Sunday, 28 September 2008

When is DRM good?

Following on from my last post I thought it would be it would be interesting to blog about DRM.

DRM is a multi-headed beast - and it covers a range of technologies including
  • Website based content protection (e.g. usernames/passwords up to signed URL's)
  • Encrypted Files with personal keys (e.g. Windows Media DRM)
  • Encrypted Streaming (e.g. Flash RTMPE + Player Verification)
  • Digital Vault Services to allow repeat access to your content (e.g. Steam) 
The key thing they all do is try and control the usage of usually of a content you have bought, rented or are seeing advertising funded.

I think the future of DRM depends on the content

Music
Basically Music DRM is dead. I can now legally buy my music without DRM with ease and I doubt anyone will succeed in bringing it back.

Music DRM is a good example of how NOT to do DRM. The early attempts were too annoying and too locked down. When I buy something DTO (Download To Own) I must be able to back it up, use it on my choice of portable device otherwise it becomes easier to pirate it!

Now we have ended up in the situation where legal MP3 DTO rules the market. 

Games
Games DRM tends to fall into two categories
  • Downloadshop DRM - like Steam
  • CD/DVD DRM like securerom
I think the Steam model is going to win and is adding value to consumers. I can buy all my games via Steam. It lets me easily (more easily than with DVD's) move them between computers. It also stops me losing my old games as I can get them again at any time! 
The CD/DVD DRM is a good example of bad DRM. It doesn't stop piracy (except for the shortest of periods after launch) and annoys the consumer. I don't want to have to carry around disks to use content on my computer!

Video
Video is the big unknown in the DRM land. At present online video for 'long form' content (as opposed to YouTube) is in its infancy. I believe DRM done well can add a lot of value - by make it easier to advertising fund content.
For video I see two models that will work
  • Rental advertising or money funded - protected by DRM
  • DTO - either with Steam like DRM or no DRM.
The key points here are
Rental
  • Without DRM this won't work - people won't pay or will strip the ads
  • DRM will have to be easy - e.g. no warnings, no security issues, transparent. Flash RTMPE is a great example of this.
DTO 
  • DRM is probably going to be optional people will start issuing content without DRM (just like happened with Music)
  • For DRM to work it has to add value - so at the very least it should allow you to re-download your content over time
  • It should also let you move content between computers (most DTO video doesn't let you do this)
  • It should let you move content to ANY portable device
The elephant in the room with DRM is piracy. It is easier for me to get video content via a pirate network that it is via legal sources. Whatever the industry does has to solve that problem!

Saturday, 27 September 2008

Adobe, DRM and Slashdot FUD

I have long been a fan of the open source movement. They provide excellent tools and an excellent model for software development. However a number of people in the community take great pleasure in spreading FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt). 
A really good example of this is the recent stories about Adobe's streaming DRM being 'broken'. For example
The summary (as ever on slashdot) is quite 'tabloid' - the Sun would be proud. It appears the story is a couple of issues rolled together
  • It is possible to capture un-protected flash streams - This is NOT news and is what I would think the open source crowd would expect and want!
  • Amazon are using such unprotected streams for their movie download service - well up to them! This is NOT adobe's fault.
  • Flash RTMPE (with player verification) which is Adobe's DRM has been misconfigured by a number of people and it is possible to rip its contents when it isn't properly configured.
The only real issue here with misconfigured 'DRM' is the last one and Adobe issued a tech note when this was first reported!
This is a real problem for Adobe as it is going to knock confidence in their solutions - which is going to hurt mainly Linux.
There are only two DRM options in town - Silverlight and Flash. Both are now cross platform on the 'important' platforms - Mac/Windows. Only flash DRM currently supports Linux (on x86). 
If people want to see Linux being a viable desktop replacement it is going to need, high quality online video. Currently to get good content means using DRM. Knocking Adobe for something that isn't their fault is only going to push this content into solutions that will never work on Linux.
A lot of people will argue - well they will just pirate it - may be - but Linux will never become mainstream if it depends on piracy to deliver video. The irony here is the Open Source community used to claim MS spent effort delivering FUD against them - now they are doing it themselves!


UPDATE - Adobe have published a response to the original article.