http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/ Engadget Comments for http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2008 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
Dude.... what the hell? This isn't the first time you said something this f*cked-up. Why do you consistently need to turn an argument about the RIAA into a racist/religious thing?

Damnit, so what if they're "mostly" Jewish. That doesn't make any of the members of the RIAA less of a bunch of assh*les. Which they are! Being an "Assh*le, knows NO gender, religion, color or creed. Oh and it also crosses boarders.

I want the RIAA to die, because of what they do, not for what they believe it.]]>Feb 22nd 2007 7:06PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
If it were possible for me to buy from the band directly and to feel comfortable that the money is going to the band, I might unleash the wallet again.

Right now I am comfortable supporting my local Houston music scene because I can control where the money goes.

]]>Feb 16th 2007 12:49PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
Better luck next time

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwins_Law]]>Feb 16th 2007 11:22PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/Feb 16th 2007 1:09PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/Feb 16th 2007 1:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/Feb 16th 2007 1:24PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/Feb 16th 2007 1:30PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/Get your T-Shirts here
http://giantrobotprinting.com/store/shirts/commies/drm

Now. Just Say No To DRM. m'kay?

Meanwhile back in the real world. It would not be hard for iTMS to sell DRM and non-DRM tracks side by side with appropriate labelling. So come on, Steve, just do it.]]>Feb 16th 2007 1:45PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/ It's good to know I am in the majority anyway. I am up in arms because I feel that when people say that there is a "better" form of DRM, they are tactitly agreeing that:

-DRM is here to stay so we may as well learn to live with the best version we can.

I disagree. DRM is NOT here to stay, and is a joke as the article points out-- everywhere it gets implemented it has been compromised. Like boog & Trent said, Don't support DRM. Never, ever, never. By allowing huge corporations to impose ridiculous restrictions on a product we have already paid for is beyond ludicrous.

You mention that labels have "mandated DRM" THAT IS THE PROBLEM. They shouldn't be allowed to do so, and we should not applaud an attempt to support a "consistent user experience" that still has restrictions on it. That just mean the experience is still consistently bad, and in my opinion, illegal.

The more we accept and support intrusions like DRM the more they will keep popping up. The only good DRM is NO DRM.]]>Feb 16th 2007 1:45PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
The labels own the music. It's their product. As participants in a market they should be allowed to sell their product in any way they see fit.

Now, as I've said, I agree that DRM is bad, and it follows that I think that it's a terrible business decision on the part of the major labels to insist on selling their product with DRM. But there's nothing "illegal" about that. There's nothing morally wrong about that, even. It's just stupid and irritating. Getting angry because media executives have made stupid, irritating decisions is not a good way to get through life, my man.

I agree with you that DRM should wither away - like I said, being anti-DRM is the majority position. But the most convincing argument you can make here is an economic one. All this talk about "allowed" and "illegal" is just nonsense. Vote with your dollars and inform your fellow consumer. But don't start off with what corporations should be "allowed" to sell - it does nothing but trash your credibility.]]>Feb 16th 2007 2:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
I think it's hilarious that a blog written about all the latest and greatest gadgets is so painfully stuck in the past. "Owning" music is an antiquated concept and all those stuck to it make themselves needlessly worse off. We have at our fingertips a system where we can pay a measly $12 a month and download whatever we want instantly and in perfect quality. Subscription services are an amazing tool of allowing people to expand their tastes in music, and they're not possible without DRM.

People talk about DRM restrictions, but the fact is that subscription services take away all the restrictions that are in place that prevent people from hearing new music. And that, my friends, is how DRM liberates consumers. To me, being able to just sample full tracks is worth at least $12 a month.

I feel that all the crap that people who "buy" (not "rent") music with DRM on it is a good thing. Y'all need to learn.]]>Feb 16th 2007 1:47PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/Feb 16th 2007 2:09PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/Feb 16th 2007 2:01PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
]]>Feb 16th 2007 2:15PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
All music DL services owe their existence to Napster who roughly 7 years ago made a little known file format ubiquitous. And after Napster was shut down in 2001 a lot of people thought "here comes a real solution". Didn't happen so people moved on to pure P2P options.

The music industry had a chance to make money on digital music and they threw it away. Then they teamed with Apple the schizophrenic king of DRM who hates it but adds it to everything and now even Apple has turned on them.

Years ago I would have gladly deleted my collection of a couple hundred songs and purchased them. but now? I just checked my collection and it's literally in the thousands. Am I going to delete them and repurchase if they pull their heads out and figure out what they're doing? Call me a criminal all you like but I don't believe in supporting stupidity.

