Note to content owners: DRM doesn’t work

Saturday, April 7th, 2007

There are some ideas that are broken, but attractive enough to some people that they are doomed to be tried again and again.

DRM is one of them.

I was thrilled to see recently that the processing key for *all* HD discs produced to date has been discovered and published. I expect this to lead to the complete unraveling of the Blu-Ray and HD-DVD content protection schemes before even 1% of the potential market for those players has been reached. Good news indeed, because it may inspire the people who setup such schemes to reconsider.

We’ve been here before. The DVD-CSS encryption system was cracked very quickly – stylishly and legally so. Content owners – Hollywood Inc – were outraged and pursued anybody who even referred to the free software which could perform the trivial decryption process. They used the DMCA as a way to extend the laws of copyright well beyond their original intent. They behaved like a deer in the headlights – blinded by the perceived oncoming doom of a world where their content flows quickly and efficiently, unable to see potential routes to safety while those headlights approach. Their market was changing, facing new opportunities and new threats, and they wanted to slow down the pace of change.
Content owners think that DRM can slow down the natural evolution of a marketplace.

In the case of movies, a big driver of DRM adoption was the unwillingness of the industry to get out of the analog era. Movies are typically distributed to theaters on celluloid film, great big reels of it. It costs a lot to print and distribute those films to the cinemas who will display it. So the realities of real-world distribution have come to define the release strategy of most movies. Companies print a certain number of films, and ship those to cinemas in a few countries. When the movie run is finished there, those same films are shipped to new countries. This is why a movie is typically released at different times in different countries. It’s purely a physical constraint on the logistics of moving chunks of celluloid, and has no place in today’s era of instant, global, digital distribution.

Of course, when DVD’s came along, content owners did not want people to buy the DVD in the USA, then ship that to Australia before the film was showing in cinemas there. Hence the brain damage that we call region encoding – the content owners designed DVD-CSS so that it was not only encrypted, but contained a region marker that is supposed to prevent it from being played anywhere other than the market for which it was released. If you live outside the US, and have ever tried to buy a small-run por^W documentary movie from the US you’ll know what I mean by brain damage: it doesn’t play outside the US, and the demand in your region is not sufficient to justify a print run in your region-coding, so sorry for you.

The truth is that survival in any market depends on your ability to keep up with what is possible. The movie owners need to push hard for global digital distribution – that will let them get movies out on cinema globally on the same day (modulo translation), the same way that you and I can see everything on YouTube the day it is uploaded.

The truth is also that, as the landscape changes, different business models come and go in their viability. Those folks who try to impose analog rules on digital content will find themselves on the wrong side of the tidal wave. Sorry for you. It’s necessary to innovate (again, sometimes!) and stay ahead of the curve, perhaps even being willing to cannibalize your own existing business – though to be honest cannibalizing someone else’s is so much more appealing.

Right now the content owners need to be thinking about how they turn this networked world to their advantage, not fight the tide, and also how to restructure the costs inherent in their own businesses to make them more in line with the sorts of revenues that are possible in a totally digital world.

Here are some reality bites:

  • Any DRM that involves offline key storage will be broken. It doesn’t matter if that key is mostly stored on protected hardware, either, because sooner or later one of those gets broken too. And if you want your content to be viewable on most PC’s you will have software viewers. They get broken even faster. So, even if you try to protect every single analog pathway (my favourite is the push for encrypted channels between the hifi and the speakers!) someone, somewhere will get raw access to your content. All you are doing is driving up the cost of your infrastructure – I wonder what the cost of all the crypto associated with HD DVD/BluRay is, when you factor in the complexity, the design, and the incremental cost of IP, hardware and software for every single HD-capable device out there.
  • The alternative to offline key storage is streaming-only access, and that is equally unprotectable. The classic streaming system, TV broadcast, was hacked when the VCR came out, and that was blessed as fair use. Today we see one of the digital satellite radio companies (Sirius or XM, I think) being sued by content owners for their support of a device which records their CD-quality broadcasts to MP3 players. Web content streaming services that don’t allow you to save the content locally are a very useless form of protection, easily and regularly subverted. And of course not everyone wants to be online when they are watching your content.
  • It only takes one crack. For any given piece of content, all it takes is one unprotected copy, and you have to assume that anyone who wants it will get it. Whether it is software off a warez site, or music from an MP3 download service in Russia, or a file sharing system, you cannot plug all the holes. Face it, people either want to pay you for your content, or they don’t, and your best strategy is to make it as easy as possible for people who want to comply with the law to do so. That does not translate into suing grannies and schoolkids, it translates into effective delivery systems that allow everyone to do the right thing, easily.
  • Someone will find a business model that doesn’t depend on the old way of thinking, and if it is not you, then they will eat you alive. You will probably sue them, but this will be nothing but a defensive action as the industry reforms around their new business model, without you. And by the industry I don’t mean your competitors – they will likely be in the same hole – but your suppliers and your customers. The distributors of content are the ones at risk here, not the creators or the consumers.

