inignoct wrote:
] interesting concept. viable?

Clueless AND Dangerous.

An iPod IS a hard drive. You cannot enforce your digital expiration date. This will not stop piracy.

However, the reason this author doesn't "get" that is that he sees the ipod as a closed device that you can't tamper with. That is what he is advocating, and you are going to see more and more of that, for TV as well...

The idea is to replace all these pesky personal computers that people can program and control for their own purposes with devices that are closed and which only serve the purposes of the media industries. The "mini-DMCA" laws that are making the rounds in the state legislatures are an attempt to ban all personal electronics that do no obey the edicts of the media industry from being attached to the networks in your house. This is the direction that things are moving.

This will not prevent piracy, this will prevent innovation. In order to deploy a new service you will have to get buy in from the companies that control these devices. If you innovate in a way that threatens established industries, they aren't going to let you in. This isn't an end run around "file swapping pirates" so much as it is an end run around the personal computing revolution.

The only reason this guy's article makes all of this sound cool is that he says things like "And trying to capture such music would be about as easy as trapping mist in a jar." Sounds neat. Unfortunately what he is presenting is an extremely dark, dystopian future in which all of this new technology does not serve to better inform or better communicate, but only to better push products.

Decius wrote:
] inignoct wrote:
] ] interesting concept. viable?
]
] Clueless AND Dangerous.
]
] An iPod IS a hard drive. You cannot enforce your digital
] expiration date. This will not stop piracy.
]
] However, the reason this author doesn't "get" that is that he
] sees the ipod as a closed device that you can't tamper with.
] That is what he is advocating, and you are going to see more
] and more of that, for TV as well...
]
] The idea is to replace all these pesky personal computers that
] people can program and control for their own purposes with
] devices that are closed and which only serve the purposes of
] the media industries. The "mini-DMCA" laws that are making the
] rounds in the state legislatures are an attempt to ban all
] personal electronics that do no obey the edicts of the media
] industry from being attached to the networks in your house.
] This is the direction that things are moving.
]
] This will not prevent piracy, this will prevent innovation. In
] order to deploy a new service you will have to get buy in from
] the companies that control these devices. If you innovate in a
] way that threatens established industries, they aren't going
] to let you in. This isn't an end run around "file swapping
] pirates" so much as it is an end run around the personal
] computing revolution.
]
] The only reason this guy's article makes all of this sound
] cool is that he says things like "And trying to capture such
] music would be about as easy as trapping mist in a jar."
] Sounds neat. Unfortunately what he is presenting is an
] extremely dark, dystopian future in which all of this new
] technology does not serve to better inform or better
] communicate, but only to better push products.

agreed. i can't think of too many things more crippling than the end of general purpose computing. despite the fact that it's a poor substitute, i'm beginning to think that compulsory licencing is the only scheme that will let us keep our computers and still give rights holders their money. However, i'd like to see more of those rights holders being the artists and less the labels for any number of reasons.