DRM: Right or Wrong?
First, here is good article on Digital Rights Managment: http://mccullagh.org/misc/articles/michigan.state.drm.0605.pdf (Warning, it is in PDF form, so wait until Adobe launches before you do anything, literally).
It's been something that has fallen into pretty much all of the entertainment industry. Music seems to be the most pervasive, since Napster has made music-file trading infamous. The RIAA has also been the most agressive when it comes to file trading, going as far as to sue those on the recieving end (historicly, companies went after the pirate distributers the most).
But this isn't something that is limited to the music industry, but to the entire entertainment industry.
Looking back, the entertainment industry would always go toe-to-toe with the tech industry, to a point of a love-hate relationship with them. VCR's allowed the movie industry a second market (the home video market), but feared that people could easily copy movies. When DVD's were put into place, there was an layer of protection that is in all DVD's, but that was easily cracked.
Nintendo has the most infamous case of piracy-fears. One of the reasons they didn't go with CD's on the Nintendo64 was because carts were much harder to massivly reproduce, where as CD's were. Then with the Gamecube, they decided to go with a 8cm DVD-type disk rather then the full 12cm that is normal for CD/DVD's.
This is a tough thing to decide upon. For one thing, I do understand the need of the entertainment industry to protect it's source of income. But on the other hand, I don't want the functionality of my devices compromised in the name of protection.
Nintendo's means, while problematic for developers, at least didn't compromise the user's functionality. But they have one advantage that the rest of the entertainment industry doesn't: they have a proprietary device. The console/handheld videogame industry isn't unified like the music, movie or television industries. It's something closer to Apple's vs. Microsoft's Operating Systems; if you want one product, you have to have that OS it works on. But because it's on the hardware that isn't very modifiable, such means of protection is more valid.
The music, movie and television industries not only don't have that convience, they have other functions they have to look out for.
Television has to make sure they don't break VCR's or Tivo's. But yet, in case you haven't already heard, they are avocating putting in a time-switch, which would delete recorded programs on your Tivo after a short time period, as well as prevent use of DVD's that have those programs. That's a form of piracy-prevention that breaks functionality.
Music has tried to make copy-protection, but it's very hard for them. The iPod and other portable MP3 players force the music industry to accept copying music onto a computer. As of yet, music doesn't incude much copy-protection because of these new functionalities. And the movie industry may be in the same boat when the long-rumored video iPod is introduced.
I tend to agree with the article above: I don't mind copy protection as long as it's doesn't interfere with my use of the product. But the entertainment industry doesn't see it that way. Every developer or producer in the entertainment industry doesn't want the field changed, so they prevent it from changing.
What they don't realize is that change happens anyway, and they need to find a way to accept it. If anything, it may be time for them to change, to make their product easier to get.
Making their products less accessable and less functional will force users to look at their alternatives. If that alternative is another competator, then they'll go there. I want my music to able to go to my MP3 player, and I certainly won't buy an album that can't do that. And I certainly won't buy a Tivo until I know it won't delete programs on me.
But at the same time, I want these products to flurish. I want the artists, developers, (and yes) the producers to make money off of their successes. While file-traders may argue otherwise, there are people who will download music or games illegally and won't bother to buy the actual product because of the free-aspect.
But yet, there is too much fear in the industry because of piracy. Podcasters would love to use their music in the background, but the music industry won't let them. Their fear is making people weary of their products and making a bad image for themselves. I understand their goal, but not their means.
It's been something that has fallen into pretty much all of the entertainment industry. Music seems to be the most pervasive, since Napster has made music-file trading infamous. The RIAA has also been the most agressive when it comes to file trading, going as far as to sue those on the recieving end (historicly, companies went after the pirate distributers the most).
But this isn't something that is limited to the music industry, but to the entire entertainment industry.
Looking back, the entertainment industry would always go toe-to-toe with the tech industry, to a point of a love-hate relationship with them. VCR's allowed the movie industry a second market (the home video market), but feared that people could easily copy movies. When DVD's were put into place, there was an layer of protection that is in all DVD's, but that was easily cracked.
Nintendo has the most infamous case of piracy-fears. One of the reasons they didn't go with CD's on the Nintendo64 was because carts were much harder to massivly reproduce, where as CD's were. Then with the Gamecube, they decided to go with a 8cm DVD-type disk rather then the full 12cm that is normal for CD/DVD's.
This is a tough thing to decide upon. For one thing, I do understand the need of the entertainment industry to protect it's source of income. But on the other hand, I don't want the functionality of my devices compromised in the name of protection.
Nintendo's means, while problematic for developers, at least didn't compromise the user's functionality. But they have one advantage that the rest of the entertainment industry doesn't: they have a proprietary device. The console/handheld videogame industry isn't unified like the music, movie or television industries. It's something closer to Apple's vs. Microsoft's Operating Systems; if you want one product, you have to have that OS it works on. But because it's on the hardware that isn't very modifiable, such means of protection is more valid.
The music, movie and television industries not only don't have that convience, they have other functions they have to look out for.
Television has to make sure they don't break VCR's or Tivo's. But yet, in case you haven't already heard, they are avocating putting in a time-switch, which would delete recorded programs on your Tivo after a short time period, as well as prevent use of DVD's that have those programs. That's a form of piracy-prevention that breaks functionality.
Music has tried to make copy-protection, but it's very hard for them. The iPod and other portable MP3 players force the music industry to accept copying music onto a computer. As of yet, music doesn't incude much copy-protection because of these new functionalities. And the movie industry may be in the same boat when the long-rumored video iPod is introduced.
I tend to agree with the article above: I don't mind copy protection as long as it's doesn't interfere with my use of the product. But the entertainment industry doesn't see it that way. Every developer or producer in the entertainment industry doesn't want the field changed, so they prevent it from changing.
What they don't realize is that change happens anyway, and they need to find a way to accept it. If anything, it may be time for them to change, to make their product easier to get.
Making their products less accessable and less functional will force users to look at their alternatives. If that alternative is another competator, then they'll go there. I want my music to able to go to my MP3 player, and I certainly won't buy an album that can't do that. And I certainly won't buy a Tivo until I know it won't delete programs on me.
But at the same time, I want these products to flurish. I want the artists, developers, (and yes) the producers to make money off of their successes. While file-traders may argue otherwise, there are people who will download music or games illegally and won't bother to buy the actual product because of the free-aspect.
But yet, there is too much fear in the industry because of piracy. Podcasters would love to use their music in the background, but the music industry won't let them. Their fear is making people weary of their products and making a bad image for themselves. I understand their goal, but not their means.
posted by SeanM at 11:08 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home