Slashdot Mirror
Chronicling the Failures of DRM
Barence takes us to PCPro for a look at the failures of DRM and a discussion of its impending death. Quoting:
"Luckily, DRM is dying, at least in the download sphere. Napster's Dan Nash believes that DRM-free is 'the general way things are going.' In his opinion, record companies 'have no choice but to adapt;' those that 'stick to DRM on a pay-per-download basis will not remain competitive.' In the US, Napster has joined Amazon in selling DRM-free content in MP3 format from all the major labels. ... Going DRM-free makes sense not just for consumers, but for the industry. Deutche Telekom says three out of four technical support calls its Musicload service had to deal with were the result of DRM. And when it offered a DRM-free option to artists they saw a 40% increase in sales."
Yes, we all know DRM sucks. and is broken, and no one wants to accept it (unless it is from iTunes..). Now, this is great for the end user to know - but even better if people in industry would pay attention!
It's spelled Deutsche Telekom, not Deutche.
They pretty much own the audiobook download market, and DRM has been an important part of their strategy from day one.
I'm pretty certain its what keeps getting them new titles to release. Book publishers aren't exactly keen on digital formats if they aren't protected from instant dissemination.
As for myself, well blow me if the drm doesn't 'fall off' within ten minutes of my purchases.
Not that I then share them, in spite of the horror stories spread by the drm producing companies.
I paid for them, and I don't see why anyone else should have them for nothing, it's just that I don't see why I should keep the drm around, restricting my ability to play them back on any device I choose when I am in all other respects abiding by the end user license.
A learning experience is one of those things that say, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' - D. Adams
But before I get modded down as a troll, it's true: DRM turns your purchases into glorified (read: overpriced) rentals since the companies that so graciously allowed you to pay them to use their product can STOP you from using it any time, for little or no real reason (see: Mass Effect and BioShock's DRMs, Steam, the Yahoo! Music store debacle, Zune not "PlayingForSure" after all, etc.) And consumers may finally be getting fed up with be treated like the criminals - especially when the DRM-free pirated versions are vastly superior to our legitimate ones.
....is, it's about time.
The companies that are using DRM are finding concrete, solid evidence that people will pay if they STOP using DRM. The stereotypes of users that they felt were accurate, and reinforced by entities such as the MIAA and such, are, in fact, inaccurate, and now they can start taking that realization to the bank.
Common sense begins to prevail. Imagine that.
There are three things I want from an online music store.
So far the only store to do that was allofmp3.com, now mp3sparks.com. Sadly even when mp3sparks.com is up you have to travel some strange paths to fund your account. Magnatune.com has the right idea as well, but their catalogue is much more limited.
Loose lips lose spit.
Wow, what a blast from the past.
There's someone who knows something about dying.
Generations from now, when 3-D printers allow us to fabricate whatever objects we have the basic atoms to create, and virtual technology allows us to experience whatever reality we have the blueprints for, issues like this will be felt through time like a tidal wave. Look at how the fundamental Christian values of early America have shaped everything we believe and experience today (regarding modesty, entertainment, science, etc.)
If companies are allowed to hold a vice-iron grip on every thin slice of entertainment that exists in our life then life in the future will be miserable and hateful. This is a triumph because it hints at a future that will allow free P2P trading, not of music, but of atomic blueprints of critical medicine and devices that will make all of our lives easier. What incredible news.
It's about the cost. Most people would pay for legitimate music. But then again, when you have to pay for gas, rent, food, etc..., entertainment is way low in one's list of priorities.
If music was made more affordable and/or reasonable, it wouldn't be much of an issue, most people would pay, I'm sure of that.
The problem started off as "Music was too expensive" CDs where like up to 30$ a CD at one time during the peek years.
When the internet kicked in and the MP3 format was created, eventually download sites and peer-to-peer was the way to go for cheap (and free) music, so, obviously, the music industry lost revenues.
Instead of understanding and adapting their price model, they used DRM, and it made things worse.
So, it's coming full circle, they don't have much choice anyways. If they want to have a music industry, they have to work with the system and they need to adapt their pricing.
Basically, this is what's I've always understood about protection schemes in computing: It's made by man, it can be broken by man.
Copy protection and DRM will never work in the long run, there is always someone out there who can figure out how it is done and break it.
your post lacks coherence and content; please, remedy this in the future
...as a matter of fact, this week.
Had a customer come in with a problem. His old computer was dying (hardware, bad capacitors on the MB), we copied his data to a new PC he purchased, set him up and out the door...
