do they or do they not allow content owners (record companies or independents) to sell music without DRM *AND* without the 30% markup?

If no, then I rest my case until there are further developments; no need to rehash why I think both of those conditions must be met.

#1 - As far as I know, non-DRM 99 cent pricing is still not available to most independent artists (the article you linked to specifically says it’s only available to a few). Hopefully that will change soon; let me know when it happens.

#2 - The fact that the Amazon store is pressuring them into this position does not dilute in any way my opinion that Apple wanted to do things the way they were doing them; it’s just that now they’re being pressured to change.

#3 - I’ve said many, many, many times before in these discussions that I’d be glad to be proven wrong on this, or at least to see the DRM-free 99 cent model offered to everyone fairly. If the latter happens (which it hasn’t yet), it would be great, but it wouldn’t necessarily do anything to change my mind about Apple’s intentions, since the motives for such a change would now be called into question given the current circumstances (see #2).

I hesitate to even comment here again on this post, but since it appears that I was the only reason you posted it in the first place, I felt obligated to respond.

I’m not sure why you’re so obsessed with “proving me wrong” on this issue, but good luck with it. I’ve already admitted (in the comment threads you linked to) to several points in which my previous opinions were wrong, so you can go back and re-read those parts if it makes you feel better somehow.

What I’d really rather not do is respond with overwhelming detail solidifying my case (as I’ve done in the past), only to be met with a short dismissal that does not address any points in my argument, and just complains that my comments are too long or that I’m stubbornly refusing to ever admit to being wrong, since we both know that isn’t the case.

do they or do they not allow content owners (record companies or independents) to sell music without DRM *AND* without the 30% markup?

If no, then I rest my case until there are further developments; no need to rehash why I think both of those conditions must be met.

#1 - As far as I know, non-DRM 99 cent pricing is still not available to most independent artists (the article you linked to specifically says it’s only available to a few). Hopefully that will change soon; let me know when it happens.

#2 - The fact that the Amazon store is pressuring them into this position does not dilute in any way my opinion that Apple wanted to do things the way they were doing them; it’s just that now they’re being pressured to change.

#3 - I’ve said many, many, many times before in these discussions that I’d be glad to be proven wrong on this, or at least to see the DRM-free 99 cent model offered to everyone fairly. If the latter happens (which it hasn’t yet), it would be great, but it wouldn’t necessarily do anything to change my mind about Apple’s intentions, since the motives for such a change would now be called into question given the current circumstances (see #2).

I hesitate to even comment here again on this post, but since it appears that I was the only reason you posted it in the first place, I felt obligated to respond.

I’m not sure why you’re so obsessed with “proving me wrong” on this issue, but good luck with it. I’ve already admitted (in the comment threads you linked to) to several points in which my previous opinions were wrong, so you can go back and re-read those parts if it makes you feel better somehow.

What I’d really rather not do is respond with overwhelming detail solidifying my case (as I’ve done in the past), only to be met with a short dismissal that does not address any points in my argument, and just complains that my comments are too long or that I’m stubbornly refusing to ever admit to being wrong, since we both know that isn’t the case.

do they or do they not allow content owners (record companies or independents) to sell music without DRM *AND* without the 30% markup?

If no, then I rest my case until there are further developments; no need to rehash why I think both of those conditions must be met.

#1 - As far as I know, non-DRM 99 cent pricing is still not available to most independent artists (the article you linked to specifically says it’s only available to a few). Hopefully that will change soon; let me know when it happens.

#2 - The fact that the Amazon store is pressuring them into this position does not dilute in any way my opinion that Apple wanted to do things the way they were doing them; it’s just that now they’re being pressured to change.

#3 - I’ve said many, many, many times before in these discussions that I’d be glad to be proven wrong on this, or at least to see the DRM-free 99 cent model offered to everyone fairly. If the latter happens (which it hasn’t yet), it would be great, but it wouldn’t necessarily do anything to change my mind about Apple’s intentions, since the motives for such a change would now be called into question given the current circumstances (see #2).

I hesitate to even comment here again on this post, but since it appears that I was the only reason you posted it in the first place, I felt obligated to respond.

