Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Media Movies Music Your Rights Online

RIAA and MPAA Developing Domain-Based DRM 272

An anonymous reader points out news that the music and movie studios are attempting to develop a new type of DRM that would allow customers more flexibility in playing content on multiple devices. The Digital Entertainment Content Ecosystem (DECE) would establish a list of devices in your personal "domain" (unrelated to web domains), and minimizes or removes restrictions within that domain. TechCrunch summarizes DECE and notes that many of the big corporations have decided to support it. "The ecosystem envisioned by Singer et al revolves around a common set of formats, interfaces and other standards. Devices built to the DECE specifications would be able to play any DECE-branded content and work with any DECE-certified service. The goal is to create for downloads the same kind of interoperability that's been true for physical products, such as CDs and DVDs. Where it gets really interesting, though, is the group's stated intention to make digital files as flexible and permissive as CDs, at least within the confines of someone's personal domain. Once you've acquired a file, you could play it on any of your devices -- if it couldn't be passed directly from one DECE-ready device to another, you'd be allowed to download additional copies. And when you're away from home, you could stream the file to any device with a DECE-compatible Web browser."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

RIAA and MPAA Developing Domain-Based DRM

Comments Filter:
  • qestion (Score:5, Interesting)

    by perlchild ( 582235 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @10:08AM (#24990525)

    Isn't that REALLY close to the permission system Apple has for Fairplay?

    • Yeah, except that I think this system allows you to register as many of your own personal devices as you want.

      I'll be interested to see if they follow through with their "goals"...but it's still going to be DRM, so the best-case scenario is still a bad case in my book.

    • by Simonetta ( 207550 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @12:19PM (#24991589)

      The music 'industry' really needs to rethink their 20th-century mentality. Where one monolithic entity (posing as several individual global corporations) controls culture for everyone by distributing entertainment 'packages' from one central source. And by bringing the full force of state-controlled legal violence against anyone stepping outside of this Stalinist framework. There really is no difference in the mind-set between the RIAA and Soviet Orwellian Ministry of Culture. Neither of them work well in the real world; which consists of real people and real culture that can't be controlled by a centralized authority.

          The only thing that government-controlled (or corporate-controlled) culture does is create a vast and illegal underground counter-culture. Artists end up imprisoned or spending all their creative energy hiding, fighting, or defending their work against the corporate Stalinist cement-heads. Society suffers, people suffer, other people and nations advance and your culture and people don't.

          Culture and Art comes from the bottom up, not the top down. Especially in an era of inexpensive and widely available technology like high resolution digital video cameras, software audio mixing studios, and internet high-speed media distribution.

          My advice is to stop sucking on Hollywood's Grand Tetons, get some gear, learn some literary and music theory, create your own works, distribute them discretely among your own trusted people, and ignore the RIAA/MIAA.

          And for goodness sake's don't let the cement-heads steal your culture. We need to completely change our mentality from believing that artistic success is being a 'rock star' to a mentality where being an artistic success consists of being able to keep our important and meaningful works of art hidden from Hollywood.

  • Fine in theory... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheRaven64 ( 641858 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @10:09AM (#24990531) Journal
    In practice, this can only work if the implementation of DECE is a trade secret, which means implementing it in hobbyist devices or open source software is impossible. Sounds like something the device manufacturers would love, since it gives them a nice big barrier to entry.
    • by mishehu ( 712452 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @10:25AM (#24990643)
      And thus we can forget about it supporting anything other than microsoft or apple. But then again, I doubt there are many pro-DRM linux or bsd users out there...

      I personally wouldn't by any nanny-device like this. I bought the file; I want to play it on whatever the fsck I want to without having to ask permission like a little child in school having go to the bathroom.
      • Re:Fine in theory... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Stellian ( 673475 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @10:56AM (#24990921)

        Thank you, but my devices already interoperate perfectly in my "domain": it's the free domain. Nothing beats freedom, you know.
        Someone needs to spell it out for these guys: selling digital media will cease to be a business in the near future. The digital ecosystem does not need the middle-man, the printing press or recording studio of days gone by. You might keep some control over software or things like that by means of DRM (think consoles), but selling audio/video media is a dying business.

