Reading this NYT article today, I am reminded of writing this blog post, in which I agreed with the argument by Steve Jobs that the placement of codes into music files to prevent copying for any reason was futile. As Steve Jobs then argued, each holder of the iPod had bought merely 22 songs out of the average of a thousand songs resident on the devices. This made it altogether unnecessary to continue to impose the Digital Rights Management system.
It seems that the music majors have finally seen the logic of this argument and have authorized Apple to strip all music sold on the iTunes site of the DRM. As it stood, the DRM was driven by the fear that music would be pirated widely in spite of the absence of evidence that it was capable of hindering dedicated music pirates. As it stood, Digital Rights was merely an expensive and demonstrably ineffective technological stunt.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Hello,
DRM is attractive for several related reasons. Content providers feel they can get more control over their wares. The term DRM has come to primarily mean the use of these measures to control copyrightable artistic content. One of the more interesting benefits of DRM will be the possibility of super distribution. It is the ability to transfer content from person to person in a digital format while accounting for payments back to the publisher.
Access Rights
Post a Comment