EMI, DRM, and ECD
that’s “Economic Civil Disobedience”
Essay Posted April 3, 2007 by James E. Nelson
In terms of marketing I’m old. By marketing metrics I might even be Neanderthal old since I’m pushing 50, but with the immense popularity of the Geico Cavemen and the compassion generated by Jasper Fforde’s sympathetic treatment of Neanderthals in the cult classic Lost in a Good Book, I figure that my opinion might count for the next week or so. With that in mind, I want to ruminate on the decision by EMI Music to remove DRM restrictions from much of their digital music.
From a marketing perspective, Digital Rights Management (DRM) is one of the more dim witted scams to come down the pike in years. Here’s how it works. When a person purchases a digital music track from a digital music store such as the ITunes Music Store for 99¢, the music file they get is relatively low quality, and can only be copied a handful of times, if at all, because of the DRM built into the file. Of course, unexplained things happen to digital files. Eventually (typically sooner rather than later), the file gets corrupted and you are unable to copy the file so you’ll have to purchase it all over again. What this means on a practical level is that the consumer is paying a premium price to rent low quality music.
While ITunes, is the most famous, Microsoft is the most egregious of the music sellers. Their DRM is so restrictive that one can’t even play music purchased from the MSN music store on Microsoft’s newest and best mp3 player, the Zune. Microsoft has promised to remedy the problem, but by the time they get around to it (even though the problem is nearly a year old it still isn’t fixed satisfactorily), young people who actually want to listen to their music will already have downloaded pirate copies (with no DRM) because their tunes were stolen by the engineers in Redmond.
Most people in the loop on this issue recognize that this is not commerce, but legalized theft. High School and College kids have been trading music since the phonograph and tape recorder were invented. Today it’s much easier to do because of the internet and file sharing tools such as Morpheus and LimeWire. But with the rise of DRM, the file sharing demographic has changed. Back in the day it was the rebellious past time of adolescents. In the past few years (paralleling the rise of DRM) it has become common among adults as well.
There is even an ethical argument (albeit, a shaky one) to support so-called “illegal file sharing.” Big Time record companies essentially steal music from artists through unbelievably unfair recording contracts. Each record company has their poster boy band that has a fair contract and is doing well financially. These “poster boy” bands (because they’re making lots of money) are willing to shill for the current system. (Metallica is the best known.) But the vast majority of recording artists and song writers sold their souls to a system of serfdom and work in servitude to the almighty record companies. In turn, the big time studios sell bad product for an inflated price to the consumer. The only ones who win are the record companies.
Congress and the RIAA get up in arms about people stealing music, but their concern is quite frankly laughable. It can be argued that on the scale of ethical concerns, using Morpheus or LimeWire to download music is about as morally odious as doing 60 mph in the old Federally imposed 55 mph zone. Given the gross inequities of the industry and the obscene profits they make, it’s more of a technical issue than a major economic violation. This is a civil disobedience argument very much in the spirit of John Hancock (and his fellow Sons of Liberty at the Boston Tea Party), Henry David Thoreau, as well as the more contemporary Saul Alinsky. Downloading DRM free music and using the money saved to support one’s favorite musicians by buying t-shirts and going to concerts (because the sad fact is, musicians enslaved by major labels make far more money from t-shirts than CDs) is an act of civil disobedience and our duty if we truly care about artistic freedom, according to digital civil libertarians such as John Dvorak.
Dvorak further argues that the current set of unworkable digital laws lead to a culture of lawlessness that is difficult, if not impossible to reverse. The old federally imposed 55 mph speed limit led to widespread disregard of speed limits in general. That has always been the effect of onerous law. Skirting the law was a way of life in the old Soviet Union largely because so many of the laws were ridiculous. Similarly, in countries where bureaucracy is run amok to the extent that very little can actually get done (African countries are the best examples in the modern world), bribery becomes a way of life. It is the only way to carry on commerce. Similarly, the combination of over-priced, low quality product in combination with DRM laws that fly in the face of two hundred years of copyright law in the United States has led to a dramatic downturn in disc sales for the record industry and a dramatic upturn in unbridled “lawlessness.”
But things may be beginning to turn around. EMI, one of the largest record labels and home of artists such as the Rolling Stones and Norah Jones, has decided to remove the DRM restrictions and increase the quality to near CD quality for most of their music on ITunes, for an additional 30¢ fee. It’s anybody’s guess whether this will stop the hemorrhaging, because the old system of poor quality with heavy handed DRM has already changed the industry dramatically.
For instance, Good Charlotte, a band under contract with EMI, gives away much of its music for free on its various web sites. One has to visit each web site regularly in order to get a full collection because no single piece of music is given away for long. The result is phenomenal sales of t-shirts, hats, and bling. People stop by to download the latest song and end up buying a key chain or wrist band. Good Charlotte also has record sales that far exceed sales of bands that are similarly popular. EMI tried to stop the band from giving away the music, but Good Charlotte managed to paint EMI as Big Brother without actually breaking the conditions of their contract. Since their record sales have turned out to be so good, EMI finally gave up the fight and now pretends it knows nothing of Good Charlotte’s under the table marketing scheme.
Aside from bands under contract with major labels, independent bands, who use the power of the internet, and slightly out of the ordinary music outlets (such as Public Television’s “Austin City Limits,” PRI’s “World Cafe” and both XM and Sirius Radio that have channels dedicated to giving air play high quality unsigned artists), have begun to have remarkable success. New York based band They Might Be Giants are relatively unknown, but because they do their own marketing and distribution they make a lot more money than the average commercially successful band.
It could be that a combination of greed and bone-headed stupidity will kill the music industry as we know it. EMI’s attempt to curb the flow is probably too little, too late. In the mean time, people who care about music, freedom, and basic fairness to the musicians will continue to play their pirated music and buy the t-shirts from the band’s web site. It’s no American Revolution, but it is nice to see another British bully, such as EMI, getting their come-uppance at the hands of the little guys all across North America and Europe.
Copyright © 2007 James E. Nelson (Just Another Jim). All Rights Reserved.
You are free to distribute as long as attribution and web address is included.
Site support by C T E K