Chris Saribay

His Irrelevant Ramblings at chrissaribay.com

nada

Protect your rights? Puh-leaze.

Saturday, June 10, 2006

image

This is probably one of the most stupid things I’ve seen in a recently. A little group called “Defective by Design” has put together some sort protest effort to contest Apple’s DRM hold on iTunes and iPod. Their plan is to loiter outside Apple Stores and hand out literature, telling consumers how man has been blind-sighted by big business, how your rights are being diminished (oh lord, you can only burn a playlist seven times before having to change it up) and at the keystone of this effort: tell consumers how they’re locked into Apple’s distribution methods exclusively (notably iTunes).

Excuse me? The only thing defective by design is this campaign, and other ones like it. While it is very true that Apple exercises DRM to keep media files from being widely distributed, it’s a measure that is far from being prohibitive. Further more, if you don’t like DRM, no one said you had to purchase an iPod (there’s tons of other players on the market), or purchase songs from iTunes (again, tons of ways to get music legally). Apple doesn’t necessarily lock you to their distribution channels- you can easily head down to a record store and pick up a bunch of CDs like you always did, DRM free. Essentially however, there’s a problem with this. It’s greatly inferior and inconvenient for consumers. Other players just don’t connect with consumers, and record stores are on the demise because they can’t compete with the convenience provided by online music stores. That’s the facts.

They claim Apple’s intent is to restrict people. Let’s get this right: Apple’s intent is strictly to prevent unauthorized distribution of media. Why do you need to burn a CD of the same order seven times exactly?  You’re purchasing a single (personal use) license for the media you downloaded, not 25 licenses, nor the right to exclusive ownership with all rights. This “sinister deal” is the same deal that you’re presented with in a record store, only without the means to enforce the rules.

When you go to the movies, are you given rights to record the film you’re watching and distribute it all over the internet? Hrm, that looks like a no. I think I’m going to have to start me a protest!

Labels: Apple

You’re missing the point. It’s not about burning playlists multiple times. It’s about owning a copy of music for personal use vs leasing a copy of music for personal use.

When you “buy” music via iTunes you are not buying but rather, leasing. You have no ownership or control. You cannot convert your file to another format that allows you to choose another device manufacturer. You cannot sell the file to another person at a price negotiated on the open market.

You compare the iTunes sale to the sale of a physical CD, but that’s felicitous. I _own_ a CD. I can rip it to my format of choice(ogg, mp3, flac, aac, ATRAC, etc). If my format of choice changes (say I switch from an iPod to a Sony device.. thus needing ATRAC files instead of AAC) I can re-rip my collection and continue to use the investment I’ve made in music with my new device.

The issue isn’t burning mix cds. The issue is control.

Sure, at the moment the iPod is the player of choice but, if that changes and Creative, Sony, or Samsung make a device you would rather use, you’ll be stuck losing the up front lease fees you paid to play all that content you have on your iPod.

DefectiveByDesign may not be taking the most effective route to changing the face of DRM but, the core message they are trying to convey is valid and real.

Posted by Grant Robertson on 04/6 at 10:08 PM

I get DBD’s point, and I’ll go as far to as admit that it’s a somewhat valid concept. However, what I do protest, and perhaps what I did not voice loud enough was the fact that people do have a choice in choosing where to get music. Want convenience? iTunes is there, with its given restrictions.

What a “free” format? Buy a CD in a record store.

Consumers still have a choice. It is the burden of the consumer to be educated in the options they have, and make appropriate decisions from there.

The group uses consumer intimidation with regard to rallying against DRM restrictions, which I further find appalling. The group refers somewhat often the fact that Apple lowered the mix burn limit from 10 to seven maximum burns, and further speculates that there’s nothing stopping them from cutting that down to zero. That’s an inappropriate scare tactic- nothing more.

Finally, they’re simply just barking up the wrong tree. Apple’s DRM restrictions have very little to do with Apple themselves (save the iPod exclusivity), and more with the recording industry, the bigots who’ve pushed restrictions in the first place. I’m sure that Apple would have loved to sell MP3s free in the clear, but that’s not happening.

Posted by Chris on 04/6 at 10:08 PM

I totally agree with you. But what bugs me most is that they’re protesting Apple. iTunes may be the 800 pound gorilla when it comes to DRM, but they’re also arguably the lesser of many evils. They’re huge because people actually LIKE it.

Posted by Daniel Hollister on 04/6 at 10:09 PM

The DRM is not really Apple’s fault. These protestors should be at the doors of the record labels, not in front of Apple Stores.

Afterall, if Apple did give into these demads and removed DRM, the music industry would slap them with so many lawsuits that there would be no iTunes or iPod.

I believe an intelligent man once said, “Don’t shoot the messenger.” In this case, the messenger is the deliverer of music, Apple.

Posted by aarplane on 04/6 at 10:09 PM

I want to protect myself too!

Posted by Laptoper on 05/14 at 08:34 PM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below: