Slashdot Mirror
Protesting Apple's DRM
tedet writes "On the heels of the recent DRM news from Bruce Perens, the UK Parliament, and the Norwegian Omsbudman, Defective By Design is planning a flash protest this coming Saturday targeting Apple Stores throughout the United States. Defective by Design is targeting Apple because '[a]s the largest distributor of DRM infected technology, Apple has set a new low in the mistreatment of our freedoms.' We can expect more hazmat suits, and they created some art specific to this action. Hopefully these direct actions by Defective by Design will get the U.S. up-to-speed with its continental counterparts." (Of course, some people are happy with Apple's DRM as a compromise which helped legitimize online music sales.)
It can hardly qualify as a flash protest if you announce it to the world days in advance.
Since Apple's implementation is the least obtrusive and most user friendly, does it make since to protest? Why not go after more draconian DRM?
No one got beat up more often than the mimes of the old west!
The problem's DRM, not Apple. Therefore, make sure you add Redmond to the flash mob as well, along with the various headquarters of the xxIA sites, etc.
Its obvious that this group complaining about Apples "number of copies" is making a point by not providing all the relevant information. As such their honest and integrity are questionable. Apple's number of copies only applies the number of times a specific playlist can be burned if that playlist contains protected music. Want to burn it again then make a new one.
Still its not like its hard to circumvent the DRM in iTunes. The easiest to understand for layman is to burn to music CD and rip back to MP3.
On the point of legally purchased. You enter a contract with Apple when you purchase a protected track. You don't have to buy it from them if you don't agree to their terms. Go buy the CD. DRM rules are not applied to items you RIP yourself as the agreement of that purchase did not involve Apple.
Now, should Apple decide to apply DRM rules to items not purchased through them, specifically CDs you own, then I can see a real reason to cry about it. My first action would be to not upgrade to such a version of iTunes and forever leave the service. My previously purchased music will still work fine, Apple will just be out a lot of customers until they change their tune.
As for the other services, you are not required to use them either. Don't like the idea of a subscription, then fine don't use one but why in the hell must you bitch about products you won't use because you don't like them? Do you just have to be a victim?
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
IMO, apple has one of the least obtrusive DRM setups available. Sure the fact that it isn't open to other players makes things difficult, but compared to the rediculous systems the RIAA/MPAA has come up with, Apple's stuff is great.
j.goforth
i'm interested to see how they would set up a legal music downloading system with absolutely no DRM wrapper. also, does their language seem...well, a little orwellian?
from TFA:
"DRM gives them that power over you. Your devices will have to do their bidding. That is what DRM is about, taking the control away from you, and giving it to Big Media and companies like Apple. The hardware and software they sell you will enforce their rules, by removing your rights. As the largest distributor of DRM infected technology, Apple has set a new low in the mistreatment of our freedoms."
my sig is an honor student
... to call it DRM. It's pretty simple to get around, and it was obviously meant to be that way. Any time I buy things from the iTunes Store, I back it up to a CD for two reasons. One, so I have a back-up, and two, so I can use it in my car. Once you have it on a CD, you reimport it to your HD and, voila. You've set the music free. It's not only inexpensive, but also prudent. I'm sure lots of people know this, but it's obvious that some still don't and the bad press that results from it is unfortunate for Apple.
DRM exists because the RIAA wants it there. Apple is contractually bound to sell thier music with DRM on it. They can't just remove it at thier own discresion.
Go protest the RIAA membership companies, oh wait then you'd have to deal with the real problem. Nevermind.
Gadget News at Gizmo.com
Apple's Fairplay DRM scheme is one of the best I've used. Apple allows you to make audio CDs and doesn't have a problem with file/image backup applications.
Do I wish Apple's DRM were better and less restrictive - you betcha! The price per song should be lower and with public disclosure of how much each party receives from each sale. The bitrate should also be higher to handle some more complex pieces of music. The number of CD burn times for each song should also be increased, not decreased. Video content should be able to be burned onto a standard and/or HD/BD DVD.
Too bad emusic cannot charge on per song basis; non-DRMed content is great (subscriptions suck).
If you want to protest, the usual method is by "voting with your feet." That doesn't mean marching in the streets, it means walking out and choosing another vendor. If you don't like iTunes DRM, then don't use it. Buy something else, like an unprotected CD and rip it yourself.
