And you can tell everybody, that this is your song... I hope you don't mind (I hope you don't mind) that I put down in words...

Starting March 26, the whole back catalog of Elton John's songs will be exclusively available for download on iTunes. That's around 400 plus tracks among his 30-something albums, spanning nearly 40 years of his musical career, as far back as his 1969 album, Empty Sky.

The deal was struck in light of the release of his latest compilation, Rocket Man: The Definitive Hits - and all this, right in time for his 60th birthday! Here's what the singer/songwriter had to say:

I've wanted my music to be available for digital download worldwide for some time, but I knew that the entire catalog - not just the hits - needed care and attention to be released in this way. Now that it's happening, I'm pleased for the fans' sake. The world has certainly changed since Philips Records issued my first single on seven-inch vinylÂ?39 years ago this month.

This Apple-exclusivity deal will only run through until April 30 though. After that, his songs would be available via digital download through other download services. As to which services specifically, the singer didn't specify.

Sony was the darling of the music world when it came out with the Walkman during the '80s and the 90's, until the iPod came along and Apple dethroned the Japanese multinational corporation. Now, Sony declares that it's learned its lesson and vows not to have the Sony Ericsson lose to the iPhone.

Sony's CEO Sir Howard Stringer admitted in a rare candid interview that he feels rueful about Sony's loss to the iPod. When he took helm in 2005, the company already had a stubborn design philosophy. All divisions were in their "own little worlds", sheltered from one another and interested only in how one of its products trumped another.

Stringer admitted that Sony's been working with IBM on electronic music distribution as early as 1997, and could have came out with a digital music player five years earlier than the iPod. But the music giant couldn't get its people to understand software. As a result, Apple took hold of the industry with its digital media player, the iPod.

However, Sony's CEO believes that the Sony Ericsson versus iPhone battle would be different. The Japanese-Swedish partnership has warmed up to newer ideas, including the concept of music on phones. But they'll never bet against Steve Jobs. In this new phone battle, thinking that your enemy is weak is a weakness itself.

Steve Jobs' anti-DRM statements have apparently scared movie and recording studios. DRM, or Digital Rights Management refers to control of access of copyright owners  to associated  digital works and devices; something that Apple and even Microsoft could eliminate in putting up an online music store within reach for anyone.

Recently, an elite group comprising of the world's largest recording and movie studios, Coral Consortium, has released an open letter to Steve Jobs saying "We have been wrestling with the issues around interoperability for some years and have concluded that it is not so much a technology problem as a business problem."

DRM has been an issue of technology, it would seem, until some up-and-coming bands and artists who weren't able to earn themselves a recording deal from any of the major recording companies were finally able to sell their songs through iTunes. Recording companies insist that DRM-protected downloads are still better than those that are not, that if your music or movies for sale are readily available on the internet, they're not very valuable, consumer-wise.

Recording and movie companies are surely facing tough competition. For sure, downloading DRM-free MP3s now is a business issue rather than one of technology; and the business issue is appearing to be bested by the techie companies already.

 

Fred Amoroso, the CEO of DRM, electronic licensing e-licensing, and software asset managment provider">Macrovision, the original DRM company, has made a response to Steve Jobs' open letter regarding the role of Digital Rights Management (DRM) in the current electronic content marketplace. In his response, Mr. Amoroso highlights four major points.

First, is that DRM is just broader than music, and that DRM has an impact across many forms of content across different media. Therefore, the discussion should not be limited to just music.

Second, Amoroso asserts that DRM increases, rather than decreases consumer value. He says that without reasonable, consistent, and transparent DRM, there will only be a delay in consumers receiving premium, quality content in their homes in the way they want it.

Third, Amoroso believes that DRM will increase electronic distribution. He says that if owners of high-value content are asked to enter or stay in an environment/platform that offers no protection for their content, there will be no reason for them to enter.

