DRM is Dead, Long Live DRM

[Damion Chaplin]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20070209_001642.html' target='_blank'>http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20070209_001642.html</a><br /><br /></div><i>"The fact is that DRM isn't making the grade. It inconveniences users and doesn't particularly protect intellectual property owners. My sense is that this position is being broadly, if slowly, adopted in the music industry, and much of what we saw from Jobs this week was his attempt to rush to the front of the mob. And I applaud that, because a clear call to action by someone with plenty of skin in the game is needed if anything is going to change. What happens, then, to DRM? I don't think it will simply go away. Rather, I think it will evolve toward a new paradigm based less on prevention than on punishment. Keeping people from copying music or moving it from device to device hasn't worked well, so why not let them copy and move at will yet still offer some piracy deterrence? It's not that extra copy of "Stairway to Heaven" that's the problem, it's the 100,000 extra copies distributed by some bootleg service or copied on mass-production pirate CDs."</i><br /><br />Well, Cringely and I agree on something for once. With last week's challenge to the industry from Mr. Jobs, the whole DRM scandal had a little fuel added to its fire. How do you think Steve's open letter from last week will affect things? What is the future of DRM, now that we all got used to it being here to stay? Think we'll see DRM-free tunes from ITMS anytime soon? :wink:

[Felix Torres]

The letter will have zero effect since it is generally understood to be a cynical attempt to divert the attention of the euro-regulators pressing Apple to license fairplay from his lock-in tactics to the behavior of the studios.
Its just a smoke screen.

Ultimately, how low-to medium quality pre-ripped files are sold is irrelevant; the majority of consumers that actually buy music buy it in the highest generally available quality: CDs.

[Felix Torres]

Just like Bill Clinton, it takes an expert to parse Jobs:
http://news.com.com/Parsing+Steve+Jobs+alternative+views+of+the+future/2010-1027_3-6159169.html?tag=nefd.top

[Jason Eaton]

Actually... there are prior records of Jobs saying he was against DRM when asked about iTunes download restrictions. So we may need to turn down the cynical knob back from 11 a little.

He has said previously, as he restated now, that DRM was added as a condition from the record studios to sell music. Without some form of protection the studios would not have licensed the music.

Now the not licensing Fairplay is a lemons to lemonade thing for Apple. Why should they give away their position in the market and their money maker?

Digital music downloads is a form of entertainment. Downloaded music effects no ones health or life. There are other places that sell music downloads and devices one can use if the *CHOOSE* to. There are even different mediums to get music without DRM imposed.

So Apple is a choice. Everyone crying for Apple to open their DRM is just wanting a free slice of pie.

[Felix Torres]

Actually, the best thing Apple has done for the industry is:
a- Not license FairPlay so it doesn't become a defacto standard
b- Not support subscriptions
C- continue to sell low-bit rate music

More power to them.
Just don't expect us to buy the whole "its the studios fault we have to lock-in our customers."

Lock-in is a valid business strayegy.
Have to courage to defend it instead of trying to weasel out by saying the other guy started it.

[Jason Eaton]

Not sure how to respond there, how can saying the truth be weassling?

In the digital download market Apple is a middleman. Microsoft with Urge is a middleman. Napster is a middleman.

Everyone of them have to agree to the Record Label's demands to sell music. Those Record label's said you can not sell the music through iTunes (etc) without putting a DRM scheme around the music. End of story.

Unless you are some how implying Apple et all should break the contracts from Record Labels and tell them they are doing it for the good of the people? Perhaps a Socialist Music Agenda?

I don't get it.