I’m not sure why you’re so obsessed with “proving me wrong” on this issue, but good luck with it. I’ve already admitted (in the comment threads you linked to) to several points in which my previous opinions were wrong, so you can go back and re-read those parts if it makes you feel better somehow.

What I’d really rather not do is respond with overwhelming detail solidifying my case (as I’ve done in the past), only to be met with a short dismissal that does not address any points in my argument, and just complains that my comments are too long or that I’m stubbornly refusing to ever admit to being wrong, since we both know that isn’t the case.

do they or do they not allow content owners (record companies or independents) to sell music without DRM *AND* without the 30% markup?

If no, then I rest my case until there are further developments; no need to rehash why I think both of those conditions must be met.

#1 - As far as I know, non-DRM 99 cent pricing is still not available to most independent artists (the article you linked to specifically says it’s only available to a few). Hopefully that will change soon; let me know when it happens.

#2 - The fact that the Amazon store is pressuring them into this position does not dilute in any way my opinion that Apple wanted to do things the way they were doing them; it’s just that now they’re being pressured to change.

#3 - I’ve said many, many, many times before in these discussions that I’d be glad to be proven wrong on this, or at least to see the DRM-free 99 cent model offered to everyone fairly. If the latter happens (which it hasn’t yet), it would be great, but it wouldn’t necessarily do anything to change my mind about Apple’s intentions, since the motives for such a change would now be called into question given the current circumstances (see #2).

I hesitate to even comment here again on this post, but since it appears that I was the only reason you posted it in the first place, I felt obligated to respond.

I’m not sure why you’re so obsessed with “proving me wrong” on this issue, but good luck with it. I’ve already admitted (in the comment threads you linked to) to several points in which my previous opinions were wrong, so you can go back and re-read those parts if it makes you feel better somehow.

What I’d really rather not do is respond with overwhelming detail solidifying my case (as I’ve done in the past), only to be met with a short dismissal that does not address any points in my argument, and just complains that my comments are too long or that I’m stubbornly refusing to ever admit to being wrong, since we both know that isn’t the case.

do they or do they not allow content owners (record companies or independents) to sell music without DRM *AND* without the 30% markup?

If no, then I rest my case until there are further developments; no need to rehash why I think both of those conditions must be met.

#1 - As far as I know, non-DRM 99 cent pricing is still not available to most independent artists (the article you linked to specifically says it’s only available to a few). Hopefully that will change soon; let me know when it happens.

#2 - The fact that the Amazon store is pressuring them into this position does not dilute in any way my opinion that Apple wanted to do things the way they were doing them; it’s just that now they’re being pressured to change.

#3 - I’ve said many, many, many times before in these discussions that I’d be glad to be proven wrong on this, or at least to see the DRM-free 99 cent model offered to everyone fairly. If the latter happens (which it hasn’t yet), it would be great, but it wouldn’t necessarily do anything to change my mind about Apple’s intentions, since the motives for such a change would now be called into question given the current circumstances (see #2).

I hesitate to even comment here again on this post, but since it appears that I was the only reason you posted it in the first place, I felt obligated to respond.

I’m not sure why you’re so obsessed with “proving me wrong” on this issue, but good luck with it. I’ve already admitted (in the comment threads you linked to) to several points in which my previous opinions were wrong, so you can go back and re-read those parts if it makes you feel better somehow.

What I’d really rather not do is respond with overwhelming detail solidifying my case (as I’ve done in the past), only to be met with a short dismissal that does not address any points in my argument, and just complains that my comments are too long or that I’m stubbornly refusing to ever admit to being wrong, since we both know that isn’t the case.

do they or do they not allow content owners (record companies or independents) to sell music without DRM *AND* without the 30% markup?

If no, then I rest my case until there are further developments; no need to rehash why I think both of those conditions must be met.

#1 - As far as I know, non-DRM 99 cent pricing is still not available to most independent artists (the article you linked to specifically says it’s only available to a few). Hopefully that will change soon; let me know when it happens.

#2 - The fact that the Amazon store is pressuring them into this position does not dilute in any way my opinion that Apple wanted to do things the way they were doing them; it’s just that now they’re being pressured to change.

