DRM Watch reports on the latest developments, with watermarking ramping up and Universal going DRM Free. Walmart is also to go DRM free.

Several questions remain to be answered going forward:

-One is an anthropological puzzle. Much of the time, the public debate about copy protection seems to be all about music, music music music, with movies, books, photos, software, games, and so on coming in almost as an afterthought. Part of the answer to the puzzle is that music is perhaps more than the other media a repeat consumption good--that is, one tends to listen to a song one likes more than once, but that is somewhat less true of movies (some get repeat viewings, especially in the children's category, but many do not) and much less true of new items. So musicians have opportunities to tap consumer demand well after the first release, and so copy protection is particularly important to them. But still the fuss about music seems somewhat disproportionate, as if there is a 13-year-old headbanger inside all of us, unable to think or talk about anything else, and capable of tremendous testosterone-fueled anger. One wonders how this will affect the policy outcome for other media forced to follow in the wake of this adolescent impulse. Not much, one hopes, but likely one hopes in vain. Either way, DRM-free is likely not suitable for most other media.

-A second is a privacy problem. Not a real problem, I don't think. Any "don't interfere with our watermarks" tracking is part of the price of the product; if it ain't worth it for you, don't buy. It doesn't make much sense to posit a right to consume a service or product illegally, and conceal this from its producers. The "state action" element required to trigger the bill of rights is weak. Still, one can expect privacy advocates to kick up a fuss; ironically conservative about what the Internet "should" look like--like it did in the late 1990's.

--Another one is a business research problem. Will we know how DRM-free will do as a business model, when early experiments don't reach much of the market? Many music sales still take the form of CD's. Different forms of music reach different demographics--including cultures widely different from our own. Well, we'll see.

--And other problem. The purveyors of music--both producers and distributors--must adapt more or less quickly to consumer demand. But... consumers in this space are particularly likely to be sending mixed signals. Consumers have a short term interest in getting content at the lowest price possible--even free--and getting it DRM-free might be an aspect of that [added later: I clarify--DRM-free is an aspect of price although the price in $$$ is above zero; it is part of the "price" more broadly conceived as the terms of sale]. BUT consumers' long-term interest is not necessarily consistent with that--their long run interest is in maintaining an income stream to producers that keeps the good stuff coming out. That might be compatible with DRM-free, it might now. But... how are the purveyors to know which aspect of consumer demand they are serving, the "gimme gimme" impulse, or the more sustainable "we know we get what we pay for" strain?

--And another one: Will DRM-free for music be the death knell of attempts to work out interoperable DRM for music? Will it speed efforts to go interoperable with DRM for other media?

All for now,
S.

posted by Solveig Singleton @ 8:19 AM | DRM & Watermarks, etc., Media: Video, Music...

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | Post a Comment(1)