Macrovision has posted a response to Apple CEO Steve Jobs’ open letter calling for DRM-free music. Here it is verbatim:
I would like to start by thanking Steve Jobs for offering his provocative perspective on the role of digital rights management (DRM) in the electronic content marketplace and for bringing to the forefront an issue of great importance to both the industry and consumers. Macrovision has been in the content protection industry for more than 20 years, working closely with content owners of many types, including the major Hollywood studios, to help navigate the transition from physical to digital distribution. We have been involved with and have supported both prevention technologies and DRM that are on literally billions of copies of music, movies, games, software and other content forms, as well as hundreds of millions of devices across the world.
There are four key points that I would like to make in response to your letter.
• DRM is broader than just music –
While your thoughts are seemingly directed solely to the music industry, the fact is that DRM also has a broad impact across many different forms of content and across many media devices. Therefore, the discussion should not be limited to just music. It is critical that as all forms of content move from physical to electronic there is an opportunity for DRM to be an important enabler across all content, including movies, games and software, as well as music.
• DRM increases not decreases consumer value –
I believe that most piracy occurs because the technology available today has not yet been widely deployed to make DRM-protected legitimate content as easily accessible and convenient as unprotected illegitimate content is to consumers. The solution is to accelerate the deployment of convenient DRM-protected distribution channels—not to abandon them. Without a reasonable, consistent and transparent DRM we will only delay consumers in receiving premium content in the home, in the way they want it. For example, DRM is uniquely suitable for metering usage rights, so that consumers who don’t want to own content, such as a movie, can “rent” it. Similarly, consumers who want to consume content on only a single device can pay less than those who want to use it across all of their entertainment areas – vacation homes, cars, different devices and remotely. Abandoning DRM now will unnecessarily doom all consumers to a “one size fits all” situation that will increase costs for many of them.
• DRM will increase electronic distribution –
Well maintained and reasonably implemented DRM will increase the electronic distribution of content, not decrease it. In this sense, DRM is an important ingredient in the overall success of the emerging digital world and especially cannot be overlooked for content creators and owners in the video industry. Quite simply, if the owners of high-value video entertainment are asked to enter, or stay in a digital world that is free of DRM, without protection for their content, then there will be no reason for them to enter, or to stay if they’ve already entered. The risk will be too great.
• DRM needs to be interoperable and open –
I agree with you that there are difficult challenges associated with maintaining the controls of an interoperable DRM system, but it should not stop the industry from pursuing it as a goal. Truly interoperable DRM will hasten the shift to the electronic distribution of content and make it easier for consumers to manage and share content in the home – and it will enable it in an open environment where their content is portable across a number of devices, not held hostage to just one company’s products. DRM supporting open environments will benefit consumer electronics manufacturers by encouraging and enabling them to create ever more innovative and sophisticated devices for consumers that play late running premium content from a number of sources.
As an industry, we can overcome the DRM challenges. A commitment to transparent, interoperable and reasonable DRM will effectively bridge the gap between consumers and content owners, eliminate confusion and make it possible for new releases and premium content to enter the digital environment and kick off a new era of entertainment.
At Macrovision we are willing to lead this industry effort. We offer to assist Apple in the issues and problems with DRM that you state in your letter. Should you desire, we would also assume responsibility for FairPlay as a part of our evolving DRM offering and enable it to interoperate across other DRMs, thus increasing consumer choice and driving commonality across devices.
In summary, we are on the verge of a transformation in home entertainment that can be as significant as the introduction of the PC into the home or the invention of the television. Already, consumer equipment manufacturers are introducing advancements in wireless connectivity and the interoperability of devices that are opening the door to new ways for consumers to acquire and view content from many sources.
With such an enjoyable and revolutionary experience within our grasp, we should not minimize the role that DRM can and should play in enabling the transition to electronic content distribution. Without reasonable, consistent and transparent DRM we will only delay the availability of premium content in the home. As an industry, we should not let that happen.
Thank you,
Fred Amoroso
CEO & President
Macrovision Corporation
http://www.macrovision.com/company/news/drm/response_letter.shtml
Macrovision. In love with DRM since 1983.
