RE: The challenge of serving *EVERYONE* (was RE: Mozilla blog: DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users)

Bob Ham wrote:
>
> >> Which would mean they would have to invest their money in producers
> >> of unencumbered content, in creative people who are more interested
> >> in producing content worthy of being shared than they are in
> >> preventing sharing.  This is a good thing, right?
> >
> > Once again, that depends on your perspective.
>
> Indeed.  Do you agree that investing in content producers who do not
> encumber their content with DRM, is a good thing?

Interestingly enough, as a Canadian who previously worked for 15 years in the 
music industry, I have a well thought-through opinion there.

Canada has the same problem as many other countries - the "Americanization" of 
its culture, be that film, music, literature, etc. That problem is amplified 
by the fact that we share a common border - in fact the longest shared order 
in the world. 80% of Canadians live within a 90 minute drive of that border, 
and American broadcasts (music and television) into the country is not only 
commonplace, but unavoidable.

With regard to investing in *local* content producers, then yes, I support 
investing in them. The Canadian Music industry is alive and well today, and 
has launched the careers of many internationally recognized artists (ranging 
from Celine Dion and David Foster, to Nickleback, Justin Beiber, Barenaked 
Ladies, Rush, and countless others). One particular source of pride for many 
Canadians involved in the music industry is how strong the *Canadian* industry 
is: prior to the 1970s if a Canadian musician was to "make it" they had to 
abandon their country and move to the United States (Neil Young, Joni 
Mitchell).

How did the country of Canada foster and nurture a Canadian music industry? 
Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_content

And so to your question: I support investing in *local* content producers, as 
it enriches our world, and helps "balance" out the weight of the US media 
juggernaut. However, I also support reasoned and reasonable "restrictions" to 
unfettered actions, in part because I saw how it worked in the real world, and 
the benefits outweighed the costs. (For what it is worth, Canadians opposed to 
the Can-Con regulations when first introduced - primarily broadcasters - had 
the same kind of rhetoric the current anti-Content Protection advocates are 
demonstrating today - so you are in good if now aged company).

I think it is entirely reasonable for a Canadian company (or a Brazilian 
company) to want to ensure that *they* remain masters of their creative works, 
so that they can "package" and "sell" those creations around the globe. I 
believe that those works have a value that they, as creators of the works, 
should have ultimate say over in terms of value and distribution. I further 
believe that I would support a company who created entertainment with their 
choice of whether or not to use Content Protection on their assets, and would 
not condemn them simply because market forces lead them to determine that in 
order to ensure their assets remain of value, that they take legal and 
reasonable steps to ensure their long-term value and viability. I would much 
rather see a Canadian video production company stay in business, then to have 
to shut their door because the rampant theft and distribution of their output 
so devalues their creative works that they cannot stay in business.

I believe this, because I understand that the entertainment *industry* was not 
established to "share" anything, it was set up to sell something: that an 
industry, any industry, needs to be financially viable to exist or thrive. The 
Canadian music industry exists and thrives today because "restrictions" 
allowed for the creation and demand of home-grown talent, that Canadians 
bought and didn't just simply "take". I would support that company either way, 
as I believe supporting native culture is significantly more important than 
being able to download the latest episode of Game of Thrones in Europe the 
night it is broadcast in America.

For all the anti-DRM rhetoric in the world you can surface, if you cannot 
protect the creators of entertainment content, and their output, you will 
continue to fail in your cause.

JF

Received on Friday, 16 May 2014 17:45:46 UTC