Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
Yes and no.
All these forms of DRM aren’t interoperable and so far as the cartoon point to that it is, indeed, correct. However, as a cartoon it doesn’t really work, because in the myth the confounding of speech _follows_ the destruction of the tower. The confusion of tongues is a punishment for trying to build the tower – before that there is “one speech” (Gen. 11).
http://tinyurl.com/2pejwk
[ed: PLEASE use tinyurl.com for long urls!]
The myth is still quite compelling and could be reinterpreted in terms of _hubris_ – overweening pride – leading people to engage in ill-conceived constructive projects that in the course of things will bring disaster in their wake. (I’m sure we could all come up with some examples.) But even reinterpreted it still doesn’t really fit this situation.
I have another reservation. I don’t think the current lack of interoperability is the _only_ problem with DRM. Whether or not the interoperability problem is solved, there might still be the problem that fair use would not be guaranteed by any replacement scheme.
So I’m not sure that even if everyone in got together and built an interoperable DRM standard we’d be much better off either. I’ll note in passing that such a scheme would, in fact, be more like the Tower of Babel – a grand constructive project – and would certainly be “confounded” if not by “the Lord” certainly by users wishing to free their content and by others with less scrupulous motives.
What is with this forum and Digital Rights Management?
1. It’s about ENTERTAINMENT people! Luxuries. Not necessities. If we are going to talk about intellectual property, lets at least talk (only) about patents on life saving drugs.
2. An entity can protect their property (ip or real) in any way they see fit. Any way (as long as it doesn’t harm innocents). If a musician (or record company) thinks they can maximize their gain (monetary or otherwise), by using iTunes and its DRM, fine, if not, they can go to eMusic with no DRM.
3. We can argue whether we think they are making the wrong choice,
but clearly some people/companies have been hurt by the illegal copying (downloading, whatever) of intellectual property, and we have to respect their decisions. In other words, if you want to put a big arse alarm (with GPS/cell phone/remote cutoff) on your car because you’ve had a car stolen, go right ahead.
4. I’m still not convinced that DRM has harmed anyone and that if DRM restrictions were lifted, 90% of digital copying will be for illegal or immoral purposes, while the rest will be for what is called fair use.
#2. “What is with this forum and Digital Rights Management?”
I’ll tell you what it is. It is not just companies putting restrictions on their own content, it is their use of the government (ie DMCA, broadcast flag, etc) to cripple any innovation that could defeat the copy protection even in the service of fair use.
The content providers also use other companies that are in essentially monopolistic positions to have their way. See the DRM in the guts of Vista and Apple’s lock on the portable MP3 player business and its refusal to license its DRM to make it interoperable with other software.
it is also fraud. Some, (ie Sony) slip malware into your computer without your knowledge. Also, all content providers say that you are “buying” a DVD or CD, when in fact you do not have more than very minimal rights to that content.
It is also the hypocrites. Content providers wail “what about the artists!?!” when pushing DRM. But that is the furthest thing from their minds. Apple has long refused to allow non-DRMed music to be sold from iTunes. Not out of any concern for the artists, mind you, but rather because iTunes is designed to drive iPod sales. Further, they have stated that they would continue to use DRM even if the music industry did not insist on it, because their DRM ensures that you will not switch to another company because you will not be able to play your music on anyone else’s player.
It is also the ineffectualness of all this. Content providers are searching for the magic DRM bullet, but REAL pirates simply cannot be stopped through technological means. All they can do is create headaches for legitimate users.
In a nutshell, that is my beef about DRM.
Call me stupid, but in that cartoony pic thing, I saw NO mention of the iPod.
This is the device that broadly spread the DRM infection across the entire industry without anyone noticing!
Without the FairPlay system people would be moving backwards and forwards, to and from apple’s and other companies MP3 players with ease!
However as it now stands, apple’s DRM is clearly there to prevent people moving to the competitions’ devices, locking people to the iPod unless they want to repurchase ALL their music again!
Thanks Apple for unleashing consumer palatable DRM under the radar and in the process, opening the Padora’s box of consumer raping DRM from everyone else o the detriment of the entire god damn world!
Lou,
It also has to do with ‘Fair Use’. I want to make a backup copy of my DVD, but my only method of doing so causes me to violate the DMCA. Maybe I want to make a backup copy without the gosh darn stupid trailers, I violate the DMCA. I do not make illegal copies, I want backups of the material I paid for which I can no longer perform with this asinine DMCA…
#2,
SO, in #1 you are saying that Corps are trying to take ALL entertaiment away?? Or at least get paid for us to go outside and walk around??
Lou, I agree with your thoughts, BUT, some DRM has gone too far (let’s take Sony’s rootkit for example ( http://tinyurl.com/y6txfd ).
In some cases your car analogy would be more like having a car with a theft prevention system that would only let you drive to locations where crime levels were low and prevent you from driving to locations where crime levels were high.
As a consumer who pays for music, DRM seems to be a way of making me pay (via inconvenience and lack of backup–as #5 says) for crimes others are doing. Wouldn’t it be better to target the source instead of targeting everyone else (not to mention that those who illegally download music will find a way around DRM anyway)?
Great find!
Such a rare event for a cartoon to portray so well what is so difficult to put into words about the main issues of DRM.
Everybody who responded:
1. Love the I need to make backup arguments under fair use. How DID people survive back in the days of LP’s (before tape backup), paper books, etc. People used to take CARE of their media. I will repeat: 90% of the copying of media is immoral (making copies for *non* backup purposes).
2. Once again: EVERY provider of intellectual property, or music, can determine how they want to sell their music. Do not blame apple. It’s a free world for everyone. End of story.
3. #2. The ONLY reason why DRM exists is because people suck and will take advantage of any situation they can. That’s why there are locks on cars, that’s why there is a lock on pretty much everybody’s home. Digital Rights Management, as it exists today, is because PEOPLE STEAL, not because people are making archival backups. And I’m glad that the government is doing what they can to minimize STEALING. Do not delude yourself that this has anything to do with stifling innovation.
4. Yes I know there are examples of fair use that certain innovations have been questionable (ie: Tivo/DVR and commercial avoidance), but the argument is not in the true exceptions but in the majority (people copy to avoid paying).
Iou, I think people have seen your reply.
That’s your take on it — good.
As a customer, if I think the product sucks, I have a right to complain. I think most DRM systems sucks; I complain about it … that’s my right.
Only iPod has a DRM system remotely close to “fair”.
#9.
1…HOW long do you think TAPE has been around, including reel to reel??
2. PROVIDER…NOT the person who made the music in the first place.
3. the average crime rate for copying is About 5%…whats the excuse AFTER they get that 5%…Go after Other countries?? where its HIGHER?? TRY.
4. NO…NOT really… People will DL a CRAP copy for a movie just to see…IF its worth watching or collecting, INSTED of paying a FORTUNE to go to a movie, are buy a DVD, for a piece of CRAP… Or watching a CUT/Edited copy on TV…
Music is abit Different…WE dont know WHO sells legal copys. According to the RIAA, you cant even sell a USED tape to a friend. If you have followed some of the RIAA stuff, according to THEM, IF I OWN a car, the passenger CANT listen to the radio…