that's so childish*. if you don't like the rules that your label imposes, then don't sign with them. they are plenty of labels around who would be willing accomadate copy protection clauses in a contract.

* I'm shooting this from the hip without looking into switchfoot's reasoning, if any (like "there was mistake at the plant"), but just solely based on the notion that this is an after-the fact reaction to be deemed cool and "for the people" - lame

Well, considering that

a) it's a Sony-wide policy about which they had no choice, and

b) the vast majority of the music industry is controlled by a handful of majors, limiting the options for a band intent on reaching a mass audience

I'm not sure how much choice they had. The only viable alternative would be to go back in time to before they first signed with Sony, and instead opt for a DIY approach. But of course, then they'd never get radio support, never get on MTV, and never sell the tens or hundreds of thousands of records that they probably have.

(plus, the musical competition in the indie arena would make their career much less luck-based)

All in all, there aren't a lot of choices to be had here if you're a mid-tier major label band like these guys. I think this is the best that fans can reasonably expect.

c'mon man, that's a defeatist attitude. so bands like Interpol, Arcade Fire, Death Cab, & what not haven't gotten where they are today without the backing of a major? and the way to buck the system is to arm kids with the tools and methods that could get them landed with lawsuits and such? that just seems very irresponsible.

I prefer the passive resistance route: i don't like the way to you do business so I won't do business with you. IMO, it's the only way to effectively promote change.

(if it matters any, I will cut Switchfoot some slack since, according to them, this policy was implemented after they signed their deal, which could be grounds to get them released from it, but which would cause a whole other slew of issues...)

Death Cab did hit their peak on an indie and most likely won't go much further on a major. But they do get their cds in the Best Buy bin for $6.99 now. That's a big win ;)

With the changes in digital distribution & the availability of non traditional venues (soundtracks, commercials, satellite radio, now the new Clear Channel venture), the playing field is starting to tip towards being levelled in the indies vs majors battle.

Now if music acts would support the cause & choose to not work with those business practices that they do not agree with, the leveling could come at a quicker pace.

If they had signed a multi-album contract with the label, their options would have been rather limited. Don't know if this is the case with them, but it could be part of the explanation.

Death Cab did hit their peak on an indie and most likely won't go much further on a major. But they do get their cds in the Best Buy bin for $6.99 now. That's a big win ;)

Well, it will probably also get them on some shitty adult contemporary radio stations. They might become less relevant for you and me, but from the standpoint of their careers, it's probably a big win.

I agree that bands can now survive and prosper on a national scale without a major label behind them. But the dreams of rock star excess have to be killed in order to get them to take that route. Ian Mackaye is an inspiration to a lot of people, but not everyone can resist the lure of the rockstar lifestyle. Some people will be seduced by it, and will sign with majors rather than grinding it out via DIY asceticism. I can't say that I completely begrudge them that decision.

As Matt points out, if they're not locked into a multi-album deal, you're right and they had a bit more choice, and can consequently be blamed a bit more for having DRM on their CD. Odds are that they're locked into their contract, though.

this isn't like, the sneakiest marketing thing ever, is it?

cynic