Re: [Drm-elimination-crew] Apple to resurrect music DRM

[Graham]

On Saturday 22 June 2013 01:12:23 Kẏra wrote:
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/media-blog/2013/jun/16/itunes-radio-apple-m
> usic-streaming
> 
> describes a planned Apple "streaming service".
> 
> Of course, music DRM never truly died thanks to smaller streaming
> services such as Spotify. If Apple's new service ends up resembling
> existing streaming services, it will impose DRM.
> 
> We should be prepared to be very vocal about this!

This is going to be a difficult argument to win.  This example seems to be the 
most legitimate case for DRM.  The argument is that the music is available 
DRM-free for a reasonable price for those who want to own it and is also 
available streamed for a tiny fraction of the price (roughly 1/100 if you 
believe the article) but at that price it can't be stored, time-shifted, etc.  

I would be interested in ideas for how we argue against that.

The main user problem I see with using DRM in this case, is the issue that it 
limits the user's choice of player.  Not really a problem for Apple who will 
probably only offer the service to iPad/iPhone/iPad users.

Of course, my real concern is that if this is regarded as acceptable then the 
content industry will use it as an example when arguing about other cases 
which look superficially similar.  For example, with video.  This could be 
used to justify DRM in Netflix or even in free-to-view over-the-air TV (such 
as UK Freeview).  We need to somehow draw attention to the fact that there is 
a major difference in this case: video content is NOT available DRM-free, to 
own, at any price (let alone a reasonable price).

The same issue occurs with ebooks: yes library lending may be a reasonable use 
of DRM but only if the books are available to own, DRM-free, as an 
alternative.  Just as it used to work in the case of paper books.

Graham