iTunes 2003 = EMusic 1998?

Lots and lots of chatter about Apple's new iTunes Music Store, which boasts music downloads with considerably fewer restrictions than major-label sponsored services like MusicNet and pressplay. But I can't help thinking it looks awfully familiar. Five years ago, EMusic started offering MP3 files for 99 cents apiece or about ten bucks for an album, which is exactly the price plan of the new Apple offering.

This begs the question, is this actually a revolutionary entry to the online music race? The answer is sort of yes, sort of no. Most of the straight business elements do seem to be drawn straight from the EMusic playbook, namely the pricing and the insistence on largely unrestricted 128 kbps files. But after talking to some iPod users, the biggest difference is the integration of the online store with both users' computers and their iPods. This was always a challenging obstacle in the more embryonic years of the MP3 era, and Apple's stranglehold over all the elements of the online music experience gives them the means to create a seamless user experience that makes paying for downloads seem a bit more worthwhile.

Then there's the catalog. EMusic was never able to get the major labels onboard, but Apple has done just that. Which is interesting, given the pushback from the majors when it comes to unsecure files. To be fair, Apple's files are primarily in their own AAC format, which means they're not universally acceptable across the online music infrastructure. They've also built in some modest rights management, allowing files to be copied to a limited number of computers and portable devices, and allowing playlists to be burned to CD a limited number of times. On the one hand, it could be this implicit definition of "fair use" that brought the majors onboard. On the other, the currently narrower reach of AAC might have done it. If and when iTunes tries to move over to the Windows platform, and/or the MP3 format, we might see some fur fly. It's hard to say at this point, but it will be worth watching.

Back over on the EMusic side, they've introduced a new download manager that, among other things, limits the number of tracks you can queue for download to 45. Whether this is an attempt to limit bulk downloaders, as they've stated, or the beginnings of a move back to a la carte pricing remains to be seen. Another interesting sidelight is the status of EMusic's indie catalog. If memory serves, the company secured exclusive digital rights to a lot of their content, which in turn, means Apple won't be able to offer it without licensing it from them. Of course, with EMusic being owned by Vivendi-Universal, who has allowed Universal Music Group material on the service, this may not be that big of a deal.

One final note that may be of interest. During the Napster craze, EMusic developed a bot that could identify the tracks that had been ripped in Redwood City, and subsequently find users who were sharing those tracks. It would be interesting to see if that kind of solution might be enough to appease the majors with regard to unsecure file formats, or if the file-sharing networks would allow them on their systems. It's likely worth a try, at least, as it may force KaZaA and Morpheus and the like to show their true colors on the exchange of copyrighted materials.