Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft DRM To Get Even Tighter
Toreo asesino writes, "Microsoft is tightening the screws on their up & coming DRM platform. First, Windows Media Player 11 removes the right to move music from one machine to another. According to their website, WMP11 'does not permit you to back up your media usage rights (previously known as licenses).' Worse, if you rip your own CDs and the 'Copy protect music' option is turned on, WMP11 will require you to 'connect to a Microsoft Web page that explains how to restore your rights a limited number of times.'" The Inquirer has an even more jaundiced take on Microsoft's turn of the thumbscrew.
Even tighter DRM? Wow... tell me again why I should install Vista?
Friends don't let Friends use Internet Explorer.
how they still manage to speak of "your rights" when there are virtually none left to speak of...
Also saw "Cannot play back recorded TV that is protected with media usage rights in Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005 after 3 days". Man this so makes me want to get all tricked out with a Zune and windows break-my-media center, because they all look so nice and they 'just work'. This must be that 'microsoft standard' thingy I keep hearing about all the time. Standard - that's when you get to arbitrarily break things that used to work, right?
See - monopolies really do work better than an open marketplace of ideas.
"We are all geniuses when we dream"
- E.M. Cioran
The more you tighten your grip, the more music listeners will slip through your fingers.
Insisting on "correct" English is like saying that there is only one, definitive recipe for chili.
Also, it would be nice if one could use WMP to rip CDs without crippling DRM. When the news is about a piece of software that's installed on massive numbers of computers worldwide, it's newsworthy even if you don't have to use it.
Excellent! I knew we could count on the MegaCorps of the world to demonstrate the drawbacks of DRM more effectively than any consumer rights activist ever could. The more they tighten down the restrictions, the more people will be inconvenienced by DRM, and the more people will care. Perhaps, one day, they will even be enlightened about what proprietary DRM systems do to interoperability and consumer choice.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
Microsoft is trying to kill DRM.
Never underestimate the power of idiots in large numbers.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Without all this DRM everywhere, I don't think we as a society would ever write another line of music. Ever.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
I've always wondered at people who bash the iTunes DRM since it is actually pretty nice to the user (as you mentioned). DRM like Microsoft's is the wrong kind of DRM. It starts from the assumption that the user is a criminal and given the opportunity will share their music with millions unless stopped by someone. The DRM on iTunes, on the other hand, is actually very nice IMHO. I can transfer music to my iPod with no problems. I can burn playlists to as many CDs as I like. I can have multiple systems access my iTunes account (home, laptop, work, etc). MS is just shooting themselves in the foot and driving yet more people to iTunes, iPod, and Apple.
Space for rent, inquire within
Isn't that normal? Isn't that what will eventually provide a market correction? Eventually Joe is going to find that 500$ worth of music he has bought over the last two years is locked into a dying PC or a stolen Zune and he has to pay all over again to get his music back. Then his friend Smartli Nuxuser tells him why he would never have that predicament at the watercooler. Happens repeatedly. Gets retold repeatedly. Joe gets mad
When Joe Sixpacks gets mad, he really gets mad. He sues left right and center. Start class action lawsuits. When CA builds million miles of highways and sues the car makers fo CO2 emissions, why cant Joe Sixpack sue MSFT? It can write all the EULA it wants, but when you get millions of Joe Sixpacks mad, all bets are off.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
it seems like Microsoft are trying their hardest to confuse people as to when they can and cannot play their music.
Look, it's PERFECTLY simple: Keep giving Microsoft large quantities of cash, and they'll let you keep playing music.
Any questions?
So.. it has come to this
This comment should in no way be taken as an overall endorsement of an Apple-boner worldview but, let's face it, there is something fundamental about music and people that the Jobsian camp "gets" that the Redmonites don't.
One significant reason why the iPod -- crippled as it is under its own DRM and Applephilic burdens -- was/is such a success is because it makes the experience of selecting and playing back popular music comparatively easy, even for people with shrunken frontal lobes and/or other severe cognitive challenges (retardation, ADHDADDADHD, neoconservatism, etc.). Even my grandma knows how to rip CDs into her library and stick them on her iPod.
The relative transparency of the process means that my grandma doesn't have to call a geek to help her. This means the obstacles between her and what she wants to listen to are minimal. Basically, it's easy. The rights management is sufficiently flexible that she doesn't know or care that it is there.
This Microsoft DRM scheme, in contrast, sounds very visible.
No matter how smoothly or non-smoothly it works, the visibility in and of itself will intimidate/frustrate/frighten much of the herd. Anything that requires an explanation -- even a simple one -- cuts scads off of the numbers of potential customers.
The perception of simplicity sells Apple products, for good or for ill. Until Microsoft understands this, they'll be playing catch up forever.
Marketshare does not equal mindshare. Evidently.
These stories are free but worth money.
I don't know which is funnier: your comment or the fact it was moderated informative.
Developers: We can use your help.
No one does eat spinach. Furthermore, any unwashed, uncooked food product is a bacteria risk. This story was only popular because of the news teasers all day long: "What COMMON VEGETABLE can send YOU to the HOSPITAL? Find out on the News at 11!"
If they had just said "wash your greens well before you eat them" everyone would have gone "Duh, of course!"
But let me ask everyone a question: AFAIK, there are only two DRM technologies in common use by commercial content distributors: FairPlay and PlaysForSure.
So, aside from the standard /. bias that Apple==Good and Microsoft==Evil, ranting against WMP and people who use it is, as far as I'm concerned, a case of "the pot calling the kettle black."
As far as I'm concerned, I'm perfectly willing to pay US$0.5 to maybe as high as US$0.75 per song to download unprotected .mp3, as long as they are of consistent quality and base volume. The only people are share my music with are immediate family and friends, and this will occur electronically or via physical media. Further, I'd be willing to pay that same amount for every .mp3 I already have in my collection that did not come from a retail CD I currently own.
But there is no f*cking way I'm paying premium prices for entertainment material that limits my ability for enjoyment. Yes, US$1 is PREMIUM PRICING considering I can buy a 12-song CD for US$15 and not only have a physical item of value, but am not physically restricted in how I enjoy the material.--- A man with a briefcase can steal more money, than any man with a gun. [Don Henley]
Way to prove the point of why a ton of people still use WMP. That soup of jargon is why iTunes is so hugely popular.