And finally, Amoroso notes that what DRM needs is for it to be interoperable and open. He says that true interoperable DRM will speed the shift to the electronic distribution of content and make it easier for consumers to manage and share content in the home. He adds that it will also enable an open environment where content is portable across a number of devices and not held hostage in just one company's product.

Amoroso expounds:

As an industry, we can overcome the DRM challenges. A commitment to transparent, interoperable and reasonable DRM will effectively bridge the gap between consumers and content owners, eliminate confusion and make it possible for new releases and premium content to enter the digital environment and kick off a new era of entertainment.

We feel that we should have enough self-control to not laugh out loud at the use of words like "enabler" and "not decreases consumer value", and take those points suggested by Mr. Amoroso with reason. We're not sure about you folks though. We'll leave the laughing, nitpicking, and debating for and against DRM to you guys.

Anyway, here's a pseudo-analytical look at this. Jobs' letter said something that implies something like this: "The industry wants something impossible, like a unicorn headed for candy mountain." Macrovision's response is this: "Yeah! Candy Mountain rocks! Let's grow pink wings, turn into unicorns and fly to Candy Mountain!"

Double plus ungood. Read the exec's letter yourselves via our "read" link below.

After creative Apple chief Steve Jobs sent an open letter to Torgeir Waterhouse of the Norwegian Consumer Council about his feelings against DRM, Yahoo! and Monster Cable also aired similar opinions on the limiting technology.

Dave Goldberg, head of Yahoo! Music, told Silicon Valley Watcher that he long advocated removing DRM because there is already a lot of music available without DRM. "It also just makes things complicated for the user," he said. Goldberg noticed that Yahoo! Music experiments found that non-DRMed music actually experienced a boost in sales.

Monster Cable's top chief, Noel Lee, was also found to have supported Jobs' ideas presented in his open letter. Lee elaborated, "Monster Cable shares Mr. Jobs' vision of breaking constraints for legal music downloads. We've always believed in the power of music. So much so, we launched Monster Music to introduce high definition surround to the world without restrictions."

The manufacturer of high performance cables' music service, Monster Music, sports a format called SuperDisc for high-definition surround tracks and completely DRM-free music. The company successfully negotiated DRM-free files with Universal Music for a SuperDisc release called "Away from the Sun."

Want to be able to transfer music from your CDs without the need of your trusty computer? Then say hello to iLoad, the newest iPod accessory to join the crowd. The iLoad, created by a company of the same name, can supposedly connect directly to the source of your media.

Be it CDs, cable TV or satellite boxes and cell networks, you can now easily take that content without hooking up to a PC or to the internet. Sounds interesting? There's more. The transfer speed from your CD to your iPod takes only about eight minutes! That saves you a lot of precious time.

If you head on over to iLoad's site, which you can access from here by clicking on the Read link below, you'll see that orders placed today would have to wait 30 shipment days. Yep, the demand is that big for this product. Oh, and it costs US$ 299. And if you want to extend its warranty to another three years, that's gonna cost you another US$ 69.

But even if you get this gadget, don't throw away your CDs just yet. You might still find some need for it in the distant future. Say, like what those guys did in Shaun of the Dead with their classic vinyls.

First of all, I just have to say...OH.MY.GOD. No wait, make that oh.my.effing.god! Can this be true? The Beatles are finally gonna have their songs on iTunes store after the whole Apple vs. Apple fiasco?

And not only that, Apple (as in the computer company) is allegedly in negotiation with Britain's EMI group. Apple wants to gain them rights to come out with a Beatles edition iPod, much like the U2-inspired edition that Apple currently has.

As we told you guys in an earlier article, The Beatles remains as one of the very few bands that haven't taken a bite of Steve Jobs' apple. Bob Seger and Metallica have already given in, and so has the Red Hot Chili Peppers. To date, iPod users have resorted to downloading their fave Beatles tunes off Limewire or other download services. Is all that about to change now?

Being a Beatlemaniac myself, I couldn't be more psyched about this but then again, these are all still mere speculation. And when Apple was contacted regarding the matter, the company's spokesman merely said that the company does not comment on "rumor and speculation."

