jdubb

With the internet revolution, it has never been easier to share information globally. Ideas, data, and media can be transferred from one person to as many people that want it, almost no matter where or who they are. This is not just a software and hardware revolution. It is not just a new form of communication. It is a renaissance of free exchange of ideas. This renaissance is being limited by those who stand to lose financially from it. Record labels like Sony BMG, Warner, Universal, and EMI, or the “Big Four,” control the rights to distribution of 70% of the world’s music (Jobs, 1). These companies obviously would lose a lot of money if the information that they controlled was shared without their management and fees. These companies have strongly resisted the sharing of music via the internet, mostly refusing to do so without some sort of guarantee that the music being shared will only be enjoyed by the people who have paid to listen to it. They have produced increasingly clever and invasive ways of protecting the intellectual property which they control.

DRM, or Digital Rights Management, is a form of copyright protection, or more accurately “access control,” that is built into media files with the purpose of limiting the users’ ability to distribute them illegally. Its purpose in theory is noble- protect the artists who create the music by ensuring that the public does not distribute it, which would lead to lost sales, meaning less money for the artist. However, this is not how it works in actuality. In reality, DRM limits where and how the music that was legally purchased can be played. This does serve the intended purpose, but it has ramifications that the music industry has largely chosen to ignore. The people who purchase DRM-encrypted music can only play them on compatible players. For example, music purchased on Apple’s iTunes music store can only be played in their software and hardware, and only the software and hardware originally registered to the music by the purchaser. This means that if the purchaser buys new computers or media players, they may not be able to play the music on them. These limitations are not nearly as restrictive as some employed by other record labels.

In 2000, Sony Pictures Entertainment US senior VP Steve Heckler stated that “the [music] industry will take whatever steps it needs to protect itself and protect its revenue streams... It will not lose that revenue stream, no matter what...Sony is going to take aggressive steps to stop this. We will develop technology that transcends the individual user. We will firewall [illegal music downloading] at source - we will block it at your cable company, we will block it at your phone company, we will block it at your ISP. We will firewall it at your PC... These strategies are being aggressively pursued because there is simply too much at stake." This only gave a mere clue as to where DRM might lead. In 2005, Sony BMG added a form of DRM to its music CDs that installed software on users’ computers without their knowledge or consent. There was no way to uninstall the software, which was supposed to lock the music, limiting the user’s ability to copy it. When several security risks and software holes were discovered and found to be caused by Sony’s DRM, the states of Texas, California, and New York sued Sony BMG for their actions. Sony released an “uninstaller” for the so-called “rootkit” (a technique used by malware companies to hide their malicious software) which, in fact, did not uninstall the invasive and unapproved software, but simply revealed it, making it no longer hidden. This is one extreme example of the recording industry’s poor forethought and lack of consideration of the responses to their actions. There are much better ways for the recording industry to approach the conceived problem of music sharing.

The recording industry needs to drastically redesign its structure, taking into account new technologies that can benefit all involved, from musician to producer to consumer. Today, it is easier than ever to produce and distribute music. This should make music cheaper, and allow more revenue to reach the musician instead of the record industry, but still, musicians only receive a tiny fraction of profits from music sales. The industry needs to embrace, not resist, the idea of sharing music for free. Intellectual Property (IP) rights should be reevaluated so that licenses to distribute the music can be included in the cost of music for an additional fee. If this were added, “pirate radio” stations across the internet could become legitimate, helping listeners, broadcasters, producers, and most importantly, musicians. The industry must be broken apart and rebuilt from the ground up, putting musicians first.