[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by rogue_ronin

So commercial reasons are not political?

Sony is not trying to make us supporters of a new Japanese Co-Prosperity Sphere, and Apple is not trying to turn everyone into hippies. So, "commercial reasons" are not particularly political -- unless you adhere to the point of view that your choice of soap is also a "political act." It's technically accurate but rarely a useful position. And it's bupkis compared to overt totalitarian control of information.

Originally Posted by rogue_ronin

....the limited monopoly of prior times is being transformed into a permanent monopoly.

Yeah, whatever. In some cases it can be difficult to knock out a market leader, in other cases it's a snap. Yesterday MySpace was the big dog, today it's Facebook, tomorrow it's Twitter. Google barely existed 20 years ago, and today they're a major force in the exchange of information and a major threat to Microsoft's OS monopoly. For all any of us knows, Sony or Apple could be gone in 10 years.

I.e. I don't see much of an indication, let alone definitive proof, that the whole world will be run by Buy n' Large by 2030.

Originally Posted by rogue_ronin

We discuss eBooks here, and DRM and copyright. Not insurgency, military repression and international relations.

Oh, so you get to invoke vague doomsday scenarios of utter "corporate control" of content, but it's improper to point out the drastic nature of actual, existing and current methods of political control of content, in order to inject some perspective into the discussion? Nice.

Originally Posted by rogue_ronin

I mean, try to mount a play that uses music from the 1950s without begging a corporation for permission. Maybe rewrite the dialogue to a showing of the Maltese Falcon... etc.

1) We're discussing DRM, not the validity of copyright laws. These situations have nothing to do with DRM.
2) Didn't you laud the value of copyright a few paragraphs ago? Either you like it or you don't, which is it?
3) The situations you cited have nothing to do with monopolistic practices. Even a small company can hold and enforce the rights to a well-known artwork.

Originally Posted by rogue_ronin

The current relative ease of distribution is being overtaken by the ease of suppression.

Sorry, not seeing much evidence of this -- other than the actions of totalitarian regimes. If anything, it's easier today than in the past to produce and distribute content without the backing of a large corporate entity, government and/or wealthy patron.

As much as people squeal about DRM and limited formats, almost every portable device I've seen allows at least one open format (if not several). Rights holders may be focusing on halting the illegal distribution of their content, but don't care much (if at all) about those who choose to release it for free.

Originally Posted by rogue_ronin

The control I fear is that there are such things as EMusic, Amazon and iTunes. Too damn big, with too much power to shape choices. It will settle into a small group of corporations (pick an industry, any industry, it always does) that will protect each other from progress and outside insurgency using wealth and the concomitant political influence.

Again, yet more evidence that radicalism is not exactly the key to rational thought.

Emusic and Amazon's music downloads have always been MP3's, i.e. no DRM. Apple is making a push to selling music without DRM. The companies you're terrified of are doing exactly what you want, namely ditching DRM, and you're still afraid?

I mean, really. What are you looking for, a world where no one charges for digital content? The abandonment of all copyright? Or perhaps there a magic number of retailers that would satisfy you? 10? 15? 30? 100? If the market doesn't support the number of retailers you like, who has to pay to support their existence? Or, what's your alternative to the capitalist approach -- government distribution of content, perhaps? Or perhaps governments should subsidize any and every retailer and distributor of digital content?

And will eliminating DRM even make much of a dent in the formation of a monopoly? Apple's music sales are now increasingly eschewing DRM, yet the iTunes store, iPod and iPhone are still the big dogs....

Your ideas seem rather hysterical and poorly thought out. Have fun winning people over to your position. :P

Originally Posted by rogue_ronin

And hip-hop -- the whole hip-hop sampling thing is something you should read up on. Do you know how much they pay for as little as 5 seconds of another song?

Of course I am. Guess what? The requirement to pay for a sample has obviously not even remotely slowed down the practice.

Most of the examples I cited indicate that copyright does not seem to have done much to hinder the production of cultural products, and it certainly hasn't stopped artists from being influenced by their contemporaries. Read an interview with any artist in the last 20 years, and they will list their recent influences ad nauseum.

Originally Posted by rogue_ronin

I'm talking about the use of DRM and the draconian laws that support it as they're being used by large corporations to carve up the cultural assets of our society between them....

And you're massively ignoring the trends that are working to the contrary: e.g. open standards, market and cultural fragmentation, a proliferation in media outlets, easy distribution, radical drops in the cost of media production, rejections by artists of large publishers, and of course ignoring the plentiful evidence that belies your position.

You're welcome to believe that the sky is falling, but I see no evidence for it.