DRM is one of those ideas that unfairly penalizes digital platforms as if they are somehow less secure than say any of the following... optical media, broadcast television, cable television... we could make a very long list. The news on Techcrunch that the industry is looking to create a standard framework for DRM for use across all devices is in one word, intriguing.
The reason that I am opposed to DRM differs from many consumers and/or techies; I see the value of content owners protecting their content but have never fully understood why they take so many measures to secure digital content when most pirated content (today) originates from other, unsecured channels. Apple's brilliance in their approach to DRM is that it is fully obfuscated from the user; most iPod owners are unaware that their content is protected because it will playback on their personal computer, etc.
I've always argued that in order for Big Media to be successful in new media they must rapidly make their content available before "piracy" or another consumer behavior becomes the predominant standard. To date, most digital initiatives within large media companies get hung up on issues of DRM and content delivery. A standard framework is brilliant if it allows new media channels to be deemed "protected" without going through years of scrutiny; this will realize the goal of being able to flood new channels as demand increases.
Given that signing partnerships is key to the success of such a model and studio backing will not create a standard alone (e.g., Widevine, Cinema Now)... this probably has a 50/50 chance of actually working in the end. Regardless, as consumers this could have significant impact on our expectations and experience around content in the future.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment