When Napster was gone, other (illegal) file-sharing networks surfaced, and the music industry, with the help of technology companies, made first baby steps into the digital music age. But they certainly weren't serious. We saw download services, for example, which charged a monthly fee, charged extra for every download and allowed a limited number of tracks - often less than ten - to be burned on a CD every month. In most cases, downloaded music was only functional as long as a subscription to such a service was active.

From a consumer's perspective, these first-generation music services made pretty much every mistake that could have been made. Digital downloads were more expensive than the actual CD in the store and despite the fact that users had legally purchased songs, DRM kept them hostage. And you have to remember, we are talking here about music that had a lower quality than the (unprotected) music you got through a regular CD.

DRM evolved into a tool that automatically assumed that every music download would fall into the hands of a criminal who has nothing else to do than to mass-distribute purchased songs. What we know as DRM today lacks common sense and has become quite the opposite of what was Napster's secret sauce: Once easy to acquire and to use, music downloads have become a pain to deal with.

iTunes was really the first music download service that embraced what Napster should have taught the music industry. There was an easy to use interface, a somewhat reasonable price for music, combined with a large selection of music in one place. And even despite its restrictive DRM, which limits the use of downloaded to five computers and as many music players as you want (as long as they are iPods), more than 2.2 billion songs have been purchased from iTunes so far. That may sound much, but in fact that is only 22 songs per iPod, according to Jobs, and a sign that people still get the majority of their music from somewhere else - such as regular CDs.

Yes, there is also the opportunity, if you are patient and brave enough, to get pirated music for free. But realistically, piracy will always be there in one form or another. There will always be someone who considers it a challenge to be first to break new copy protection technologies and there will always be someone with the necessary resources to break any DRM technology. But instead of making legal digital content as inconvenient as possible for all of us, what about making it as convenient and safe as possible? Could that approach create enough value to devalue pirated music? Would ease-of-use convince more people to purchase more digital music legally?

The content-technology-consumer dilemma

What is standing in the way of a potentially more convenient way to purchase and consume digital music (and video) is a love-and-hate triangle between content owners, technology companies and consumers.

Consumers have shown that they are willing to pay for digital content on their PC and portable music players. Technology companies consider this trend as one of the key reasons for users to buy new computer products; as a result, the Intel's and Microsoft's of this world, are increasingly dependent on a growing online availability of music and videos.

In some way, technology companies act as a mediator between the consumer and the content industry: On the one side, tech firms would need to advertise lots of content with as little DRM as possible in order to attract new customers; on the other side, without strong content protection technology, they can't convince content owners to make their content available to consumers.

However, what would appear to be a powerful position for technology companies, turns out to be a one-sided game: Content is king. Content owners have the upper hand at this time and pretty much dictate what is enough DRM and what is not. The tech industry is just learning to understand the way Hollywood ticks and individual tech companies are unlikely to risk their young and fragile relationships with content owners.

A changing environment

Interestingly, there is an IT company that has made its way deep into consumer electronics and has grown into a powerhouse that is connecting traditional computing technology with technology that enables everyone to enjoy audio and video on easy-to-use devices - Apple. Other than what I have described above, Apple is beginning to depend less on the music industry than the music industry depends on Apple. iTunes may account for just 10% of all sold music tracks, but the service represents the dominant digital music distribution platform and has the influence to shape future trends - more than any other product in this segment.

But Apple knows that there are growth barriers - growth barriers that are responsible for the fact that the average iPod owner has purchased only 22 songs from iTunes. In his open letter, Steve Jobs indicates that copy protection is that growth barrier and what is remarkable, is the fact that he breaks apart from what appears to have been generally accepted scenario and openly questions the value of DRM. Suddenly, it becomes clear that Jobs and Apple may be powerful enough to follow through with an initiative that could end up in the demise of DRM or, at least, in a much more reasonable DRM than what we have today.

Jobs' "Thoughts on Music" appear to be more than just a collection of some random ideas that have been posted on the company website. They are a reality check and a wake-up call for the music and IT industry. Time will tell, if Apple will make another move in a game that finally could balance the triangle between content owners, technology providers and consumers.

Keep your eyes on this topic. From the consumer's view, Jobs' posting is one of the most significant moves we have seen in digital music in several years. And maybe, just maybe you could see other technology companies joining Apple in this unprecedented effort. Everyone can live without DRM. Even the music industry.