Slashdot Log In
Yahoo Music Chief Comes Out Against DRM
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:00 AM
from the getting-on-the-bandwagon dept.
from the getting-on-the-bandwagon dept.
waired writes "It seem that a trend has begun in the music industry after Steve Jobs essay. Now a senior Yahoo chief has spoken out in favor of Apple CEO Steve Jobs' call for major labels to abandon digital rights technology (DRM). It points out that consumers are getting confused and that the Microsoft DRM "doesn't work half the time"."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Yahoo Music Chief Comes Out Against DRM
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 304 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Monkey see, Monkey Do (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Monkey see, Monkey Do (Score:5, Funny)
(http://roberthallam.com/)
Next up: Steve Ballmer says he's going to "fucking kill" DRM.
As predicted (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Thursday February 21 2002, @04:37PM)
These people are not dumb, and slashdotter's aren't the only ones that understand the folly of DRM.
Re:As predicted (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Re:As predicted (Score:4, Informative)
(http://www.kirun.co.uk/ | Last Journal: Saturday November 29 2003, @11:55AM)
Why didn't everyday people speak out? (Score:4, Insightful)
The very idea of "managed rights" flies in the face of the Constitution, the ideals of the Founding Fathers, and what it truly means to be American. It's difficult to say for sure why most people didn't take a far more active stance against DRM. The first reason is no doubt because it'd take effort to do effectively, and most Americans would rather watch the NFL or American Idol instead. The second reason is perhaps because they just don't give a fuck, and that's quite dangerous a stance to be taking.
Regardless, the American people as a whole should have stood up and said NO! to any sort of "rights management" system. DRM is just plain un-American.
How the heck is parent insightful? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think those things mean what you think they mean. "Digital rights management" != inaliable rights as laid down by the U.S. Constitution and liberal political theory. Lets be clear here, the two have absolutely NOTHING to do with each other. Digital rights management is essentially a technology mechanism to enforce (or hinder the breaking of) contract law. The only thing it flies in the face of is consumer convenience. DRM certainly annoys me as a consumer, but I think things like no-knock warrants, the drug war, idefinite detention without trial, and asset forfeiture laws fly in the face of the Constitution, the ideals of the Founding Fathers just a tad more.
Re:How the heck is parent insightful? (Score:5, Informative)
I agree with much of your post, but this is incorrect. "Fair use" is a well-established legal principle, not just a Slashdot mantra. While not its primary goal, DRM does its best to contradict our established rights by preventing even fair use of legally purchased material.
Re:Why didn't everyday people speak out? (Score:4, Insightful)
What really upsets me is DRMed hardware. DRMed media is bad enough, but I can choose not to purchase it. At the rate things are going, soon we'll only be able to purchase locked-down hardware that's both more expensive due to DRM and less flexible. A bought and paid for tangible device that restricts what I can do according to arbitrary rules devised by companies that treat their customers like thieves is unacceptable to me.
This American does speak out. (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://digitalcitizen.info/)
Americans use a lot of non-free operating systems and software (which digital restrictions require), but if you take the time to teach them to value their freedom they'll listen and learn. On my radio program, I found it interesting to take a wide angle—people found it interesting to discuss how copyright and patent issues intersect with their everyday lives.
It's critical to not give up the freedom talk and not give into the people who would have you compromise your values in order to placate proprietors. There is a deep thirst for substantive talk and action about issues that matter.
jobs against drm? (Score:2, Insightful)
(http://www.forensic-data-svc.com/)
Re:jobs against drm? (Score:5, Insightful)
Unture assertions and faulty comparisons. (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.myspace.com/mypetmachinemusic)
This is just not true--at least not anymore. The price of any Apple Computer is completely in line with an equivalently equipped Dell, Gateway, etc. Sometimes, the price of the "PC" is even higher. True, Apple does not have a computer that competes with a $300-something dollar Dell price-wise; however, Dell's computers that do compete with Apple's computers feature wise are often more expensive than the Mac offering. Sometime ago, Apple sold hardware that could reasonably be called overpriced. Now it's just a troll to say so.
The rest of your argument is fallacious as well. Apple does not force consumers to buy a new Mac to run a new version of OS X. The most recent version of OS X runs just fine on Macs that are 5+ years old. Conversely, the RIAA want you to re-buy all of your music every 5-10 years when it becomes available in a different format. What Apple does is not even comparable.
Re:jobs against drm? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:jobs against drm? (Score:4, Informative)
(Last Journal: Sunday August 21 2005, @02:38AM)
It would be similar to the Zune where you can squirt some songs, but not others. Confusing.
Re:jobs against drm? (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://theravensnest.org/ | Last Journal: Sunday October 07, @07:05AM)
I don't really see this. Put a big 'UNENCUMBERED' notice next to all the DRM-free songs. Start giving priority to DRM-free music on the front page of the store. Only recommend DRM-free music. Pretty soon, all of the other labels are going to want to re-negotiate their contracts to allow DRM-free distribution.
