Sunday, 25 March 2007
Is DRM the best way to save the music industry?
In the music industry the term piracy is certainly nothing new. It can be traced as far back to the 1960s with the invention of the compact cassette, which became the first recordable audio device which posed a threat to the profitability of the music industry. Throughout the years there have been many attempts to try and stop this 'file-sharing' which exists, which some may say are economically damaging the music industry. Digital rights management focuses on strengthening the property aspect of music, and making file-sharing less attractive. This includes teaching youngsters, either in the classroom or in the courtroom, that downloading is stealing.Many online music stores employ DRM to restrict the usage of music purchased and downloaded online. i-tunes and Napster employ DRM in order to control the amount of music downloaded, however this is not the best way to save the music industry. Although DRM does have its advantages and it makes illegal downloading harder, it does not put an end to the problem which is facing the music industry. There are many organisations and individuals who oppose DRM, stating that it has little to do with piracy; as most pirates are not individuals with a computer, but organizations with access to a media duplicating plant and employing skilled staff; DRM's "sole purpose is to maximize revenues by minimizing your rights so that they can sell them back to you. No matter how hard DRM tries to restrict the amount of illegal downloading, it is not going to be able to save the music industry. Although it is an economic problem, it is also a cultural problem. Cd's are too expensive, marketing is deceptive, musicians make enough money already and downloaded music is free promotion for record companies; these are all some of the reasons why downloading illegally takes place. By teaching youngsters in classrooms or in courtrooms that downloading is stealing is not going to make a great difference to the music industry as they would ask themselves, if it is stealing then why is it available to us and so easy to carry out?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Much of this is well written and well argued. However, there are a few points that are less successful than others. Many would question your justification of piracy "if it is stealing then why is it available to us and so easy to carry out?" with counter questions such as: If you leave your purse open is it OK for me to take money from it? Also your claim that "musicians make enough money already" is problematic on several levels. Only a handful of musicians produce the sort of revenue that your point implies and anyway, are you suggesting that it is OK to steal from people because they are wealthy?
Post a Comment