Since we've been giving all forms of copyright protection a pretty hard time here lately, it seems like the only fair thing to do is give the other side a chance. And, fortunately, one reader's response to a recent story provides a well-reasoned and articulate argument in favor of Digital Rights Management.
The reader wrote:
"The idea that DRM itself is a problem has become fashionable, but doesn't hold up to close analysis. It's a bit like saying that safes are a bad idea because banks make too much money. Or, alternatively, that they interfere with the rights of consumers by making it more difficult to access their money. More realistically, it's a rationalization by people who have romantic notions about bank robbery. Sounds great -- but it's bad policy."
"DRM can be used well -- to protect the expectations of copyright owners and copyright users to get what they expected when they entered into a deal. DRM can also be used poorly, where copyright owners put restrictions onto their content that interfere with what users thought they were getting or were entitled to. It's not DRM that's the problem, but the bait-and-switch. Given the size of the piracy problem -- worth billions to copyright owners, not all of them big companies -- and the fact that we don't want piracy police peering into our homes and networks, technical solutions are the only way to reasonably enforce the deal."
"For example; suppose the maker of a movie documentary wanted to offer the film on a $0.99 per view basis, or for $10.00 to keep. Suppose also the movie maker wanted to offer it for $500 to movie theater owners to show to a large audience and $50,000 for a television network to air it. Absent DRM, arguably every copy should be $500 (or even more), because the only license that is really available is the license that would allow it to show on a movie theater. (I figure the movie maker could sue the network to protect the $50,000). In fact, if the title is available anywhere in unprotected form, it is essentially available to everyone and for all uses. None of these business models work. On the other hand a beneficial DRM would allow the $0.99 per view model to thrive -- if consumers wanted it; and if they preferred the $10 transaction -- great -- the market will decide."
"In short, an unemotional DRM debate would be focused on whether the content industry is authorizing the correct rights -- i.e., not taking away the rights consumers have come to appropriately expect (put aside whether consumers now expect to download stuff for free) -- or not, not on whether DRM should exist. Further, many other arguments about DRM are really antitrust arguments -- does someone have too much market power or are they exercising it inappropriately? Again -- the beef in France is with Apple's behavior. Whether or not they are right about Apple (I think they aren't, but others may disagree), when an artist chooses to self-distribute their song/picture/film/poem/book online protected by a DRM -- can people seriously say there is a market power problem? There was a wonderful article just this week in the New York Times magazine about a recording artist (I need to find her records) who is neglected by the mainstream record companies and wants to self distribute. If DRM empowers her to sell her recordings without a CD distribution company, it's hard to find market power and, in fact, it diminishes the power of the record company and facilitates a free market. In short, that seems to me incontrovertibly a good thing."
"There is a dangerous proposal in Congress to allow people to crack DRMs to exercise 'fair use' rights. This is like demanding that every bank publish the safe combination -- after all, they argue -- the banks are protected because they can sue those who abuse the privilege. The purpose of safes is to avoid the need for elaborate detection and lawsuits. The same for DRM."
While there certainly are some points in this reader's arguments that I disagree with, his basic thesis certainly has more than enough merit to deserve serious discussion. What do you think? Is DRM intrinsically a bad idea, or can it actually provide some value to the marketplace? Join the debate by posting your comments on my website or writing me at Foster@gripe2ed.com.
Read and post comments about this story here.
12:47:39 AM 
|
