Good feedback on my post from and in .
The ’lope wrote:
Here’s the nut graf from TJ’s post:Just because Steve wouldn’t hold them in parallel, doesn’t mean the rest of us can’t.That’s fine, but the point the Macalope was trying to make is that you can do that aaaallll daaaaaay loooong and you aren’t going to gain an inch with the MPAA. The Macalope and Daring Fireball certainly weren’t arguing that there should be a difference between the two, just that one is currently under successful seige and the other is not. The Macalope’s advice? Wait for music DRM to fall. Then let’s talk again.
First of all I have to admit that I have no idea what a “nut graf” is. It sounds like some sort of painful reconstructive plastic surgery procedure. However, if one is looking for a summary line or two from my original epic, I would suggest this:
Steve Jobs was asked if he was going to advocate for removing DRM for video.
Steve Jobs responded by saying:
I knew I’d get that question today. Video is pretty different than music right now because the video industry does not distribute 90 percent of their content DRM free; never has, and so I think they are in a pretty different situation and so I wouldn’t hold the two in parallel at all.
To which I said:
This is the PR version of “These are not the droids you’re looking for”
I don’t really believe that I would convince the MPAA, because the MPAA is just as dense as the music industry. John Gruber’s nailed it when he said:
I think the other record labels are not going to get on board with this [selling DRM-free music] before they see the results. I really do think that the executives at the other labels really do believe in DRM. They really think “The reason our sales are down industry-wide is that these filthy pirates are stealing all of our music and if we could just sell everything with DRM so that no one could pirate it [then] our sales would go right back up and we could have all the cocaine and Lamborghinis we want [laughter]. The [19]80s are going to be back.” … The golden era of the record industry was when everybody went out and replaced the albums they had already bought with CDs. They spent $18-19 to buy all the music they already owned. That’s what they want everyone to do again. And that’s not going to happen. (from the about 20 minutes in. is the speaker.)
The MPAA is looking to capitalize on their golden era (VHS to DVD) by selling us the same content over and over and over. I described the various formats that are available (DVD, iPod, PSP, etc) and the fact that the MPAA would like to sell me the same movie for each of them. People are not going to accept that forever.
“Tom” wrote in with some good comments, including:
I agree with you, but to the MPAA consumers swallowed this shit for 20 years and crying about it now is just a bit late.
Two responses: 1) This situation has not existed for 20 years. There may have been copy protection on VHS tapes and DVDs for 20 years, but the need or desire for the average person to want to use a movie in a different way has not. We didn’t have iPods or Zunes or PSPs 20 years ago, so whether or not VHS tapes had copy protection on them didn’t really mean much. 20 years ago all we really wanted to be able to do was watch them on our 30-pound VCRs. 10 years ago all we wanted was to play them on our 15-pound DVD players. So, yes, we may have sat back while they put all this copy protection on there, but a) we had no reason to really care, and b) we had no recourse (i.e. the internet).
2) Just because people have put up with something (even for a long time) doesn’t mean they won’t revolt when given the chance. Tom seemed to imply that when he wrote:
Gruber may be right about the MPAA not having a “Napster moment”. The MPAA may even be fooled into thinking this is because their DRM is somehow “working”, but I thin the simple fact is the file sizes involved. As the pipe gets bigger the chances increase for more casual movie file swapping and then we’ll see. But realistically that’s likely still a few years out.
Which seems to imply that the only reason people haven’t revolted already is that the technology isn’t in place yet, not that they are willing to put up with it forever.
It should be obvious now why there are hardly any movies on iTunes. The MPAA hates Apple’s FairPlay DRM. Compare that to Unbox and it’s pretty obvious why. Apple will never consent to such terms, and they’re the terms the MPAA thinks they deserve. I’d like to think that as Unbox and others fail miserably the MPAA will give Apple a shot, but so far they’d rather no sell online than offer anything like fair use.
Very true. The whole thing reminds me of another quote that the MPAA and RIAA could learn from:
The more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through your fingers (Princess Leia to Grand Moff Tarkin, in Star Wars: Episode 4, A New Hope
As for the legality, Tom wrote:
You tend to gloss over the legal argument against DVD copying, but I do not. Not because there aren’t tons of software programs to let you do it, and many people actually doing it, but because that alone will hardly convince an entity to allow it legally. If it did, then smoking pot, speeding, etc., wouldn’t be crimes.
A few responses to this as well:
1) I remember when I was growing up in Massachusetts and the speed limit was 55 mph and people routinely went 70. One day some government official had the bright idea of enforcing that speed limit. How? They put a state police car on each lane of a 4 lane highway and had them drive exactly 55 mph.
The evening news had video of the traffic jam that went for miles and miles and miles.
Not long after that, the speed limit went up to 65 in most places. It’s 70 in others. And in most places that I’ve lived, the speeding penalties for going less than 10 mph over the speed limit are pretty minimal.
The 55 MPH speed limit was created during the 1970s gas shortage. It took 20+ years for its grip to be shaken loose by nothing more than the fact that so many people were already breaking it there was seen to be little else to do than change what was seen as a needless limitation. At some point, even after a long time of being law, we have a tendency to loosen overly restrictive rules.
If the MPAA started actively going after everyone who just wanted a backup copy, or a copy on their own iPod, there would be enough Senators with friends and family members caught in the web that you’d better believe that things would come to a head quickly.
If the MPAA continues to make it harder and harder to just watch the dang movie that I’ve bought with my own money, you will see more and more people trying to find ways around it.
2) The penalties for possession of quantities of drugs which indicate they are for personal use are also fairly minor. It’s when you start to have enough to distribute (possession with intent to sell) that it becomes more serious. One might draw a comparison between cracking DRM to make a backup copy of a DVD that I already own vs cracking DRM so I can put the movie on Limewire. Any jury member whose kid broke a $20 DVD will see the value in a backup copy for personal use.
3) There are community concerns about speeding (i.e. I could have an accident) and drug use (what it does to health, crime, etc) which simply don’t apply to me having a backup of a silver disc. It’s a true victimless crime with no real drawbacks. Contrast that to Prohibition, which did have the “greater good” on its side and still failed. Why? Because people refused to accept it.
The longer the MPAA and RIAA treats its paying customers like idiots and criminals, the more control they insist on having over how we use the content that we paid for, the more people’s hatred and resistance will grow. Eventually the technology will be there (the Napster moment, as John Gruber put it).