U.K. Group Wants DRM'd Media Labeled 244
peterfa writes "The BBC reports that the U.K. 'All Party Parliamentary Internet Group' wants companies to label their DRMed products. Consumers will see a label on the product before they buy. The label will spell out clearly just how easy it is to copy media, and what they can and cannot do. This is in response to Sony BMG and their virus-like DRM. The group claims the industry is turning media into a rent system, rather than a purchase system."
go even further (Score:5, Interesting)
I wonder what their response will be to the request to label their products and how their DRMed, and make it "crystal clear" (nice irony) to the consumers. I propose they go even further.
I've encountered a couple of CDs which had some message to the effect, "while every attempt has been made to ensure an enjoyable experience, blah, blah, blah, ... we cannot guarantee this disc
will play on every and all of your devices." And, all of those
(btw, the print is so small, it's unreadable) actually did play
on my computer, and not in my car, and I had to go through a few
hoops to return what the store claimed was "non-returnable".
Since they are knowingly creating a corrupt version of what is or should be a standard format (compact disc), it should be their responsibility to allow the consumer to know positively for sure what devices and manufacturers their product will be guaranteed to play on. This, in addition to the clear and explicit list of how the tracks may be copied, .... all of the other suggestions in the
article.
From the article: "The group claims the industry is turning media into a rent system, rather than a purchase system." If that's the case, and it does appear that's the industry's direction, they're changing the rules as they previously existed, even more reason they should list the constraints and restrictions of their product. By visual inspection alone, it is impossible to look at a CD and know whether it is of the "corrupt" ilk.
Does it seem ironic there are laws requiring "explicit lyrics" warnings on CDs, and not information that explains whether or not you can even play the damn things?
(would have posted this a moment sooner, took me a second to find the "Read More..." link. ;-) )
Labelling suggestions... (Score:3, Interesting)
2. "Statutory warning: DRM is injurious to your sense of fair-play".
etc... and meanwhile:
Why not label devices and products that support DRM? That would be a more effective step to 'inform' consunmers, one would've thought...
-
Re:go even further (Score:5, Interesting)
label (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd suggest a color coded advisory system.
Three-Pronged Evaluation (Score:5, Interesting)
I thought about this idea some time ago, and came up with a system where the media's friendliness was measured according to three aspects:
The media should contain no measures to prevent or deter duplication, nor should it require measures on the part of the playback platform to support such deterrents.
The media should contain no measures to prevent or deter redistribution, nor should it require measures on the part of the playback platform to support such deterrents.
Usage of the media should not be monitored, metered, or compromise the user's privacy or usage habits in any other way, nor should it require measures on the part of the playback platform to support such monitoring.
Each aspect would represent one leg of an iconic triangle. The triangle logo (and sub-permutations thereof) would be trademarked so it could only lawfully be used by the authority performing the evaluations. So all you'd have to do to know which media were safe would be to look for a complete triangle.
Schwab
AllofMp3.com (Score:3, Interesting)
Now I just obtain unrestricted mp3's wherever I can eg AllofMp3.com. They say the return royalties to the artist, and that's good enough for me. I'm sure the RIAA etc.. are more than willing to sue if they think they have a case
I'll buy from the labels when they make media that's usefull to me.
Knowledge is power (Score:5, Interesting)
- Peter Lee, Disney executive [economist.com]
At least someone is thinking about the consumer... (Score:2, Interesting)
It's better that the consumer be forewarned about what they can and can't do with the movie/music that they bought, than to buy it first, and then frustratingly run into it later.
But are there going to be different versions of the same CD?
1. Paul Oakenfold, with DRM copy protection
2. Paul Oakenfold, without DRM copy protection
Are they going to be the same price? If so, then what incentive would a consumer have to buy the DRM version?
Maybe what will happen is that ONLY the DRM version is sold. But then what do you do if (as the article mentions) you need to copy it to review it (which is allowed in the UK)? Buy the same CD twice? "Yeah right. I can't do my job because I can't make a copy of the CD. What do I do? Thank god for the PirateBay!"
But at least somone is thinking of the consumer so that he's not smacked in the face by DRM.
Re:go even further (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:go even further (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, right from the beginning, Philips has made a stand that these copy protected CD's are never sold with the 'CD-Compact Disc [wikimedia.org]' label on it, since they do not comply with the Red Book standard Sony and Philips published back in 1982.
So if you're shopping for a CD and the logo is not on it, it's a good signal to read a the small print. In my experience, you'll often find copyright notices for the copyprotection on there somewhere.
However, it seems to me that right from the beginning this stuff has gone the wrong way. Hackers and pirates are way more inventive that 'regular' consumers, so any copy protection will be cracked (after all, if it was IMPOSSIBLE to get the audio off there, it would never sell), while Joe Average will never get it to play on his car stereo.
I rip all my CD's to my harddisk, since I like variation, and a big harddrive with WinAmp [winamp.com] is a much better CD-changer than a real CD-changer ever will be. I have over time bought several DRM'ed CD's, and none of them have EVER given me much trouble ripping them. Most work was one that required the 'black marker on the outer ring' [interesting-people.org] trick.
My two cents...
Or tapes (Score:4, Interesting)
Another even closer example is cassette tapes, many people had huge collections when the switch to CD's was made...
