I’m coming around to seeing Cory is right to be as indignant as he is.
Cory responds to Wired Editor on DRM:
I would be sure that every single review of a DRM device carried the following notice: WARNING: THIS DEVICE’S FEATURES ARE SUBJECT TO REVOCATION WITHOUT NOTICE, ACCORDING TO TERMS SET OUT IN SECRET NEGOTIATIONS. YOUR INVESTMENT IS CONTINGENT ON THE GOODWILL OF THE WORLD’S MOST PARANOID, TECHNOPHOBIC ENTERTAINMENT EXECS. THIS DEVICE AND DEVICES LIKE IT ARE TYPICALLY USED TO CHARGE YOU FOR THINGS YOU USED TO GET FOR FREE — BE SURE TO FACTOR IN THE PRICE OF BUYING ALL YOUR MEDIA OVER AND OVER AGAIN. AT NO TIME IN HISTORY HAS ANY ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY GOTTEN A SWEET DEAL LIKE THIS FROM THE ELECTRONICS PEOPLE, BUT THIS TIME THEY’RE GETTING A TOTAL WALK. HERE, PUT THIS IN YOUR MOUTH, IT’LL MUFFLE YOUR WHIMPERS.
It’s clear that the media cartels are as bad as he claims — the whole idea of “giving away” PVRs that will erase programming you recorded, unbeknownst to you, is amazingly bold. I have been soft on Apple and iTMS for no better reason than that I like it and have been taking the admittedly wobbly middle ground that if Steve can snooker the RIAA into DRM that’s as weak as it is — ignoring the “updates” that remove features for a minute — I think it is a kind of progress.
My fear is that without the wobbly middle way, all we have is the cartels claiming “piracy” and a lot of energy being spent on lawsuits and incredibly lame DRM (shift key or magic marker, anyone?). I think stuff like iTMS has the potential of showing the cartels that there is some way to open up to digital distribution. I realize some smaller companies get it already: there are labels that refuse to even consider DRM and some bands who openly endorse P2P sharing.
I guess I’m just wobbly.