Okay, here’s the deal with Apple Music, iCloud Music Library, and DRM

Folks are in a bit of a huff about Apple Music's DRM-clad files. Here's what (I'm guessing) is going on.

Earlier today The Verge's Chris Welch posted his concerns with one aspect of Apple Music: iCloud Music Library, Apple's next-generation version of iTunes Match built specifically for the streaming service. One of Welch's concerns is that any tracks he's downloading onto his iPhone or iPad for offline and local use are being DRM-encoded—even tracks that were uploaded from Welch's Mac.

So why is Apple doing this? The answer lies, as do most things, with the record companies.

The true difference between Apple Music and iTunes Match: paying off the record companies

iTunes Match, which launched in 2011 in part as a way to combat the growing streaming phenomenon, offered customers something akin to a music locker service, but with an Apple twist: For $25/year, they could not only stream and download their iTunes Music Library on any device they owned, they could upload their Mac's music library to Apple's servers—up to 25,000 tracks not purchased from iTunes—and access them from any device as well.

Here's where it got tricky: Apple wasn't just acting as a dumb pipe—they weren't just dumping each customer's 25,000 songs into an online locker and calling it a day. Lots of customers had the same overlapping songs, Apple mused. And they were often terrible in quality, having been ripped from old recordings. Wouldn't it make more sense to avoid uploading any songs the company already had in its 20-million-strong iTunes library, and instead offer those recordings at a nice, high-quality 256kbps bitrate? And better yet... Apple had made such a stink about DRM in the past. Why not make those matched recordings DRM-free?

So Apple went to the record companies with this proposal, and the record companies (somewhat understandably) freaked out. They saw Apple saying "We're going to give users our high-quality recordings of their terribly-ripped music," and heard "All of these horrible internet pirates are going to get high-quality music copies of their pirated music." Hence, the $25/year fee: In order to have DRM-free music, Apple had to strike a financial bargain with the record companies.

Fast forward four years, and we're in a similar, stranger situation with Apple Music. The company describes its music service as "All the music you already have. And all the music you could ever want." And with a tagline like that, it made sense to integrate iTunes Match's library upload-and-matching service with Apple Music's gigantic streaming catalog.

Here's where I'm speculating, but I'm guessing I'm not off-base: The record companies, again concerned with making money and piracy, probably weren't thrilled with such an endeavor. Four penny-pinching years had passed since iTunes Match's debut, and letting Apple integrate Match into Music meant losing untold number of $25/year subscribers—and an extra cash payout.

So I'm guessing the record companies told Apple "You can integrate Match into Music, but you either have to charge subscribers more per month, or DRM-lock their songs on other devices." Now, the $9.99/month price tag is pretty sacrosanct for streaming services—to up that price to something like $12.99 or even $14.99 was probably not something Apple reasonably thought they could offer.

So instead, we're left with this weird, awkward compromise. Pay $9.99/month for Apple Music, and you get all your music on all your devices—but that music will be DRM-restricted if it's matched or from the Apple Music streaming catalog. Or... pay $25/year for iTunes Match too, and you won't have to deal with DRM restrictions.

I was wondering why Apple hadn't been more forthright about the differences between Apple Music's library upload and iTunes Match, and if it is indeed the record companies putting pressure on them about DRM or a higher-cost service, no wonder—it's not easy to explain music deals to the general public.

It's a terrible, awkward, compromise. But if my speculation is right, it's apparently what Apple felt they needed to do.

Wait, what about the iCloud errors?

Duplicated songs, poorly-matched art—these are all problems iTunes Match has had for years, especially when demand was heavy for the service. Apple Music's iCloud Music library sounds like it may have some similar launch hiccups, and indeed, I've seen a few dupes in my library already. Given the scope of Apple's Music rollout and the company's past luck with cloud services, I'm not surprised on this front—but I also know that the company probably has all its backend engineers on deck trying to fix bugs. I'm less worried about those than I am about DRM, personally.

So what do we do?

You've got a couple options if you don't want to deal with DRM on your personally-matched files.

1. Email Apple. Tweet @cue. Make some noise. Ask for a $12.99/month DRM-free Apple Music subscription (about the price of Match + Apple Music).
2. If you want your library accessible on your other devices without DRM, keep an iTunes Match subscription alongside your Apple Music subscription. I've tested and confirmed that any files you own will still show up as "Matched" or "Uploaded" on other Macs with iCloud Music Library enabled. (If they don't, and you have both subscriptions enabled, just log out and log back in.)
3. Don't use iCloud Music Library if you're worried about errors, and use Apple Music solely as a streaming service and for online radio.

Me, I'm going to go update my iTunes Match vs Apple Music article (again) and keep both of my services for the time being.