and variable pricing were announced the same day.

Get your history on the issue straight. If it was up to Apple, there never would have been DRM in iTunes in the first place.

Also, first person to call me a "fanboy" needs to grow the eff up!

@cabjf:

Well, besides having legal rights to do almost anything you want with the song

Well I wouldn't say that's true.

and allow you to play it on anything that supports aac (not just Apple's players that support Fairplay DRM), you can also download a higher quality version of it.

And that's about it. I'm willing to bet that when you pay the upgrade, you find out that you've clicked on something that says you still only own a "license" to play the music on your own personal equipment, and that you don't really own it outright and can't give it or sell it to others. That right will always be reserved for the original songwriter, and recording artist {and record company} who did the recording of the song. Apple can't transfer that right to you.

@Brain.wav: You knew what you were getting into when you bought the DRM'd songs. Cautious purchasers bought CDs with the right to copy included or naked mp3s from services like Amazon Mp3.

@Brain.wav: Brain is correct, just converting to MP3 isn't a solution, you will lose quality. Granted it's probably unnoticeable to anyone but the most discriminating audiophile who probably aren't using AAC anyways. But still you paid for a certain level of quality already, why should you have to pay more to maintain it. Once again this proves, DRM only hurts consumers and not pirates.

This comic sums it up best
[xkcd.com]

its soooooooo overstated, but anyone who bought from itunes did so willingly. No one forced them to buy their DRM-laced content but themselves.

You are paying for the iTunes Plus version which not only is DRM free but 256 bit rate. For me, I find no reason to "upgrade" but those of you with better ears might opt for this just for the better quality!

@shadydentist: That makes two of us. Been using amazon.com instead for buying my mp3's once they started offering music that way.

@morganlh85: That's what I ultimately had to do. I bought several TV seasons over iTunes, but iTunes' video player has mixed performance (scaling, resizing, etc) on both my laptop and high end gaming system. I torrented high quality rips of the seasons so I can play them over VLC and easily stream them via Boxee.

I don't mind paying for digital distribution... but I do mind being locked into poorly performing software.

@Cyclokitty: But the downside of the "burn and rip" method is it can really kill audio quality.

Hmm, I'm a bit undecided on this. I don't really need the music to be DRM free but, since it does get you a higher quality file, I may do it. I haven't purchased very much from them, most of my mp3s came from converting all my cds to mp3s. I think it's great that the records companies finally allowed Apple to do this and that they now have different prices. It's kind of a pain to have to pay for the upgrade, especially if you purchased a lot from them. Of course no one wants to pay more for something they already have.

@cynu414: you still wont OWN the music. its not YOURS. you just own the right to play it. It is still OWNED by the Artist and/or Record companies.

they should be paying me for crippling my songs for so long.