RSSMedia's NMT Blog

Just because you can restrict usage doesn't mean you have to: are the days of DRM numbered? (Digital Rights Management technologies are used to place restrictions on how files downloaded can be used.) The BBC has a fairly detailed run through the arguments surrounding the use of DRM in music and video files. What's apparent is that there remains a tension between giving consumers what they want and 'protecting' content copyright (or is that revenue?). Researching the ways in which both audiences and institutions have adjusted to the online distribution of media would be excellent preparation for this summer's exam.

Labels: consumers vs institutions, DRM, internet

The terrific Wired.com has a very useful guide to understanding DRM. Make sure it's top of your 'to read' list!

Labels: consumers vs institutions, DRM

The Guardian on Thursday had a detailed exploration of the possibility of major online distributors of music (although the principle will be extendible to other media) dropping DRM. The idea of letting users own content that is free of restriction is clearly something that is going to provoke all kinds of debate. To this end, Warner Bros have declared the dropping of DRM to be 'without logic or merit'. If the industry does follow the urgings of people like Steve Jobs and drops DRM, you can be sure Warner will follow suit - especially if it means they're losing revenue as a result of a principled stand in favour of DRM technology.

Labels: consumers vs institutions, DRM

Steve Jobs has called for an end to the use of DRM (digital rights management) in the music files sold online. It could be that this will remove one of the major obstacles to downloads rendering CDs obsolete; at the moment the CD format allows high quality audio that you can use as you wish (including copying, sharing, editing) - unless there's some sort of DRM used on the disc. Whereas DRM on CDs is rare, it's the accepted practice with downloads from legitimate sites. Some, like Steve Jobs, it would seem, think that preventing consumers freely using something they've paid for is unfair and hampering efforts to increase the take up of digital downloading.

Whether the music industry will agree is another matter; only once Napster forced them did they submit to the idea of online distribution. Downloads make sense in terms of a mainstream format for the majority of users (portable, instant, easy to store to name just three), but the majority aren't giving up on CDs - could it be the perception of the risk of formats that aren't universally playable and that are limited in either time, or number of uses? Imagine being told some of your CDs would only play in a certain brand of player! Or that you could list to the CD on just a few of the CD playing devices in your home!

Read about DRM in Wired magazine (the article linked here is from 2001 but it still contains relevant ideas, if not up-to-date examples).

Labels: consumers vs institutions, DRM, internet

Apparently the copy protection on HD-DVD has been cracked, in theory allowing the copying of 'certain titles'; surely no one is surprised? As technology advances it seems institutions are keener than ever to protect their revenues, often pursued despite the threat of alienating consumers (as Sony discovered in 2005). The region coding on DVDs and copy-protected content, often using DRM (digital rights management) technology, are highly disputed technologies: if you buy a CD the music is open to manipulation by you (copying, lending, remixing, for example), and many feel justified by this perhaps because of the physical ownership the CD format represents. Technically it's illegal, but who's really going to care if you remix a few songs for your own use? The music industry, if the use of ever-tighter security technologies are anything to go by. However, formats like WMA and AAC both allow the tight control of the uses of the music bought by consumers, in ways such as how many copies can be made, what devices can play the music and even how long the music will be playable.

A question you need to consider (even though there's no easy answer, as always): just because this type of control is possible, is it a good idea? Clearly there will be strong arguments on both sides, and you need to contemplate them given the twin focus of this unit - audience and institutions.

Labels: consumers vs institutions, DRM