|
|
Music industry thinks DRM is bad
Author: Wil HarrisPublished: 15th February 2007
The iTunes/iPod DRM model could be on the way out.
Further, 54% of executives think current DRM standards restrict customer's use of the music too much.
However, it appears that they're all too scared they might be wrong to actually do anything about it.
The BBC has the skinny on the report, from Jupiter Research, and says that the report was carried out over December and January, which was before Jobs issued his 'drop DRM' manifesto on the Apple website.
Since Jobs came out in favour, ostensibly, of no DRM, we've heard rumours on the net that EMI music could be about to do a deal to put out MP3s of its catalogue. However, suggestions are that EMI wants big upfront payments from music services to guarantee its revenue under this model.
70% of music industry execs thought that it would be best for music if songs downloaded could be played across any number of MP3 players from different brands - rather than the iTunes/iPod model. However, 40% said that they thought governments across the world would have to step in to make this happen.
The report makes it sound like the industry is caught in its own rhetoric, and can't bring itself to take the risk that it thinks will see a brighter future for its bottom line. Consumers are starting to really take up an anti-DRM stance, and Jobs' missive is only helping draw attention to the restrictions we face on media today, which often go far beyond that mandated by copyright law.
Is the music industry going to move to MP3 music, eschewing DRM? Let us know your thoughts over in the forums.
Recent articles on bit-tech.net
Comments (12)Stats: 0.146 seconds
I guess it's good news though. Finally music executives seem to be getting the message. The consumer now has total power. They have to please us or they lose at what they do. If we're not pleased we can simply cut them out of the loop at no big detriment to ourselves.
However I can't see any changes take place until they [industry] come up with a replacement that will still allow them to reap ungodly amounts of ££ for overpriced media while still protecting their copyrights.
I would be very shocked (tho happy!) if they dropped DRM altogether and assumed an "honesty" policy whereby ppl who purchase and dl a tune will keep it to themselves and not distribute.
In my opinion, I wouldnt -- simply cos if i paid for it, why would I want to give it out for free?
Some people like to share the things they love, and see as many other people taking enjoyment from something as possible. Materialsm for the lose and all that.
The big companies who like to sue the shirts off peoples backs "for the good of the artists" are the ones who like DRM though, and thats why it's not gone yet.
Now I'd like to see the same thing done with games, I'd like to see more games like Galactic Civilizations II and Company of Heroes, where you don't even need the disk in the drive to play it.
Seriously, I think it's crippling our content, and it can be defeated, in a few months, even with the millions of dollars used to create them. (AACS anyone ?)
e.i: "Here a castel, make us 20 CD per year for the next... well we will tell you when you repaid us..."
Probably now, the music industry is near bankrupcy, so they they start to be depressed...
At the end of the day, to the thief the lock is only as strong as the window. You can pour as much money into buying the strongest locks but it only slows the user down. I dont want to have call the company up every time i want to unlock my house.
I remember my first encounter with drm'd content with sky by broadband. It was a major pain in the ass, the content and the client was locked to a single computer. If any other family members wanted to watch a film they had to do it on my pc, but we all have our own pcs so it just didn't work out.
I know drm won't be going away too soon but i would rather it be a little more slack and just actually test drm in a normal house hold that is a little more grey area or unaware than what the record companies think we are.
Already, just the fact that they know that you downloaded music illigally, is already illegal in their part, without permition from a judge. And to have that they need solid proof that you did it.
Incase you don't know, this what, form the people that got suied, said it happended: the msuic industry comes with a hudge pack of legal paper, with ocmplicated term, so that you wither need to have a high vaccabulary level, know well the law, and have A LOT of time to read it all, or pay a lot for a lawer to read it trought, and tell you at the end... "Your getting suied by them, vbecause they suspect that you downlaoded X numbe rof music, they are ready to setle for 50 000$"
(I smell music industry needing some money here).
Wait until they do that in Canada, specially in Quebec, where if you are suied and you can not offord a lawer because you are at minimum wage, the provincial goverment will pay you one (no loan).
NOTE:
Due to the msuic industry, a lot of the songs you listen were not done by the artist you like. Did anyone listen to U2... Apple U2 song they play in their ads, are way off from the average style U2 groups song is like...
And let's not talk about Maddona.. where when she did a concert in Montreal, teh music indutry made "Madonna radio".. where you can listen to madonna song 24/7 with interviews, and lots and lots and lots and lots of ads (you really can not imagine how much ads they are)... it's like song + ads + half a song + "this song is sponsord by...." + rest of song... and so on.
Station was removed teh next day she played... Not all tickets were sold for here concert