MobileRead Forums - View Single Post

Bob Russell · 03-16-2006, 02:23 PM

There are a lot of reasons why DRM is hated. It enables content providers to control how and when the customer views the content. It means that the customer must repurchase the content if technology changes. It often prevents backups. You can't loan content. You can't even view content on multiple devices. You are tied to the viewers allowed by the provider, so in many cases it rules out Linux or mobile devices.

True, not all DRM implementations cause all these troubles, but these are not out of the norm. It's really a headache for the consumer. Why is it so prevalent? Especially, when it's generally agreed that mass piracy can't be stopped with DRM? The answer is that it sticks around because content providers are afraid of widespread copying, because content providers want a long ongoing stream of revenues from customers for a given song or movie or game, and because legislation currently supports it with a strong hand.

Well, as if that isn't enough, we now discover another problem with DRM that is very intuitive. "... according to tests conducted by CNET, they found that while many players met or exceeded their claims, one feature that has a drastic affect on battery life is the infamous DRM." There was a drop in one test from 16hrs battery playback to 12 hrs playback just changing from mp3 files to WMA 10 DRM files. True, the test doesn't seem to take into account the effects of non-DRM'd mp3 versus non-DRM'd WMA, but one would suspect that the extra processing required for DRM unencoding. And if you have purchased a particular content in a DRM'd form, you don't exactly have the option of switching to mp3 anyway, do you?

Before I sound like I think DRM is never a good idea, let me say that it does seem to make sense in some circumstances to implement DRM, and that DRM has the potential to allow more content owners to bring content to the market. However, in it's current forms, with little in the way of standards or consumer friendliness, I think it would be fair to say that it is more often called "pure evil" by users than "a helpful hand."

Via Digg and CD Freaks.

03-16-2006, 02:23 PM	#1
Bob Russell Recovering Gadget Addict Posts: 5,381 Karma: 676161 Join Date: May 2004 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Device: iPad	DRM drains your battery by up to 25% There are a lot of reasons why DRM is hated. It enables content providers to control how and when the customer views the content. It means that the customer must repurchase the content if technology changes. It often prevents backups. You can't loan content. You can't even view content on multiple devices. You are tied to the viewers allowed by the provider, so in many cases it rules out Linux or mobile devices. True, not all DRM implementations cause all these troubles, but these are not out of the norm. It's really a headache for the consumer. Why is it so prevalent? Especially, when it's generally agreed that mass piracy can't be stopped with DRM? The answer is that it sticks around because content providers are afraid of widespread copying, because content providers want a long ongoing stream of revenues from customers for a given song or movie or game, and because legislation currently supports it with a strong hand. Well, as if that isn't enough, we now discover another problem with DRM that is very intuitive. "... according to tests conducted by CNET, they found that while many players met or exceeded their claims, one feature that has a drastic affect on battery life is the infamous DRM." There was a drop in one test from 16hrs battery playback to 12 hrs playback just changing from mp3 files to WMA 10 DRM files. True, the test doesn't seem to take into account the effects of non-DRM'd mp3 versus non-DRM'd WMA, but one would suspect that the extra processing required for DRM unencoding. And if you have purchased a particular content in a DRM'd form, you don't exactly have the option of switching to mp3 anyway, do you? Before I sound like I think DRM is never a good idea, let me say that it does seem to make sense in some circumstances to implement DRM, and that DRM has the potential to allow more content owners to bring content to the market. However, in it's current forms, with little in the way of standards or consumer friendliness, I think it would be fair to say that it is more often called "pure evil" by users than "a helpful hand." Via Digg and CD Freaks. Last edited by BobR; 03-16-2006 at 06:35 PM. Reason: Picture was too "imposing".