The music industry’s fear of Napster led them down the DRM rabbit-hole. Microsoft, Apple, SONY and others all developed DRM systems and pitched those to the music industry as a “sane ” approach to online music distribution. It was a nice pitch: “All the distribution benefits of download, all the economic benefits of vinyl”, in a nutshell.

Of these contenders, SONY was clearly ruled out because they are a content owner and there’s no way the rest of the industry would pay a technology tax to a competitor (much as Nokia’s Symbian never gained much traction with the other biggies, because it was too tied to Nokia). Microsoft was a non-starter, because they are too obviously powerful and the music industry could see a hostile takeover coming a mile away. But cute, cuddly Apple wouldn’t harm anyone! So iTunes and AAC were roundly and widely embraced, and Apple succeeded in turning the distribution and playing of legal digital music into a virtual monopoly. Apple played a masterful game, and took full advantage of the music industry’s fear.

The joyful irony in this of course is Steve Jobs recent call for the music industry to adopt DRM-free distribution, giving Apple the moral high ground. Very, very nicely played indeed!

A few years back I was in Davos, at the World Economic Forum. It was perhaps 2002 or 2003, a few years after the dot-com bust. It was the early days of the iPaq, everyone at the conference had been loaned one. I remember clearly sitting in on a session that was more or less a CEO confessional, a sort of absolution-by-admission-of-stupidity gig. One by one, some well known figures stood up and told horror stories about how they’d let the inmates run the asylum, and allowed twenty-something year olds to tell them how to spend their shareholder capital on dot-com projects. This was really interesting to me, as I’d spent the dot-com period telling big companies NOT to over-invest, and to focus on improving their relationships with existing customers and partners using the net, not taking over the world overnight.

But the real kicker came at the very end, when the head of SONY USA, also responsible for its music division, Sir Stringer, stood up to make his peace. He gloated on at length about how SONY had NOT invested in the dot-com, and thus how he felt he must be the only person in the room who had not been taken in by the kids. It was a very funny, very witty speech that earned a round of applause and laughter. I was left wondering whether he had any clue whatsoever how many songs would fit on the iPaq in his pocket, or how long it would take to download them. I suspected not. Of all the CEO’s who had spoken that day, I thought he was the one most likely to be hit hard, and soon, by the digital train.

Sir Stringer is now CEO of SONY worldwide. Funny, then, that the SONY PS3 should have been delayed so that work could be completed on its DRM system.

Some bad ideas are just too attractive to die, once and for all.

91 comments:

  1. Luis "Dextro" Nabais says: (permalink)
    April 7th, 2007 at 8:16 pm

    I have to say I usually just ready your blog but after reading this text I felt a need to give you my round of applause for such a great text. That last bit about that meeting was just the cherry on the top of the cake to me, I really laughed out loud imagining those guys speaking about the dot-coms like the vatican probably spoke of the theory of evolution when it came out: Pricesless.

  2. Stat(ing) My Mind » Arquivo » DRM by Mark Shuttleworth says: (permalink)
    April 7th, 2007 at 8:25 pm

    [...] Mas vou deixar-me de conversa fiada e deixar aqui o link: Note to content owners: DRM doesn’t work « Entrada Anterior   [ Arquivos ]  [...]

