Macrovision has made a response to Steve Job’s thoughts on DRM. You have to admit that Mr. Jobs has certainly stirred a mighty big pot with his comments, but I’m hopeful something positive will come out of it all.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Macrovision on DRM & Jobs
- Thread starter Rich Tate
- Start date
xX_Jack_Carver_Xx
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Messages
- 2,542
The industry needs to learn that they sell a SERVICE not a PRODUCT.
DRM will never work, it will always be cracked, this is simply a fact of modern life.
The only means to accomplish what they want is to sell a song(album) or movie with 256bit encryption, with a key tied to the purchaser's identity, with the purchaser having signed a contract not to disclose the key to anyone and hefty $$ penalties for doing so.
Even so, if the key/copy gets loose, there is nothing they can do but collect damage$ from the original purchaser.
If THAT is something they want to do as a business, then do it, otherwise FOAD as yoou are in the SERVICE business, get used to it.
DRM will never work, it will always be cracked, this is simply a fact of modern life.
The only means to accomplish what they want is to sell a song(album) or movie with 256bit encryption, with a key tied to the purchaser's identity, with the purchaser having signed a contract not to disclose the key to anyone and hefty $$ penalties for doing so.
Even so, if the key/copy gets loose, there is nothing they can do but collect damage$ from the original purchaser.
If THAT is something they want to do as a business, then do it, otherwise FOAD as yoou are in the SERVICE business, get used to it.
i expected nothing less than this from a company who has a very big stake in DRM.
I buy ALL my music, and hope people buy my bands music, i think it more likely that my music is purchased when the music does NOT suck. but to Fred and the RIAA want to dominate the discussion... because i personally choose a file format that does not use DRM the assumption is that i have acted illegally? so are we moving back to manifest destiny as viable argument as well?
so is Fred saying that any/all "unprotected" content was obtained illegally? it really pisses me of that anyone who uses or wants fair use is a pirate. while he does not explicitly state, it is implied, and thus begins the mantra chanting by the lobbyist to all of congress to hear.
I buy ALL my music, and hope people buy my bands music, i think it more likely that my music is purchased when the music does NOT suck. but to Fred and the RIAA want to dominate the discussion... because i personally choose a file format that does not use DRM the assumption is that i have acted illegally? so are we moving back to manifest destiny as viable argument as well?
freeloader1969
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2003
- Messages
- 2,238
The biggest laugh for me is how he says that no DRM will cost consumers more money. I'd really love to sit down with this guy and have chat.
stonedwaldo420
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2005
- Messages
- 505
While the letter is filled with a lot of disturbing statements, there is one that I would like to point out.
Mr. Amoroso says that they would like to charge people different prices depending on how free they want the product to be. If you want to be able to watch it on the TV upstairs, thats gonna cost you extra . And boy are you going to pay if you want to bring it over to a friends house!
The justification?
It will save consumers money!!
I highly doubt that. The product limited to the device it was purchased on will probably cost about as much as it does today.. maybe a SMALL drop. Everything else will cost you much more.
Finally, there is simply no way that DRM media could be as convenient as DRM free. The simple definition of DRM means that some actions will be prevented.
Thats the kinda BS I expected from him though.
Mr. Amoroso says that they would like to charge people different prices depending on how free they want the product to be. If you want to be able to watch it on the TV upstairs, thats gonna cost you extra . And boy are you going to pay if you want to bring it over to a friends house!
The justification?
It will save consumers money!!
I highly doubt that. The product limited to the device it was purchased on will probably cost about as much as it does today.. maybe a SMALL drop. Everything else will cost you much more.
Finally, there is simply no way that DRM media could be as convenient as DRM free. The simple definition of DRM means that some actions will be prevented.
Thats the kinda BS I expected from him though.
He needs to add a disclaimer that macrovision's only products are content protection and that if the industry stopped using drm, his company would go out of bis. So people can see what a hypocrit he is, since it has been proven numerous times, if you offer someone something free they will pay more for what ever extra crap you are sellling to the get what ever is free.
Baen free lib, has proven that if you offer free books sales of the paper versions go up, the sites that offer free songs to get people interested in the bands sell more music. Those are just off the top of my head.
Baen free lib, has proven that if you offer free books sales of the paper versions go up, the sites that offer free songs to get people interested in the bands sell more music. Those are just off the top of my head.
Sounds like something that a sony exec/rep would be saying (sorry had to say it!). Seriously though, he's trying to confuse the issue by saying DRM is better than non DRM. I wonder if he's tried any of his company's products/DRM products in general. 
Caffeinated
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2002
- Messages
- 1,451
Of course he's going to say DRM is great.
The truth is, DRM is of absolutely no benefit whatsoever to the consumer, no matter how you look at it. The only ones making money off of it are companies like Macrovision and the corporations that try to shove it down our throats to protect theoretical "sales" and to make more money.
The truth is, DRM is of absolutely no benefit whatsoever to the consumer, no matter how you look at it. The only ones making money off of it are companies like Macrovision and the corporations that try to shove it down our throats to protect theoretical "sales" and to make more money.
Manny Calavera
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2004
- Messages
- 3,986
"such as by enabling people to rent content at a lower price than ownership"
Consumers never get the opportunity to "own" media, consumers get no ownership rights at all, we cant resell, get a refund etc like you can with a TV,or vcr,or dvd player you buy.
Consumers get usage rights as granted by the copyright holder, DRM makes it easier to restrict these usage rights which takes us further away from what they would call "ownership".
He is trying to sell lies and snake oil...
He wants to handle Fair Play ?? Yeah I bet,he wants the big fat pie that is Itunes,or at least a large slice....
Black is white,war is peace,sure,whatever you say Freddy boy.
Consumers never get the opportunity to "own" media, consumers get no ownership rights at all, we cant resell, get a refund etc like you can with a TV,or vcr,or dvd player you buy.
Consumers get usage rights as granted by the copyright holder, DRM makes it easier to restrict these usage rights which takes us further away from what they would call "ownership".
He is trying to sell lies and snake oil...
He wants to handle Fair Play ?? Yeah I bet,he wants the big fat pie that is Itunes,or at least a large slice....
Black is white,war is peace,sure,whatever you say Freddy boy.
good to read, and know that on this issue i am not alone. i was asked about this at a family event a while back, and tried to explain...it was deer caught in the headlights syndrome.
short and to the point, DRM is not about piracy prevention, it is all about generating revenue streams where none existed before. its about changing fair use rights to ensure more money for content owners. the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is a huge problem, and actual fair use is long gone.
short and to the point, DRM is not about piracy prevention, it is all about generating revenue streams where none existed before. its about changing fair use rights to ensure more money for content owners. the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is a huge problem, and actual fair use is long gone.