Will People Really Boycott Apple Over DRM?

Ian Lamont writes "DefectiveByDesign.org is waging a battle against DRM with a 35-day campaign targeting various hardware and software products from Microsoft, Nintendo, and others. On day 11 it blasted iTunes for continuing to use DRM-encumbered music, games, TV shows, movies, audiobooks, and apps with DRM, while competitors are selling music without restrictions. DefectiveByDesign calls on readers to include 'iTunes gift cards and purchases in your boycott of all Apple products' to 'help drive change.' However, there's a big problem with this call to arms: most people simply don't care about iTunes DRM. Quoting: 'The average user is more than willing to pay more money for hobbled music because of user interface, ease of use, and marketing. ... Apple regularly features exclusive live sets from popular artists, while Amazon treats its digital media sales as one more commodity being sold.' What's your take on the DRM schemes used by Apple and other companies? Is a boycott called for, and can it be effective?"

Comments

Sorry...

[Anonymous Coward]

It will never be effective. The average Joe coulden't tell you what DRM stood for let alone boycott it.

Re:Sorry...

[eebra82]

It will never be effective. The average Joe coulden't tell you what DRM stood for let alone boycott it.

The average Joe must not know what DRM means to experience the implications of it. I hate car analogies, but you don't have to be a greasemonkey to understand that something is wrong with your car.

The average Joe will run into DRM restrictions, and;

..ask a friend about it (or)
..google it (or)
..curse and never use the service again

Re:Sorry...

[dragonjujotu]

Not likely, people have been trained to believe that newer is better anyways, so why not just upgrade it all. It really only affects the people who can't afford to upgrade, but they're already trained to believe it's not really necessary to be up-to-date.

Re:Sorry...

[hal2814]

I don't think you can blanket statement DRM. It's been implemented in too many ways. The average Joe probably hasn't even noticed the Apple DRM because they probably haven't tired to do something that's not allowed by it. On the other hand, I imagine at least a few average Joes have noticed the horror that is SecureROM.

Even if I'm wrong about the average Joe's run-ins with DRM, I don't think an Apple DRM boycott will be effective because the number of people who dislike Apple's DRM, use it anyway, and are willing to boycott it is probably very small. I'd wager it's very near 0. If they'd be willing to boycott it in the first place, they're probably not using it now.

Re:Sorry...

[Angostura]

You know what, I don't think the average Joe actually will run into the DRM restrictions in iTunes and so won't give a flying whatever. I do know what DRM is, and it doesn't raise it's ugly head day-to-day.

I buy music, I put it onto my iPod and burn it to CD. Now what am I meant to be protesting about again? ... That's a rhetorical question.

Re:Sorry...

[PriceIke]

Apple has a golden delicious reputation with most of its customers, even in spite of the very mild DRM attached to its music downloads, for two reasons: 1) the DRM is pathetically easy to remove, Apple knows it and anyone with half a brain will figure it out in approx. 2 seconds, and 2) Apple hasn't f*cked over its customers to a level anywhere approaching what Sony or Microsoft has done with their absolutely outrageous efforts at DRM. To this day I refuse to buy Sony products of any kind due to the rootkit bullsheet back in late 2005. And don't get me started on Microsoft and "Palladium".

Re:Sorry...

[0100010001010011]

If we can't get people upset and up in arms about trampling of the Constitution, Bill of Rights, Police SWAT teams acting like mini-Army battalions, what the hell makes you think they'll get motivated enough to top buying Apple stuff?

Apathetic indeed

Re:Sorry...

[swillden]

But just wait till the day you want to switch from iPod to some other MP3 player

So then you burn your music to CDs and then rip it. It's an inconvenience, not a hindrance. So, even fully-aware buyers are left to balance the convenience of the music store, etc., against the inconvenience of creating MP3s, or whatever. Which wins? It's a judgment call and I can see many people shrugging and sticking with iTMS.

or for the day when Apple threatens to switch off their licencing servers

As long as the service is profitable -- and it's doing very well -- that won't happen.

Thankfully, Requiem is available to strip Apple's FairPlay DRM, for those who care to look for it.

Ah, right, there's that option as well.

Bottom line: Apple's DRM is too leaky to be really annoying to people, other than those who stand on principle (like me).

Re:Sorry...

[Gerzel]

Well if all DRM was of the very mild variety I wouldn't have any problems with it.

Mild DRM such as watermarking and such which doesn't actually reduce the functionality of the product can help deter most who would casually infringe and if handled properly could build a reputation that the industry has ways of figuring out who really bought what (even if they have to tell us in the fine print that the drm is there and yes we all know it can be removed). However that isn't enough for many in the industry so they go for strong drm, drm that doesn't seek to build a reputation but rather tries to force compliance and be as its proponents claim unbreakable; even though it is every bit as bi-passable as its weaker counterpart to those who would criminally break copyright laws.

It all boils down to the enforcement and practice of copyright laws has become unjust because non-governmental agencies like the RIAA have taken upon themselves governmental powers and the law has been stretched to cover such extreme lengths of time.

Don't rage against the concept of copyright, it is sound. Rage against its abuse in the law and commercial enterprise.

I say we need to get to something like 25 years from publishing date with 25 years additional after registration(must be completed before the first 25 expires w/no exceptions) and the registration process should involve submitting a copy to a national or state copyright library and should be payed for by the holder(the first 25 are free).

No

[jgtg32a]

No

Re:No

[cabjf]

Not only that, but a boycott of Apple would play right into the record companies. They demanded DRM in the music store to begin with, so Apple came up with a solution. But then, as the iTunes store grew, the record companies realized that Apple was in control because of the very thing they demanded was in place. Why do you think Amazon can sell DRM-free tracks? The record companies are trying to break Apple's stranglehold on the downloadable music market. Although, given that iTunes does have some DRM free tracks from one record company, I am willing to bet Apple would rather just sell them without the DRM as well.

Re:No

[cgenman]

What you're looking for is iTunes Plus. Bog standard AAC files in high bitrate, for the same cost as DRM-encumbered files.

If you really want to show that you care about a lack of DRM, skew the sales numbers so that non-DRM files are obviously outselling the encumbered ones.

Re:No

[jellomizer]

If you are going to have a strong anti-DRM movement you also need a Strong anti-piracy movement to go with it. Otherwise the companies, government, and people who don't care as strongly will just see you as a bunch of Wackos who want something for nothing AKA "The Pinko Commie who Hates America". If they offered a strong voice against piracy and worked hard to discourage such behavior then their message about easing and finally removing DRM will not be heard on deaf ears.

Activist love the idea of being this little group fighting a big evil and heartless corporation. However if you want action you need to treat your opponents as people too and understand and work with their concerns as well, then you can create change. Otherwise you are in a battle of wills who's ever will is the strongest or has the extra buck to fight back will win, not because of intellect or greater good. Why do you think Marten Luther King was more effective in history then the Black Panthers, The Black Panthers worked on creating a divide while MLK tried to create unity. Yes it is much more exciting to be in a Moral Battle of Right and Wrong however war (even with words) isn't the answer Open Dialog with the willingness to accept and respect your opponents concerns, works much better.

So you don't like DRM neither do I. However if you are going to get a broad cooperate acceptance of removing DRM you are going to create a culture where illegally downloading free music and not paying for them ever is no longer considered socially acceptable.

Re:No

[Nursie]

"If you are going to have a strong anti-DRM movement you also need a Strong anti-piracy movement to go with it."

"if you are going to get a broad cooperate acceptance of removing DRM you are going to create a culture where illegally downloading free music and not paying for them ever is no longer considered socially acceptable."

I think you're wrong. You can easily show people that:

1. DRM doesn't affect availability to pirates.
2. DRM costs money to implement

And therefore it's just not worth it. I can understand their concerns just fine, but their actions are expensive and counter-productive. They make the end product less valuable to users, who are then more likely to turn to piracy.

I don't "pirate" music, but I won't buy anything DRM'd either, because ripping my CDs and storing/playing them on various devices is my goddamned right.

Their fault?

[JickL]

Is it their fault that the music companies are willing to let Amazon sell DRM-free music to have a bargaining chip against Apple when discussing pricing?

Re:Their fault?

[DurendalMac]

THIS! Defectivebydesign has shown themselves to be just another group of ill-informed asshats. Apple does not have control over whether or not they put DRM on music. The labels do. EMI has DRM-free tracks. So do a lot of indie labels. The other big three would need to greenlight DRM-free tracks for Apple to sell them. This has been known for a long time, but of course DBD chooses to ignore it in favor of sensationalist crap. DRM sucks, but they're blaming the wrong person here. Now, Apple has some DRM crap that's no fun, but they need to stick with stuff that's legit.

Re:Their fault?

[Lars T.]

You could show your "appreciation" for the DRM'd music by buying something from the iTunes Plus store...

