Written by Ian Paul

How does a tech company spell suicide in 2009? D-R-M. Word is going around that the masters of the universe at Apple have embedded a DRM-type chip into the headphones of the new iPod Shuffle. That means that without that chip -- either in an adapter or a new pair of headphones -- you can barely control your new device and the new VoiceOver feature is rendered obsolete.

The assertion came from iLounge during its recent review of the new iPod Shuffle. The blog, famous for its detailed product reviews, doesn't say how it knows Apple included an authentication chip in the new headphones, only that it has.   A further investigation by BoingBoing discovered a mystery chip named 8A83E3 buried in the Apple earbuds' architecture that may be the authentication chip.

The reaction to this rumor has been mild surprise. Some have argued this policy has been good for Apple financially and may lead to higher quality headphones from third-party vendors. However, I have to say, if the rumor is true then this is a horrible path for Apple to tread. By forcing consumers to constantly buy something as commonplace as headphones every time a new feature is added will only serve to upset the public and distance Apple from its dedicated base of consumers.

More troubling is a report from the Electronic Frontier Foundation that suggests Apple may be embracing the authentication model after it pushed other industries to abandon copy protection. The EFF points out that several of Apple's core products have some sort of DRM or authentication chip embedded in them, including iPods, the iPhone, OSX, and video ports on the new MacBooks. In its report, the EFF accuses Apple of trying to "shove competitors to the fringes and wrest control out of the hands of users."

In other words, by forcing manufacturers to license Apple's authentication technology to create third-party products, Apple inflates prices and reduces choice, while increasing its own profits. Now, I don't want to suggest that Apple doesn't have the right to make money; of course it does. But its methods should not put undue pressure on consumers to purchase only from a "walled garden" of products -- no matter how beautiful that garden may be.

In 2007, Steve Jobs wrote a letter entitled "Thoughts on Music," which turned the music industry on its ear. In that letter Jobs saw a rose-colored world free from copy protection where "any player can play music purchased from any store, and any store can sell music which is playable on all players." Jobs then went on to state that, "this is clearly the best alternative for consumers, and Apple would embrace it in a heartbeat." Apple has promoted DRM-free music. So if DRM-free music is the best alternative for consumers, why isn't DRM-free hardware? Why should you be forced to switch one method of DRM protection for another?

I want to reiterate that this mystery chip in the Apple earbuds may not be an authentication chip. However, considering the DRM protections in some of Apple's other products, the rumor is not outside of the realm of possibility. If it is true, then it's a very bad idea and I hope Apple reconsiders.

Now some thoughts by me: My take is that you need to use a third party headphones with your iPod or iPod touch. Why? It has been proven that the Apple iPod earphones can cause permanent hearing loss. Why? You need to wear headphones that are "open" and allow air. If you have comments or questions, feel free to write me now at: msantell@mac.com

Written by Mitch Santell

There is a a strange Dilemma in Hollywood right now. It all has to do with the credit crunch. On one hand you have major filmmakers like Stephen Spielberg and Peter Jackson who get turned down for funding....read on....

Steven Spielberg and Peter Jackson don't hear "no" very often.

But after they submitted a final budget of $130 million for their 3-D animated movie "Tintin," based on the Belgian comic strip, to Universal Pictures, the studio balked. The decision has left the two powerful filmmakers scrambling to find another financial partner.

When even Spielberg and "The Lord of the Rings" director Jackson, who have made some of the biggest blockbusters in history, can't get their movie made, you know something is up in Hollywood. Universal's refusal to finance "Tintin" underscores how in today's tough economic climate, bottom-line concerns trump once-inviolable relationships between studios and talent.

Until now, however, filmmakers of Spielberg's and Jackson's stature were thought to be immune to the brass-knuckles tactics of the studios. Squeezed by a business trapped between rising costs and leveling revenues, the two filmmakers are Hollywood's latest -- and most prominent -- victims of cost containment.

Movie studios have long entered into financial arrangements with talent for reasons other than pure economic reward. Sometimes a deal is made for the prestige of associating with a famous actor or director; sometimes it is done in the belief that half a financial loaf from a proven hit maker is less risky than a whole one from an untested filmmaker; and still other times it happens simply to keep relations warm so the talent will want to work for the studio.

