Since I moved the DRM part to a subsection of this site for reference only, I thought it'd be nice to explain why.

Ofcourse, the madness is still there. I continue to oppose DRM as the solution to such things as piracy (not in all cases though). To start off, lets do a recap.

What is DRM?

DRM stands for Digital Rights Management. It's a big bucket we fill with all technologies designed to control how, when and where we are able to play digital content. It can be used, for example, to make sure you play a video only once. Or, to make sure you only play that video on your own computer and/or your own portable media player. It's most often used to prevent piracy of the digital content itself, making sure if you hand a copy to all your friends, your friends' media player won't play the content.

So DRM is evil?

Quite to the contrary. DRM is not evil. Actually, DRM is a damned good idea! The problem with DRM is that it's not very practical. It doesn't do it's job very well, but causes a lot of headache and grievance for the honest consumer, and on occasion can cost you a bunch of extra cash as well.

The good

Back to DRM is a damned good idea. As probably anyone can see, piracy is a big problem for the 'content providers'. If they release a movie on DVD or a new album on CD, it's gets ripped and spread to the world by piracy, and they make a lot less money. If they make a lot less money, they have a lot less money to create future content, and thus future content will either be less in quantity, or less in quality. DRM attempts to halt this effect by controlling how you play and copy the content, which would seem like a good thing, if you're not a pirate :-)

The bad

The thing about DRM is, it doesn't actually work that well in the 'anti-piracy' corner. DRM is not hackproof. Sure, they attempt to make it that way, but really, it isn't (yet). Many DRM systems have been hacked (some older version of the DRM used in WMA and WMV, for example); you might even see copy protection on games and software as DRM, and we all know most games and software packages have such things as keygens and cracks floating around.

It only requires ONE pirate to get at the content, and it's on the loose. It will be uploaded to newsgroups and/or shared on P2P networks, and within days, the entire world has access to it. Is there a single well-known movie or album out there that has not been pirated/put on the internet because of DRM? I believe not.

The flaw in the system is that it prevents John Doe from making a copy for his friends, but does little to prevent the 'big scale' piracy. Let me ask you, in these days of common broadband access to the internet, how much of the pirated digital content comes from the internet, and how much is passed on by friends? I'd be willing to bet, that at least in my country, 99% will be downloaded from the internet through a P2P service or usenet. As you can see, DRM is no problem there (since the original pirate took it out). Pirates will always find a way to do it - the only way to prevent it, would be to prevent people to actually play the content.

It does however become a problem for John Doe though, who might want to make a backup of his new movie, to put the original in his safe where it doesn't get damaged while he can 'screw around' with the copy. Or maybe he wants to transfer that DRM'd song to his portable MP3 player or car stereo - he can't! Though it is theoretically possible for DRM to be set up so that this is allowed, this hardly ever happens, and never happens well.

The ugly 

A lot of DRM schemes require some sort of license to play the content. This license is often verified through the internet against a licensing server operated by the company that brought you the download. The problems start happening when your internet goes down - often this prevents you from playing the content. Another problem is when said company goes bust. What happens to your license? It will become void most likely, resulting in you having payed for content you can never play. If you want to play it again, you will have to pay for a new license and a new download, which will cost you, especially if you have a large content library.

Another thing is the ability of your devices to play the content. Often, a new DRM system will require new devices for you to play them. Look at HDTV: a lot of HDTV's sold in the last few years do not support HDMI/HDCP. HD-DVD and Blu-ray, however, do require your HDTV to provide HDMI/HDCP for you to be able to watch their contents in HD (output will be downscaled to DVD quality for non HDMI/HDCP compliant devices). For all those who have HDTV's without HDMI/HDCP, this simply means they will have to buy a new one - and it's not like those things are cheap.

Looking at it like this, it is no wonder there is quite a large bunch of folks out there who simply do not buy anything with more advanced DRM on it, but choose to download it 'for free' instead. The troubles accompanying it, the extra cash you have to spend on it, the possibility of 'losing the investment', etc, they are all reasons for this. The content providers are doing it to themselves.

The verdict

DRM is practically flawed. Designed to protect the content providers from piracy, but doesn't actually have a lot of effect in that area. The honest consumer is being punished for the piracy going on by serious discomfort and in some cases (like HD-DVD/Blu-ray and HDTV) by having to spend serious money for no apparent good reason. Meanwhile, the pirates are still pirating and no one got any better in the end, just worse. Punish the (mostly) innocent, let the criminals go free (seems a lot like most justice systems in the real world doesn't it :-)) 

Furthermore, most content providers are 'counting themselves rich' when they look at the DRM as an idea. These nutcases actually got it into their head that if they could DRM everything, the same amount of content being freely downloaded would instead be bought from them. In the real world, people tend to download a lot more than they are willing to pay for. That being said, a lot of people do buy albums and movies they have gotten to know by copies. The problem here, is greed. I'm quite sure Bruce Willis won't starve because someone goes to the cinema to watch his latest movie and instead of also buying the DVD when it comes out, downloading it from the internet. Most productions that make the cinema, make a profit long before the DVD actually hits the shelves, and none of the money made there will go to good ol' Bruce, but to the production company instead (who were already taking the biggest profit). Music? Mostly the same thing. If you want to support the band for their art, go to their concerts. If you want to support the record company executive, go buy their CD (ofcourse this is not always the case, more and more bands have their own labels these days, and it is rumored there are some labels around who don't work that way).

Ofcourse, there is a lot more to be said for both sides, but this is not a book, it's a blog :-)

DRM Madness

Right, back to the point for this entry! Why did DRM Madness move to a subsection? Well, ofcourse I like the 'Dr. Madness' thing and have been playing with the idea of making a blog for a while, but this is not the biggest reason.

DRM Madness was focused primarily on the DRM for HD content used by HD-DVD and Blu-ray and related devices (HDTV, etc). I had hoped it would generate some response, but it hardly did. I do know there were several thousand views per day, and I hope it has 'educated' a few people at the least. Either way, the first HD-DVD and Blu-ray devices are already making it into some enthousiasts living rooms, so there is little to be done now, short of simply not buying them. Also, some of the content is becoming a bit outdated, but most is still fairly actual. This is why I have moved it instead of removed it, since it does bring a bunch of info together and can be handy as short reference.

If you're looking for it, it's here. 

For me, personally, it'll be a while before I get such HD devices. I don't even have an HDTV yet, and I want to see how it plays out. Who will win? HD-DVD or Blu-ray? My money for the long term is still on Blu-ray as it is simply a much better product on the whole. It's a bit more expensive though, but can hold a lot more data (maximum of almost 7 times HD-DVD). For this reason alone, for storage, you'd be mad to go with HD-DVD - the question is which will win in the media sector. Also, the HVD might be out before Blu-ray for storage becomes mainstream, which might mean Blu-ray will actually never become mainstream for storage as people which large storage demands might skip it altogether. (Then again, people have been talking about blue lasers for optical media since the CD came out long long ago, and only now it's here, so who knows how long the HVD will take).

As for DRM'd content over the internet, I have not bought any yet, and I do not think I will in the foreseeable future.