Which cost more, I would buy from iTunes but amazon is cheaper for drm free music.

Since when is 99 cents more than 99 cents?

It's optional!

[RMH101]

What about the huge numbers happily using iTunes and an iPod to playback their MP3 collection? You don't have to buy your media from the ITMS...

Unlikely

[neoform]

Most internet users can't tell the difference between firefox and IE, it's unlikely they'll understand what DRM even is. Those who do understand DRM, probably never bought from the itunes store in the first place.

Re:Unlikely

[whisper_jeff]

"Those who do understand DRM, probably never bought from the itunes store in the first place."

Not even remotely true. Lots of people who understand DRM have bought from the iTunes store. Understanding DRM doesn't necessarily mean opposition to it. Or, more specifically, understanding it doesn't mean opposition to it in every and all forms. Some DRM sucks and should be avoided in protest. Some DRM is sufficiently light that people don't mind. Yes, some oppose DRM in any and all forms but some, even though they understand DRM perfectly well, don't object to it in the same way.

I have

[tamarik]

I, for one consumer, already have. I don't buy Apple products because of the DRM. Creative Zen MP3 player, Dell, and Fujitsu laptops, and Samsung i760 cellphone. My ex uses a Mac Mini. My best friend sweears by his iPhone and a couple Macs. Nice machines! Apple looks like a good OS but this danged DRM is the showstopper.

Bah! Come on Apple, lighten up. You seem to think all yer customers are sneaks and thieves, like Sam's or Best Buy.

Re:I have

[falcon5768]

First off, your kidding yourself if you think your laptops dont have DRM on them. Go play something HD on a older digital monitor with a older connection and talk to us. Hell scre that you using XP? Yeah I thought so.

Second you think Apple actually WANTS DRM? Apple isnt in the music making buisness, nor or they in the video making buisness. They sell machines to do it, tools to do it, but ultimately they are not making movies and music. So where is it for them to WANT DRM? They want to sell you shit. Its the people they deal with, the major labels who WANT to make sure you get their crap and dont steal it. Apple practically makes nothing off the stuff they sell in the store. So little that the labels play to raise their rates a while back basically was countered with Apple saying "fine we will close the store then." They didnt even flinch when NBC left them, which says a lot about how much money they are really making with these deals that 1-2 especially when you consider that Apple is the one paying the hosting fee and maintenance fees for running the store, not the labels who just provide the song or video.

So really what you think your doing in boycotting them is just being stupid and showing your lack of knowledge of the situation. Because Apple really isnt in the business to DRM crap, and your saying they are just shows you to be a idiot.

people want software they can use

[thegoldenear]

"The average user is more than willing to pay more money for hobbled music because of user interface, ease of use"

Why should it be surprising that people are willing to pay for ease of use? it can mean the difference between actually being able to use something and not being able to.
Most people can't use most of most software.

exclusivity

[wall0159]

"Apple regularly features exclusive live sets"

I think this sort of thing prevents the uptake of Free Software in general. People want to be part of an "in crowd", and seek ways to believe it's true (eg. Da Vinci code, fashion, nerd snobbishness, etc). People will pay for this feeling, and I reckon it was used to help prop up the monarchies (and now demonarchies*).

I mean, how "exclusive" is a live set on iTMS? Anyone can buy it, right? This is where marketing comes in. Grass-roots arts and software producers don't want to come across as "here's some scones that my mad-great-aunt made (they make great hearth-stones), all proceeds to the parish..."

*typo intended, exscuse the piss-take ;-)

Uphill battle

[bignetbuy]

DefectiveByDesign would have better luck picking on Microsoft or some of the game publishers. Apple has managed to find the sweet spot between user freedom and DRM. Yes, Apple still uses DRM but it doesn't encumber a majority of Apple iTMS users.

Let's run through Apple's DRM:

1. Can play music on up to five different computers. So, home, work, laptop, and two other places are covered.
2. Can play music on iPod. So, can take music with us and play almost anywhere.
3. When de-authorize / re-authorize computers as needed.
4. Can rip music to Audio CD and *STRIP OUT DRM ENTIRELY* from the music track.

I hate DRM as much as the next /'er but the above "restrictions" are pretty darn loose. When iTMS and its uber-convenience is added into the equation, Apple's DRM becomes a minor annoyance. Point-Click-Purchase? One-click purchases? Recommendations based on previous purchases? It becomes pretty easy to overlook the little bit of DRM that is involved.

I'm not an Apple fanboy either:

[me@mydesktop ~]$ uname -a Linux my.rhel.desktop 2.6.18-92.1.18.el5 #1 SMP Wed Nov 5 09:00:19 EST 2008 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

Or you could just not buy what you don't like

[gsslay]

I'm confused. If 'boycotting' means simply not buying what you don't like from some place that doesn't supply what you wish, then I guess I've been boycotting certain retail outlets all my life. With minimal effort on my part.

Should I be starting websites of my own to tell people what I won't be buying? Cos that could get pretty time consuming and frankly I have better things to be doing. Obviously these people don't.

Re:yeaaaaaaah goodluck with that

[pressman]

Not buy any music from any artist on any major label? Wow. That's a bit extreme.

True, the majors sign a lot of crap that they can sell at high prices for short term profit, but they also sign bands that will survive in the long run.

Not buying from the majors means not buying Jimi Hendrix, Led Zeppelin, The Beatles, The Ramones, Motorhead, Slayer, Mr. Bungle, etc.

Support quality, not ideology.

I pity people who limit themselves based off of ideology. True, there is a ton of great music on the indies and that is the majority of where my music dollars is spent, but denying myself the greats, the legends from the past because of a deluded idea that labels are inherently bad is just plain stupid.

Vote with your dollars. Don't buy the new Britney, sure, but denying yourself Led Zeppelin's Presence, Metallica's Master of Puppets.... just plain stupid.

The problem with the /. perspective on the music industry is that the crowd here only considers the technological perspective on the industry and not the financial realities faced by artists who sign to the majors. Good bands who sign bad deals. Hell yeah I'll buy an album by a good band on a major. If they don't get that sale, chances are they will end up in major debt to the label. Believe me. Way too many of my friends have suffered from this. Psychefunkapus. Limbomaniacs. Fungo Mungo. All peers of Primus from back in the day who dreamed of big time success and wound up only with big time debt due to their lack of business experience and cock-eyed optimism.

Great albums ruined by naivete and ruthless business practices. I felt duty bound to buy their albums to help my friends and to have copies of this stuff after it was shelved by the labels.

Signing with the majors does not immediately mean the music is sub par. Many indies sign a lot of crap as well. The whole shoegazer and emo movements of the late nineties early 2000's was largely fueled by the indie labels.

This entire notion is based on a false premise.

Buy what is good. Period.

itunes may be the best compromise right now

[v1]

Acknowledging DRM is bad to the core, there are just economical and business factors that can't be overcome in a single step from DRM to DRM-free. iTunes is doing a good job bridging the gap, providing a fair comparison between tracks that are protected and tracks that are not. It's also getting around or minimizing MOST of the problems that DRM causes. iTunes right now is the most consumer-friendly form of DRM available.

It's unreasonable to assume in any debate that the other side is just going to toss up its arms and say I GIVE UP YOU WIN and concede the world. That's what this "defectivebydesign" group is trying to achieve, and it's never going to work that way.

iTunes is probably the best thing going for the anti-drm movement right now, and that I mean even above non-drm music. It's easing the music industry into free music at a pace it's willing to go. It's something that the consumer can tolerate, and something the industry can tolerate. Right now, drm-free isn't something the industry can tolerate, and drm-lockdown isn't something consumers will tolerate.

The consumers will never accept lockdown, but the industry eventually should accept fredom of format. Just need to give it some time in the middle with things like iTunes to make them warm up to it.

Re:Attacking the short poll in the tent

[Scratch-O-Matic]

Way back in the Napster days, I told several people that my threshold for paying for downloaded songs was $1 per track. Dang if Apple didn't do just that. I've actually bought tracks off iTunes rather than find an old CD that I own and rip it myself...very similar to the way I used to use Napster. My opinion: iTunes is a good service, the price is right, and the DRM doesn't interfere with my particular use of the product.

Re:Well, it has with me

[Sancho]

I still have my AppleTV, but it didn't take long to exceed its capacity. So I started storing my television shows on my computer. A couple of computers (and iPods, for that matter) later, I've moved my stuff around so much and dropped and reauthorized stuff to the point where the shows I bought when I first got my AppleTV are, for all practical purposes, gone forever unless I want to re-buy them.

How does this happen? I thought that content purchased from the iTMS were tied to your account, which you can pretty much authorize to 5 computers at a time. You can deauth at any point, either from the computer itself, or from their website.

Unless you've switched accounts, I don't see how your content would be unplayable.