Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> ____/ John Bailo on Monday 16 July 2007 06:21 : \____
>
>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> So why do you buy Defective by Design music? To be honest with you, I never
>>> encountered any form of DRM, not even in eBooks. Encryption is not for
>>> access control, it's for privacy.
>>
>> It does have one very useful feature and that is it allows subscription
>> or rental services.
>
> But don't you see that transforming the model to one where music (media) gets
> rented leads to losses?
>
>> For example, for only $15 a month I can listen to 1,000,000 CDs on
>> Rhapsody (including on Linux using Web Rhapsody).
>>
>> And now Netflix, using DRM, allows me to to get 24 hours of online movie
>> viewing as an adjunct to their DVD deliveries.
>>
>>
>> DRM is actually a very disruptive technology -- because it threatens the
>> old school iTunes, sell you a song market, and it challenges the "steal
>> a song" bittorrent.
>
> Well, it's a "disruptive technology", all right. It disrupts a lot of things
> for the consumer, not the business. That is a very bad thing.
>
iTunes is not "old school", indeed, it /uses/ DRM, and is very recent.
Unless you have phenomenal bandwidth available, having access to film
archives is no guarantee that you can see them. In fact, it's quite
likely that it will be quicker to put a CD in first-class post to watch
it the next day than to try to send it over the net. If you want to
watch two films, then it's probably 96% certain to be quicker to post
the CDs/DVDs, if you want to watch three things, then you'd best use the
post, because current generation access technology just hasn't the
bandwidth in most cases for most people, *and*, IP networks are not able
to do reliable streaming.
>> It's my kind of technology -- if done right, it lets the consumer win by
>> buying only the media they need, at a very low price. Much cheaper
>> than buying every CD, DVD, mp3 that you would ever want and far less
>> wasteful and redundant.
>
> You don't buy, you rent. You then run out and you are forced to come out and
> get some more. Putting expiry dates on data is culture gone backwards. Food
> expires. Knowledge needs to endure and be preserved.
You cannot "do DRM right". It's an impossible goal. Anyone with any
technical knowledge can see that it's only possible by draconian legal
measures which put governments or companies in charge of huge sections
of society, equipment, purchasing, licensing, etc. etc.
George Orwell wrote books about this, and the consequences of it.
>
>> The real question is why is Linux so far behind on DRM...
>
> Linux serves consumers. It's written by the consumer, for the consumer (with
> assistance from companies that respect and appreciate the fact that happy
> consumers will return). Windows and Mac OS are written for greedy people at
> their command. These people have other friends in industry, e.g. in the media
> companies.
>
DRM is Microsoft's last hope of forcing a monopoly into the consumer
space. If they can get enough people/organisations to fall for it, they
could be successful. Making fools of the BBC trustees was a good move,
making a fool of Ashley Highfield was equally a good move.
Microsoft also need a tool for the business space, and they believe that
if they can force OOXML through so-called "standards" bodies by whatever
means they need (like putting 19 pro-Microsoft people onto committees a
few days before a vote!), then they'll get corporates. Getting the
British Library and the National Archives must've been like Santa and
all his little elves turning up together for Microsoft - an opportunity
to lock the British Public's own data for decades into a licensing model
that even Shylock would've been embarrassed by.
So, DRM is for locking consumers, OOXML for locking businesses and
governments. Or, we can do it as a table:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Microsoft post-GPLv3/Linux survival strategy table
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Method: | OOXML | DRM | Patent trolling
--- -------------- ------------ ----------------
Locks: | Business, | Consumers | Business (by fear)
| governments | Music,Film | Developer (by fear)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Method: | Silverlight | XPDF | XBox360
--- --------------- ------------ -------------------
Locks: | Web | Archives, | Console users,
| | Libraries.. | Games developers
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Method: | Zune |
--- ---------------
Locks: | MP3 users |
| |
---------------------------
As ever, Microsoft have an excellent set of strategic pushes to get
themselves back onto the monopoly treadmill, however, they do not seem
to be getting quite the traction they once did. They also have other
products aimed at other spaces, too, but it's very important to consider
not just what they're doing, but what the intended goal is.
Microsoft are not going to fail, but they will need to have a new
management team, and will need to re-invent themselves in order to
survive. Recruiting IBM's chief patent troller was an interesting
approach, but probably about the dumbest thing they could've done in
terms of learning to live with the FSF's world. This problem seems to
have characterised many recent decisions by Microsoft - a kind of
short-sightedness which is probably a direct result of having set the
tone for so many years, and failing to recognise that they no longer do
so.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |
|
|
