|
|
|
|
Digital Rights Management - a dance with deception
Viewed 1009 times. 8 people liked this blog. You can rate it below if you haven't already.
-->
The past couple of weeks there's been a real shake up on digital rights management. Originally on my blog I posted a link to a series of interviews from some key people over at Midem. (A music industry touchstone for 2007?) A couple of days later Steve Jobs candidly spoke about his opinion on DRM and how it's holding back the industry. (Thoughts on Music)
If you followed the RIAA and their press releases, you would believe that music without DRM would be the end of the world. (Online Piracy and Electronic Theft) But as more information into the cost/value of DRM becomes available, it is starting to paint an interesting picture to the contrary. (Study: P2P effect on legal music sales)
The bigger question in here isn't about digital rights; It is about music ownership.
Before digital rights management, the personal ownership of a song was the responsibility of the individual. With a physical product, the mechanical control of the product (CD / vinyl / tape) allowed for an illusion of control by the RIAA. Major labels and the RIAA believed that most people were simply consuming music as a complete and final step in the music production distribution process. Any duplication of the music product was happening only after an arduous task of analogue duplication. A process that most music consumers would not be interested in performing.
Computers and digital music files made the process of duplicating a song an instant and simple process. The novelty of digital files without a simple and economical marketplace for purchasing them allowed a whole new 'pirate' marketplace to grow. In this vacuum the RIAA has lobbied that music product revenue was being lost.
Which brings us to today and the dance of DRM. Without a unified process of protecting the digital rights of music that is created, there is no simple and economical marketplace. Conflicting formats limit the ability to play music from one online music site with another music sites device. Files without any DRM included can be played on all devices... but those songs are generally not available through the online music marketplace as paid products.
When a consumer purchases a CD, they don't have to deal with incompatibilities. The illusion is that these songs will not be transfered, that their music rights will be respected. Without DRM digital music files can be instantly shared.
But does this sharing replace the value of purchasing the music?
The industry is setting the stage for a test. Companies like Apple and EMI are betting that a simple economic marketplace will make up for any illegal duplication. (Music industry divided over digital future)
We'll have to wait and see where this will go. The idea of DRM free music has been met with skepticism from anti-DRM communities. (Reaction to Apple CEO Steve Jobs’ call for end of DRM) The RIAA believes any product released without DRM is a mistake. Something has to change the marketplace to make it easier for music consumers to purchase the songs they like regardless of the playing device. 2007 looks to be the year we'll start to explore these market options. The end result, music files that are under the ownership of the purchaser with rights management under their own control.
Originally posted on Lx7.ca (my website) | |
Comments
02/20/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
p
Interesting topic. And you've done your homework.
I'd be curious to find out how much youtube has hurt television/dvd as it is technically breaking the same intelectual property laws as the pirating of sound recordings (you can't download but with an internet conection you can see alot of what's on tv).
If anything I've bought more sound/video from stuff I've heard on the internets.
I'm not really pro or anti-piracy but when you can't listen to stuff you paid for (because you can't put certain files into certain players) what other option do you have.
anyway good blog.
02/20/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
Geddupnoise
oh man, this is a debate that no one will win. With out people thinking as musicians first and politicians SECOND, the while issue of music piracy will continue on and on in an endless vortex, going no where. Music should be controlled by musicans, not politicians.
:-D
02/20/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
Taxis
I don't see it so much of a debate happening at this site. I think most people here support the free distribution of music.
I think the entire industry needs to make a perceptual shift. Mark my words. In ten years the only way people are going to be able to make money from music is if they distribute it themselves in a strange format or license it for TV.
Recent blogs: UBC sex study
02/20/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
lunatinker
the people who win will ultimately be the industry landlords (BMI, etc.) and the enforcers (RIAA) and, my favorite,
the people who stay the hell away from both.
02/20/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
lunatinker
my favorite it timbaland. here''s a doof that is rapping in tandem with missy elliot about breaking pirate legs , ad nausea-um, then he's indiscriminately sampling chiptunes. the RIAA wants to protect his right to steal and make bank? why? i so don't get it. he's fired.
02/20/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
stringedthry
i'm with you, taxis. the days of music celebrities are numbered. live shows and licensing will be the jobs of future music artists (and it will get only harder to eek by a living). very soon the market will be so saturated we'll look back upon the era of music superstars (and corporate music bullshit, such as DRM) as quaint.
02/21/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
Raaphorst
here's a long doc of the effects of p2p on records sales: link
conclusion: almost zero effect!
the music industry is lying. they have sold many albums without DRM over the years. you could copy disks, you could copy vhs tapes etc. you can copy DVD's. so why do we need DRM now? CD's were without copy control. things gotten worse when copy control was added. and it died: copy control was not a good idea. copy control = DRM
but you can also share your books, anything really you have bought. but with digital that's much easier and so the music industry is scared. but in the end this is a great help for promotion I believe. radio airplay also stimulates record sales. sure some people will record from radio but the amount of record sales further increases this, so the effect is positive.
what will happen? nobody knows, but I think that DRM is dying. and that's good because DRM limits the devices we can choose to buy for playing those files. if you choose Apple iTunes you have a lifetime connection with Apple because no other devices support these files. that will harm Apple in the end and therefore Steve Jobs has stated that he would like to stop using DRM. after all these years of DRM on iTunes he begins to understand that it was no good idea after all.
the amount of free sharable music files also increases. many bands give away their music for promotion because it's a great way to find new fans, fans who will show up at live concerts.
if you give away high quality content for free I guess that means business. YouTube is doing the same thing. they are all doing the same thing. how to make money? content providers needs to earn a percentage of the ad generated profits. and they will all be doing this in the future, YouTube... Revver.com and Blip.tv are already doing it for video's.
it has always been like that: huge platforms who are providing music are making money trough advertisements, commercial radio and tv is using this model. the same model can be used for internet.
02/21/07
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
rrooyyccee
It seems it would make the most sense for music to be given away for free from corporate sites. So Coldplay could give their next album in mp3 format away for free from Coke's website. Sure it would immediately be up for download at limewire, but many people don't like using P2P, and want a clean source. P2P slows down computers. . . I find myself having to dedicate an entire computer so that I can still use the computer for other applications. most users will never want to do that.
I don't see how it could become harder for artists to make a living. If Coke pays Coldplay for free distribution rights, and if Coldplay could sell DVDs and concert DVDS at their webiste, they would still make the same kind of revenue.
Has anybody on this list made a living wage off of an independent label's advance?
It seems like what is being removed is a physical distribution system. Good riddance. . .it is all wasted energy and resources. We now have an efficient distribution and advertising system.
Register / login
|
^
EM411 is Copyright 2001-2008 EM411.com
All rights reserved. | Contact | RSS
|