Take a look at the bottom of the defectivebydesign.com webpage:
DefectiveByDesign.org is a campaign of the Free Software Foundation Empowered by CivicActions.com Copyright © 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301, USA. Verbatim copying and distribution of site content permitted worldwide, without royalty, in any medium, provided this notice, and the copyright notice, are preserved.
That's right, there are restrictions to using the contents of their website!!! Doesn't matter how "friendly" these restrictions are, the very fact that there are restrictions is EVIL! Heck, I can't even modify their copyright block, that's right, there is content on their site that I can't modify! I suggest they send some guys in hazmat suits over to their own offices and start the cleanup pronto.
The problem is that Apple's unobtrusive approach to DRM is, by itself, the best argument for DRM one is likely to find, so by bringing this to everyone's attention the FSF is only hurting their own case. Those people who see that protest are going to walk away with that message "oh, so DRM is that thing that the iPod has. well the iPod's never kept me from doing anything I want to do, so I guess that means DRM isn't that bad". Then the next time they see something about an unambiguous abuse of DRM, the drm==ipod association the FSF created in their mind will rear up and they'll go "oh, but drm is just that thing the ipod has. surely this isn't that bad."
I was hoping the FSF would finally be the one to force the DRM problem into the consciousness of "normal america" but it's clear that no, the FSF still has no idea how people's minds work. I guess we can write this protest campaign off as ineffectual from here on out, and the best we can hope for is that it will manage to avoid hurting the digital freedom cause.
Why the heck isn't the FSF using their time protesting Apple to complain about and call attention to Apple's use of TPM/TCPA/Palladium in the new macs? That's:
- A real issue
- One that precious few people are aware of, and there's precious little information available about even for the people who are aware
- Irrelivant to trust of Apple-- Saying "but DRM lets Apple do terrible things to you later!" will get immediately brushed off as "oh, Apple wouldn't do that". But once TPM is present, it can be abused by anybody. You can get people to believe "TPM will let people do evil things to you later" without broaching the impossible task of convincing them "Apple is doing something evil to you now".
FSF, where is your brain?They are much more numerous than iTunes tracks, and are equally DRM restricted!
GPL Deconstructed
I agree with you that DRM is an inherently bad technology, but I can't help but agree that the protests are better directed at more draconian schemes. The RIAA doesn't need Apple: should Apple pull out of the DRM game, the RIAA will simply move to stores with even worse models; God knows there are enough of those to keep the RIAA satisfied.
If the protests are to be truly effective, then they need to recognize that RIAA will always be as draconian as they possibly can. Thus, the protests should be focused to push RIAA to less draconian schemes than the status quo, not more. You don't do that by targeting moderates like Apple; you do it by targeting the more draconian stores. Then, as RIAA is forced to become accustomed to less draconian schemes (because the market won't stand for more draconian ones), you tighten the noose, continually pushing RIAA toward better schemes until you finally get them off of DRM completely.
Is this more difficult than simply targeting the largest vendor? Of course it is. It's also much slower. But it has a far lower chance of unintended consequences.
I have a pretty good understanding of DRM and yes, APPLE is the market leader in online (drm'd) music sales. However, this is all due to the trickle down effect created by groups like the RIAA.
No major label will sell drm-free music. Emusic, the number 2 online store sells mostly drm-free indie label and back catalog stuff b/c no major label will allow them to sell the next Britney Spears album without some alleged protection.. And- if they did allow this, it would cost a pretty penny.
Apple just happens to be the number one player in the market due to their success with the IPOD. The labels had online stores and failed in the past. Every legit apple competitor, outside of emusic, sells DRM'd files. I don't think this is by choice.
If you want change, you need to start with the source. THE RIAA. THE MPAA. They set the terms that allow Apple to sell their content.
If I'm wrong, please enlighten me.
Thanks!
Kwame
That was the first and last purchase I made from iTMS.
THAT is how you protest DRM!
Seems like these guys want to hang around Apple stores and bitch to every customer who walks in trying to buy an iPod.
Well, they may not be lying. They may be terminally clueless. Nobody who's even just been following the debate could have missed this stuff:
They claimed that Apple limits the number of copies you can make of a song. That's not true, you can burn as many copies of a song as you want. You just have to make a new playlist now and then (which is pretty easy, it's about 3 clicks and a drag).
They claimed that Apple was the biggest distributor of DRM in the world. Not even close. Microsoft beats them hollow, and the DVD industry makes both look like small potatoes.