Boomeranged. seems he had audio files, some purchased, some of his own creation, in ATRAC format. Of course, he could not play them on his new PC. Seems that Sony recently dropped ATRAC and shut down their licensing servers, too.
Fortunately, we were able to resurrect his old PC, which was still in our boneyard, and run it long enough to export his DRM'ed files to WAV. Lost his meta-data, cost him a couple hundred $ in labor, but we got his stuff. He left happy, and we talked with him about DRM and how it hosed him.
When It Counts.
If a bad market and poor long-term profits ruled, then spammers would be out of business, too. As it is, far too many companies and business models rely on it. Hampered or not, failures or not, the practice will continue much like the use of social security numbers as a citizen ID number continues: because people have learned to expect it.
Has BD+ been cracked yet? I've heard tons about it early on (especially on slashdot), but nothing at all in the last few months. Is it possible to play a Blu-ray disk on Linux?
"A witty saying proves nothing." - Voltaire
This is on topic: this is what DRM is like!
The thing I find most galling about DRM is that we've already been through the same thing, in the early 1980s, with the software "copy protection" wars.
Vendors of copy protection systems would sell their snake oil to software companies, the new uncrackable copy protection would get cracked within months of release, everyone who wanted warez could get copies, but the idealistic suckers who paid for theirs clogged support lines with problems, when the not-quite-standard disk formats turned out to be not-quite-compatible with many diskette drives.
On August 19, 1986, The New York Times reported that "At best, copy protection does nothing good for legitimate users and only annoys software pirates. At worst, it makes it difficult to install software onto a hard disk and to make backup copies that are vital if the original is lost or destroyed. It slows the performance of some programs and causes snarls in others. It can be a pain for networks of PC's hooked together to share data and peripherals. And, worst of all, there have been reports that some ''killer'' protection schemes have destroyed hard disk files, inadvertently or otherwise.... Software makers who have abandoned copy protection this year seem to be avoiding bankruptcy, and they have certainly gained goodwill. When the goodwill comes from big corporate buyers (including the Federal Government, which has refused to buy copy-protected software), it is likely that the losses from pirated software can be offset."
By the end of 1986, all major software publishers had abandoned copy protection, including the longest holdout, Lotus... but not before the failure of Lotus Jazz, a Mac program, which, according to John Dvorak, failed in part because its copy protection was too hard to break.
Why do we need to go through all this again? As the saying goes, insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
Of course all those other attempts have failed. It's because they didn't use my super secret (and soon to be patented) method for riskless, full control family friendly DRM 2.0.
Now shut up until I close the deal with these twits, would ya?
Help stamp out iliturcy.
From TFA, "The online music industry has evolved so that, while there are open file format standards - notably MP3 - the major companies have so far preferred proprietary or licensed file formats protected by DRM systems."
The problem with that statement is MP3 has never been an open format. It too requires a license to use. The difference is that the spec is public, so anyone can license the technology.
For an actual open format with freely available source code, check out ogg.
In the US, Napster has joined Amazon in selling DRM-free content in MP3 format from all the major labels.
A percentage of iTunes tracks are DRM-free, but certainly not all.
The big question is: why won't the labels allow iTunes to sell all of their tracks DRM-free?
Obviously the labels would love to eliminate the iTunes policy of 99-cent only pricing, but there must be something more than that.
I think it's because the labels probably thought they were taking part in a fun little experiment when little ol' Apple told them about their new iTunes store, and the next thing they knew, they were dealing with the largest music retailer in the world. The only leverage they have left is to keep Apple's contracts DRM-restricted while opening other distribution partners' contracts up to DRM-free options.
In regards to Software Protection, fear drives it.
The fear that if you're the only software without copy protection, everyone will pirate it. Then, your company's revenue tanks for the next 18-24 months until you get a new version. Without revenue, you can't fund R&D for the new version. Meaning you, Mr. CEO, is out of a job. Most likely many of your employees too.
So, in the face of this possibility, many companies are willing to put up with losing a couple sales by inconveniencing customers and paying tons more in support costs to ensure their only revenue stream continues to flow.
In regards to DRM for music/movies:
It's kinda the same thing. But I don't understand why music/movie companies are so risk adverse since they have such large revenue streams outside of online distribution. They'd be wise to try it now, while the online distrubtion industry is still small, and then switch to DRM if they run into problems. It's much riskier to switch later once the industry is huge. That applies to movies. DRM on music is just silly.
Most problems with MS windows are amplified by DRM. I have had system crashes at multiple occasions, and when trying to reinstall XP on a new HDD I run into issues like this:
- The version of XP you have is upgrade only, and can not be used on a clean HDD.