I'm not sure either how consumers will respond to the natural evolution of digital music. With ITMS stuff they would still be able to play it on a computer even if a newer kind of non-iPod came along that people really wanted, so in a way it's not as lost as tapes were after players were really phased out.
The question I have though is what would really come along that would be compelling enough to supplant the iPod for the market at large? The iPod grew because you could rip CD's and easily get them on your iPod where they are more accessible... and now the library grows through ITMS purchases (for many people, not all). So that would indicate that in the future the iPod lockin effect Apple seeks would indeed grab hold as many people's whole music libraries are digital now and they'd be more likley to buy a player that would work with it, probably a lot more likley. Between tapes and CD's you had the change to random access, but what is compelling about a change from one digital format to another? With video you can go with quality but with audio a lot of people really can't tell if an MP3 is better or worse than FLAC and so efforts for improved digital audio formats are stillborn, like SACD.
Once in digital form I don't see any given player offering so much of an advantage that it overcomes the simple ability to use all the music you already have. The only way for anyone to break Apple's hold on the market is to start selling all music in MP3's, then that allows people to choose whatever player they like and possibly have even more players, some of them more specialized. But the music industry itself is steadfast in actions that ensure Apple will remain at the helm - and they've just given Apple a few more years by contract to work on pulling the noose tighter.
Perhaps if eMusic really takes off we'd see more record companies finally wake up and sell MP3's (like Werkshop). If enough major labels did that it would free up the logjamm, and then Apple could release an official version of JHymn to unlock all the ITMS music so it would just be straight-up AAC.
Re:go even further (Score:1, Interesting)
And sell it under a misleading, standard name... (Score:4, Interesting)
Unfortuately that's not disproportionate by their own standards: There are countries where (for several years already) one could not go (or take one's kids!) to the movies without being exposed to media companies' threats of detention and rape [heise.de].
Re:Knowledge is power (Score:3, Interesting)
At least with ogg or even mp3 you have a chance of preserving your record collection. Still the best way to get around DRM is to record off free-to-air music channels and then rip this to ogg or mp3. This does take time but you can get a good selection and it is free although the Music Industry would love to stop this as well.
Now we know that as soon as the music goes to your ears then it is fair game for copying until the Music industry comes up with something that can stop this. It would be interesting or should I say horrifying to see what the "spin" from the Music Industry would be to do this and it would be sad indictment on our species if they did not rise up against any proposal to limit the listening of music to those who have paid for it. I am not condoning piracy but no one is going to stop me listening to music on a radio or TV and taping it if I choose to do so.
Re:go even further (Score:3, Interesting)
On the other hand, no goods are exempted from the Sale of Goods Act requirement that goods are "fit for purpose". This means that if they're selling something that the legal "reasonable man" would expect to be a CD, they have to make it clear to you at time of sale (before you hand over your money) that this is not a CD, and you can't expect it to play in all CD players. If it doesn't play (and therefore is faulty), it's up to them to demonstrate that it's your equipment at fault, not the "CD".
Re:At least someone is thinking about the consumer (Score:5, Interesting)
Major Artist - New Album
Doesn't actually work in the office CD player due to "rights management". So we've no idea. The boxart is nice, though.
0/5
and so on.
Re:Nice idea (Score:2, Interesting)
Which is why I stopped buying from iTunes once JHymn stopped working (although apparently you can install iTunes 5, open a new account, never upgrade the software, and JHymn will still work).
Hmmm...maybe I should just try that.
Re:go even further (Score:2, Interesting)
Believe it or not I've done this when I wanted to return a copy of Windows XP. It wouldn't load on my system (some sort of motherboard problem).
Anyone else had such luck?
Re:Nice idea (Score:2, Interesting)
Just my 2p, but I found that when you actually explain what DRM is and how it restricts bought music content to a new user, it puts them right off it from the start. Recently my sister was looking for somewhere to purchase some songs, but hadn't yet bought an mp3 player. I told her that if she used iTunes or any other equivilant service she could find that the mp3 player on eBay for £30 that she wanted would not play it. She forgot about it in the end and got the track off a friend.
Way to go DRM, you missed a sale.
Re:Definitely, DRM products should be labeled. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:go even further (Score:3, Interesting)
I propose the same system for DRM's media. Not less than one third of the front of the box should carry a warning saying one of these things:
Re:Nice idea (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Three-Pronged Evaluation (Score:3, Interesting)
You have to see it from their POV too. Campaigning for total freedom to distribute music as you see fit will get you nowhere. Campaigning for restrictions on fair use is totally fine, but under no condition is sharing your CD with 6000 people accross the world 'fair use'. Lumping all these claims together devalues the real genuine grievances that people who cant play their CDs or make back up copies have.
This needs to be serious (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:go even further (Score:4, Interesting)
I think that the DRM sticker would be more welcomed on the face of the CDs than the Explicit Lyrics one, since DRM, as proven by Sony, can be much more damaging to the consumer than swearing in songs.
In many cases, it is actually in the record label's interest to post the "Tipper Tag" (Explicit lyrics label) because it will, quite frequently, boost sales.
The DRM warning, on the other hand, will most likely cut sales, ergo it is not in the label's interest.
Hoist 'em by their own petard (Score:1, Interesting)