Quote:
Originally Posted by T_Frain_K
Naah, I doubt the word failed is appropriate here.
Think of it:
If the appliance of a protection system, which does indeed prevent some users to pirate a product, is cheaper than the estimated loss due to the absense of it, it did pay out.
You´re totally right, any system can be cracked. But the more sophisticated it is, the less is the number of people able to actually use it - that little part is likely overseen in DRM-related discussion, although it is possibly the most important point of it.
Think of Apple:
The iTunes store booms. And that is in a time, where everything available there can be aquired through other, illegal means. Similar with movies - the amount of online-movie stores is still growing.
|
I agree that if a DRM can prevent enough people from illegal copying that you make more money from sales than the DRM cost, it would be worth it.
This, however, ist not the case as some studies have shown (although the studies are based on estimates and bits and pieces of information leaked out because the media industry is not giving any hard numbers on their expenses for DRM)
If I said that DRM failed in other areas I was, however, pointing to the abolishment of DRM in many online music stores. If you invest a lot of money into the development of a DRM system and you abandon it in the end, that would qualify as a failure.
Also, my statement against DRM was not a voice pro piracy. I was actually thinking of iTunes like you: They (as well as other music shops) sell music without DRM now and still make cartloads of money. That proves to me that people are willing to pay for legal goods and that it's more a matter of just listening to your customers than selling them severely crippled goods and threatening them for trying to do things with their rightfully bought stuff they always did (like taking your music along in your car or continue reading a legal book even if you bought a new device).
Abolishment of DRM, in my opinion, does not mean that digital goods should be stolen. Copyright holders have every right to protect their rights but DRM is taking away a lot of things I could always legally do with my own property. This is acceptable if you define DRMed goods not as sold goods but more as rented goods. But if I only rent my digital goods I expect a significantly lower price than if I purchase something to own. With music there were such models (flatrate for all the music you wanted but you could not share, take it to another place and it was useless once you cancelled the flatrate) and while it's not my cup of copy I think it's a very valid business model and in that case DRM is also a valid option.