The particular problem for Universal with "Tintin" is that Spielberg's and Jackson's involvement comes with a huge price tag. The two filmmakers together would command such a large percentage of the movie's revenue as part of their compensation -- without putting up any of the capital themselves, as is typical in Hollywood -- that it takes a substantial slice of the profit off the table for the backers.

Studios in recent times have shunned some costly deals with filmmakers and stars. Fox decided not to make the comedy "Used Guys" in 2006 with Jim Carrey and Ben Stiller after concluding the deals with the actors outweighed the odds of making its money back. And many in Hollywood also remember how Paramount Pictures just barely broke even the same year on "Mission: Impossible III." Even though the movie grossed nearly $400 million worldwide, its star and producer Tom Cruise pocketed more than $80 million.

The main reason these two dynamic filmmakers were turned down was something Hollywood can't tolerate in a down market. What is that? Paying in this case 30% of the profits to Speilberg and Jackson. Directors just like actors are going to have to tighten their belt.

The other side of the equation is the public is now picked up the pace in going to the movies. Check this out:

In Downturn, Americans Flock to the Movies

LOS ANGELES — Hollywood could get used to this recession thing.

While much of the economy is teetering between bust and bailout, the movie industry has been startled by a box-office surge that has little precedent in the modern era. Suddenly it seems as if everyone is going to the movies, with ticket sales this year up 17.5 percent, to $1.7 billion, according to Media by Numbers, a box-office tracking company.

And it is not just because ticket prices are higher. Attendance has also jumped, by nearly 16 percent. If that pace continues through the year, it would amount to the biggest box-office surge in at least two decades.

Americans, for the moment, just want to hide in a very dark place, said Martin Kaplan, the director of the Norman Lear Center for the study of entertainment and society at the University of Southern California.

“It’s not rocket science,” he said. “People want to forget their troubles, and they want to be with other people.”

Helping feed the surge is the mix of movies, which have been more audience-friendly in recent months as the studios have tried to adjust after the lackluster sales of more somber and serious films.

As she stood in line at the 18-screen Bridge theater complex here on Thursday to buy weekend tickets for “Jonas Brothers: The 3D Concert Experience,” Angel Hernandez was not thinking much about escaping reality. Instead, Ms. Hernandez, a Los Angeles parking lot attendant and mother of four young girls, was focused on one very specific reality: her wallet.

Even with the movie carrying a premium price of $15 because of its 3-D effects — children’s tickets typically run $9 at the Bridge — Ms. Hernandez saw the experience as a bargain.

“Spending hundreds of dollars to take them to Disneyland is ridiculous right now,” she said. “For $60 and some candy money I can still be a good mom and give them a little fun.”

A lot of parents may have been thinking the same thing Friday, as “Jonas Brothers” sold out more than 800 theaters, according to MovieTickets.com, and was expected to sell a powerful $25 million or more in tickets.

Other movies kept up their blistering sales pace, too, including “Tyler Perry’s Madea Goes to Jail,” about a gun-toting grandma. Even “Taken,” a relatively low-cost thriller starring Liam Neeson, is barreling past the $100 million mark this weekend.

Historically speaking, the old saw that movies do well in hard times is not precisely true. The last time Hollywood enjoyed a double-digit jump in attendance was 1989, when the unemployment rate was at a comfortable 5.4 percent and the Gothic tone of that year’s big hit, “Batman,” seemed mostly the stuff of fantasy. That year, the number of moviegoers shot up 16.4 percent, according to Box Office Mojo, a box-office reporting service.

In 1982, theater attendance jumped 10.1 percent to about 1.18 billion (the top seller was “E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial”) as unemployment rose sharply past 10 percent. Then admissions fell nearly 12 percent, an unusually sharp drop, in 1985 (the “Back to the Future” year), as the economy picked up — suggesting that theater owners have sometimes found fortunes in times of distress, and distress in good times.

Academic research on the matter is scant. One often-quoted scholarly study by Michelle Pautz, of Elon University, was published by the journal Issues in Political Economy in 2002. Over all, it said, the portion of the American population that attended movies on a weekly basis dropped from around 65 percent in 1930 to about 10 percent in the 1960s, and pretty much stayed there.

