What is Digg?Sponsored by Amazon.com
Kindle(TM) - Amazon's #1 most gifted product view!
amazon.com - Order Kindle now and receive it in time for Christmas. Free Expedited shipping. Click to learn more.
76 Comments
- krewemaynard, on 10/12/2007, -2/+76Who dugg this down?! DRM doesn't stop pirates, it frustrates honest people.
- AndrewDiggs, on 10/12/2007, -2/+58I pay a monthly fee to PlaysForSure. I can't tell you how many times the DRM accidentally locked me out of music I paid for and legitimately have a right to play.
Meanwhile, my friends who download music from p2p sites or copy their friends' ipods laugh because they're never locked out of their music. - chris9902, on 10/12/2007, -1/+40Musician > Record company > [DRM] > Consumer
There is 2 things wrong with that. - johnham, on 10/12/2007, -2/+38So if people pay money for a song and then are unjustly barred from listening to it, you say it doesn't matter because there are "bigger problems in the world"? Bigger problems being idiots like you.
- cday, on 10/12/2007, -1/+28These top ten reasons are nicely written, clear and easy to understand. I liked 'em! :o)
- IMustBeEmo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+22Benefits like keeping the big four major labels at the top of the market?
If you call that a benefit... - Klarth, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20One single reason does it for me: It's ***** petty. The rest of our belongings aren't dynamically managed, so why should our media be? It's like having pointlessly restrictive, invasive rules imposed on being allowed to lend DVDs to friends. Not good.
- skifreak107, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20Saying there are bigger problems in the world than your own rights is absurd. Everything in this world is fought over someone's rights - either your own or someone else's.
- williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -3/+201. More money for coke and hookers for record publishers
There must be more... - FredSanford, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18You're right, you won't read about the benefits of DRM on Digg anytime soon. Why? Because the executives who benefit from from DRM at the expense of artistic freedom and consumer rights are not Digg readers.
Check the RIAA's social news site. You might find something there. - Heymoe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16I believe DRM is quite well implemented. Its power is to lock you into a proprietary format and make you loyal to that format.
That is, until the DRM provider changes the format and makes you spend for the music all over again. It just happened this last week with Plays For Sure versus the Zune.
But I’m sure that’s just an anomaly that won’t affect anyone... - IMustBeEmo, on 10/12/2007, -5/+18We wouldn't need DRM if the music industry would quit forcing "bands" to produce ***** music.
If there was good mainstream popular music, DRM would die.
Piracy is the complete opposite of the cause of DRM. - jonnyq, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13The purpose of DRM is to make sure that the only people who get content are the people who paid for it.
If you read the list, especially the top 5, you'd have seen that DRM doesn't do that at all. Anything that can be DRMed can still be copied, by some method, reencoded without the DRM and redistributed to the pirating masses. So, the only one possible benefit to DRM is completely nullified. - Stonedonkey, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11What is important to keep in mind is that DRM is not designed to protect media, as much as it is designed to sell itself. Big money can be made licensing your digital gatekeeper.
- rideagain, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I don't think that DRM is causing difficulties because it's "not good yet". I think that what's not good about it (e.g. you can't copy your DRM song to an arbitrary music player and then back to your computer) is that way by design.
- dhollister, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11My problem with the "DRM-free" wishful thinking is that there is still no solution in place to prevent piracy. I do agree it should be different than it is now, but as someone who works in the industry and constantly has to see my career flash before my eyes, I know that we absolutely need to find a way somehow to discourage piracy or figure out alternative ways of making money from it. Once we do that, DRM-free is fine by me. But why do it now when for every legal copy of a CD there's like 14 illegal ones?
- haxx4, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8The Top 10 Arguments Against DRM
One question we get a lot here at LearnOutLoud is why we've chosen to go DRM-free with our digital downloads. I've explained it to a number of people and written a number of posts about it but I've never summarized our reasons for going the DRM-free route in one post before. So here goes... (And if you have no idea what I'm talking about or what DRM is please click here.)
1. DRM doesn't prevent illegal use of files, it just makes it a bit more difficult to access them. A lot of publishers are under the impression that once you put DRM on a file nothing bad will happen to that file ever. It just ain't so. There are a multitude of tools out there that allow you to strip DRM off of files relatively easily. So while DRM might make illegal sharing a bit more difficult if someone really wants an unprotected/unencrypted version of the file it's not very hard to do this. This is an important point because...