Related articles:
62% of music industry execs think eliminating DRM would increase music download sales – February 14, 2007
Warner’s DRM-loving Middlebronfman warns wireless industry it may lose music market to Apple iPhone – February 14, 2007
Windows Vista’s DRM is bad news – February 14, 2007
Monster Cable announces full support of Apple CEO Steve Jobs’ call for DRM-free music – February 13, 2007
Microsoft’s Bach talks Apple iPhone, DRM, Zune, and more – February 09, 2007
Recording Industry Association of America wants their DRM, calls for Apple to license FairPlay – February 08, 2007
Warner’s Middlebronfman: Jobs’ DRM-free music call ‘without logic and merit, we’ll not abandon DRM’ – February 08, 2007
Dvorak: Apple CEO Steve Jobs is dead right about DRM – February 07, 2007
Apple’s Jobs jolts music industry; Zune exec calls Jobs’ call for DRM-free music ‘irresponsible’ – February 07, 2007
Apple CEO Steve Jobs’ posts rare open letter: ‘Thoughts on Music’ – calls for DRM-free music – February 06, 2007
Apple Inc. and The Beatles’ Apple Corps Ltd. enter into new agreement – February 05, 2007
Norwegian Ombudsman: Apple’s FairPlay DRM is illegal in Norway – January 24, 2007
Major music labels ponder DRM-free future – January 23, 2007
Clash, Pink Floyd manager: ‘DRM is dead’ – November 06, 2006
Study reports the obvious: most music on iPods not from iTunes Store – September 17, 2006
Warner’s Middlebronfman: ‘We sell our songs through iPods, but we don’t have share of iPod revenue’ – October 05, 2005
Warner music exec discusses decapitation strategy for Apple iTunes Music Store – September 28, 2005
Warner CEO Bronfman: Apple iTunes Music Store’s 99-cent-per-song model unfair – September 23, 2005
You’re looking at me, are you? Get a dull knife and cut your crystal balls off.
In other news, Exxon states that extraction and burning fossil fuels hasn’t contributed to global warming. In fact, to the contrary, the increased carbon dioxide emissions has allowed Coke and Pepsi to reduce costs (free carbonation) allowing more people to enjoy the beverages. This, in turn, allows more people to quench their thirsts, which is actually counteracting any real effect of this so called ‘global warming’ nonsense.
Sounds like a desperate cry for help to me.
Steve Jobs’s open letter was called “thoughts on music.” Macrovision should not be acting so paraniod… yet.
Chrissy,
“Media has done just fine for a gazillion years with no DRM.
DRM has not stopped rampant piracy in Asia”
– While those two statements are essentially true, they don’t necessarily support each other.
Media has been created and provided in many ways, but only recently has the illegal copying and distribution of it become incredibly easy and cheap for anyone to do. The fact that something hasn’t been used in the past is not in itself a valid argument for why it isn’t necessary in the future. After all, business models, like everything else, evolve over time.
Likewise, the inadequacy of an idea’s implementation is not in itself a valid reason for its abolishment. That is why people innovate instead of sticking their heads in the sand when confronted with a problem.
With that said, I firmly believe that DRM is not necessary on many of the things that it is currently being used with, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t necessary for all things.
Come on, they’re a DRM company. What else would they say? “Oh yes, lets abolish DRMs! We were thinking about going the opposite direction and providing DRM cracking tools…this will work out great!”
Steve Jobs consciously limited his discussion to music because music is the area where a DRM-free solution makes the most sense (subscription services-i.e. a system requiring “metering usage rights”-are a failure because people want to own their music). This is also the least threatening to those content providers, some of whom are already dipping their toes in the water and whose entire catalogs are already being pirated (so what more do they have to lose?).
Fred Amoroso is consciously trying to broaden the discussion to include all forms of digital content because he knows that extensive catalogs of DRM-free music are a looming possibility and he’s trying to hold the line on DRM. By tying the DRM discussion to different forms of digital content, he broadened the array of content providers on his side, including those like the MPAA who are scared to death of unprotected content floating around (even though it already is) and aren’t as far along in considering the possibility of a DRM-free future. His line about increasing consumer value is only valid if content providers never consider the possibility of doing away with DRM and consumers consider receiving the same content in a slightly different form to be a benefit, when most consumers rightly look at it as the greedy providers just selling them the same thing over and over again.
I think most thinking people will see Amoroso’s letter as the self-serving attempt to delude the public that it is.
DRM does not work. Crooks do whatever they want, honest people are inconvenienced.
I wonder how Macrovision stays in business. What do they tell their customers? Our DRM will protect your content? Yea right!
My mom might not know how to circumvent Macrovision products but she can’t work her DVD player either.
Ask an 18 yearold if Macrovision or DRM is stopping them from watching or listening to whatever they want.
Macro what?
A large printed threat of law suit or fine on the packaging would do about the same as Macrovision.
