Mixing up issues and missing the point


Apple and DRM and proprietary players, oh my!

I started out writing a comment on Tara's HorsePigCow post about meeting with a Microsoft muckety-muck, but my rule is that once a comment exceeds three paragraphs, it's begging to be a post instead.

So here it is:

The issue of DRM and music players came up, and Tara reported the following conversation:

"We discussed DRM, Open Source vs. proprietary, the blogosphere and the online community in general. Thomas, being the super gadget guy, brought up the CableCard technology for Microsofts Media Mediacenter (which really led us towards the whole DRM discussion).

Yes, I put the challenge out to Jim that Microsoft, having the money and the power, should be fighting hollywood and the RIAA, but he's right...Microsoft isn't the only company backing down from that fight. Apple is definitely as guilty.

As Thomas said:
'It frustrates me to no end that more people are not upset with Apple's behavior. While I can certainly see where they have a right to make a profit, they have sold *so* many iPods at this point and made *so* much money, it does seem to me that opening up their format to other players would be the right thing to do.'

I guess someone has to get strategic about it. It will probably have to come from the community. I just hope that these companies stand behind the community when it does."

And here is the comment I'd like to make:

These are entirely two different issues...one about DRM and one about a business strategy of sticking to proprietary technology.

Re DRM: Apple has negotiated deals with the record industry that are the most liberal out there. The number of copies you can make and computers that can share your digital copies of major label and artist music via iTunes is more than other services. So, Apple did use its influence and leverage to negotiate better deals for its customers than other companies could get. Attacking Apple on this issue is missing the point: it's the RIAA and record labels who need to be influenced by the community.

Re: proprietary ipods: this isn't a DRM issue in any way shape or form, just a business strategy of choosing to remain proprietary over going standards-based. Short-term it seems to be working out fine for them. Over the long term, if ever the next iPod-killer is introduced that is really an iPod-killer, then they may find themselves in trouble. [As a side note: I worked for a company that had to make the transition from a high margin proprietary system to a standards-based system. In hindsight, we abandoned our proprietary system too quickly. Customers need a reason to change systems, and if we had continued to improve and innovate on ours, they would have had no reason, and perhaps we would have been in better shape for a longer period of time.]

Anyway, Apple is going to, whether we like it or not, make the decision based on whatever they believe will drive future profits better. This isn't some unique Apple decision, this is the responsibility of public companies. Again, our real target here should be the laws that essentially require public companies to have a very narrow definition of what is "good business." If the only reason to open up iTunes Music Store to other music players is because it would be nice for consumers and give them more choice, but has no business/profit rationale, then it ain't gonna happen.

My point here isn't that Apple should or shouldn't open it up or that they should or shouldn't agree to sell music that has DRM requirements...my point is to try to give to Caesar what is due Caesar.



Posted: Sun - January 29, 2006 at 09:34 AM       EmailFeedback

©