2. All it takes is one person to crack the file and it can be made available to everyone. Most illegal trading of files happens over P2P networks. The thing with P2P networks is that it only takes one copy of a file to be unencrypted/unprotected to have that file be available to all. Check any P2P search engine and you'll find a multitude of titles that are supposed to only be available for sale online as protected files. Of course, there is one other possibility...
3. Anyone selling content on CD is already selling unprotected files anyway. With the exception of debacles like the Sony rootkit, 99+% of all CDs sold contain unencrypted files. This means that anyone who sells content on CDs is making unprotected content available and that putting those files online is as easy as ripping them to MP3 files, a pretty simple task these days. What boggles my mind is record companies and publishers who are willing to make content available unprotected on CD but for some reason insist on copy protection for digitally downloaded files. Especially considering that...
4. DRM adds a lot of costs for content producers - Implementing DRM isn't free of course. The costs to develop and/or license DRM technology, encode media files and deal with a multitude of DRM-related customer service complaints are usually passed on from the retailers to the content producers. What this means is that content producers make significantly less money selling DRM "protected" content than they do selling DRM-free content. Royalty rates offered to many content producers from online retailers are often pitifully low and DRM is typically used as a main reason why this is so. That's a shame. Of course that's not the only cost...
5. There's a huge hidden cost in trying to sell DRM'ed content - In addition to the many costs of implementing DRM for content there's a cost that is often overlooked: The sales you lose because people don't want to buy DRM'ed content or have incompatible players. This is huge. There is a growing number of people who won't buy any content that has DRM. In addition, because there is no universally compatible DRM standard, many people can't buy your content if they don't have a compatible player. For instance, if you only sell your content with Apple's Fairplay DRM all of the people getting Zunes during the holidays won't buy you content because it won't play on your player (and vice versa of course). So by implementing DRM you are losing out on a significant (and unknown) amount of revenue.
So those are five good reasons why content producers shouldn't implement DRM. Let's take a look at five good reasons why DRM hurts consumers...
6. Often the costs of the DRM are passed along to the consumer as well. Since DRM isn't free someone has to pay for it. Sometimes it's the content producer in the form of reduced royalties. Other times it's the consumer. Take the example of eMusic and Apple iTunes. iTunes tracks sell for 99 cents while eMusic tracks sell for 25 cents. One of the reasons why eMusic can sell its music for so much cheaper is that it isn't spending tons of money implementing a DRM system and dealing with customers who are having DRM issues. So it is able to offer a technically superior product for a significantly lower price. Which is good and even better when you consider that...
7. DRM-free content will play on your device of today and your device of tomorrow - It'll be a little shocker for some people in a few weeks when they get the new Zune device from Microsoft and try to load all of their Rhapsody or MSN Music tunes on it only to find that they won't work. Why? Because Microsoft's previous DRM (PlaysForSure) isn't compatible with the new Zune DRM. And that's an example of one of the biggest problems with DRM. It locks you into a specific player from a specific company. While that might be good for a hardware manufacturer like Microsoft or Apple it's not good for you the consumer. Want another reason? Consider that...
8. Your media devices of the future will be significantly different than your media devices of the present. I discussed this point at length in my post The 5 Dangers of Buying DRM'ed Media. There's a really good chance that your next media player won't be an iPod and that in the not-too-distant future it'll probably be your cellphone. If that's the case then you need to be aware that any DRM-encoded content that you buy probably won't work for you anymore. While millions of cellphones are currently shipping that play MP3 files, very few of them will play songs from iTunes or audiobooks from Audible.com. So if you're at all interested in being able to play your content (the stuff you paid hard-earned money for) in the future you should think twice before buying anything infected with DRM. Furthermore...
9. DRM fundamentally changes who is control of your media. This might be the most esoteric of the arguments and is a bit difficult to explain but in a nutshell, when you buy DRM content for the first time in history, someone else is dictating to you what you can do with something that you've legally purchased. Watch this short video from the great folks over at DefectiveByDesign which illustrates this point nicely:
Finally, it's really important to understand that...
10. Whenever you buy DRM'ed content you support the system of DRM - I buy DRM'ed content from time to time like most of you. However, I have realized that with each purchase of DRM'ed content I help to perpetuate a system in which DRM is acceptable. And at the same time, whenever I frequent a site that offers DRM-free content I'm helping to support a system in which DRM is viewed as unacceptable and a bad business practice. There are a ton of good sites out that offer DRM-free content (here's another great list) and they could use your support. By rallying around these sites we can help to tip the balance and make this a world where the power is in the hands of people who produce content and legally purchase it.
