Slashdot Mirror
HBO Exec Proposes DRM Name Change
surfingmarmot writes "An HBO executive has figured out the problem with DRM acceptance — it's the name. HBO's chief technology officer Bob Zitter now wants to refer to the technology as Digital Consumer Enablement. Because, you see, DRM actually helps consumers by getting more content into their hands. The company already has HD movies on demand ready to go, but is delaying them because of ownership concerns. Says Zitter, 'Digital Consumer Enablement would more accurately describe technology that allows consumers "to use content in ways they haven't before," such as enjoying TV shows and movies on portable video players like iPods. "I don't want to use the term DRM any longer," said Zitter, who added that content-protection technology could enable various new applications for cable operators.'"
I'm still waiting to see how long it takes these people to realize that they're actually driving piracy with every day they wait. They should consider the data gathered in the "freakanomics" research. The data clearly shows that most people are honest, and those that aren't simply aren't. If you offer up content at a fair price, the majority of users will purchase that content rather than resorting to illegal or immoral means to obtain it. Meanwhile, the DRM restrictions will do little to stop those looking for a free ride. They're not going to pay for it in the first place, so why worry about it now? If they can't get past your DRM scheme (not likely), they'll rip it from the DVDs or HD-DVDs.
The software industry had to learn the same thing many years ago. Copy protection annoyed the paying users while doing little to stop the pirates. Why can't anyone get that lesson through their head?
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
doubleplusgood warmfuzzy protection for all your digital lifestyles!
Ask me how the Heisenberg Principle may or may not have saved my life.
Next task:
Redefine 'rape' as 'enthusiastic love-making.'
You can't talk about Wikipedia's flaws on Wikipedia
'Digital Consumer Enablement would more efficiently confuse consumers "to prevent the use of content in ways they haven't before," such as enjoying TV shows time shifted to when they want and movies on portable video players like iPods where they can see them more than once. "I don't want to use the term DRM any longer," said Zitter, "even my Grandma knows by now that DRM is bad, so obviously we have to change the name of it."'
More Twoson than Cupertino
Perhaps he could give me a single concrete example of something that I can do with 'enabled' media that I could not do with the same media with the DRM/DCE removed.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
... as Windows Genuine Advantage.
Put a positive spin on the name and you can fool anyone!
He's sadly correct that successfull deployment of DRM is only a good marketting campaign away.
Those people will never get it. The name doesn't matter. What's so sinister about "Digital Rights Management"? It sounds pretty nice to me. The bad connotations aren't coming from the name, it's the essence of what DRM is.
People keep thinking that the order and choice of letters is all it takes to turn something bad into something great.
This has been happening also in the way people have called people with mental handicaps throughout the years, and the constant "reinvention" of the terms, to keep the names less insulting:
-----
Socially responsible guy: We shouldn't call them "idiots" anymore. That's insulting. We'll call it people with mental retardation: retards.
General public: Yea, that is a nice neutral name, no bad connotations.
One year later:
General public: My brother is a damn retard, I hate him.
Socially responsible guy: That's insulting. We shouldn't call them retards anymore. We'll call them people with "slow mental development". Slow people.
General public: Yea, that's neutral and nice. Cool.
One year later:
General public: My neighbour is "slow" or something. Huhuhu.
Socially responsible guy: We shouldn't call them "slow", that's insulting. Well call them "people with special education needs". Special people.
One year later:
General public: My new coworker is "special". Huhuu, get it? "Special". Hehehe.
----------
Basically you can change a name any times you want. Bad fame will come to haunt you never mind how hard you try.
That would be the meddlesome laws of physics right?
The reason we have DRM is that the media companies don't think that their interests are aligned with those of the consumer. The hell of it is that most of the time, there's no conflict. If HBO makes DRM-free video available on-demand, most of their existing customers would use it just about how you'd expect. They'd occasionally pay whatever nominal fee, and watch that episode of the Sopranos that they missed last week, and everybody will be happy. HBO gets another revenue stream, and the customers get improved ease-of-use.
On the other hand, you know that *somebody* will set up their PC with a cablecard (or whatever) and just start downloading everything they can get and then uploading it to the internet where non-subscribers can get it for free.
HBO is understandably worried that if their most popular content is available for free, some customers will stop paying for it. Based on prior experience with people "pirating" cable, I can't say that they're wrong. People used to regularly break into our cable company's distribution boxes and strip off the notch filters back in the days of analog cable, and there's a brisk business out there on the internet for devices to help people to cheat cable & satellite TV channel restrictions.
I'd like to believe that DRM-free media will eventually win out, because it's so much more convenient for everybody involved, from the producers, to the consumer electronics industry, to the end-user. Unfortunately, there's some anecdotal evidence from the recent experiences of the music industry that the existence of DRM-free digital coipies of content just leads to rampant copying, and that does have some negative effect on sales. The music industry went digital without an effective DRM system in place, and now they're stuck with it - you can't stop making CDs, or nobody would buy your music.
That's a "mistake" video companies are eager not to repeat.
An old fellow is talking to his grand-daughter as he works in the garden, and he keeps talking about he manure he's spreading on the flowerbeds. The bothers the girl's mother and she asks her husband "I hope your father washes his hands before he comes in... and why can't he call it 'fertilizer' like polite folks"? He replies, "honey, it took us 30 years to get him to call it 'manure'".
Look, folks, you got people to quit calling it "Copy Protection" because people got tired of the smell. Now it seems like it smells just as bad when you call it "Digital Rights Management". Calling it empowered this or enabled that isn't going to make it smell any better.