The empire of Apple Inc. is slowly and steadily spreading its influence across the music industry, as Apple CEO Steve Jobs added another ally in his campaign to rid music of its digital copyrights last week.

The EMI Group, the third-largest recording company in the world, announced it will sell its catalogue online without the standard built-in digital copyright protection. This announcement came just two months after Jobs released a statement on Apple’s Web site calling for the abolition of digital music copyrights.

‘Steve Jobs was just priming the record industry for this change with his statement,’ James Abbott, a music industry professor in Syracuse University’s College of Visual and Performing Arts said. ‘It was a little warning, telling labels that Apple was going to move on this, if they already weren’t in the process of doing so.’

Selling songs without digital copyrighting means that consumers can transfer and play the music bought on iTunes or any other digital music retailer on any kind of portable music device. Previously, all tracks downloaded from the iTunes store were protected so they could only be played on Apple iPods.

The songs will be sold through iTunes and other online music retailers starting in May. The copyright-free music will have both a higher sound quality and a higher price. EMI songs sold on iTunes will see a 30 percent price increase, from 99 cents to $1.29.

Steve Salem, a freshman music education major and non-iPod owner, said he would consider buying songs from iTunes now that he could put them on his MP3 player.

‘I don’t buy songs from iTunes right now, obviously,’ Salem said. ‘I think they’d be worth it if I could transfer the songs from iTunes onto my player without having to buy a more expensive iPod.’

Full albums without digital copyrights will have the same price as albums with copyright protection. Customers can also upgrade their already-purchased tracks from EMI to the higher quality, non-copyrighted version for 30 cents.

While selling tracks without copyrights opens up the market for other, usually cheaper MP3 players, Apple has a firm hold on the portable music player market with its iPod.

‘I wouldn’t get a different player, even if all of iTunes’ music wasn’t copyrighted,’ said Jessica Jensen, a freshman biology major. ‘I like my iPod; it’s easy to use, and it’s all I’ve ever used, so I wouldn’t switch.’

The EMI catalog, which includes artists such as Coldplay, Norah Jones, The Rolling Stones and Radiohead, has about a 10 percent share in music sales worldwide, along with the other major record labels, according to the 2006 Nielsen Soundscan.

Although EMI has the rights to The Beatles’ catalog on CD, their music will not be available on iTunes. Even though Apple Inc. and Apple Corps Ltd., The Beatles’ record company, settled their lawsuit over the Apple trademark, Apple Corps has not given Jobs and Apple digital rights to the Fab Four’s collection.

While EMI CEO Eric Nicoli said market tests showed people preferred the tracks without copyrighting, it may not be the consumer consensus.

‘I probably wouldn’t buy the more expensive tracks,’ said Chuck Bouley, a freshman civil engineering major. ‘It seems like a waste of money, and if you buy a lot of songs that would add up fast.’

Currently, songs on iTunes are encoded in a format called AAC at 128 kilobits per second. The new tracks are double that, at 256 kbps, and will take up slightly more memory on MP3 players.

‘I think one of the great things about this is the improved sound quality,’ Abbott said. ‘By using its own encoding format, Apple was taking away from the sound quality of a lot of songs.’

Abbott said the most notable sound quality changes would be apparent on classical and jazz tracks, rather than the frequently downloaded pop songs.

Jill Emerson, a freshman music education major, said she listens mostly to the classical and jazz genres and has noticed some sound quality issues.

‘Some of my classical tracks sound a little bit muffled on my iPod,’ Emerson said. ‘But the price thing sounds like kind of a pain. I guess if I really wanted a song, I’d buy it for 30 cents extra.’

Record companies are worried that getting rid of digital copyrighting could lead to an increase in music piracy and a loss of profit for the labels. The move by EMI is unprecedented, and the other major labels will be monitoring it closely to see if it is a successful one.

‘The other labels will definitely be watching and hedging their bets,’ said Kevin Moore, a music industry professor at the College of Visual and Performing Arts. ‘They’ll be seeing if getting rid of copyrights is a good idea economically, at least concerning their own sales for the future.’

Digital music still only accounts for about 10 percent of total music sales, so while this move is making waves in the music industry, it will be a while before it has a significant effect on consumers, as majority of music sales are still in CD form.

‘If I’m going to pay for my music, I prefer to have a physical copy,’ said James Contompasis, an undecided junior in the Whitman School of Management. ‘I think the higher sound quality that’s being offered is good, and I’d probably buy full albums from iTunes since they’re the same price as un-copyrighted ones.’

Apple’s influence continues to affect the music industry, particularly the digital music industry. Record labels and consumers appear to be watching Apple’s every move and poised to see just how much Apple’s iTunes and iPod will continue to dominate the digital music industry.

‘Anything Apple does inevitably causes an avalanche in the industry,’ Abbott said. ‘The consumers get better quality songs that they can play anywhere, and the labels and Apple get a cut of the profits. It’s a win for everyone.’

Published on April 8, 2007 at 12:00 pm