]]>Feb 16th 2007 2:15PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
Note: I only support the RIAA on DRM, otherwise I hate that organization-- it's specifically designed to give us lowest common denominator crap like Nickelback.]]>Feb 16th 2007 2:17PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/Why would I ever stop paying? I'd rather cut off cable tv or get rid of text messaging on my phone.

And if they ever decide to stop supporting DRM tracks, we've seen time and time again that PlaysForSure can be broken.

Moot point.]]>Feb 16th 2007 2:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
And if you've got a broadband connection, why can't they just stream your "rented music" to you?

You are either a shill or a moron. If I were you, I'd rather be a shill, because then I'd be getting paid for the moronic stance that you have, instead of just being stupid enough to believe it yourself.]]>Feb 16th 2007 2:33PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
Sony Connect provides the same rights as iTunes.
-5 computers auth'ed at any 1 time.
-Unlimited exports to Network Walkmans (except to Memory Sticks and Minidisc) that are AUTHORIZED with your CONNECT account.
-7 Playlist CD Burns.
-Memory Sticks & Minidisc's are limited to 3 exports with Warner Music Group music, evey other label is unlimited. (You can always check in/out WMG music, though.)

Bonus: Sony CONNECT allows you to re-download your music from their servers... Can you say the same with iTunes?

Bonus: You can burn purchased music directly into ATRAC3 cd's for playback in Sony ATRAC3 CD Players except with music from Universal Music Group.


Sorry I'm off track. I guess I'm a fanboy for CONNECT, but I can assure you they've been better to me than Apple. They haven't ever dis-allowed me anything. And customer support has always gave me more export rights and de-auth'ed any machine at a whim. I've been with em since launch Spring 04 and couldn't be happier. ]]>Feb 16th 2007 2:41PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/All of that being said, I don't even care one way or the other about DRM. I can do everything I need and want to do with my music whether it's from my own collection or purchased online. It doesn't matter if it can be cracked or not; the point is to make the average honest person realize their license limitations, not convince thieves not to steal. Thieves will make excuses and justify stealing no matter what anyways. ]]>Feb 16th 2007 2:58PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/Chicksta:

You are a little off here. DRM ASSUMES that you are going to illegally distribute copies of your music after you buy it. As a result, it stops you from being able to play it from any device that you legally own. Everyone is in agreement that people should pay for an item that they want. That is not in dispute.

You mentioned CDs-- if you buy a CD you can play it in your car, on your computer, or any other stereo you own. If you download music with DRM you can't. Big difference. God help you if you put a song on your ipod and your ipod breaks-- how do you get the song back you paid for? You don't, that's what.

Jeans aren't sold with a restriction saying what you can wear them with. For instance, noone sells jeans that can't be worn on a Sunday. When you buy them, they are yours. Same with music. If I buy a song, it is mine to play on whatever damn stereo I please.

If someone REALLY wants to break the law, they can-- there are any number of websites where you can download music for free and never get caught, and then send it to everyone else you know for free. Many, many people still do this. They can play their music on any device they own.

The only people that cann't play their music on any of their devices are the ones that pay for it legally. DRM assumes the buyer will try and copy the music and illegally distribute it. Now, why would a person that legally paid for a song try and spread it around illegally? If they wanted to do why pay for it in the first place?

The only people hurt by DRM are the ones that follow the rules, save their money, and buy things legally.

Pirates just laugh because they already get music for free, along with movies and TV shows. Even books. Supporting DRM hurts the small artists, and hurts the consumer. Plain and simple. Ask any independent musician what they think of the RIAA.

I do not think businesses are bad, or capitalism. I think that DRM is bad, and complete BS, and must go away. NOW.

If I seem emotional, its because I cannot believe how often people are content to have their rights stomped on. If organizations like the RIAA are able to dictate how products are used, we as consumers are in for a nightmare further down the road.]]>Feb 16th 2007 3:12PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/You're missing the point. DRM doesn't stop all pirated music, but it does stop some. The form of pirating it stops is for casual thieves. Most people don't troll the P2P and torrent sites for music (I know a lot of people who are scared of hackers getting into their computer that way) but they would gladly accept that hot new iTunes track from their friend.]]>Feb 16th 2007 4:12PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/ It's good to know I am in the majority anyway. I am up in arms because I feel that when people say that there is a "better" form of DRM, they are tactitly agreeing that:

-DRM is here to stay so we may as well learn to live with the best version we can.