The film industry appears to have had a hand in its recent good luck. Over the last year or two, studios have released movies that are happier, scarier or just less depressing than what came before. After poor results for a spate of serious dramas built around the Middle East (“The Kingdom,” “Lions for Lambs,” “Rendition”), Hollywood got back to comedies like “Paul Blart: Mall Cop,” a review-proof lark about an overstuffed security guard.

“A bunch of movies have come along that don’t make you think too much,” said Marc Abraham, a producer whose next film is a remake of “The Thing.”

Certainly exhibitors are looking for a profit lift in the downturn. A new report from Global Media Intelligence on Friday predicted that the fortunes of movie theater operators like Regal Entertainment and Cinemark Holdings would be “increasingly favorable against a backdrop of highly negative economic news.”

Cinematic quality has little to do with it. The recent crop of Oscar nominees has fared poorly, for the most part, at the box office. Lighter fare has drawn the crowds.

“It would take a very generous person to call these pictures anything other than middle-of-the-road, at best,” said Roger Smith, the executive editor of Global Media Intelligence.

The box-office surge started just before Christmas with the comedy “Marley & Me,” in which Jennifer Aniston was upstaged by a dog. And it has continued, weekend by weekend, with little sign of let-up, analysts say.

“Watchmen,” a dark superhero film, opens March 6 and is expected to do megawatt business. It is to be followed by “Monsters vs. Aliens,” a 3-D behemoth from DreamWorks Animation that analysts expect to have the biggest March opening ever for a nonsequel.

Movie theaters are already adding 3 a.m. screenings for “Watchmen” next week, and advance sales by online ticket companies like Fandango and MovieTickets.com have been strong.

“Fandango is experiencing the best first quarter in its history for ticket sales,” said Rick Butler, its chief operating officer. “I see no signs of a drop-off.”

From my view if film directors are willing to take less personally from the overall profit of a film, you may see a lot more "green lights" given to upcoming productions. (Of course in Speilberg's case he just received 350 Million Dollars!

Written by Mitch Santell

In 2006 I attened the first ASCAP I create music event in Los Angeles. It was the single best deal in the music industry. I've been a member of ASCAP since 1977 when I launched L.A. Music Publishing.

Over the years I've admired how much ASCAP cares about the people that join their organization and the seem sincere in their desire to educate new as well as established composer and publishers. When I attened my first event they had RANDY NEWMAN himself teaching a class on film scores and what he does and what to look for every cool.

Next, I had a great connection and presentation by Seth McFarland, the creator of Family Guy. Why was he there? Seth is also a composer on his own show. Family guy uses an orchestra of 55 musicians each week to produce this award winning show.

From the ASCAP Web Site check this out......

"About the ASCAP "I Create Music" EXPO

Build your network. Develop your craft. Boost your career.

Succeeding in today's music business depends on connections - with the right people, information, advice, tools, services and technology that are available to music creators. But discovering what is truly important can be challenging. ASCAP's annual three-day "I Create Music" EXPO makes it easy and worthwhile. It is the one place where serious songwriters, composers and producers like you can connect face to face at panels, workshops, performances, exhibitor demos, One-on-One sessions and networking events with the real people who can make a difference in your career - from the world's most successful music creators to industry experts and technology innovators. If you are committed to developing your craft and advancing your career, join the growing community of participants at the ASCAP "I Create Music" EXPO, get your music heard and connect with your future success.

Launched in 2006, the ASCAP "I Create Music" EXPO is the first and only national conference dedicated to songwriting and composing. Selling out in its inaugural year, the EXPO immediately provided a unique opportunity for songwriters, composers, publishers, producers - and those in the industry that support them - to come together in an unprecedented way to share their knowledge and expertise. In its short history, the innovative programming offered to attendees has grown to include celebrity Q&A's, master classes, songwriting and composing workshops, publisher and business panels, One-on-One sessions, DIY career building workshops, showcases and performances, song feedback panels, state-of-the-art technology demos as well as leading music industry exhibitors.

Some of the biggest names in music, both on the creative and business side, have participated at ASCAP's EXPOs. The EXPO's headliner interviews have been with Jon Bon Jovi & Richie Sambora, Jackson Browne, Steve Miller, Randy Newman and Tom Petty".