  3. dtamas says: (permalink)
    April 7th, 2007 at 9:33 pm

    These words remind me Cory Doctorow’s talk at Microsoft Research in 2004…

  4. dave says: (permalink)
    April 7th, 2007 at 9:41 pm

    These words remind *me* of Steve Jobs talking to Rolling Stone Magazine in 2003:

    “When we first went to talk to these record companies — you know, it was a while ago. It took us 18 months. And at first we said: None of this technology that you’re talking about’s gonna work. We have Ph.D.’s here, that know the stuff cold, and we don’t believe it’s possible to protect digital content.”

    http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/5939600/steve_jobs_the_rolling_stone_interview/

  5. dragonish says: (permalink)
    April 7th, 2007 at 11:40 pm

    “effective delivery systems that allow everyone to do the right thing, easily”

    Apple knows how to do exactly that, easily…

  6. Nota a los propietarios de contenido: el DRM no funciona at Electriblog says: (permalink)
    April 7th, 2007 at 11:59 pm

    [...] -La siguiente es una traducción al español de este apunte de Mark Shuttleworth- [...]

  7. Demian says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 12:05 am

    I liked this post so much that I’ve translated it to spanish and put it in my blog. I hope you don’t mind (if there’s a problem with it just let me know and I’ll put it down).
    A note aside: I belive celluloid is not used anymore in film. And another (and bigger) reason for movies to be released in different (later) dates than in the US is because of translations and dubbing times. Not all studios and production companies have anough money to make previous translations and a simultaneous release of a movie (a notable exception is George Lucas). But other than that, an excellent post!.

  8. meneame.net says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 12:13 am

    “Nota a los propietarios de contenido: el DRM no funciona”…

    Mark Shuttleworth (el CEO de Canonical y padre de Ubuntu) se despacha a gusto contra los sistemas de protección de contenidos y la industria del entretenimiento. Para quienes no dominen el inglés he dejado una traducción en mi blog: electriblog.com/…

  9. Nicholas Telford says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 1:56 am

    A very entertaining and thought provoking piece, I strongly agree with what you’re saying here. I’m just hoping it’ll happen sooner rather than later, we’ve already been waiting a good 10 years since the early days of Napster for the industries to change their attitude, if they wait any longer, the consumer will lose their taste for digital distribution and move on to the next cool thing.

    Demian: Releases are delayed significantly in English speaking countries as well, so while translation might delay things a little, it’s not the biggest factor.

  10. Paul Jacobson says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 6:01 am

    I think you hit the nail on the head when you said that people will develop business models not based on old mindsets. The recent EMI announcement that it will be selling 256kbps tracks DRM-free gives me hope that the rest of the industry will follow with DRM-free models although I think that will only happen if offering DRM-free music is going to prove to be profitable. Sure there is now an open door for pirates but at least people who want to buy music and listen to it on their device of choice have a great option.

    Now if only the iTunes store was available in South Africa so we, too, could benefit from this!

  11. www.tipshack.com says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 6:17 am

    This is what Mark Shuttleworth has to say about DRM….

    An interesting read on what most everyone is saying about DRM. It is a foregone conclusion that DRM is DOA (almost). Mark Shuttleworth puts a business spin on it the way that Another Mark (Cuban) might put it….

  12. C says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 6:40 am

    I think their use of AES in Blu Ray and HD-DVD is very clever actually. They’ve already revoked WinDVD’s key, from this Slashdot article: http://it.slashdot.org/it/07/04/07/1417253.shtml


    “An update posted for Intervideo WinDVD 8 confirms that it’s AACS key has been possibly revoked. WinDVD 8 is the software which had it’s device key compromised, allowing unfettered access to Blu-Ray and HD-DVD content, resulting in HD movies being made available via many torrent sites online. This is possibly the first known key revocation which has taken place, and little is known of the actual process used for key revocation. According to the release, ‘Please be aware that failure to apply the update will result in AACS-protected HD DVD and BD playback being disabled,’ which pretty much confirms that the key revocation has already taken place for all newly released Blu-Ray and HD-DVD discs.”

    Of course all it will take is a flaw in a class of hardware players–because although each individual one has a specific key, if all the models have a flaw that let’s you get the key is a huge problem– and we’ll see key revocation and recalls and possibly consumer revolt.. (although the sony rootkit fiasco should have been much bigger than it was in the media, so I don’t know..)

  13. john aho says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 6:46 am

    I think you are right on the money here. By embracing DRM companies are assuaging ragers at RIAA and MPAA but ultimately ignoring consumers. I make music myself and although I’m still starting out I don’t really see much of a benefit of signing with a label given how the “standard” recording industry contract rewards artists with little to no money and a loss of rights to their own music.
    I think that now in the digital age music and data wants to be free. Businesses that provide a fair market price for a good drm-free product will be rewarded. Songs are priced a bit too high still at 99cents and should be lowered somewhat so that it makes more sense to consumers to buy.