        • by JackassJedi ( 1263412 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @11:25AM (#24991139)
          Any business is based on the creation of goods. In the case of music, there use to be twofold goods: the music itself (created by artists), and the media on which it was being distributed (created by the record companies). The second good is not needed anymore since access to the music itself is theoretically ubiquitous, hence yes, it is dead on a dying business, and the sooner these companies realize that, the better they will be off (see disaster of e.g. AGFA who missed the digital camera boom).
          • by laffer1 ( 701823 )

            The record companies offer another service, marketing. Granted, many people are successful by advertising their own tunes online via youtube, myspace, etc. However, not everyone is good at selling themselves. I think the record companies could adapt to become marketing companies and retain a revenue stream.

            The other problem we have is that everyone is in a rush to get rid of physical media thinking it's a good thing. There are down sides. With DRM, we will only get a few companies selling content which

            • I've been pretty satisfied with hulu.com, though sometimes seeing the same advertisement two or three times in an episode is annoying. Only having one commercial per break isn't overkill. I started DVRing shows simply to skip the numerous commercials. If there's only one per break, I'm more inclined to watch it. The quality, though not great, is passable. I don't hate commercials, but the problem is when what was once 12-14 minutes of commercials in an hour, is now pushing 17-20 on some shows. If they
            • by drakaan ( 688386 )
              ...actually, the record companies only offer *one* service...and yes, it's marketing. Before CD burners and cheap computers capable of recording, mixing, and editing digital audio, a record studio would have been the only reasonable way to get a professional-quality recording of a song, but that hasn't been the case for years. Where we're at now, is that the record companies have a vested interest in discovering and promoting artists that will agree to allow their work to primarily benefit and be controll
        • by mi ( 197448 )

          The digital ecosystem does not need the middle-man, the printing press or recording studio of days gone by.

          This whole "middle-man" meme is a red herring [wikipedia.org]. Even if all writers [nytimes.com] and musicians [cnet.com] start selling directly — rather than through publishers and studios — they will still be concerned about people, enjoying (or otherwise benefiting from) their creations without paying for it.

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            One solution is to switch to a different business model -- make your money from touring, and treat everything else as promotional material.

            If a few million people have heard your music because it was pirated, or because it was (illegally!) attached as a soundtrack to a funny YouTube video, well, it's hard (impossible?) to buy publicity that good, and you just got it for free.

            In fact, there was a great article [salon.com] about this -- basically arguing that because of how ridiculously greedy the publishers and studios

            • That's quite true indeed. The major corporation are interested in profit, and they are the only ones who will lose when (not if) the paradigm shifts.
              That's because there will always be a marginal value attached to authorship that no copyright law must protect: a musician can tour, a famous author can give lectures etc. I don't think the world will be starved of artistic masterpieces if copyright falls, because I don't think money is the prime motivator for top authors.
              Even when it comes to technical works,

        • by afidel ( 530433 )
          Exactly. I never bought any music online (and very little on cd) until Amazon started offering high quality, DRM free MP3's that are guaranteed to play on just about any music device in existence. As far as your conjecture that selling music is a dying business, I strongly disagree. The price may drop over time, but since costs are dropping probably faster I feel the industry will do just fine.
    • by TD-Linux ( 1295697 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @10:26AM (#24990655)
      In addition, the iPod will never support it. There goes 70% of the potential users.
      • by rvw ( 755107 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @10:59AM (#24990935)

        In addition, the iPod will never support it. There goes 70% of the potential users.

        Wait until the next update of your ipod. I can't think of any reason why it wouldn't be technically possible to get this working on an ipod.

        • by TD-Linux ( 1295697 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @12:46PM (#24991825)

          In addition, the iPod will never support it. There goes 70% of the potential users.

          Wait until the next update of your ipod. I can't think of any reason why it wouldn't be technically possible to get this working on an ipod.

          Of course it's technically possible, but when was the last time you saw an iPod with a PlaysForSure logo?

