Slashdot Mirror
Store Says DRM Causes 3 of 4 Support Calls
Carter writes "Ars Technica is reporting that Musicload, one of Europe's largest movie stores, has found that 75% of its customer support problems are caused by DRM. Users have frequent problems using the music that they have purchased, which has led Musicload to try selling independent label music without DRM. Artists choosing to abandon DRM in favor of good old-fashioned MP3 have seen 40% growth in sales since December. Good to see someone in the business both 'gets it' and is willing to do something about it."
Curiously, the article doesn't mention any specific problems. I'm racking my tiny brain right now to think of some problem that isn't desired by the RIAA.
I submit to you the anecdotal evidence of my sister's "iPod." She purchased songs through iTMS and attempted to move the DRM'd files onto her SanDisk MP3 Player. Then she wondered why it didn't work. It didn't work because the files have digital rights management & only brand specific players will play it--and vice versa.
You know, right now iPods are probably the most popular portable music device. But I don't know of any other music download DRM services that they work with. So if some third party download service called Musicload is reporting that 75% of problem calls are DRM related, I'm going to wager that every single call went a little something like "Do you have an iPod?" "No." "I'm sorry, iPod doesn't support our DRM." (or the German equivalent). In fact, on their site, I don't see an iPod as being supported.
I think a DRM standard that everyone adopts would avoid these issues but I don't forsee that happening in the future. It benefits Apple somewhat because they can have a great service or a great player and reap the market. I don't blame them, however, because they do a fine job on both ends. I am concerned about any sort of free market existing here.
In the end, the RIAA wants these problems. They don't want you docking a player with many computers and soaking up the files. They want one player associated with one computer associated with one account and any attempt to anything else should wipe everything off the face of the planet. Why? Money. Somehow the consumer no longer has a voice.
My work here is dung.
I personally don't understand why everybody hates DRM so much. Let's consider the needs of the handicaped for once.
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
Four support calls isn't really that bad...
This store is taking a realistic look at their support costs, and has determined that a particular "feature" is costing them a lot of money.
Woohoo. Great. Little happy dance. Big fucking deal.
They aren't the ones who are pushing DRM. They ahve it because without it they wouldn't get the major label tracks which (I presume) form the bulk of their income. This isn't hurting the labels who are requiring the DRM, its simply sqishing the middle players. Now, this is certainly better than just squishing the consumer, but it's still a far cry from leverage to affect change where the change can actually occur.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Phone for support, act dumb. Drive that 75% up to 95%. If the cost of providing support exceeds revenue, maybe DRM will be dropped.
Once I was a four stone apology. Now I am two separate gorillas.
I have given up on downloaded music these days, if I really like a band I'll buy a new or used CD, and definitely never use iTunes.
Next thing you know, we'll be getting out the microphone and rip a song right from the loudspeakers - oldskool.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Make the media more expensive. Drive out your own customers. Complain there aren't enough people in the known world to sue. Lather rinse repeat.
As Dick Dale said:
This is a guy that's survived a shark bite, beaten cancer, and has been supporting himself playing music since the early 60's. Anyone who tells you that you need a major label to promote your work is either ignorant or actively trying to defraud you.
If they go independant
* Their music will *never* be played on mainstream radio ("payola", though in more subtle forms, is very much alive today)
* Their videos will never be played on Music Channels like mTV
* Their CDs will never be sold in major music stores, or sold on major online retailers.
* As a result of the aforementioned, they will never be able to to gain much exposure, and thus never be able to sell many concert tickets, which is the biggest revenue stream for most musicians.
In short, going independent is a sure way to not make much money.
The entire music industry is a cartel, much like the DeBeers diamond cartel. Like DeBeers has with diamonds, they have near complete control over the production and distribution of their product. This allows them to manipulate both supply and demand, which in turn, allows them to sell their product for more than it would be worth in a truly open market. Because of the control they have over every aspect of music production and distribution, third parties are not able to make much money selling music unless they join the cartel.
Currently the music industry is trying to further limit distribution of their product via DRM. This further increases the profit margins because consumers cannot resell their DRM locked music, like they can used tapes or CDs. DeBeers has done a similar thing - though by different means (obviously you can't put DRM on a diamond), and been very successful at it over the last century.
I know the DeBeers/Music Industry analogy isn't perfect, by DeBeers is the most successful cartel ever so I imagine every cartel looks to it for "inspiration".
I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.