#3 - I’ve said many, many, many times before in these discussions that I’d be glad to be proven wrong on this, or at least to see the DRM-free 99 cent model offered to everyone fairly. If the latter happens (which it hasn’t yet), it would be great, but it wouldn’t necessarily do anything to change my mind about Apple’s intentions, since the motives for such a change would now be called into question given the current circumstances (see #2).

I hesitate to even comment here again on this post, but since it appears that I was the only reason you posted it in the first place, I felt obligated to respond.

I’m not sure why you’re so obsessed with “proving me wrong” on this issue, but good luck with it. I’ve already admitted (in the comment threads you linked to) to several points in which my previous opinions were wrong, so you can go back and re-read those parts if it makes you feel better somehow.

What I’d really rather not do is respond with overwhelming detail solidifying my case (as I’ve done in the past), only to be met with a short dismissal that does not address any points in my argument, and just complains that my comments are too long or that I’m stubbornly refusing to ever admit to being wrong, since we both know that isn’t the case.

do they or do they not allow content owners (record companies or independents) to sell music without DRM *AND* without the 30% markup?

If no, then I rest my case until there are further developments; no need to rehash why I think both of those conditions must be met.

#1 - As far as I know, non-DRM 99 cent pricing is still not available to most independent artists (the article you linked to specifically says it’s only available to a few). Hopefully that will change soon; let me know when it happens.

#2 - The fact that the Amazon store is pressuring them into this position does not dilute in any way my opinion that Apple wanted to do things the way they were doing them; it’s just that now they’re being pressured to change.

#3 - I’ve said many, many, many times before in these discussions that I’d be glad to be proven wrong on this, or at least to see the DRM-free 99 cent model offered to everyone fairly. If the latter happens (which it hasn’t yet), it would be great, but it wouldn’t necessarily do anything to change my mind about Apple’s intentions, since the motives for such a change would now be called into question given the current circumstances (see #2).

I hesitate to even comment here again on this post, but since it appears that I was the only reason you posted it in the first place, I felt obligated to respond.

I’m not sure why you’re so obsessed with “proving me wrong” on this issue, but good luck with it. I’ve already admitted (in the comment threads you linked to) to several points in which my previous opinions were wrong, so you can go back and re-read those parts if it makes you feel better somehow.

What I’d really rather not do is respond with overwhelming detail solidifying my case (as I’ve done in the past), only to be met with a short dismissal that does not address any points in my argument, and just complains that my comments are too long or that I’m stubbornly refusing to ever admit to being wrong, since we both know that isn’t the case.

do they or do they not allow content owners (record companies or independents) to sell music without DRM *AND* without the 30% markup?

If no, then I rest my case until there are further developments; no need to rehash why I think both of those conditions must be met.

#1 - As far as I know, non-DRM 99 cent pricing is still not available to most independent artists (the article you linked to specifically says it’s only available to a few). Hopefully that will change soon; let me know when it happens.

#2 - The fact that the Amazon store is pressuring them into this position does not dilute in any way my opinion that Apple wanted to do things the way they were doing them; it’s just that now they’re being pressured to change.

#3 - I’ve said many, many, many times before in these discussions that I’d be glad to be proven wrong on this, or at least to see the DRM-free 99 cent model offered to everyone fairly. If the latter happens (which it hasn’t yet), it would be great, but it wouldn’t necessarily do anything to change my mind about Apple’s intentions, since the motives for such a change would now be called into question given the current circumstances (see #2).

I hesitate to even comment here again on this post, but since it appears that I was the only reason you posted it in the first place, I felt obligated to respond.

I’m not sure why you’re so obsessed with “proving me wrong” on this issue, but good luck with it. I’ve already admitted (in the comment threads you linked to) to several points in which my previous opinions were wrong, so you can go back and re-read those parts if it makes you feel better somehow.

What I’d really rather not do is respond with overwhelming detail solidifying my case (as I’ve done in the past), only to be met with a short dismissal that does not address any points in my argument, and just complains that my comments are too long or that I’m stubbornly refusing to ever admit to being wrong, since we both know that isn’t the case.