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by MacDork ( 560499 )

        In addition, the iPod will never support it. There goes 70% of the potential users.

        And the largest music store in the US. But that's exactly what this is about, isn't it? Reinventing Fairplay so they can re-establish their cartel... Too bad for them, since to do it, they need a vertically integrated solution like iTunes/iTMS/iPod. Apple makes everything from the hardware all the way down to the QuickTime file format. That's why everyone who attempts to compete with Apple fails. Tougher still: They not only have to make all the pieces to succeed, they have to do a better job of it tha

    • by MykeBNY ( 303290 )

      Yeah, reminds me of the HDMI thing. In theory, any device capable of outputting HDMI should work with any device capable of receiving HDMI. But due to its complexity in implementation, at least in the first generation devices, it was pretty hit or miss. So you've got a shiny new PS3 and a shiny new TV, but HDMI won't work, and you're stuck doing the digital->analog->digital transcoding for no good reason.

      So with this DECE thing, even if users play by the rules, will it actually work?

      What if one dev

      • by RulerOf ( 975607 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @10:49AM (#24990859)

        So with this DECE thing, even if users play by the rules, will it actually work?

        IMHO, the *AA could create a DRM scheme so advanced that it it powered by AI and knows, with 100% success, whether or not you're using content in a method that constitutes fair use...and it would still be bullshit, because no one should be able to tell you what you can do with what you own.

        There's a difference between breaking the law, and not having the choice to.

        • by mpe ( 36238 )
          IMHO, the *AA could create a DRM scheme so advanced that it it powered by AI and knows, with 100% success, whether or not you're using content in a method that constitutes fair use...and it would still be bullshit, because no one should be able to tell you what you can do with what you own.

          Maybe instead they could attempt to produce entertaining fiction.
  • DRM... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 13, 2008 @10:09AM (#24990533)
    You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.
    • Re:DRM... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by poetmatt ( 793785 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @10:18AM (#24990605) Journal

      For once, an accurate phrase.

      The fact that this DECE will be easily crackable (there is nothing that isn't, especially when hackers have an incentive to spite riaa/mpaa), and a complete failure, apparently has been neglected.

      I mean haven't these guys learned that renaming DRM doesn't make it any less annoying? Did they forget about that "digital enablement" or whatever it was called?

      Sheesh.

    • Re:DRM... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by RDW ( 41497 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @10:38AM (#24990757)

      'So far, the list includes several big-name brands in computers, networking and consumer electronics, but there are some glaring absences, including Apple'

      FAIL!

      If the lipstick isn't even compatible with your favourite breed of pig, their silly little 'coalition' is just as doomed as all the others before it.

    • I find that extremely offensive to the hardworking female lawyers of the RIAA and MPAA. You, sir, are a sexist.

      I demand a formal apology.

      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        You're comparing lawyers for the RIAA and MPAA to pigs? That, sir, is very offensive to pigs.

        I demand a formal apology.
    • Re:DRM... (Score:4, Funny)

      by Frosty Piss ( 770223 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @11:03AM (#24990961)

      You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.

      What does Sarah Palin have to do with this?

    • "You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig."

      MMMMmmmmmm......bacon. [Drool]

  • by Nursie ( 632944 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @10:11AM (#24990545)

    Because I've never taken a cd to a friend's place, used it in someone else's car (or a hire car), or given one away to a friend when I didn't want it any more.

    Fuck that, I'll stick to the CD, which I can rip myself.

  • DRM is still DRM (Score:5, Insightful)

    by QuietLagoon ( 813062 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @10:13AM (#24990569)
    No matter how much lipstick you put on DRM, it is still DRM.
    .

    The problem with DRM is that DRM requires a server out on the Internet to give me permission to listen to the music, or to watch the movies, I have purchased. Without that server, the content I purchase are little more than a random collection of useless data bits.

    Look at those people who foolishly bought into Microsoft's DRM for music. In a short while, Microsoft will be turning off the DRM server, and all the music thus "protected" by Microsoft's DRM will be unusable.

