DRM is a Big Lie
After reading the latest news about Sony/BMG’s latest DRM debacle with MediaMax 5, I’m left wondering whether anyone at Sony/BMG has an IQ above 50. I don’t say that lightly… I believe it is a valid question. But before I go any deeper into the question of executive intelligence, lets present a few facts, some of which the whole world seems to be missing.
Fact 1: DRM isn’t designed to stop pirates
Most people define a pirate as someone who steals the music and makes copies of it for public consumption. If you are that determined to steal the music, there is a low cost way to do so… it is called a patch cord. That’s right, just buy a $5 cable that plugs into the line out of one sound card, then attach it to the line in of another sound card. Voila… a near-perfect copy, no matter what your DRM software tries to do. If you are a sophisticated, high volume pirate, you might even spend a few $k to provide a copy that is an improvement over the original. For those of you with a single computer… don’t fret. Many sound cards will allow you to patch the line-in and line-out jacks and use them at the same time.
Fact 2: DRM isn’t designed to help “starving artists” as the music industry states
The only artists who ever make any money at all from record sales are the ones who are already mega-rich. Those who are still trying to ‘make it’ seem more likely to get a statement telling them how much they owe the record company. Don’t believe it? Check out www.janisian.com.
Fact 3: DRM companies already know that their software is ineffective
A few years ago, I was involved in some Internet radio work. Part of my job involved adding tags to music that would be used to trigger events. While asking a not-to-be-mentioned DRM company about some of their watermarking techniques, I threw in a question about how they protect their music from the simple patch cord copy. After several non-answers that were essentially just restatements of their sales brochure, one of their execs told me that their software was meant to keep honest people honest. A few years later, when a company named Sunncomm actually tried to sue the guy who told everyone to disable the autorun feature by holding the shift key, their knowledge of how bad their software was became obvious.
Fact 4: DRM software providers have a TERRIBLE track record
In the past, DRM has been easily defeated by holding down the shift key, changing Windows settings, drawing on the CD with a fine-line marker, and by running Linux. This doesn’t even include the patch cord method. Meanwhile, DRM has been responsible for security holes and seriously irritating customers. It seems that the only competent part of the DRM community is the marketing staff.
So… if DRM software does nothing except raise the barrier to illegal copies by the cost of a patch cable, just exactly who is it stopping? Would it be those nasty pirates who can’t afford the $5 entry fee? Sounds like the real target is the law abiding citizen who wants to archive his collection, not the pirate.
Now back to the original question. Assuming that all of the above is true (not much of an assumption, you can prove the first two very easily… the last two should be fairly obvious), what entertainment executive in his/her right mind would choose DRM? It won’t stop pirates, and it will only irritate the average customer. About the only explanation I can think of is that someone fell for the DRM company’s hype.
Just to be clear… I don’t condone the theft of music. I don’t frequent P2P sites, I don’t download music, and I loathe the real “pirates". However, I do like to make additional copies of legally purchased Cd’s for my car and for work. I have several computers that I use for playback while I am working, and I resent any big company’s assertion that it is OK for them to create security holes in my system to install software that has no chance of actually accomplishing it’s goal. Shame on you music industry… you are biting the hand that feeds you.