Slashdot Mirror
DRM Content Drives Availability On P2P Networks
jgreco writes "The music industry once feared that going DRM-free would drive a massive explosion of copyright-infringing music availability on P2P networks. Now, a new study seems to suggest otherwise. The answer is obvious: if you can easily get inexpensive DRM-free content that works on your devices through legitimate channels, most people won't bother with the headache of P2P networks. It appears that users largely turn to P2P to acquire DRM-free versions of content that is distributed with DRM. The MPAA, of course, will not come away from this with the obvious conclusion."
How many more years of this before other industries like software (SecuROM anyone?) come away with the obvious conclusion as well? DRM doesn't do anything but restrict legitimate purchasers of the product, people who illegally obtain things don't have to deal with such inane restrictions
Basically, this is based on the correlation that "hey, most of the stuff through a trackerless BitTorrent setup is pirated movies/tv, porn, and software, almost no pirated music" and "you can get DRM-free music easily, but not movies/tv, porn, and software" as implying "its because of DRM that people pirate stuff".
Unfortunately, there are two problems here:
a) Music is not just DRM-free, its also SMALL. BitTorrent's strength is moving big files, while pirated songs are very small in comparison, you can just email em to your friends.
b) A lot of porn online is DRM free, so why so much porn in BitTorrent?
Correlation does not mean causation.
Test your net with Netalyzr
Lest anyone think that TFA is saying that BitTorrent is used almost exclusively (to a degree of 99%) for copyright infringement, remember that this study focused on DHT-based, trackerless torrents. Legit torrents, like Jamendo and Linux distributions, usually use their own trackers. There's no reason for them to use DHT. So the study will naturally underrepresent legal BitTorrent content.
Also, the bit about DRM doesn't surprise me one bit. Nobody likes DRM except rights holders. It causes many more problems than it solves (which are very few already), not the least of which is perpetual content control even after the copyright expires. Far from banning circumvention of it, we need to heavily discourage (or outright ban) the use of DRM as we know it.
That Anonymous Coward guy is pretty annoying. Can we have the government censor him or something?
I do not necessarily mind paying for music. I do mind being told what type of device I can play my music on. That, my friends, is tyranny. This leads me to another gripe: The iPod and its ilk. We bought the device, therefore we own it and should have the right to modify it to work the way we want it. This is very much like purchasing a car, truck, or motocycle and customizing it. We purchase the vehicle so we own it and can modify it (legally) to ways we see fit. In this day and age, it looks like we purchase the license or right to use something which stifles innovation and puts us even further technologically behind other countries.
DRM does not work on some operating systems such as the one I (ab)use. It is so very strange that those who can not use legally purchased DRM content, and in most cases can't even do the legal purchase, look elsewhere.. isn't it?
9/11: Never forget it was a false-flag operation
I pay for music - because typically I look for specific artists or songs. It's easier for me to find it on Amazon rather than wade through piles of junk.
I would also like for the music industry to clean up its licensing. Let me buy music that I can play anywhere, in public, to any group of people smaller than, say, 100.
No strings, no fear, no stupid RIAA tricks. Come on RIAA, make it easy for us to be legal. You make it as hard as possible, with impossible convoluted licensing (you need a separate license for public performance and for copying a CD) so that it's nearly impossible to remain within the licensing restrictions and play the music I like.
Heck, I could make a strong argument that the music industry licensing is so convoluted that it is impossible to play music and be legal.
So clean up your act.
I don't think rights holders implement DRM to curb piracy (which it doesn't). I think rights holders implement DRM to make customers pay for the same media multiple times, and/or to tie them to specific devices, software or services. Why else would they be pushing it despite the fact that all DRM is cracked sooner or later? "Piracy" is just a convenient excuse.
That Anonymous Coward guy is pretty annoying. Can we have the government censor him or something?
Agreed. It basically comes down to these choices:
I know you're joking (yeah, ok, most BT traffic probably is "piracy"), but my only recent use of the protocol was to download Knoppix; it seems they can't afford all the bandwidth to serve ISOs directly (unless you pay a small fee), so they've turned to Bittorrent... Precisely its intended use!
I do not necessarily mind paying for music. I do mind being told what type of device I can play my music on. That, my friends, is tyranny. This leads me to another gripe: The iPod and its ilk. We bought the device, therefore we own it and should have the right to modify it to work the way we want it. This is very much like purchasing a car, truck, or motocycle and customizing it. We purchase the vehicle so we own it and can modify it (legally) to ways we see fit. In this day and age, it looks like we purchase the license or right to use something which stifles innovation and puts us even further technologically behind other countries.
Ok, so write your own firmware on the device and do what you want.. No one is stopping you.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Obviously RIAA and MPAA will commission a study of their own that will find that the reason people pirate is that they are evil and want to steal the property of their poor, starving artists. But of course the bias of the study is in favor of the rights holders because they foot the bill for the study.
OTOH, this study suggests that people just want to own what they purchase and use whatever means available to make the ownership permanent. But of course the bias of the study is
I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.
I understand what the article is implying. I used to pirate music, but then Amazon came along with decent quality MP3s that I can purchase at a reasonable price through an easy interface, and which play on anything. If I want something that can't be found on Amazon I still go P2P for it, but this activity is lessening as my library becomes more complete and Amazon keeps adding content. I used to pirate movies but then the Roku player came out and I was able to tie our Netflix account right into it. Now I get decent quality movies and episodes on demand, for no more ongoing cost than I was already paying for the Netflix account and an Internet connection. In other words, when things work to my benefit I spend money. When they work towards an evil empire's benefit I do everything I can to rip it off. So if you want me to spend money you've got to let go.
To my shock and amazement, the Region 1 DVD release of the film JCVD from Peace Arch Entertainment has two non-DRM "digital copies", one in MP4 and one in WMV format. Both play fine in Ubuntu and on any device which supports MP4 and/or WMV. It's nice to see a company do this correctly. I've been meaning to write them a thank you note - think I'll do that now.
I hate the term "digital copy" though. Did DVDs and Blu-rays become something other than digital copies at some point?
Oppressing an entire population is never cheap.
--Jeckler (/. Beta IS GARBAGE!)
I like content
I used to buy content
But then you asked for money for every blank
So fuck you
I would like to see HD movies
But you said Macrovision is a must
And I can't upscale to my TV
So fuck you
I bought into HD-DVD
And picked up a few nice movies
But the content cartel said no
So fuck you
I have divx on every player
And terrabytes of storage
But I can't buy movies that way
So fuck you
My mp3 player does wireless
And its legal to share songs*
But the player won't do it
So fuck you
*In Canada
Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061