[IP] Re: We didn't need all that DRM after all??

[David Farber <dave@farber.net>]

________________________________________
From: Peter Wayner [pcw@flyzone.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 3:36 PM
To: David Farber; bob37-2@bobf.frankston.com
Subject: Re: [IP] We didn't need all that DRM after all??

I'm not sure I follow this. How are Hulu or YouTube not DRMed? There's very little practical difference between a proprietary format and some encryption that calls itself DRM.

 I don't remember seeing a "download DIVX file" button on their site. It is possible to save copies of the video with special software from questionable sources, but I don't see either Hulu or YouTube heading toward embracing wide open file sharing or P2P.

Plus, I wouldn't celebrate this as a market success yet. Google is reportedly losing a bundle on YouTube. Plus, it loses more as traffic goes up:

http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/7/google-we-can-t-figure-out-how-to-make-money-on-web-video-either

Even Google can't continue to subsidize this forever.

-Peter

On Jul 29, 2008, at 10:53 AM, David Farber wrote:

Let’s pause – putting aside all this argument over traffic management there is a far bigger implication – a marketplace solution in place of DRM. You don’t have to treat your users as criminals through DRM schemes with a huge amount of collateral damage – you can offer them a better product by some measure. Being able to go to a trusted site with a simple interface actually works. Sure, you have to be competitive and price is a factor but far better to compete than use DRM to cripple key technologies.

Without DRM think of how much more value we can find in current content. You can use your PC in lieu of the set top box and redistributed it to your viewing surface. You needn’t be limited to 1995 HDTV while also having the option of viewing on small screens or simply innovating.

While there is fear that there won’t be enough critical mass but the long tail phenomenon doesn’t mean people won’t choose to cluster around whatever happens to be popular – that’s a social effect and not necessarily a result of marketplace constrictions.

DRM is the face of fear and locks us firmly in the past and leaves us unable to create new value – a very stupid policy these days. Perhaps I’m being overoptimistic but fighting the future mustn’t be our primarily policy.

And the same goes for cable franchising rules that force us to spend billions on silos that cause so much collateral damage.



-------------------------------------------