Re:jobs against drm? (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Tuesday April 20 2004, @05:02PM)
Microsoft DRM "doesn't work half the time"... (Score:5, Funny)
I'm reminded of that song... (Score:2, Insightful)
If Slashdot used DRM... (Score:5, Funny)
Hey! I just upgraded to Slashdot Vasta "Bedroom Premium" edition and your post came out:
(The second one was a false positive for "Let it be")
Good news but... (Score:1, Interesting)
If it weren't for this I'd believe these companies coming forward now were coming forward of their own free will and not because they're getting scared at the fact that governments and lawmakers, particularly in the EU are turning against DRM.
Re:Good news but... (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://lunarworks.ca/)
If they had stood firm against DRM in the first place, these online stores would have never happened.
Now that they've demonstrated that these stores work, and the public is transitioning to them, they can start making demands.
You have to get your foot in the door.
Re:Good news but... (Score:5, Insightful)
I can explain this to you. Your problem is that you are a rational human being. You must understand first of all that the music industry is irrational. Imagine the following conversation, which illustrates the problem:
Tech company: We'd love to sell your music in non-DRMed format.
Music company: We're not interested in selling it without DRM.
Tech company: We're not going to sell it with DRM!
Music company: Fine. Don't sell it. Get nothing. We can live without online sales. If you want a piece of the pie, you have to sell it with DRM. No negotiations. No exceptions. That's how it will be done. Take it or leave it.
Yes, the music industry really is that dumb. They would rather not sell it at all then sell it without DRM. Remember, their goal is to rip you off. They have proven time and time again that they would rather sell one CD for $18 than 3 for $10 each. This is irrational behavior, but they have been very consistent in it. If they can't sell you something at their price and on their terms, then they don't want your money. They really don't. It truly is "their way or the highway". So when you realize that the only deal that could be made was to sell music with DRM or not sell it all, is it any wonder that Yahoo and Apple and everyone else agreed to DRM? There weren't going to be any sales without it. Besides, they were able to make the major labels take the heat for DRM, which is totally fair, so it wasn't a difficult business decision to sell DRM music since they could make money off it and they wouldn't have to answer to pissed off customers who don't like DRM since it wasn't their fault the music had DRM. It really is that simple. Make money off selling DRMed music or make nothing.
Remember too that I am talking about the major music industry companies and smaller labels or individual artists have a more rational outlook. How rational is it to decide "We'd rather sell one at $18 than 3 for $10 each", but that is exactly how they operate.
Why didn't he just come out and say Apple? (Score:2, Insightful)
And the RIAA won't listen to him EITHER. (Score:5, Interesting)
1) legislation/lawsuit (unlikely as they own the legislatures and have armies of lawyers)
2) have a massive clientele defection (unlikely because they're a monopoly like the telcos) or
3) have their talent pool stop making revenue (crappy quality music, and so on-- also highly unlikely).
Bottom line: he's sucking up to his clientele (us, supposedly) and Wall Street, especially Wall Street who wants to pound the crap out of them for other foollish moves. They should have demanded that Mark Cuban stay with them for a few years after they bought his Broadcast.Com.
It's all PR. Nothing to see here.
Re:And the RIAA won't listen to him EITHER. (Score:5, Informative)
Don't rule this one out.. Some talent is going inde. Some consumers are moving outside the Clear Chanel CD advertising route. Talent now gets exposure on youtube, Google Videos, etc. They put their products on CD Baby and emusic. You get higher quality (192Kbs VBR compared to 128Kbs fixed) with no DRM and lower prices. This trend is growing. Given time it will gain critical mass. It is legal and the RIAA and their team of lawyers are powerless to sotp it. They will have to adopt or die.
Arvil Lavine and Bare Naked Ladies have already moved. I think some of the newest TSO releases are now on inde labels. The RIAA can only screw the talent and consumers so much before they both seek an alternative.
How politic of him (Score:3, Insightful)
A lot of this is just saying, "it's them, not us". Fine for geek politics, but it probably is not going to make a pig's fart of difference to the RIAA/MPAA cabal.
I want DRM to go away to, but it isn't going to happen through these feel-good speeches. It's going to happen through things like the recent EMI announcement (which frankly only applies to a chunk of their catalog that isn't selling anyway).
Re:How politic of him (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.familyreserve.com/)
The day after Jobs' Blog Post, the Wall Street Journal had two front page stories above the crease about it. That introduced this issue to probably a hundred thousand people who weren't previously aware of it, and they're overwhelmingly the important, moneyed, influential movers and shakers who it's most important to make aware of it. I was visiting my mother the next weekend, and that WSJ was lying around, and she asked me what it was all about. It was the first she'd heard of any of it. She only had a rudimentary idea of what a Media Player is. I'd tried to tell her about DRM before, but she never listened. Now she knows.
Jobs' Blog Post may be the event that precipitates an interest in this issue that will eventually lead to change. The backroom deals are the conclusion of the change process, not the origin. You're right that won't happen in "the tech press," but for the first time I've seen, this story was just blown a mile outside the tech press.
I don't get this "killing our friends" meme (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Apparently nothing can satisfy you? Are you all just terminally apolitical? The enemy of the enemy is our friend. Back them the hell up.