But the latest buzz is that Apple is "close" to reaching an agreement with EMI to become The Beatles' exclusive online music store for a limited window of time. Oh, and that's not all, Apple is also said to be wooing EMI to let them use a a Beatles song for a company ad. Trivia: Nike was the only company to ever have used a Beatles song for an ad - "Revolution" - back in 1987, for which the company was sued by the Fab Four.

During that whole controversy, the Beatles was reported to have commented that they "don't sing jingles to peddle sneakers, beer, pantyhose, or anything else." Perhaps mp3 players then? Hahaha. I dunno 'bout the rest of you guys, but if Apple does come out with a Beatles-edition iPod, not even George and John's rise from the grave will stop me from getting one.

If you've heard rumors of a red iPod and just started drooling uncontrollably out of sheer lust, then you can start turning all that pent up emotion into kinetic energy and make a dash for your favorite Apple store. Yes people, the red Nano is a reality.

Looking as red as a cherry and retaining its trademark sleekness, the Special Edition 4GB iPod Nano RED has everything you love about the Nano: it's lightweight, has a 1.5-inch color display, battery life for up to 24 hours, and it only costs $199. Also, $10 from every one of these babies sold goes directly to the Global Fund to fight AIDS in Africa. A very good deal for a very good cause.

The New York Times posted an interesting bit of news today. In France, a small group of people were trying to get themselves prosecuted for a crime they apparently did commit. The crime: playing music bought on iTunes on something that isn't made by iPod.

The protest was done by members of StopDRM, a group of computer users concerned with the growing restrictions on legally-purchased media. It was their attempt to point out just how unruly digital rights management (DRM) laws and measures can be.

They claim that the problem with digital controls and protection measures to stop piracy is that it also seems to lead to overt control of  the systems of digital media. "They say the law is intended to stop piracy, but I am not a pirate," said Jerome Martinez, one of the lead protesters in this unusual event. "I support artists with legally purchased works, but I do not want to be forced to use a particular device to play them."

That's a valid point. You have to wonder how we'll be able to choose how we play our music. Unlike earlier periods in technology, when there were fewer avenues for playing movies and music, the 21st century's given way to more freedom because of the fluidity of the digital medium. The issue now is in enforcing certain protection measures without limiting the choices into a monopoly (or a ZenZunePodocracy).

The police in the story were unsure in how they were to deal with the issue, but the message is clear. Changes need to be made in digital rights management so that we can better distinguish between what should be all right and what is certainly wrong.

Holdout artists, come out, come out, wherever you are...

In this iPod day and age where CD sales are continually dropping and more and more people flock to the Internet to download and buy songs, analysts say that bands and artists (or what we call 'holdouts') would inevitably have to give in to Apple and allow their songs to be purchased on the company's download site if they don't want to be left behind in the industry.

Andrews, manager for Bob Seger and Kid Rock, is amazed at the popularity of Apple's iTunes in the music industry (about 70 percent of the legal downloading market) having sold over a million songs in the last three years. Bob Seger has decided to release his classic 1976 album "Night Moves" but is still in negotiation to have his entire album downloadable and not just some of his select songs.

Metallica, who ironically was one of the bands who petitioned for Napster to be shut down, has also given in to iTunes and released their songs for sale late last month. The Red Hot Chili Peppers did the same thing in April with "Stadium Arcadium," their first album in three years. The band, along with Bob Dylan, has also used the site to sell concert tickets.

Holdouts such as the Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Garth Brooks, Radiohead and Kid Rock still avoid iTunes because of piracy and artistic integrity concerns (with their songs being sold for just 99 cents each). Also, online distribution leaves them with a very small profit.  Andrews similarly revealed that artists are now earning less than a dime for each song sold, as compared to the 30 cents that they used to get.

Other record labels won't release statements (just yet) about allowing their artists' songs to be downloadable in iTunes but admit they're working with their artists and bands to keep their options open about their music and album sales, especially online distribution.