    Do you really want to give the RIAA an on/off switch for your ability to listen to your media collection?

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      Technically, users who bought MS Fairplay 1.0 can still play their music because their machine is still authenticated. The problem will be if anything ever happens to the machine like a re-install of the OS or the music owner decides to buy a new machine. There are no more servers to authenticate the new/re-installed machine. As someone who had to re-install XP many times because of stability/malware issues, re-installing Windows happens a lot.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Reziac ( 43301 ) *

      "Do you really want to give the RIAA an on/off switch for your ability to listen to your media collection?"

      Precisely why I don't buy anything I can't rip, or can't shift wherever I want to, or sell if I get tired of it.

      I'm not interested in "sharing" it with the world. But I want to do whatever the hell *I* want to with it on *my* devices.

  • by CaptainPatent ( 1087643 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @10:15AM (#24990581) Journal
    Blackhat developing domain-based crack.
  • by nathan.fulton ( 1160807 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @10:16AM (#24990587) Journal
    A few problems:
    1. Co-Option! TFA: "it [DECE] could be a very good thing for consumers." Ever heard of the concept of a co-option? The anti-DRM movement has so much public support (outside of /. et al) because of its downfalls in terms of flexibility. Take that away, DRM seems more reasonable to Joe College, his parents, and his little sister.

    2. More centralization, more big corporations, less privacy, and another chance for IE to redeem itself. TFS: "you could stream the file to any device with a DECE-compatible Web browser" And what exactly does DECE compatability mean? Does this mean my real identity is broadcast when I use a browser? If so, Will it be disabled by default?

    3. Use your MP3 player/computer for storage of non-music files? Think again.
    TFA: "The caveats: the devices have to be registered electronically to that user, and the copyright holder gets to limit the total number of devices customers may register."
    Considering the history of DRM, I wouldn't be surprised if this means both corporations AND whoever cracks their methods gets to see everything.
    • by plover ( 150551 ) *

      Absolutely. The ..AA is attempting to duplicate the commercially successful implementations of DRM. FairPlay seems successful because it works on iPods, and iPods are the music players. AACS seems successful because Blu-Ray has been accepted by the HDTV crowd.

      But like anything else, this is a delay tactic. Most iPod customers don't yet understand that someday they may want a music player that isn't an iPod. Some have been burned as they try to move their iTunes music to their non-iPhone cell phones.

  • by TD-Linux ( 1295697 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @10:18AM (#24990601)
    ... as long as it's IE (possibly Opera or Safari).
    Unless this form of DRM is radically different from its predecessors, it will only be supported on closed-source browsers, which eliminates Firefox, Chrome, and Konqueror.

    I really don't see anything new here - we already have standard formats like mp3 and mpeg-4 (aka XviD) that play on a variety of devices. This new plan looks like a great way for DECE to profit from licensing and certification fees, but not much else.
  • Sorry, what's a "web domain"?
  • Insanity (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anomalyst ( 742352 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @10:23AM (#24990627)
    Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
    • Yawn. If you buy into a DRM system you surrender control and trust. It's inevitable that your trust will be broken and the cost of surrendering control will become apparent. They're actually teaching you with these methods why you can't trust them with the keys to your system and the content you buy. My rant [slashdot.org] on this issue is two and a half years old now, and it's as true as ever. DRM won't work. DRM can't work.

      It is good though to see yet another technology scammer taking the media giants for yet anot

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      It's also called science [xkcd.com]
  • A compost pile is an ecosystem. So I'm suggesting HEAP - Helpless Effort to Accumulate Profit (of shit)
  • by EllynGeek ( 824747 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @10:33AM (#24990705)

    Something that always gets overlooked is how this is also an attempt to kill off the second-hand market. As has been said before, their ultimate goals are to get paid for every viewing and listen, and to cut those pesky greedy artists out of the deal entirely.

  • ....am not at all interested. There is literally NO value-added here. You can get good prices on digital downloads from places like Amazonmp3.com, and all my music can transfer (wirelessly! instantaneously! more-marketing-phrases-here!) from all my devices to all my other devices.

