Ļ DRM is Dead, Watermarking to Replace It? - Thoughts Media Forums Digital Home Thoughts

Digital Home Thoughts - News & Reviews for the Digital Home

Register in our forums so you're ready for our next giveaway contest...


Zune Thoughts

Loading feed...

Apple Thoughts

Loading feed...

Laptop Thoughts

Loading feed...




Go Back   Thoughts Media Forums > DIGITAL HOME THOUGHTS > Digital Home News

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #1  
Old 01-14-2008, 08:00 PM
Jason Dunn
Executive Editor
Jason Dunn's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
Default DRM is Dead, Watermarking to Replace It?

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/news/2008/01/sony_music' target='_blank'>http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/news/2008/01/sony_music</a><br /><br /></div><em>&quot;With all of the Big Four record labels now jettisoning digital rights management, music fans have every reason to rejoice. But consumer advocates are singing a note of caution, as the music industry experiments with digital-watermarking technology as a DRM substitute. Watermarking offers copyright protection by letting a company track music that finds its way to illegal peer-to-peer networks. At its most precise, a watermark could encode a unique serial number that a music company could match to the original purchaser. So far, though, labels say they won't do that: Warner and EMI have not embraced watermarking at all, while Sony's and Universal's DRM-free lineups contain &quot;anonymous&quot; watermarks that won't trace to an individual.&quot;</em><br /><br />This might be an unpopular opinion, but I say bring on the watermarking technology. If it means getting DRM-free audio files that I can use on any device I want without the hassle of authentication, I'm more than willing to put up with watermarking that says I bought a song. In fact, to protect the work of artists from theft, I think personally identifiable watermarks and ISP filtering of P2P traffic based on detection of watermarks isn't such a bad idea. I strongly suspect the people that purchase content are generally not the types to turn around and put their paid content up onto a P2P network, so the people complaining about this probably aren't the ones who buy content to begin with.<br /><br />Where do you land on this issue? Would you shy away from a watermark that identifies you as having purchased a song or movie?
__________________
Want to contact me personally? Use this. Want to read my personal blog? Check it out. Want to follow me on Twitter? Here you go.
 
Reply With Quote
 


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:28 AM.