I disagree. DRM is NOT here to stay, and is a joke as the article points out-- everywhere it gets implemented it has been compromised. Like boog & Trent said, Don't support DRM. Never, ever, never. By allowing huge corporations to impose ridiculous restrictions on a product we have already paid for is beyond ludicrous.

You mention that labels have "mandated DRM" THAT IS THE PROBLEM. They shouldn't be allowed to do so, and we should not applaud an attempt to support a "consistent user experience" that still has restrictions on it. That just mean the experience is still consistently bad, and in my opinion, illegal.

The more we accept and support intrusions like DRM the more they will keep popping up. The only good DRM is NO DRM.]]>Feb 16th 2007 3:23PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
EDawg: Jeans do have a restriction - you can't copy them. You and your friend can't both wear the same pair of jeans at the same time. Music was like jeans back in the days of vinyl and 8-track.]]>Feb 16th 2007 3:31PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
If you want to pirate music, you can do so without paying for it. Stop being a shill. Good Lord I can't believe I am reading this. Excuses for piracy? I'd love to know who you work for.

Really? Really? You all REALLY support DRM?

Right now I can go and download all the music I want illegally without DRM. That is what those of you don't seem to grasp-- elminiating DRM will make the music industry MORE money.

PEOPLE THAT WANT TO STEAL MUSIC ALREADY DO.

I give up. Someone else want to join in and explain why DRM is bad on Engadget? Engadget... people supporting DRM... I am sweating.

There have to be a bunch of Music RIAA industry types on here posting]]>Feb 16th 2007 3:53PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/Feb 16th 2007 3:37PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
My suggestion:

http://chuckbrown.com/the-case-against-digital-rights-management-drm.html]]>Feb 16th 2007 3:48PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/You know, if I buy a digital music file, I CAN play it in my car, my computer, and on any stereo (AirTunes). DRM has not taken away my ability to do that. But again, where does anything say that I have the right to play that music file on my phone, or on any device I own? Does that mean that when I upgraded to a CD player from a record player, I was entitled to a free CD because I owned another format of the content? According to the license, I don't have that right; I have to buy it again. And if I break a vase, or a CD, or stain my clothes, why on earth would that give me the right to a free product? So why would breaking my iPod be different?
And as to why would a person who legally bought music want to distribute illegally - where on earth did all of the illegal files come from in the first place then?
Again, I certainly don't feel that DRM is evil or good. It's the attitude of people that want to justify stealing by -blaming it- on DRM or executive pay or whatever other bs that is tired. At least have the balls and admit to being a cowardly thief, who 'only' steals when they think they won't get caught.
]]>Feb 16th 2007 3:52PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
You asked who I work for? I'm a programmer for a small software company. Essentially, I produce "intellectual property". Software, music, video is all intellectual property. I put real time, work and effort into making intellectual property. If that data is pirated, the company loses money, and I and my fellow employees suffer. We might even be laid off!

We lock our doors at night and install alarms in our cars because thieves might rob us if we didn't. We have a right to take precautionary measures to protect our property. So, why shouldn't companies have a right to protect their intellectual property? Intellectual property pays my rent, it's my livelihood! Damn right I think it should be protected!]]>Feb 16th 2007 4:37PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
However, if I pay $.99 a track, I better be able to use that any way I'd like.

]]>Feb 16th 2007 3:56PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
Oh my, the shills are here, and they are here to stay.



]]>Feb 16th 2007 4:30PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
Yeah DRM!!!!


Wait (dumps brain washing Kool Aid on ground)

NO]]>Feb 16th 2007 4:31PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/Feb 16th 2007 4:47PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/Feb 16th 2007 5:12PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
No thanks and fuck you.

Most of the people you represent are not "artists". It is YOU that are in fact doing more damage to legitimate artists by cheating them, making originality and innovation formulaic, and offering an inferior delivery system.

The internet service providers and computer component manufacturers are laughing themselves to the bank while you further complicate and convolute the product for which you yourselves are an anachronism.



Downloading and sharing Rock and Roll is sooo fucking Rock and Roll!!!!!!!!