    Maybe lower data quality music/video should be given away for free and if you want the premium version it shouldn’t cost very much. That way it would be something along the lines of Google videos but instead of paying to see content it would only be paying to see a higher resolution of the content. Or you could have companies sponsor high rez content with commercials ala on demand tv right now. To gain the most viewership the pricepoint should be on the low side to encourage viewership.

    My few cents worth.

  14. Pinhedd says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 7:37 am

    I never cease to be amazed by the persistence of DRM aficionados. Eventually all digital media is decoded and transformed into raw data which is passed through the various devices and busses in a computer and displayed or played. It should not take a genious to know that if it can be displayed it can be captured, if it can be played it can be recorded, those are two fundimental laws of electronic media.

  15. Dessimat0r says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 7:45 am

    DRM requires extra processing in the media player as well, which usually cuts battery life by a considerable margin.

  16. Pierre says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 7:48 am

    Very interesting point of view :)
    It changes a lot from many “DRM is evil – just kill DRM” speeches you can hear anywhere on the web.

  17. Brent Royal-Gordon says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 7:54 am

    DRM is the perpetual motion machine of the information age–fundamentally impossible, but people who want it and don’t fully understand that fact delude themselves into thinking they’ve discovered the secret.

  18. Jorge says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 8:19 am

    Movies ARE STILL printed and distributed in Celluloid film, and is for more than physical constraints. The only ones that would benefit on the savings of digital distribution for feature films would be THE STUDIOS, and theaters that are already strugling would have to take a big time hit. There is more to it than just “digital is better”… the cost of printing film is absorbed by the studio but theatres have to buy those big film reels to project on their old fashioned 35mm film projector. The issue is that if we want to create an all digital workflow for feature film distribution what do you think is needed for the film to make it into the screen? After all is said and done, it needs to be projected, and a comparable quality Digital 4k or 2k projector is 4x or more the cost of a conventional 35mm film projector with less than half the life of the sturdy old fashioned beast… For the movie theaters is a very easy equation. Efficiency and sleeknes have nothing to do with it. Until Sony or somebody can create a projector that surpaces the economic advantages a 35mm system still posses we will not see direct-to-theater satellite or fiber feature film distribution.

    It would be nice, yes, but as of right now Digital distribution has no place in todays era of greedy studios and struggling movie theaters.

  19. BTT | Blog The Tech » Blog Archive » Note to content owners: DRM doesn't work (Mark Shuttleworth) says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 9:40 am

    [...] Note to content owners: DRM doesn’t work  —  There are some ideas that are broken, but attractive enough to some people that they are doomed to be tried again and again.  —  DRM is one of them.  —  I was thrilled to see recently that the processing key for *all* HD discs produced to date has been discovered and published. Source:   Mark Shuttleworth Author:   Mark Link:   http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/96 Techmeme permalink [...]

  20. Mark Shuttleworth: DRM doesn’t work « News Coctail says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 9:50 am

    [...] Mark Shuttleworth: DRM doesn’t work Filed under: Uncategorized — recar @ 9:49 am Mark Shuttleworth: DRM doesn’t work There are some ideas that are broken, but attractive enough to some people that they are doomed to be tried again and again. [...]

  21. William says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 10:04 am

    Why do we need the labels ? Why don’t the artist sell their music on their own and keep all of the revenue from their music along with the rights to distribute and sell it where and at whatever price they want (This can be done using Darmik as well as many other places on the internet). DRM is not the issue; control of distribution channels and revenue from holding the intellectual property of artist is the issue. For many major labels it seems that their strategy is to own or shut down any and all independent avenues to sells and distribution for the artist. In my opinon the major labels want to make sure that the artist has no choice in who sells and distributes their content; and that the fans have no choice in price and format. The Majors want to be the only game in town.

    I think that we should no longer look to labels for the solution to freeing music from its old world model. We should look to the artist and to the fans that purchase the music. The artist should be the group that charts their own destiny as far as price, format, and distribution point. The fans that purchase the music should be allowed to purchase the music in a format that works uniformly on the devices that they use to play the music. If the artist gives their permission fans should also have the ability to resell the artist content for them, and in exchange receive a portion of the revenue. Neither the artist or the fans needs a label or a technology company to force a model or a format on them. I think that if we asked the artist and their fans what they wanted as far as music formats, pricing, distribution and ownership that we would more than likely already know the answer.