Thanks for taking the time to listen to me ramble and I hope you now have a better understanding of why this issue is important and what you can do to help make this world a better for place for content producer and content consumers.
Posted by jbischke - dkreifus, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8There have been pirates way before music was available in a digital form. Heck, go back a few hundred years. Have you seen PIRATES of the Caribbean?
DRM is coming into play because record producers are GREEDY. CD sales actually went up with the popularity of MP3s. Why? Because people will download a song from a band they never heard of, hear it and like it. But they want it in a higher quality, something that mp3s cannot deliver in a good sizable quantity. (ie: higher quality songs are VERY large.)
So the person went and bought the CD.
As many others have said before, DRM will not stop pirates. It will frustrate honest users. Think of your average non-computer savvy person. All they want to do is download a song, or put it on their mp3 player. They don't want to work with passwords, and worrying about if an item is compatible with a file type. Will my ipod work with this file from Napster? Who knows.
The users will get frustrated, and just give up on it. Then they'll go in search of pirated stuff. Or get it from their friends, with a mp3 ripper. - sophiaperennis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"DRM doesn't prevent illegal use of files, it just makes it a bit more difficult to access them."
That is really one of the flawed selling-points of the RIAA, that DRM is a preventive measure against piracy. Of course this is nonsense. All they the RIAA really wants, is to continue their control of the market. - learnoutloud, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Hey chegs. I loved the picture and was glad to see you did the cc license. I think I did the attribution right (by linking back to the photo on Flickr) but if not feel free to let me know and I'll correct. Thanks!
- johnham, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7If iTunes was non-DRMed, and had slightly lower prices (not allofmp3 low, but a similar structure of payment based on popularity/song length/file size), I would never download an album illegally again.
- b0rg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3DRM can be annoying, confusing, and anti-customer; the original Divx investors learned this the hard way. People *were* willing to pay, and often pay *more* for a movie that didn't have complicated usage restrictions, and offered no "I gotta have that!" advantage over regular DVD or even VHS. I want to buy a movie or an album, I don't want to buy a "limited non-transferrable right to play media before (date) up to (n) times within an (x) hour window", and I don't want to give my credit card number to fifteen different media companies, at least one of which has an IT manager who will patch his financial database servers "real soon now".
DRM can also be transparent but - here's the big catch - it has to offer a benefit to the customer. I buy a fair amount of stuff on iTunes, because I can get it right away, I can choose from a large library without having to deal with six different companies (ARE YOU LISTENING, TV NETWORKS???), and it doesn't limit my use of the music in a way I'd notice - I have my library copied to three computers, and some or all of it on three iPods that my kids and I use.
Apple also has made itunes clean and has never, ever made the fatal mistake of surprising me with a bunch of pop-ups, third-party spam, or "special features" installed without my consent. (if they do make that mistake one day, all bets are off, and I hoist the Jolly Roger faster than you can say "50 DVD-R-spindle for $12 at Fry's!") - chegs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3ever look at a photo and sure you have seen it before?
I was sure I had seen that photo before and sure enough it was mine
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chegs/253988593/
kinda freaked me out but yay for creative commons :) - Phoenixfury, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Cleverboy. That would be something Steve Balmer would say who seems to assume that everyone are thieves. You don't even know the poster you commented to. Who are you judge that person as a thief. Personally I agree with him. In fact I'm willing to state one better. I think all music should be sold in a market place style fashion much like Amie.st. Everything starts free and go's up by demand, but not to go over 98 cents. Granted mostly everything would likely wind up at about 98 cents, but at least the price would be controlled through real demand. I think an online market place model is where it's at.
- tech42er, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Yeah. It's d e f e c t i v e by design! Visit their site.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3One thing that isn't mentioned there is what happens when the DRM system your content is encrypted with is no longer supported!
There are several software companies now out of business who made their profits by creating software which they then protected with hardware dongles and activation schemes.
A lot of their software is still in use today but what happens when you want to transfer your license to a more up-to-date PC?
You simply can't do it because the DRM authorizer no longer exists!
What do I do in 10 years if I want to install windows XP (for like, fun or something)?
The same with multimedia stuff too.