]]>Feb 16th 2007 5:17PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/Feb 16th 2007 7:20PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
Maybe we shouldn't be forcing this issue so much. Maybe it's okay to let the RIAA have their week little pretense of artist protection. It's shown very clearly in this well written article that we have, and will continue to defeat DRM -- we're practically obliged to do so. So the "industry" spends hundreds of thousands (millions?) of dollars developing and implementing DRM on all media and on all hardware platforms. A few smart super heroes stay up for a week and crack the DRM. The consumer ends up paying for the DRM R&D on the hardware side, but ends up pirating all the software. So for the consumer it's a wash. The hardware companies are getting paid for their licenses. But the labels, studios, artists, and talent lose out. Ironic huh, RIAA? Maybe the Artists and Talent should be more concerned about this. Instead of making money from download sales, they're forced to perform live at strip malls and state fairs.]]>Feb 16th 2007 7:50PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/Feb 16th 2007 8:15PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/What I find discouraging is that people who try to say stealing is okay never have the ability to intelligently debate their viewpoints and counter any of the points I addressed. Resorting to name-calling and saying it's 'cool' or that record companies are greedy (as opposed to the companies that made just about every product you ate, watched, wore, and/or used today) are hardly legitimate reasons to justify stealing. Did you steal your car because those car executives are so overpaid, and there are so many middlemen your car price has to subsidize? If you did, do you think the executive would suffer, or do you think someone somewhere down the totem pole would lose their job and suffer instead?
It's not a victimless crime; if nothing else, the music itself suffers. My thinking in why music stinks so much now is because it's no longer a business that people with the passion for it want to be in, or can afford to be in. Maybe that just leaves a bunch of schmucks who sit around trying to make new DRM products every other week; instead of people focusing on discovering and promoting talent. It's not about the quality and love of the music anymore, it's about how many 'gigs' you've got... most of which you'll never bother to listen to... and that speaks volumes. ]]>Feb 16th 2007 9:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/Feb 17th 2007 12:17PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
First off, the only way they can offer everything DRM-free is to wait until EVERY LABEL IN THE WORLD signs off on selling DRM-free. This will take years. During those years, everything will be DRM-encumbered...so billions of songs will have been purchased from iTunes with DRM, encrypted on millions of peoples' PCs. Even the all-or-nothing approach results in inconsistency (except for users that don't use the system until the transition is complete).

All it takes is an icon that shows the song to be locked or not locked. If people can't "grok" that, then the software isn't very well written.

I can't imagine any reason to push an all-or-nothing approach, other than to provide rationale for DRMing everything indefinitely...which is probably the reason Jobs is pushing it.]]>Feb 17th 2007 12:24PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
I agree with those of you who say that if you rent music, then it is not unresonable for there to be some system to require you to continue paying for your music / stop the music if you discontinue the service.

That having been said, to those of you parroting the DRM excuse, it is rediculous. Yes, a particular source may say that if you buy our music, you can only listen to it on an XYZ player. However, there is little legal difference between this and saying that if you buy a particular pair of underwear you must wear it outside you clothing. That is to say, if you buy music to listen to, the company selling it cannot resonably say on what you can listen to it. The fact that digital media allow for easy copies is a completly seperate argument. The only reason we are even discussing this is because we started down this ridiculoud road of restrictions in the first place.


To those who asked, if you bought a tape do you automatically get a CD when CDs are invented? The answer is, of course not. On the other handd, I have taken the time and effort to transfer some very rare vinyals of mine to MP3 so that I can play them on my iPod. This is legal, fair, and completly impossible under DRM (in theory, in practice we know that transforming format is not so hard).

Furthermore, many kinds of DRM, especially FairPlay are dangerously close to being anti-trust violation. And while I have never been a fan of the anti-trust laws, I think that any number of practices in regards to media in the last 5 years merit serious scrutiny by the FTC.

Case in point: I am an "executive" at a medium sized recording company (I am a member of the board, and work at the company). No, we don't often record music, mostly we record voice overs, telephonme wait messages, etc. Recently, we started producing audio books, as we had the talent, the studios and the resources to successfully transition into a new media. An obscene amount of cash later, we actually started selling our books, a profitable and worthwhile venture. Nonetheless, the barriers to entry are immense because of the stranglehold which several companies (you know who they are) have on the market. In addition, "the usual suspects" will frequently go to court in support of a copyright which they DO NOT OWN, and which THEY KNOW THEY DO NOT OWN. The reason? Really small companies (an engineer with Pro Tools, a garage studio and the willingness to work really hard) do not have the resources to fight a court battle, and so drop the issue.

But I digress, DRM is ineffectual ("bad guys" have no problem pirating music) and quite probably illegal in the way in which it applies absurdly restrictive rights, bundling and contracts of adhesion (I.E. "We reserve the right to update these terms at any time"). DRM also completly obliterates the purpose of copyright -- the theory that the copyright owner has the right for a SET AMOUNT OF TIME, after which it is public domain. DRM schemes do not have a clock, therefore, after the copyright expires (which, even today, will eventually happen) the consumer is stuck with considerably less than full use.

