Napster isn’t a good example because it showed the industry that people very much wanted their products, they just didn’t want to pay for them. By not purchasing, pirating or sharing music with DRM (basically ignoring DRM product), you are telling the industry you DO NOT want that product at any price.

That is a much stronger message than Napster ever sent, which in the industry’s mind was “our customers are cheap thieves.”

Peter: “If you complain that disc prices are too high and you don’t like the DRM, but you go ahead and keep buying CDs anyway, why should the industry change?”

well, people tried that in Napster and the music industry is still freaked out by it, years later. i can see no circumstance under which the general population will – en masse – cease buying music. it’s simply not going happen.

but you haven’t addressed my earlier point, which was if that did happen – i doubt it would lead to any change, other than even more restrictive policies on music b/c it seems to be the nature of the RIAA to more readily believe in inappropriate behavior on its users part than its own. as such, they’d conclude that it wasn’t a consumer population fed up with its pricing, but rampant piracy.

your “solution,” then, is to me no solution at all, but merely a prelude to more draconian measures.

It’s no different than any other aspect of the product. Suppose the industry raised the price of CDs to $500 a disc. You can be very sure people would be angry AND they would stop buying discs. That would hurt everyone involved and the price would come down.

Say what you want about the FTC’s report on prices, but millions and millions of discs were sold during that time. Apparently most people didn’t think they were too expensive. Sure, it is really a monopoly system and you can’t buy a cheaper version of your favorite band’s new CD from a different label, but if you truly feel it’s too expensive then don’t buy it. No one is forced to buy music. You might really want that new disc but you WILL survive without it. Sometimes people need to make sacrifices to institute a change.

I have asked before and not gotten an answer, “If you complain that disc prices are too high and you don’t like the DRM, but you go ahead and keep buying CDs anyway, why should the industry change?” They have absolutely no incentive whatsoever to change as long as you keep buying.

I’m not saying anything they are doing is right, or in the consumers’ best interest. But I would certainly defend their right to try to make as much money as they can from their product, just as every other business does. If or when they go too far and raise prices too high or make the DRM too restrictive, it is the consumers right, and obligation, to say “no more” by not purchasing the product.

I can’t give you a more practical resolution because I believe this is an economic fight and it needs to be fought with economic weapons, not technological ones. If people actively stopped buying discs with restrictive DRM and actively did support discs without it, the industry would change. What other option would they have if they wanted to continue to make money?

Peter: Can you explain how this oligopoly, when the mass of consumers will never think deeply enough to boycott, can you give a more practical approach to resolve this?

Peter:

“It’s not like anyone is going to die from not hearing a song.”

true, but you’d have to admit that music has more a pull and more of an emotional investment from a consumer perspective than, say, trash bags.

“The music and film industry have instituted DRM to combat what they see as an _economic_ problem.”

an economic problem with the status quo, you mean. basically the music industry recognizes that with distribution and discovery having been revolutionized by the rise of the internet, and fear their jobs are at risk. they are right. their actions are an attempt to preserve a model that is increasingly obsolete. should i cry for them, these folks that stole from me? no, just as no one’s crying for buggy whip manufacturers.

as for putting my faith in my fellow consumers, i think that’s a lost cause given the lobbying efforts of the industry that have little or nothing to do with consumer needs.

plus, if we do as you say and stop buying discs, what do you think the record industry would say? my bet is that they would turn around the very next day and cry that it was all due to piracy, and nothing to do with their business practices.

this simply is not a simple, free market issue as you might wish.

The music and film industry have instituted DRM to combat what they see as an _economic_ problem. Whether you believe that is the true nature of the problem or not, the best way to fight it is using the same economic principles. If people stopped buying products with restrictive DRM the industry would listen. When the next big artist sells 5000 CDs instead of 500,000 they will notice. Something like that will also cause big retailers like Best Buy & Wal-mart to put pressure on the industry. They don't want to lose sales and customer traffic and they have a lot of pull in the marketplace.

If you say you don't like CDs with DRM, but then buy them anyway, why should the industry change? They already have your money.

There is going to be short-term pain on both sides, but the economics of the free market system WILL make it work in the long run.

Joel: many thx for the tip – i was hoping somebody would come up with a solution. will try it when i get back from OSCON.

Peter: we’re definitely not going to see eye to eye.

“They do. Right on the back it says Unauthorized duplication or public performance prohibited. You may not like the arrangement, but you do know about it before you buy.”

don’t agree at all. the definition of “unauthorized duplication” is unclear, given that historically fair use has permitted personal copies – particularly those that are for another device. as i argued above, i highly doubt the majority of consumers see the message and understand that they can’t put their music on an iPod, and i think the RIAA realizes that explaining that would hurt sales. that’s ridiculous.

“If companies release CDs with extremely restrictive DRM then people should stop buying them.”

seriously – that’s the argument you’re going to use with the fan of a band, who’s willing to pay for the CD but just wants to be able to listen to it on an iPod?

“The real solution is not piracy and illegal downloading, it’s having consumers speak with their wallets.”

sure. it’s consumers fault that they need to hear the latest CD from the band, and any exploitation of that need by the RIAA is completely justified because they keep spending.

on a free market note, i suggest you visit the link discussing the FCC’s findings.

BillSaysThis: right on. we don’t always agree, but we’re violently aligned on this one.