When trying to recover by installing from CD:
- The version of XP you are trying to install is older than what is on the PC (upgraded with service packs). This is for upgrade only.
I also have a test machine with multiple languages and test with different HW configurations. After using it for a few years, now, every time XP is reinstalled, I have to call MS to get the license key.
I agree with TFA: DRM'ed products will fail.
What a breeze to install Ubuntu.
don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
Honestly, no one would give a shit about DRM if it didn't interfere with normal music listening activities. If the end user were not inconvenienced by DRM, no one would give a hoot about it. The problem isn't DRM, it's greed. Consider this scenario: a fan purchases a song from an online store. That song can be authorized on any number of devices with nothing more than a password. The playing device never has to phone to a server. There are no limits to the number of copies that can be made, nor the number of devices that it can be played on. The DRM is an open format that any manufacturer can use. The only thing preventing anyone from listening to the song is a password. If this were the case, I theorize that it would cut out a large percentage of casual piracy, yet would never inconvenience the listener (save the initial authorization procedure which would only take seconds). Or course OMFG the RIAA might have to accept some losses in it's battle to prevent 110% of music copying. Oh noes! And, oh gee, perhaps an open standard would create a DRM that can be cracked. So what? In the end if they actually did a study of actual numbers I imagine they would find their sales went up, word of mouth would create new fans and sales, and the DRM would create just enough of a hindrance to prevent rampant theft, save for those who are hell bent on stealing all their music no matter what. The problem is that the RIAA and other groups like them see piracy in black and white terms. If it exists, they are loosing money. That is an immature way to view business and human nature. If they were willing to accept some losses as inevitable, they could recoup much more by lowering the DRM bar so that it is virtually invisible to the honest user.
No, you failed reading comprehension.
He said what they want not what they currently have. DVDs only give them what they want if they stop working after 48 hours. I see their perfect world being where they sell, as middlemen, a music box for a 200% markup then every month thereafter get another chunk of cash. They don't have to pay anyone to carry the music, it comes out of the box and can't be heard by anyone except the named listener. They don't have to make any new music, the stuff from five years ago is just fine.
The "top ten" used to be a good way of getting near this, they had to recycle the old muzak into music to hide the 'covers' but it was good. Today it's not working so well, the internet has memory, it's easy to find the ten year old crap and compare it to one year old crap and see the file marks. Also internet and schoolyard file sharing is instant with no transaction cost, and your mother said it's good to share.
Arghrr, you made me read the parent post.
I think the impact of allofmp3 can not be understated. They showed the cost of distributing digital music. They could sell whole albums for $1, which means that at $9.99 on iTunes someone is making more than $8.99 on top of the credit card processing and hosting fees. When someone buys a CD, they have a feeling (no necessarily accurate) that a big chunk of their money is going to creating and distributing the physical product. With a download album, they know that the distribution cost under $1 to do profitably, and the rest is going to store markup and to whoever owns the copyright. If they did a little more research, then they'd know that the vast majority of this is going to middlemen. I doubt many people would complain about paying $1 to the store to cover expenses and $1 to the creators of the song (writers and performers). Paying another $8 to record company execs, somehow, doesn't seem worth it.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Well when I was a kid I'd take a trip
every summer down to the Music Strip
to visit the stores in the Post-Napster1.0 World.
I'd run my computer mouse along
the world wide web, after doin' a GREP,
and one day I happened to catch my self a true Song.
Well, I stuffed it down in a 3rd Party pod,
Added a couple ringtones on top,
And when jogging day came I took it for a run.
So I turned down Maple, up Vine, to Arkham,
across the field for the Flea Market parking,
and jogged down Main when that Song went totally beserk.
The DRM-Enabled Device with Hash Tables
tried to run the codec Fable(tm) on this plain ol' MP3.
It went to look for a license that never existed;
The song just started playing while the Server persisted,
trying to lock down a Song that was already free.
The Day the Song went beserk,
On that DRM'ed Musical Clerk,
During my morning run across Main Street.
It was a fight for survival
'Led to an MP3 Revival,
and Indie Bands all shouted Halleleujah!
Well, Eighty Seven DRM servers were cleared,
Five hundred thousand tunes reappeared,
and seven Boards of directors fired the CEO's on the spot.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
I'm in favor of copyright but not DRM, for pretty much the same reason that I'm in favor of speed limits but don't want a speed limited car. I'm pretty sure that people who are honest still don't want to pay for products deliberately made less functional.
http://marriedmansexlife.com/