So, to those of you who apologize for DRM, stop. To those of you who require DRM (and require others to use DRM -- as we ocasionally are required) stop. To those of you who actually see this for what it is, my sincerest agreement.

~ Whiteside]]>Feb 17th 2007 2:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/

2nd if you know anything about the major record industry then you know 2 things

1) How underhanded it is (back shelfing artists who sound to much like an artist the record company already has is an example I know a lot about).

2) Artists see little cash in the way of record sales. It is all about live shows and product placement. Most rap artists have their “bling” on loan from the industry, it is not stuff they own. Why? Because of the deal with the record industry (they only see a few pennies for every album sold.)


The major issue with DRMs is how they punish the people who actually purchase the products. That is the major issue at hand. The Sony rootkit is a more extreme example but other issues that are along the same lines. That purchasing something, only to not have the “proper hardware” to view it. About 4 years ago I was using my PS2 as my DVD player, but due to my electronics set up I had to unplug and plug in about 3 different electronic devices just to watch DVDs on it due to DRM. So I only had about 8 DVDs total at the time.

Ultimately this isn’t an issue of protecting intellectual property. If you believe that then you are looking past years of (VHS, Tape decks, CD Burners, etc) where the entertainment industry cries foul but then ultimately gives in and everything is fine.
]]>Feb 17th 2007 8:58PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
Sign this petition i've just set up.

http://www.petitiononline.com/enddrm/petition.html]]>Feb 18th 2007 9:37AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
Content, whether it be music, video etc. is licensed to the consumer. Consumers never "own" that content, per se.

However, consumers will (depending on the intellectual property laws of their country) have: (i) an IRREVOCABLE licence to use that content; and (ii) the right and title (i.e. ownership) of the media (if any) on which that content was purchased.

Previously, and in most countries with sane intellectual property laws, consumers were also guaranteed, in law, a right of "fair use" in relation to that content.

Generally speaking, "fair use" can be said to be the right to make a tape of a record purchased or the right to quote extracts from a book in a college essay, for example. This was the status quo until the digital age. (It should also be noted that in most jurisdictions, breaches of intellectual property rights were a civil offence, not a criminal one. In other words, the rights holder could sue for infringement but a court could not generally fine or imprision an infringer.)

In the digital age it became easy to quickly and cheaply make perfect copies of content and to distribute that content to anyone, anywhere in the world.

Rights holders (i.e. the record labels/music studios etc.) didn't like this development. They took a strong approach to implementing DRM and lobied leglislators to enact legislation such as the DMCA, but not to amend or revoke the laws relating to fair use.

This created the following situation: digital content was now 'locked' down by DRM, the DMCA (or the like) made breaking the DRM (or even discussing the breaking the DRM in some cases) a criminal offence. Fair use rights in relation to digital content are now almost impossible to invoke in relation to DRM protected content without committing a criminal offence.

But now it looks like the tide is turning and rightholders are more willing to work with and for consumers, rather than against them and are reconsidering their stance on DRM.

This has already happened in the MP3 arena, largely due to the phenominal sucess of the iPod and other devices, with rightsholders abandoning DRM on CDs.

My stance is that this is a good, sensible, move. The real problem is the commercial pirates running the duplicating factories which are churning out millions of counterfeit CDs and DVDs. ]]>Feb 18th 2007 3:39PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
Don't you think that PERHAPS somewhere in that decade the RIAA became greedy and draconian because they could see their cash cow coming in to dire straights in the near future? Or do you actually believe your own BS?

Lets not even get in to the actual way copyright was intended to work and whom it was for, because that had nothing to do with music or DRM.

I will never understand the DRM apologist.]]>Feb 20th 2007 3:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/Feb 21st 2007 9:44AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
Really? Find me another where I tried turning an argument that direction. Please.
Here: http://www.google.com/search?q=site:+engadget.com++Andir3.0

That's a link that will help you get started searching through all my posts. Go on. Hate away. Waste your time looking through all my posts to prove how much more superior you are to me.]]>Feb 22nd 2007 8:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/
Wait…wait..wait. You say something completely racist about Jewish people, then you expect me to waste my time hunting around for all the other racist comments YOU’VE ever made on this blog site? As if you're worth it!? You're NOT! Ummm… YOU ARE a racist, a Nazi, and a jealous hater. 3.0 try upgrading...

…And I am superior to you… in every way. Learn to live with it.]]>Feb 26th 2007 12:21AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/16/drm-the-state-of-disrepair/Feb 26th 2007 3:51AM