Slashdot Mirror
RIAA and MPAA Developing Domain-Based DRM
An anonymous reader points out news that the music and movie studios are attempting to develop a new type of DRM that would allow customers more flexibility in playing content on multiple devices. The Digital Entertainment Content Ecosystem (DECE) would establish a list of devices in your personal "domain" (unrelated to web domains), and minimizes or removes restrictions within that domain. TechCrunch summarizes DECE and notes that many of the big corporations have decided to support it.
"The ecosystem envisioned by Singer et al revolves around a common set of formats, interfaces and other standards. Devices built to the DECE specifications would be able to play any DECE-branded content and work with any DECE-certified service. The goal is to create for downloads the same kind of interoperability that's been true for physical products, such as CDs and DVDs. Where it gets really interesting, though, is the group's stated intention to make digital files as flexible and permissive as CDs, at least within the confines of someone's personal domain. Once you've acquired a file, you could play it on any of your devices -- if it couldn't be passed directly from one DECE-ready device to another, you'd be allowed to download additional copies. And when you're away from home, you could stream the file to any device with a DECE-compatible Web browser."
You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.
.
The problem with DRM is that DRM requires a server out on the Internet to give me permission to listen to the music, or to watch the movies, I have purchased. Without that server, the content I purchase are little more than a random collection of useless data bits.
Look at those people who foolishly bought into Microsoft's DRM for music. In a short while, Microsoft will be turning off the DRM server, and all the music thus "protected" by Microsoft's DRM will be unusable.
Do you really want to give the RIAA an on/off switch for your ability to listen to your media collection?
A few problems: /. et al) because of its downfalls in terms of flexibility. Take that away, DRM seems more reasonable to Joe College, his parents, and his little sister.
1. Co-Option! TFA: "it [DECE] could be a very good thing for consumers." Ever heard of the concept of a co-option? The anti-DRM movement has so much public support (outside of
2. More centralization, more big corporations, less privacy, and another chance for IE to redeem itself. TFS: "you could stream the file to any device with a DECE-compatible Web browser" And what exactly does DECE compatability mean? Does this mean my real identity is broadcast when I use a browser? If so, Will it be disabled by default?
3. Use your MP3 player/computer for storage of non-music files? Think again.
TFA: "The caveats: the devices have to be registered electronically to that user, and the copyright holder gets to limit the total number of devices customers may register."
Considering the history of DRM, I wouldn't be surprised if this means both corporations AND whoever cracks their methods gets to see everything.
... as long as it's IE (possibly Opera or Safari).
Unless this form of DRM is radically different from its predecessors, it will only be supported on closed-source browsers, which eliminates Firefox, Chrome, and Konqueror.
I really don't see anything new here - we already have standard formats like mp3 and mpeg-4 (aka XviD) that play on a variety of devices. This new plan looks like a great way for DECE to profit from licensing and certification fees, but not much else.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
And thus we can forget about it supporting anything other than microsoft or apple. But then again, I doubt there are many pro-DRM linux or bsd users out there...
I personally wouldn't by any nanny-device like this. I bought the file; I want to play it on whatever the fsck I want to without having to ask permission like a little child in school having go to the bathroom.
In addition, the iPod will never support it. There goes 70% of the potential users.
Any business is based on the creation of goods. In the case of music, there use to be twofold goods: the music itself (created by artists), and the media on which it was being distributed (created by the record companies). The second good is not needed anymore since access to the music itself is theoretically ubiquitous, hence yes, it is dead on a dying business, and the sooner these companies realize that, the better they will be off (see disaster of e.g. AGFA who missed the digital camera boom).
Power corrupts the few, while weakness corrupts the many.
It shouldn't bother you, either. DRM doesn't affect people who aren't criminals. So don't worry about it unless you're a filthy thief, then you're only getting what you deserve.
If only this were true...
In reality, it only affects the people who don't pirate things.
For example, my copy of Spore restricts my to three installations. That's it. So between my desktop and my laptop, thats two right there. Then, if I have to format one for whatever reason...there's my third. After that, I can't play it if I get a new PC, or if for some reason I have to format again, now I can't play the game I legally BOUGHT and PAID for, without jumping through all kinds of hoops with EA's customer service, with one of those being interrogated like I was a criminal for the reason I needed more than three installs. I PAID for this game!
And then, on the other hand, you have the pirates who got the same release date, didn't pay a dime, and get MORE flexibilty with the product, and can install it on as many PCs they like. It's this kind of comparison that makes people who don't want to steal from the developers (myself included) start to seriously think about pirating in the future.
DRM doesn't prevent piracy. It encourages it.
Just re-encode the MP3s as FLAC. Problem solved!