By Peter Cochrane, 30 March 2009 08:00
COMMENT
Compiled at a Heathrow Airport Hotel between assignments in the USA and UK, and dispatched to silicon.com via 3G
You must have noticed by now that publishers and media companies insist on locking down content on their websites.
Pictures, graphs, movies, sound files and text are all welded down to stop you getting at it. Some presenters and public speakers even convert their PowerPoint slides to a PDF or another format which you cannot conveniently access, modify and re-use.
Why do these people go to all this trouble? Are they so misguided they actually think they can control their content and that of others?
Haven't they been watching the music industry? Don't they realise that we, the user community, reward companies and individuals that afford us more freedom and not less?
And don't they see the commercial damage being inflicted on the organisations practicing such backward content control policies?
The technology to scrape almost anything off the screen is now universally available and mostly free, or of such low cost that no one cares. Locking things down is a futile gesture offering a mild inconvenience to those wishing to use any online material, be it photographs, movies, music or text.
In fact I think we can safely assume that no matter what form the content, someone soon will publish 'a scraper' to lift it right off the screen.
Before the legal eagles and priests of DRM begin to chastise me, let me just say that this activity has a long and proud history going back thousands of years. The copying and distribution of works in almost every format has always been the norm. But the dam wall really broke with the printing press, followed by the camera and the humble tape recorder.
In each case the 'smine, all smine' brigade went apoplectic and tried to retain control and restrict both access and progress. Fortunately, they lost, and none so dramatically as the music industry, which spent millions of dollars on DRM and market control mechanisms, and lost even more by ignoring the new sales and delivery channels offered by the internet and mobile networks.
My take is that the real challenge is in the realisation of new business models that provide new reward paths for the originators and performers of works. Many people have evolved theirs, and I have certainly evolved mine - if only more would follow. Yes, actively giving away your content can create even more business.
Ultimately this is all about human creativity born of a finite population of a limited life span and capability. To get the maximum output and the greatest progress, sharing and freedom are essential. They always have been, and I can't see why it should be stopped or in any way inhibited!
Comments
There are 6 comments. Join the discussion
1. misceng
Fortunately I don't HAVE to buy DRMed DVDs. I have had a few given as presents and this strengthens my resolve not to buy. Why should I as an honest citizen have to suffer an unavoidable display telling me how criminal it is to copy etc. the content when I have already got it? This happens every time I use the DVDs so ensuring that I start to view the proper content in a state of irritation.
2. Richard
Not only remove the crazy anti-copying mechanisms, but also accept user input:
Last Saturday, I used the public library's subscription to that well-known commercial Encyclopaedia.
What a disappointment: Reading an article was incredibly slow because each page was over 1MByte, all for just a few lines of un-illustrated text.
Worse, the first sentence of this article - written by accredited "professionals" - contained a dangerously false statement which completely destroyed any confidence in the remainder of the article.
Despite the frequent disparaging comments from "professionals"; I much prefer Wikipedia:
- No searching around for passwords etc.;
- Fast loading, illustrated articles;
- Errors quickly corrected by "the community";
- Accepts user input & corrections.
3. Ant Norris
Richard - beware the centralised populism based information that Wikipedia provides, there is a whole world of information out there, and it's not all on the web (yet). While Wikipedia is a great information starter, it shouldn't be the last word in information, that's a very dangerous controlled path.
On the subject of controlling content, while I partly agree, what about rip off that profits from your hard work, what is your opinion of that Peter? Should there be no come back? What about your information when it's used out of context but appears to still linked to you because you allowed your slides to be used? What if I took all your posts and made a book out of them (like you have done), but I profit from the sales?
4. Peter Cochrane
Misceng = Perhaps we should start a list of pet niggles and irritants. This would be a good starting point! Peter
5. Peter Cochrane
Richard = I'm with you - slow is a definite turn off! The only time I really worry about Wiki anything is when I don't have some grounding in the topic. But then again I constantly find errors in books too! Peter
6. Peter Cochrane
Ant = I overcame this problem by changing my business model and now encourage people to take what I produce - yes, I just give it away! Remember that the value (money) isn't in the data it is in the meta-data, or the related atoms! Peter