Slashdot Mirror


Former Apple Exec Speaks Against DRM

Wysz writes "Mike Evangelist, former Director of Product Marketing for Apple's "Pro" applications, has blogged his thoughts about DRM. Like many of us, he is offended by the fact that the record labels and movie studios treat their customers like criminals. While he notes in the comments section that iTunes is the best of the worst, he admits to using third-party tools to remove the DRM from iTunes tracks."

6 of 408 comments (clear)

  1. more difficult to abide by today by yagu · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From his blog:

    From this day forward I will never spend a another dime on content that I cant use the way I please. If I cant copy it to my hard drive and play it using the devices I want, when and where I want, I wont be buying it. Period.

    I agree. This has been my philosophy for a long time. Unfortunately, you can only find out after the fact you've bought something with crap built in. If there is any disclaimer at all on the packaging, it's microscopic (look at the recent Beastie Boys CD). The first thing I do with a new CD is rip it, verify it plays on all of my PC's, and all of my CD and DVD players. If it doesn't, I return it. (And, yes, I even erase the ripped music.)

  2. What I dislike... by Psionicist · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What I really dislike about DRM is the general consensus that everything actually will have DRM in the future. Even many hardcore geeks at Slashdot seem to reason DRM is here to stay and, if anything, we should try to use the lesser of all the evils. Well, I don't agree (and I didn't vote for Bush either, *shrug*) and the sooner the consumers unite somehow and nicely tell the record- and movie industry we don't want their freaking DRM the better.

    Microsoft, being a maker of software based DRM-solutions, plays along nicely by reinforcing the record/movie industry's "threat" that they are "forced" to use DRM if future content should be playable at all in the future. This is _untrue!_ Even if many content industries want DRM, it's not needed, and we shouldn't give up and let them have it that way. Think about it, if a CD can be played in a stereo, even if the stereo has some kind of DRM, any competent taiwanese manufacutrer should be able to create a player for the computer, regardless if RIAA, MPAA or Microsoft likes that or not. That's the way it should be.

    I am worried someday, somewhere, some freaking moron political figures will rule the computer is an "entertainment device" and must be managed with DRM (think Vista, Trusted Computing etc). That's the day we are all fucked, even if don't actually listen to music or watch TV.

  3. DRM = Big Brother by TheZorch · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Does the name George Orwell mean anything to you people. Wake up and smell the coffee! Big Brother is coming, and we need to stop it now before its too late. I'm serious...stop laughing dammit...ok now I'm ticked! Seriously though, we as Americans and citizens of other Free Nations need to stand up and say that "we will not allow corporations to take away our rights and freedom no matter what". Send a clear message to the RIAA, boycott their products, and spread the word that you can boycotting them and why. All that's needed to start a landslide is a single pebble. Are YOU that pebble? Think about it.

    --
    Michael "TheZorch" Haney
    thezorch@gmail.com
    http://thezorch.googlepages.com/home
  4. Re:Good luck! by Khaed · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've worked in retail. The stores say that employees steal more than anything. I've worked a place where a manager had to walk employees out to be sure they didn't snag something. So I'd just like to add evidence, from experience, that "everyone" does know that. At least everyone even remotely involved.

  5. Re:Good luck! by Total_Wimp · · Score: 5, Interesting

    At least the department store removes the tag after you buy it.

    Lets take this a little bit further.

    A department store decides to leaves the anti-theft tag on it's clothes permanently to prevent people from copying it's designs. You go to the store and buy a baseball cap. You take the cap home and your wife thinks it's cool too, but the tag jumps in the way and refused to let her put it on her head. Your daughter finds a hack to let her wear the cap, but the damn thing is watermarked so the store can tell it's "stolen". The store sees her wearing the cap and sues you.

    You deal with the lawsuit and throw away the hacked cap, but you liked the cap so much you buy a second copy. You wear it regularly for a while then put it in a drawer and only wear it occasionally. When you decide to buy a new house and move, the cap refuses to let the movers take it out of the old house. It also refuses to let the new owners of the old house use it. It sits in the garage and is useless to anyone.

    You still are pretty charmed by the cap so you buy a third copy. Since you've been going bald for a few years, it's nice to have your head covered up on summer days. After watching infomercials late at night, you decide the Hair Club for Men is the thing for you. You're really happy with your new "hair" but you still want some cover so you go to put on the cap. It refuses to go on your head.

    You are PISSED! You've bought three copies of that F**KING cap and now you can't even use it, just cause you have new "hair". You swear to never buy another cap from that GOD D**NED company. But the cap really has a lot of sentimental value so you end up buying a fourth copy anyway.

    Yep, DRM is just like those little tags

    TW

  6. Re:Department store tags vs. DRM by Jherek+Carnelian · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If you don't like DRM, suggest another way for them to sell music.

    Easy.

    Q: How has the internet changed things?
    A: The cost of distribution is now effectively zero.

    No smart business will even try to charge for something that is free. Even if they have a 300% markup, 3 * 0 is still ZERO.

    Q: What's left to charge a markup on?
    A: Labor costs.

    The cost to create the album, book, movie or video game is where there is still opportunity to charge a mark-up. So, forget all about copyright which is (primarily) about controlling distribution. There is no value in distribution any more.

    Instead, sell all the creations as work-for-hire to the public domain. Yes, let the public pay for the cost of creation plus whatever premium you can milk from them. If it costs $500K to produce an album, then ask for $1M up front from the public at large. Let the people pay whatever they think such an album will be worth to them. Take all those payments, put them into an escrow account and when it hits $1M you get to work. When you are done, release the finished album to the public domain and collect your $1M in payment.

    This can work for the same reason that the cost of distribution is now zero - the Internet. The cost of collecting payments from millions of people is approaching zero too. We still need the right financial infrastructure to do it efficiently, but technically all the pieces are already available.

    Q: How does "work-for-hire to the public domain" benefit the content creators?
    A: It substantially reduces their risks by guaranting the return on their investment up front.

    Q: How does "work-for-hire to the public domain" benefit the consumers?
    A1: They will actually own the results - no worries about breaking the law to share with friends.
    A2: They have much more of a say into what kinds of entertainment get created - not advertisers, not studio execs, but the actual consumer gets to vote with his dollar before production which is far more effective than "voting" after the production is already finished.

    Q: What if not enough money is collected to reach $1M?
    A: Lower the asking price, or give up and return all the escrowed money or spend some money on hype to encourage more buyers. This is the epitomy of a free market, no government involvement required at all.