Blogging Ottinger (tim)EFF critique of Digital Rights Management
The EFF has a critique of digital rights management (DRM).
Part of the argument is that DRM is unprofitable in all of its incarnations so far, and harmful to the music industry. Perhaps they ask the wrong questions:
Given the total failure of DRM to date to enrich creators or prevent unauthorised Internet distribution of works, it is a pity that NAVSHP started with the premise that the world needs more DRM, rather than exploring whether that is indeed the best way to foster the development of the home audiovisual market.
A more reasonable and balanced approach would be to start by asking, “How can we enrich creators and encourage creation?” and “If DRM vendors claim to be able to enrich creators and prevent unauthorised Internet distribution, what evidence can they offer in support of these claims?”
Another key bit was considering the presupposition that users are somehow under contract regarding the use of properties they’ve purchased:
Does a user form a “contract” to eschew playing a DRM CD on her MP3 player simply by bringing it to the cash-register and paying for it? The entertainment industry argues that the simple act of buying a good like a DVD or a CD is a contract through which consumers agree to waive their rights under copyright to their detriment and a rightsholder’s benefit. Unfortunately this report reinforces that spurious assumption without any analysis of the underlying legal reality.
I found the article interesting and enlightning. I think consumers don’t want DRM, and I pretty sure that any scheme they come up with will be defeated by pirates immediately. It restricts the use, not the theft, of property. I don’t want to pay extra money for licensed devices so that I can have my fair use rights restricted. I think that DRM is strictly about a company trying to control its customers.