    Artist should control pricing of their content as well as the format (drm or no drm) and distribution points. There are DRM formats available to content owners, so the issue of drm or not is one that is up to the content owner not one that should be made by any technology that is used to distribute the content. The decision to use drm is one that the content owners must make based on many factors. The key point here is that there are choices available and that the content owner should and can make this decsion.

    I think that we should write off any current music that the major labels own as content that will never be in an open format playable on any device. We should also understand that more than likely this content will only be available at distribution points and at prices that the label; not the artist or their fans have anything to do with. We must accept this and move on to the next phase of digital content distribution that will give artist and content owners the freedom to decide their own destiny.

    As far as the Myspace love fest. It needs to end. Artist, fans, and consumers of content must know and understand that any revenue generated for Myspace (A Newscorp company) is going to continue to fund the operations of fox news ( http://www.foxnews.com/oreilly/) as well as the continued dismantling of independent media around the world. If as an artist or a fan or a user of the Internet you support any social issues or an independent and free media then myspace is not the place to become a member. By doing this you give them continued revenue and power.

  22. Yoick: Connect, Interact, Create and Share » Blog Archive » Digital Rights Management Gets Shuttled says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 10:24 am

    [...] Content owners take note, the guy who thawte you digital certificates and became Africa’s first (paid) astronaut has given us his views on DRM and it ain’t pretty. Read on if you dare… [...]

  23. Las Noyas de Taran says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 11:45 am

    [...] Vía Meneame encuentro la traducción al castellano de un artículo de Mark Shuttleworh titulado Note to content owners: DRM doesn’t work. Dice lo que es obvio, que se dejen de DRM y que busquen nuevas formas de negocio, porque poner puertas al campo es lo que tiene, que es pa’ na. Pero lo dice muy bien dicho y con un par de anécdotas graciosas, así que echadle un ojo [...]

  24. Greyhawk says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 12:44 pm

    Nice article. Succinct and informative. Although it’s pretty unlikely major companies will adopt that “no DRM is the best DRM” idea, they’ll probably try to look for a better money-making alternative.

  25. Endemoniada » Mark Shuttleworth’s take on DRM says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 12:53 pm

    [...] You can read the entire article on Mark’s blog. [...]

  26. QuarkBlog » Blog Archive » Nota a los propietarios de contenido: el DRM no funciona says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 1:48 pm

    [...] Software Libre 1 Visitas Esta es una traducción de un post (hecha por Electriblog) del blog de Mark Shuttleworth, más conocido por sus viajes por el espacio y ser la cabeza del proyecto Ubuntu. [...]

  27. kosta says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 2:13 pm

    This is a very thoughtful piece of writing. Mark Shuttleworth is becoming a significant person in the open source world: Ubuntu; school labs in parts of africa; and now insightful commentary. Impressive!

  28. Robert Devi says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 2:37 pm

    Good posting. The “Someone will find a business model that doesn’t depend on the old way of thinking” is the real kicker. People naturally gravitate towards the best value/flexibility/convenience for the money and there’s no way to get better value/flexibility/convenience than unencumbered. Any attempt to try is as futile as trying to place a bed-cover on a bet that’s too big. You might get three sides fastened, but as soon as you try to fasten the fourth side, one of the other sides will come undone. The other kicker is that any business model that depends on treating your customers as “the enemy” is bound to fail compared to one that treats them as “friends that can help grow the business”. It’s Sales 101. Any business model that depends on cutting off a demographic because of arbitrary non-business factors (e.g. you can’t trust them or they run a device that you can’t control) will fail compared to one that can reach all demographics. That’s Marketing 101. This doesn’t even go into the other technical problems with DRM that you mentioned.

  29. Note to conent owners: DRM doesn’t work « insignificant thoughts says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 2:41 pm

    [...] The rest is every bit as good, and if you have even the slightest interest in digital media, I highly recommend you head over to his blog and read it. [...]

  30. TalkAboutComics Blog » Is DRM even worth getting worked up about anymore? says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 3:13 pm

    [...] Link [...]

