> <ending> > >A key assumption in this presentation is that > >the costs associated with the current model of > >oligopolistic intermediation as well as the > >artist lock–in that is its consequence is at > >the root of the crisis in music distribution. > </ending>
Certainly an interesting read. While I certainly agree that distribution and publication systems as they currently stand for music and games are very broken, and that piracy is a direct symptom of that breakage are quite clear. However, I think there is a bit of a romantic "the Interwebs will fix this," logic to it. I'm going to leave DRM to the side for a moment, because like the author I think long term it is a hole to be peed in more than anything else. While I definitely agree that online media distribution is going to be quite big as time goes on. But isn't it also being sectioned off by the same people already with stakes in it? Looking at most online distribution systems for games, that is certainly the case. I'm also think about net-neutrality here as well. I'm afraid that we've already realized too late that this new delivery system can break down existing barriers, and it is being re-colonized by corporations. DMCA is one example of that endeavor. The other thing I'm afraid of is having to work to find things (user experience). I really don't want to have a Facebook, MySpace, or a numerous sets of music networking sites just to have my music handy for purchase. If we can't really have portable social network selves, a portable music network self seems just as unlikely. Then there is the trouble of prestige and the "privilege" of access. There are a lot of bands that are already doing well in the networks they've established for themselves, and for some reason despite the availability of alternatives, musicians still flock to the big labels. The same goes on in the game industry. Let me tell you. The one thing that can go a long way is independent labels and publishing companies, but frequently they sell off to the big media companies and a small number make bank. Odd odd odd. Back to DRM for a moment. Apple is such a fetish for anti-DRM folks, it's like pornography for them. I suspect largely because of the success of the iPod despite it "just being for mac users." But even though this article hints at that it might not be Apple pushing DRM and instead the labels (though they seem to neglect the fact that Steve Jobs has said that it's the studios demanding it, not Apple), it doesn't judge them on behavior. They are reactive with DRM. If they were proactive, I could see the argument, but they're not. You want to see aggressive proactive anti-piracy? I've got a ton of patents by SOE, Nintendo, and MS. All in all, very good, but I still didn't feel any better at the end. ;) Casey