    If they made the music cost waaay less than non-DRMed music, they might have a shot. But I suspect that would only really entice the people who are already buy DRMed music because they don't care about true interoperability any

  • Unless they can find sufficient clueless morons to buy into this, it'll flop.

    For myself, any device or service that restricts my ability to play purchased media in any way I want doesn't have any appeal at all.

    Note I said purchased. I *do* purchase my media, all of it, in fact I spend a fair bit of cash on audio purchased online and dvds.

    I only buy products which are free of DRM or trivially easy to rip into other, more portable formats. If these guys think my cash will flow endlessly into their restrictive

  • From China or Korea within two months after DECE is introduced: six or seven players that are "DECE-region-free".

    • by mpe ( 36238 )
      From China or Korea within two months after DECE is introduced: six or seven players that are "DECE-region-free".

      That long?
  • by mgkimsal2 ( 200677 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @10:54AM (#24990891) Homepage

    What do you bet that was the original full project name? ;)

  • Once you've acquired a file, you could play it on any of your devices

    Can't I do that anyway? Oh wait...

  • by Phoenix666 ( 184391 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @10:59AM (#24990937)

    You really have to think that after 10 years of consumers telling the labels and studios what they want, and then voting with their feet when they don't get it, it would have sunk into even the head of the thickest *AA dinosaur. In the annals of colossal stupidity, the last 10 years of IP wars will have to rank pretty near the top.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by jimicus ( 737525 )

      You really have to think that after 10 years of consumers telling the labels and studios what they want, and then voting with their feet when they don't get it, it would have sunk into even the head of the thickest *AA dinosaur. In the annals of colossal stupidity, the last 10 years of IP wars will have to rank pretty near the top.

      10 years? Try 100.

      Radio will kill the live music industry. Vinyl will kill radio and live music. Home taping will kill vinyl, radio and live music. Copying CDs will kill music. MP3s will kill music.

      It wasn't true back then and it isn't true now. People want to listen to music, plain and simple. The RIAA know that damn well, they're not that stupid. Quite why they're so keen to describe every new piece of technology as the thing that will eventually kill them, I don't know. Some sort of control thi

      • by mpe ( 36238 )
        Radio will kill the live music industry. Vinyl will kill radio and live music. Home taping will kill vinyl, radio and live music. Copying CDs will kill music. MP3s will kill music.
        It wasn't true back then and it isn't true now. People want to listen to music, plain and simple. The RIAA know that damn well, they're not that stupid. Quite why they're so keen to describe every new piece of technology as the thing that will eventually kill them, I don't know. Some sort of control thing?


        About the only way to
        • by jimicus ( 737525 )

          About the only way to kill music would be something which would kill the human race. However if the current music industry were to die, for any reason, a new one would come into being within a short time.

          And the people best equipped to do it would be those who understand how music works.

          Note that this may not be the money men in suits at the top - it may be the talent scouts rather nearer the bottom.

  • As usual they ignore the obvious fact that it only takes one person to exploit the analogue hole, and after that the internet will take care of the rest. Heck, even if you could shut down the internet data storage technology is rapidly approaching the point where you would be able to carry every piece of music ever recorded in a studio on your key-chain. It's over already, adapt or die.

  • Less convenient (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    What does this give me that I don't get with P2P?

  • NO DRM. PERIOD. No matter HOW they dress it up, it's STILL DRM, and it's STILL UNACCEPTABLE, it's still the RIAA looking over everyone's shoulder and putting a leash on purchased content. Them, them, FUCK THEM.
  • by Dirtside ( 91468 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @11:35AM (#24991211) Journal

    Repeat after me: All DRM is inherently defective and bad for consumers. Consider the baseline: completely unfettered media. You can do with it whatever you want.

    All forms of DRM add fetters to that situation without giving any additional abilities or functionality. There is absolutely nothing that can be done with DRMed media that cannot be done (in a technical sense) with unfettered media.

    • All forms of DRM add fetters to that situation without giving any additional abilities or functionality.