  31. giafly says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 3:43 pm

    Great article. I just now realised why large-scale ID systems are hard/impossible – it’s because they are a special case of DRM. Unfortunately for me I have to design one by Friday.

  32. Det siste Torbjørn leste var... « Torbjørns blogg says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 4:33 pm

    [...] Det siste Torbjørn leste var… Denne artikkelen. Den er skrevet av Ubuntu-sjefen, Mark Shuttleworth. [...]

  33. Kevin McGrath says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 6:15 pm

    So, now we have thorough, rational arguments, combined with actual, factual research and, of course, the consumers tearing at the walls of the DRM establishment.

    If you are a music or Hollywood executive, how on Earth is it possible to continue to ignore all of this and still keep your job?

    On the off chance that one of aforementioned execs is reading this blog, I say this: The number of people working — for free, night and day — to crack your protection schemes will always outnumber your force by 10 to 1 *if your lucky*. You can continue to try and lock it down if you want, but it only accomplishes two things:

    1. It raises your production costs.
    2. Convinces more legitimate consumers to obtained protection free media.

    Learn now or die slowly.

  34. just a Canuck says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 6:41 pm

    Great post! This reminds me of a post written some years back by Jim Carroll (jimcarroll.com) concerning the CRTC (Canadian Radio-Telecommunications Commission) which he entitled “Dance of the Dinosaurs”. The oft-repeated theme of attempting to rebottle the genie, but unable to find the cork. Or the bottle.

  35. NoTiG says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 6:59 pm

    I found this blog entry from digg….

    very well said!

  36. BrokenBlog » Blog Archive » Digital Distribution is Not the Future says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 8:04 pm

    [...] I read Mark Shuttleworth’s post on DRM today. He makes some good points about how DRM doesn’t work, and he’s right. Thing is, he and other DRM-haters seem to think digital distribution is the future. It’s not. [...]

  37. mark says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 9:32 pm

    DRM will never work! EMI has already joined in the non-drm fight. Now the other 3 major labels have to just give in…

  38. O'Bunny says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 9:49 pm

    Love the article, love the ideas. As a musician and a recording guy, It makes a lot of sense.

    One comment, though — the first half-dozen or so paragraphs are essentially unreadable on my 1024×768 screen. The sidebar overwrites the text. And don’t suggest that I need a bigger screen/better browser/whatever — if your content doesn’t work with my standard hardware and browser, it *is* your problem, right?

    :-) , of course, always smiling.

  39. The Beginning of the End to DRM? « Glengage says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 10:48 pm

    [...] I’ve done a couple of talks on DRM at library conferences in the past and I’m scheduled to do a couple more this year. I hope that I can give attendees a more optimistic outlook in the next few months. In the mean time, be sure to spread the word about DRM at your place and educate your staff. There are some good overviews out there including “How to explain Digital Rights Management (DRM) to your dad” and Mark Shuttleworth’s recent post “Note to content owners: DRM doesn’t work.” For a great library-specific overview of DRM, ALA has a great DRM guide for librarians (PDF) on its web site. This entry was written by Glen and posted on April 8, 2007 at 6:42 pm and filed under Digital Content, Presentations, Libraries, Annoyances. Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL. « Five Non-Library Blogs [...]

  40. /dev/random :: links for 2007-04-08 says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 11:19 pm

    [...] Note to content owners: DRM doesn’t work There are some ideas that are broken, but attractive enough to some people that they are doomed to be tried again and again. DRM is one of them. (tags: drm technology) [...]

  41. its about time» Blog Archive » links for 2007-04-08 says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 11:27 pm

    [...] Mark Shuttleworth » Blog Archive » Note to content owners: DRM doesn’t work There are some ideas that are broken, but attractive enough to some people that they are doomed to be tried again and again. DRM is one of them. (tags: drm technology shuttleworth media mp3 copyright windows music linux interesting 2007 apple) [...]

  42. Dennis McDonald says: (permalink)
    April 8th, 2007 at 11:31 pm

    For a while I was thinking that our deliverance from DRM would be a Rogue Nation somewhere with massive manufacturing capability that would develop its own DRM free digital multimedia technology that would eventually find its way into the shelves of Region 1 stores.

