Re: [tlug] iPod considered harmful

["Josh Glover" <jmglov@example.com>]

On 02/08/06, Jim Tittsler <jwt-tlug@example.com> wrote:

> It seems a couple of places he argues that record companies can't
> copy their music onto iPods and have the songs play without licensing
> Apple's DRM.  But the iPod plays vanilla AAC and MP3 tracks that have
> no DRM restrictions just fine.  So what he is really arguing is that
> they don't get to control the DRM scheme... because DRM is not a
> requirement to play on the iPod... the record companies just believe
> it is prerequisite to sell music.

OK, let's take this another direction: DRM.

As a creative person, I like the idea of DRM. I should have some
controls over how my works are distributed, and if I decide to make
forking over some of your hard-earned a prerequisite for enjoying my
work, that is my right. What I hate is the current implementations of
DRM.

I was thinking the other day (a rare occurrence, that) about an open
standard for DRM. I understand that the current DRM players would
resist such a thing because of loss of revenue, but would there be a
chance of it actually working? If there were a standard DRM, the
record companies would not have to spend megabucks either developing
in-house DRM / root kits or licensing them from third parties.
Hardware media player manufacturers would be free to implement the DRM
on their players, and consumers should be able to buy any DRM'd track
from any online store or record company and have it play on any
device.

Are there any reasons other than the greed of the current DRM players
why such a think would not work? Am I overlooking any technical or
social problems?

-Josh