What happens to my HD copy of T2 (part of the Ultimate release)when MS decides that its not going to bother supporting the DRM it uses any more? I get a wasted disk, thats what. I paid for it, but thanks to DRM I can no longer play it at all! - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3There are NO benefits from TC. It is solely there to lock software to a specific computer/device and prevent any activity that might let the owner of said hardware/software do what they want to do.
TC is based COMPLETELY on the premise that EVERYBODY is untrustworthy so we (the hardware and software makers) have the right to impose whatever conditions we want onto them!
For example, Apple in effect, believes that EVERY SINGLE ONE of their mac customers is in fact an untrustworthy software pirating bastard who will kill their mother with a broken lawn chair at the drop of a hat, so they lock the OS to the hardware (overpriced PC hardware) using a TC chip who's future function is still not disclosed. They can pretty much do anything with it and there is nothing we the consumers, can do about it.
Remember that right to be treated as innocent before being found guilty?
Well DRM and TC are the exact opposite.
We are all being treated as guilty of crimes we might not ever even think of breaking! Wouldn't you just love the cops to break down your door and shoot you dead because you might break a law in the future, even though you personally know you wouldn't??
Thats DRM for ya! - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Good luck with the 2nd one, god damn disney now make ALL of their DVDs nonstandard with fake bits, rubbish data, invalid structures and the like.
Hell, if they go too much further the damn disks won't even play on regular DVD players, a bit like some of the stupid copy protection on game CDs that caused them to fail on more than 25% of all computers because the drive just wasn't able to read through the non-standard crap the publishers encoded the disk with.
Thank god for RipIt4Me is all I can say.
As has already been said, all DRM does is make like more difficult for the people who buy stuff legitimately!
People don't necessarily want to pirate music, software, movies etc, but while the record/software/film industry keep on releasing overpriced, under performing garbage instead of product people actually want to give them money for then its not going to stop.
The harder these pricks from big business try stamp down, the harder the pirates will push back, and its the pirates who are winning at the moment.
God bless their black little souls!! - woodcoxcb, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Yes, as a matter of fact, I pirated Pirates of the Caribbean...
- airphloo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Has anyone ever really tried to sell DRM-free music? No.
Piracy would be very manageable if regular people could go to an online store and buy any song, and then be able to play that song on any standard device at a good quality.
Why do I ever pirate music? Because iTunes doesn't sell it, because I want it at a higher bitrate, because I want to be sure it works even after the iPod monopoly has died out.
It's just too bad that the music industry was too slow to provide the content before Napster made them so cautious. If they had just started selling the stuff right away, mass-music stealing would be no more of a problem than shoplifting. - Phoenixfury, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I agree with you both and I loath DRM. I am tied to the Apple Fairplay DRM which is actually pretty laxed as far as DRM gos. The thing is as long as I'm using Apple's products (iPod, iTunes, and Quicktime) I barely notice the DRM is even there. In this case I have no problem with that.. However the moment I want to hook my iPod up to my Xbox 360 to jam out on some tunes, I run into a bit of a road block with the DRMed songs I purchased. This is where most consumers have a problem with it. When you make DRM incompatable with other devices you use, then it becomes a huge problem for you.
I'd also like to add another point to the list, point #11. DRM is often used by the hardware manufacturer to sell a product. That's right, they are using that very thing that drives us crazy to sell your soul to their product. If you buy an iPod and buy iTunes, then you have no choice but to stay with iPod or abandon your purchased music collection and start over. The same is happening with the Zune only this time it's getting real. If you built up a library in any other online store but the Zune market place, you'll have to start all over again.
If we must have to live with DRM as a necessary evil, then a DRM standard must be enforced across all of the online stores that do use DRM (leave the non DRM'd ones out of this) then there needs to be a universal standard that works across the board. DRM shouldn't be used to force you to stick with an iPod or a Zune.. In the end that's where the problem really lies. However if you can allow songs I bought on iTunes to work on any licensed device I bought other than an iPod, then I can guarantee that some of the grumbling from the previous 10 points will go away. I'm willing to put up with DRM if I'm able to do the things I was able to do before DRM infected my life. However DRM is used in a marketing war that ultimately not just hurts the consumers, but some of the people in the record industry as well. - Jugalator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"It's pure ignorance to hop up and down and whine about DRM when the alternative is clearly worse."
Again, are you really sure about this? Many just assume this because "selling unprotected music is crazy". It would only be in a world where piracy didn't exist, but it's everywhere. If you want a direct link to any recent big album release of your choice, I'd be able to give it to you within minutes. How can the alternative be worse than that? The piracy would remain, but at least the music companies would be slightly more competitive with piracy. Slap on extra benefits with the music sales (bonus material etc), and maybe things would even work for them for once. - johnholmes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's not ignorance to point out something isn't working. This article quite clearly points out flaws in all DRM schemes that are probably insurmountable. Although you may think DRM is a 'necessary evil', the article correctly points out it will never be able to provide the blanket solution the content providers believe it will.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Stop blog-spamming!
- KSUdesigner, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3There are just as many valid arguments against renting music.
- Dustyb, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I pay monthly for URGE. In the 4 or so months I've had it's gone off without a hitch, best $10 a month I can think of spending. On the other hand I used to have Rhapsody, and it was hell. Problem after problem, they should have been paying ME $10 a month because of all the work I had to do fixing it. So there are very valid arguments against DRM, I for one will never actually purchase a DRM song, just rent.
- M0b1u5, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Make a stand!
Don't buy ANYTHING with DRM.
Tell the sales person why you won't buy.
Email the store manager.
Get a T-Shirt: ELIMINATE DRM. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Its just a pity that VLC has all the polish of a dry cow pat. Seriously, its ugly, non-intuitive and just not very appealing.
- giant.robot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2A good portion of these ten reasons are duplicates so it's really more like five reasons against DRM. You would also be hard pressed to back some of them up. For instance suggesting DRM adds cost to music and backing that claims up using an example of iTunes and eMusic. They carry a very different set of record labels.
eMusic's catalog is almost exclusively small indie labels and indie bands. You might find music you like on the service but you're not going to find Top 40 music on there for 25¢ a song. The songs on iTunes cost more but they have a larger catalog from larger labels. A major lebels release on CD likewise costs more than a smaller indie label record on CD. Larger labels tend to demand more money and so things are more expensive. - ibeetle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I agree, but why stop at DRM'd music.
Cable TV is encrypted. Let us all stick it to the cable man and tell him where to go. Lets all drop cable.
Video is encrypted. Both VHS and DVD have anti-copying encoding. So out the window with our DVD and video tape players. That will show Blockbuster what we are all about.
Then those damn video games. Let us tell Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft where they can go with their DRM encryption. I am throwing my PS 2 and Nintendo Wii in the trash right now.
I completely agree we need to show the entire entertainment industry what we think of DRM.
Who is with me? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@cleverboy "Exactly. It's pure ignorance to hop up and down and whine about DRM when the alternative is clearly worse."
An alternative like say, creating good enough content that people will be willing to pay for (even when they don't have to) to support the artist?? - MrViklund, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2We don't need any "top 10" arguments or a list. Speak with the dollars, they will listen. If you don't like DRM, I don't, don't buy DRM:ed music.
- Nothlit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Did you try VLC player? I don't think it would care about something as silly as that...
- Wolfboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Today I saw the DRM evil in person...
My girlfriend tried to play a DVD on her computer... the DVD was one she bought at a video store. It would not play because it said the video card in her laptop has its TV output turned on and that violates the "copyright protection" on the DVD.
Her laptop doesn't have a TV output and I couldn't find any setting in Windows to disable this alleged TV output setting.
So she can't watch the DVD she legally bought.
It's all so stupid. - cleverboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Phoenix, you said that you wouldn't steal an album again. Why do you think I'm "assuming" you're a thief? Sorry man... you've already said you ARE. It's not a bad thing, its just reality. You SAID, if you had better prices... you'd actually BUY the albums you normally download. So... you're a potential customer... who is STEALING your music.
All I'm doing is listing the top reasons for recidivism. Don't shoot the messenger, I'm just splashing some cold reality. If you think about my points, you'll know them to be true. Everybody does. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1And they are exactly right. I support them 100 %. I refuse to purchase any DRM'd content.
- tech42er, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Actually that is mentioned. Reread the article; it's the last 2 or 3 reasons. And the DbD vidoe rocks!
- williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That assumes that an obsolete business model has to be bailed out. Why is that?
- tech42er, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It seems relevant.
- philipbowman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1But who decides what the 'correct ratios' are? Pound to a penny says all the money will go to the big labels and none to independent artists. Also, I understand that hardly any of existing 'copying taxes' (e.g. on blank CDRs etc) is currently getting to artists anyway.
-
Show 51 - 78 of 78 discussions