      There is the possibility of providing a service through which to re-download the media, as many times as you want.

      Granted, it's possible to provide that with completely unfettered media -- so, strictly speaking, it's not the DRM itself that adds this. It is, however, possible for a DRM'd system to have additional capabilities that the non-DRM'd media alone wouldn't have.

      So...

      All DRM is inherently defective and bad for consumers.

      Consider services like Napster et al -- download anything you want that exists in the service for some reasonable monthly fee, less th

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      Yeah so their evil marketing attempt is to still make it seem like a bonus; they will eventually have reached their goal when we assume that we have no granted rights to begin with, from there on, any right will seem as a bonus. Maybe that's their idea of how this should continue.
  • The "same" as CDs (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Adrian Lopez ( 2615 ) on Saturday September 13, 2008 @12:03PM (#24991437) Homepage

    ... the group's stated intention to make digital files as flexible and permissive as CDs, at least within the confines of someone's personal domain.

    In other words, not at all the same as CDs.

  • You continue wasting money on DRM that isn't effective. And I'll continue getting the content I want in the format I want it in.

    MPAA and RIAA are obsolete.

  • The goal is to create for downloads the same kind of interoperability that's been true for physical products, such as CDs and DVDs.

    No, the goal sounds like being able to charge outrageous licensing fees for "certified" devices, thus helping to extinguish DRM-free players, music sources, etc.

    It is unlikely any open source, unencumbered device or software would receive the certification blessing.

  • My Domain for my money transactions is limited to accounts i own and operate plus a few trusted family accounts.
    The money is free of DRM to move between these accounts.
    Beyond this personal domain, my money is tied up by my DRM and cannot move to Sony, or other RIAA labels without violating federal statues.
    Sorry.

  • ... they just quit treating pirates better than the paying customers and get rid of drm totally?

  • ... is the domain of "any bloody thing that I ever want to play it on, any damn time I want to play it, with absofuckinglutely no hassles whatsofuckingever"

  • There are still lots of people who think the hardware is broken when they run into a DRM problem. I refuse to buy anything blu-ray because of the DRM system they have in place.
  • The RIAA knows damn well that this whole battle has never been about shifting legitimately purchased content between devices in your "domain" (insert your own Seinfeld "master of your domain" joke here). Unfortunately, that is one of the arguments that many (including posters here) have used in the past: "I just want to shift the music I've already paid for (snort) from CD to computer to iPod to [insert device] -- I would never (suppressed giggle), EVER think of downloading it for free (fingers crossed behi

  • Wow, DRM, again.. why? they really can't admit they are on the losing side of this argument. Sheesh!!
  • Eh, this sounds like the high-and-mighty features that FlexLM [wikipedia.org] was supposed to bring to the CAD market over the last few decades. Anyone who has used development tools from Xilinx, Altera, Cadence, et al, knows what an outrageous PiTA this thing is. It's undeniably twitchy, and changing any configuration item (like adding a new licensed feature) results in something breaking somewhere else. You have to have a degree to manage a FlexLM server, and I can't envision Joe Sixpack *ever* getting a floating lice
  • Just buy CD's and do what you want with it. Encode it to Flac, Apple Lossless.... etc... copy the disc to a new cd... no DRM no Nothing.

    If we let the CD die, we're in trouble. I dont want compressed to shit music. I like my uncompressed audio because i can convert it to any format i want.

    The CD is key to our freedom. If everything goes the way of downloadable lossy compressed file formats, we will have lost quality for convience... and the freedom to do with our music as we please.

    Buy a CD today. Or atleast

    • by nietsch ( 112711 )

      How about we don't give money to the RIAA bunch? that means you have to be picky with the music you buy. Maybe a campaign is in order to let the independents mark their products with 'No RIAA-evil used in the production of this album'. That way it becomes a little easier to discern it from RIAA poison.

  • If you want my business again you will do 2 things:

    1 - remove *all* DRM, both direct and indirect forms of it.
    2 - produce product worth my money.

  • Sort of blows me using my ipod eh?

The difficult we do today; the impossible takes a little longer.

Working...