Reminds me of an old saying (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://trillian.mit.edu/~jc/ | Last Journal: Saturday August 14 2004, @05:03PM)
So Microsoft's standard approach of writing software that confuses users and doesn't work very well is telling the public that this is what all DRM is like. We see this all the time, for example with viruses which are invariably reported as infecting "computers", not just "Microsoft computers". Similarly, the difficulty of learning to use the little beasts is a property of "computers", not of any particular brand.
It reminds me of the old saying: "Nobody is all bad. They can always serve as a bad example."
In this case, though, MS could well be doing us a service. By convincing the gullible public that "DRM is confusing and doesn't work very well", they are inadvertently helping in the fight against DRM everywhere. Even if someone will come up with DRM that works (for some value of "works"), it won't be used, because it won't run on Windows (and on non-MS systems, the crypto geeks will break it within hours of release). Most users will just accept that MS's DRM is what DRM is like, and will oppose its use anywhere as a result.
Of course, one could argue that a correct implementation of DRM is probably intractable. This is mostly because determining which "fair use" rules apply wherever the use might live is a seriously difficult AI problem. It can't actually be determined by a human-level intelligence, as demonstrated by the need to ask the courts rather than just reading the law books. So we need an AI that's much more intelligent than any team of human lawyers, and has deep understanding of all the "IP" laws of every jurisdiction in the world. Of multiple jurisdictions, actually, when Net transactions are considered. We won't likely see this level of AI in our lifetimes.
Discuss amongst yourselves
The obvious (Score:4, Insightful)
In a well duh moment, they figured out the installed base of equipment that can play MP3's is just about everyting. A MS or Apple format locks out all other format players. People don't buy incompatible formats. DRM in any format is incompatible with the majority of media players out there. Before you jump on the iTunes bandwagon... Do you have a DVD player? Do you use Linux? Do you have a MP3 player? Do you have a CD player that can play MP3 CD's in your car or as a portable CD player? iPods are everywhere, but not nearly as everywhere as MP3 players.
Selling MP3's is a much bigger market than selling something that will play on a Windows PC and Plays for Sure devices or just iTunes on Apple and PC platforms and iPods, or worse yet Zunes.
Re:The obvious (Score:4, Funny)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Music Industry ? (Score:1)
(http://slashdot.org/~nurb432/ | Last Journal: Friday August 27 2004, @03:24PM)
They sign any good bands lately?
Film at 11 (Score:2, Funny)
In other new, the Earth is round and the Sun is really far away.
Master Chief Goes Against DRM (Score:1)
Okay, time to lay off the Halo books for a while (and maybe of the caffeine).
DRM free week (Score:1)
So let Jobs and Goldberg put their money where their mouths are - lets have a week (or longer?) where they will only sell non-DRMed. Any record company not willing to go without DRM won't have any sales for that period. I for one would be interested to see what the sales numbers would be.
Personally, I would be willing to pay for non-DRMed tracks (and I do from http://bleep.com/ [bleep.com])
Microsoft DRM (Score:3, Funny)
(http://www.codepunk.com/)
What does it take to please... (Score:5, Insightful)
Over the last five years, not a week has gone by that there hasn't been an anti-DRM screed posted to this forum. Yet, when finally some industry leaders come out publicly against DRM, the mostly highly modded posts are those claiming it's nothing but a cynical ploy.
You know, I'm just as cynical as the next guy when it comes to proclamations from the CEOs of giant multinational corporations. But, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Sometimes a statement isn't some carefully crafted strategic move based on hidden motives. DRM is a big pain in the butt to online music distributers and equipment manufacturers. The leaders of these industries are now making public statements on this matter. That's a good thing. If you are reading more into it than that, you've got too much time on your hands.
-Yahoo Exec No longer Works at Yahoo- (Score:1)
(http://www.sc2blog.com/)
He no longer works at Yahoo. Besides , David Goldberg (The exec) has been very vocal on this issue for over a year , so this actually might be the reason why he and his buddy "look forward to going back to our entrepreneurial roots" as was stated in Yahoo's press release .
Oh then I guess I won't feel too bad... (Score:2)
From the "Do As I Say, Not As I Do" files... (Score:1)
I'm already having enough political smoke blown up my ass by the 2008 presidential contenders, Gavin Newsom, Bush/Cheney, and Scooter Libby. I don't have any room left for corporate smoke...
Gee there's a novelty (Score:2)
Wow. So its just like every other technology from Microsoft then. Acutally I think it actually working half the time is somewhat optimistic.
Oh fucking nosies (Score:1)
(Last Journal: Friday February 17 2006, @06:59AM)
No - wait.
just look at MSN Music (Score:1)
(http://brauns.dyndns.org/)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but... (Score:1)
(Last Journal: Saturday September 24 2005, @03:25PM)
DRM only makes their programming more complex and costly for music distribution and playback applications which they essentially give away for free. They only play ball with the studios because their rights to distribute the content are threatened if they don't use DRM.
Cheers
I like DRM (Score:1)
(http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Friday October 18 2002, @10:07AM)