FUD would be much more effective than Macrovision.
In other news, believers in global warming call those opposed to the theory equivalent to Holocaust deniers! See Ellen Goodman’s recent column. (All of which goes to prove that theories based on computer models are a case of the tail wagging the dog.)
Macrovision shows that they can’t read. The article was aimed at the music business. Do we need DRM? Only if people are going to rent digital downloads — but I think that whole concept is fatally flawed. Downloading implies ownership (the file is now on MY machine) much more so than renting a physical object. The two models are just not comparable, and digital media companies have yet to understand that. Renting a physical object has thousands of years of human culture behind it, a set of obligations, contracts (both social and legal) and so forth. Downloading, however, implies both immediate usability and endless use.
What he want is me to pay more when enjoying a media on more than one device/location.
It’s like this. When I see a newspaper that I want to take home to read, then I buy it and read it at home. Well, sometimes I don’t have enough time to finish it, well then I will bring it to my cabin which I am going to this weekend. “HEY YOU! What do you think you are doing? You have to pay more if you want to bring that newspaper to your cabin this weekend.” And guess what, this is one big newspaper, I didn’t finish it. That will cost you. Because the newspaper drm-countdown will expire after 3 days. Last opportunity is to read it one the way back from the cabin, on the train/buss. Oh, a third location. That will cost you sir.
“Well maintained and reasonably implemented DRM will increase the electronic distribution of content, not decrease it.”
Uh?
Fsking idiot. All the cash he makes from stifling content with DRM has twisted him beyond redemption.
Rock on Steve!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”raspberry” style=”border:0;” />
These people just don’t get it – DRM is like a pothole on the road: an obstacle, NOT a “feature”. Just like potholes, DRM adds no value to content. This guy is like a toll-collector demanding extra money for the potholes on the road…
Dear Fred:
DRM is hacked without mercy and it is plain to see that current DRM technology cannot guarantee anyone that intellectual property can be preserved absolutely. It seems that that persons who wish to use digital technology to sell products are at a constant disadvantage. Either businesses must assume that their customers are generally honest citizens who will gladly pay a reasonable fee for the product or are predominantly thieves who steal as a matter of fact. It appears that many in the business believe that most citizens are criminals. This begs the question, why do some people in the business continue to willfully engage in commercial activities with people with whom they obviously detest and mistrust? In other words, are these people stupid, naïve, greedy?
The best DRM ever created was invented by Thomas Alva Edison. It is called that phonographic cylinder. This was later modified to the phonographic disc. I would strongly encourage you to reconsider this “uncrackable” DRM. I’m sure life was grand when music was only available on vinyl. I’m being facetious, of course. However, I am still confused. Why it is that a person with your years of experience and many talents still hasn’t designed a DRM that is superior to all others. I mean, this is what you do to get paid, right? So, why the delay? In my opinion, you haven’t a clue how to build an uncrackable DRM that will be accepted by the consumer. I think that you’re just stringing the music industry along, feeding them shit, and getting paid well for it. Congratulations. I wouldn’t go as far as to say that you’re “stealing” from them, but that’s just me.
Sentimentalize all you want, you still can’t change history, the genie won’t go back in the bottle, and you know it.
Tony,
The term global warming’ strikes fear in the heart of people every time you say it, but it’s simply a rise in temperature over time, and it’s happened before.
We have maybe 100 years of data on a rock that’s 6 billion years old. Mother Nature tends to even herself out, and the fact is, the Earth is cyclical.
I have a file an inch thick from 30 years ago when scientists said the planet was cooling.
There was also a significant spike in world temperatures during the 1400s, well before the Industrial Revolution,. We haven’t studied this long enough to know what causes global warming.
I’m not sure which is more arrogant for humans: to say we caused it or to say we’re going to fix it.
YYAAAWWWNNNNNNNNNN
Move along citizens, nothing to see here.
OTOH, Who in their right mind would ever have thought a company that produces copy protection software would come out with a statement supporting copy protection?
The sky is falling
How come Steve posts an open letter to a broad industry, and then all the CEOs in that industry need to make their so-called response letter’s to Steve entirely public. First, I don’t believe that any letter is actually sent to Steve, and Second, if it was then making that correspondance public is pretty cheesy. If these guys want to enter the debate publicly, then they should address the broader industry as Steve did, not make this look like a CEO vs CEO fight. Don’t they teach these protocols in CEO school any more?
An Open Letter Response to Macrovision and Fred Amoroso
As an industry, we can overcome DRM, period. A commitment to transparency, interoperability and DRM free content will effectively bridge the gap between consumers and content owners, eliminate confusion and make it possible for new releases and premium content to enter the digital environment and kick off a new era of entertainment.
At Apple we are willing to lead this industry effort. We offer to assist Macrovisoin in the issues and problems with DRM that you initiated 24 years ago. Should you desire, we would also assume responsibility for Macrovision as a part of our dismantling DRM plagued offerings and enabling them to interoperate across multiple platforms, thus increasing consumer choice and driving commonality across devices.
In summary, we are on the verge of a transformation in home entertainment that can be as significant as the introduction of the Macintosh into the home or the invention of the television. Already, Apple is introducing advancements in wireless connectivity (Airport Extreme 802.11n)and the interoperability of devices that are opening the door to new ways for consumers to acquire (iTunes) and view content (Apple TV) from many sources.
With such an enjoyable and revolutionary experience within our grasp, we should eliminate the role that DRM has played in stifling the transition to widespread electronic content adoption and distribution. Without DRM free media we will only delay the availability of premium content in the home. As an industry, we should not let that happen.
Thank you,
Steve Jobs
CEO & President
Apple, Inc.
Meteorologist,
Well, I guess we should just give up then. SUVs for everyone!!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
Reads as foolishly as the proposed NY congressman’s law against listening to gadget while walking across the street.
interoperable and open….
? ..wouldn’t this be completely “interoperable” and completely open without the DRM ?
Creating the industrial oxymoron, MORON.
I would like to start by thanking Steve Jobs for offering his provocative perspective on the role of digital rights management (DRM) in the electronic content marketplace and for bringing to the forefront an issue of great importance to both the industry and consumers.
I don’t trust this guy.
The solution is to accelerate the deployment of convenient DRM-protected distribution channels—not to abandon them.
I don’t trust this guy.
At Macrovision we are willing to lead this industry effort. We offer to assist Apple in the issues and problems with DRM that you state in your letter. Should you desire, we would also assume responsibility for FairPlay as a part of our evolving DRM offering and enable it to interoperate across other DRMs, thus increasing consumer choice and driving commonality across devices.
I told you I didn’t trust this guy.
Friggin’ weak… So in a nutshell this guy is saying, “You got it all wrong Steve. More and consistant DRM is necessary and lucky for you, that’s what we do! So give us your DRM so that WE, and not you, can control the world of DRM and we alone will be the ones who decides who sells what where and who plays what where.”
Lying business fuck… Does he really think that no one will be able to see through that thin fake veil of supposed caring. That he’s actually concerned about consumers and not about his own agenda and bottom line. God! I hate lying business fucks!
To find out who the good guys and bad guys are in this saga of DRM, think of DRM as the ring of Lord of the Rings… Everyone greedily wants it so that THEY can control the universe of media and be the most powerful men in the universe, and they’ll say or do anything to get there hands on it, whereas Steve and only a few others actually want to chuck it into the fires of Mt Doom and rid the universe of this evil once and for all.
“To find out who the good guys and bad guys are in this saga of DRM, think of DRM as the ring of Lord of the Rings… Everyone greedily wants it so that THEY can control the universe of media and be the most powerful men in the universe, and they’ll say or do anything to get there hands on it, whereas Steve and only a few others actually want to chuck it into the fires of Mt Doom and rid the universe of this evil once and for all.”
I like that analogy.
Ha, ha…MDN magic word: “control”
He says: “Abandoning DRM now..will increase costs for many of them (consumers).”
No surprise that he doesn’t offer one line to explain how or why that might be!
THE MUSIC/FILM/PUBLISHING INDUSTRIES NEED TO CUT OUT 90% OF THEIR IRRELEVENT & PARASITIC MIDDLEMEN.
The video industry distribute the majority of their content DRM free – it is called Television. Television works because we can tape a movie and watch it later when convenient.
The Macrovision DRM on DVDs is not a ‘reasonable, consistent and transparent DRM’, but a pain that gets in the way of purchasers all the time. It cannot be licensed for 5 devices or for making copies to tape or any other media for legitimate purposes (e.g. watching at Grandma’s).
I would be sympathetic if Macrovision matched FairPlay’s capabilities, or Macrovision had made strides in the past decade to expand legitimate consumer’s uses. Since it doesn’t, this open letter is just snake oil from a snake oil company.
Um, yeah. Not a SINGLE argument Fred makes is compelling (or even true) for the consumer. What a coroporate wonk trying to peddle his snake oil.