  43. /dev/random :: DRM doesn’t work says: (permalink)
    April 9th, 2007 at 1:42 am

    [...] Mark Shuttleworth gives several reasons why DRM is ineffective. All DRM depends on some kind of encryption, and all encryption will be cracked eventually. All it takes is *one* copy to be broken and it’s all over. They’re only hurting legitimate users who want to watch the movie they bought on their iPod, PSP, or other device while it won’t even slow down the high volume pirates. [...]

  44. Ian Brown says: (permalink)
    April 9th, 2007 at 6:11 am

    Perhaps the biggest reason for DVD region coding is price discrimination – the studios want to sell discs at different prices in different markets. The European Commission is investigating Apple for this exact same trick in the iTunes Music Store, which charges different prices for tracks in the US, continential Europe and the UK.

  45. Spr0k3t says: (permalink)
    April 9th, 2007 at 7:07 am

    DRM was created as a legal way to remove fair-use from the average user so the corporate marketing giants could sell you the same media multiple times for different targets mediums. Corporate giants are starting to take notice that people will gladly delve into piracy just to avoid the DRM.

  46. lipilee.hu | speak no evil says: (permalink)
    April 9th, 2007 at 10:53 am

    [...] Arról nem is beszélve, hogy (ahogy azt egyébként pont a napokban üzente Mark Shuttleworth a forgalmazóknak) nincs olyan védelem, ami tényleg működik, és még használható a végeredménye. Ha rendszergazda vagy (voltál valaha), pontosan tudod: a hálózatról jövő betörések megakadályozásának egyetlen módja az, ha kihúzod a hálókábelt. [...]

  47. pauldwaite says: (permalink)
    April 9th, 2007 at 1:53 pm

    > “Microsoft was a non-starter, because they are too obviously powerful and the music industry could see a hostile takeover coming a mile away. But cute, cuddly Apple wouldn’t harm anyone!”

    I dunno; I think the labels also saw the popularity of the iPod, and wanted a ride on that gravy train. But I think I see your point: it’s easy to imagine that they thought the iPod would cease to be fashionable, and Apple would lose the race in the long run like the Macintosh did in the enterprise. Ho ho ho. Sorry guys, Steve ain’t getting fired this time.

    > “if they wait any longer, the consumer will lose their taste for digital distribution and move on to the next cool thing.”

    Nonsense. Digital distribution isn’t a fashion any more than cellular phones are. It’s more convenient, and cheaper. It isn’t going anywhere.

  48. Mike says: (permalink)
    April 9th, 2007 at 4:12 pm

    Yes the Sony comment was most funny. They gave up having the corner on the multibillion dollar digital music player market with their insistence on having their own propriety DRM music system. Not only could the rest of the industry see it, so could the consumers.

  49. FreeSoftNews » Blog Archive » Shuttleworth: Note to Content Owners: DRM Doesn’t Work says: (permalink)
    April 9th, 2007 at 5:40 pm

    [...] “DRM is one of them…” Complete Story [...]

  50. Off-Topic: Mark Shuttleworth on DRM « Sinking Point says: (permalink)
    April 9th, 2007 at 6:49 pm

    [...] Off-Topic: Mark Shuttleworth on DRM I’ve just enjoyed reading Mark Shuttleworth’s blog article on DRM. If you’re in the music recording/publishing/distribution industry, and are lost amid the trees, he’ll show you where the wood is. (Found via Groklaw’s news picks.) [...]

  51. Richard Bell says: (permalink)
    April 9th, 2007 at 10:23 pm

    The reason given for the regioning of DVD’s is a crock. The real reason for regioning DVD’s is that North Americans can, and will, pay more for a DVD than someone in southeast Asia. To combat piracy, the MPAA sells DVD’s outside of North America and Europe for a little money as they dare. Through regioning, you cannot buy a legitimate copy of a film at the cheaper price offered in other parts of the world.

  52. o movimento pós-DRM da EMI « Chá Quente says: (permalink)
    April 10th, 2007 at 12:56 am

    [...] Você ainda liga pra DRM neste cenário? O Defective by Design mantém seu combate lá fora, enquanto Mark Shuttleworth e Charles Cooper assinam ótimos artigos contrários à tecnologia. [...]

  53. Tony Agudo says: (permalink)
    April 10th, 2007 at 1:48 am

    Mark, while your blog post is excellent, I’m a bit surprised that you didn’t put up examples of successful DRM-free businesses like eMusic against some major DRM trainwrecks, like Sony’s rootkit scandal, or Alpha-DVD(http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=106425).

    Robert Devi:
    [/i]The other kicker is that any business model that depends on treating your customers as “the enemy” is bound to fail compared to one that treats them as “friends that can help grow the business”. It’s Sales 101.[/i]

    Took the words right out of my mouth :)

  54. Note to content owners: DRM doesn’t work at Jeremy’s Blog says: (permalink)
    April 10th, 2007 at 4:16 am

    [...] Mark Shuttleworth recently posted about some of the follies of DRM. I’ve said in the past that I think it’s possible for DRM to have a place, but when it gets in the way of the consumer it’s just stupid. When people can’t legitimately pay you for something, they’ll just rout around you. Most people are honest and do want to pay, so punishing them for the mistakes of a vast minority who will never pay is silly. From the article: [...]

  55. tecosystems » links for 2007-04-10 says: (permalink)
    April 10th, 2007 at 5:32 am

    [...] Mark Shuttleworth » Blog Archive » Note to content owners: DRM doesn’t work “There are some ideas that are broken, but attractive enough to some people that they are doomed to be tried again and again. DRM is one of them.” – right in one (tags: MarkShuttleworth DRM economics Blu-Ray HD-DVD) [...]

  56. netzpolitik.org: » Argumente gegen DRM » Aktuelle Berichterstattung rund um die politischen Themen der Informationsgesellschaft. says: (permalink)
    April 10th, 2007 at 7:53 am

    [...] Ubuntu-Gründer Mark Shuttleworth hat in einem Blog-Posting verschiedene Argumente gegen DRM zusammen gefasst: Note to content owners: DRM doesnt work. There are some ideas that are broken, but attractive enough to some people that they are doomed to be tried again and again. DRM is one of them. […] [...]

  57. Digital Phantasy » Mark Shuttleworth: DRM doesn’t work! says: (permalink)
    April 10th, 2007 at 9:56 am

    [...] Anyway, Mark wrote a great piece on DRM, and it’s a suggested read for everyone: The truth is also that, as the landscape changes, different business models come and go in their viability. Those folks who try to impose analog rules on digital content will find themselves on the wrong side of the tidal wave. Sorry for you. It’s necessary to innovate (again, sometimes!) and stay ahead of the curve, perhaps even being willing to cannibalize your own existing business – though to be honest cannibalizing someone else’s is so much more appealing. Read the rest here. Leave a Reply Name (required) Mail (will not be published) (required) Website XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong> [...]

  58. The Freelance Traveller says: (permalink)
    April 10th, 2007 at 11:26 am

    Let me second Tony Agudo’s applause and comment about not spotlighting successful DRM-free businesses. Another anti-DRM success story, not in the music industry, is Baen Books, who distribute SF and fantasy books in multiple widely-supported electronic formats, entirely without any sort of DRM. They’ve said that trusting their customers has worked for them, and so has allowing some of their content to be distributed not only DRM-free, but cost-free: The Baen Free Library and the (now twelve volumes) Baen CD-ROM Library are widely distributed by SF/Fantasy fans, entirely legally – and in at least one channel where illegal electronic copies of books are traded, they WON’T trade in Baen’s non-free books, out of respect for a company that respects their customers. Baen editors have also said, categorically, that their e-book business has increased the sell-through on their bound-paper releases as well – hard evidence that the customers are NOT the enemy, which is effectively the presumption behind DRM and DRM-supporting laws like DMCA.

    (got here via a link in the news picks at Groklaw, 10 Apr 2007)

  59. protocol7 » Blog Archive » links for 2007-04-10 says: (permalink)
    April 10th, 2007 at 12:17 pm

    [...] Note to content owners: DRM doesn’t work (tags: drm media music by:mark_shuttleworth) [...]

  60. Sportman1280 » Very Good Article On DRM says: (permalink)
    April 10th, 2007 at 8:08 pm

    [...] Read it for yourself. [...]

  61. Chris Ward says: (permalink)
    April 10th, 2007 at 9:40 pm

    I’m an engineer and scientist; one of those who put the Internet together. I quite like the idea of having a 600-million-processor computer, and a radiotelescope like http://www.lofar.org/ , and other wonders of the modern world.

    But when a bunch of lawmakers and businessmen tell me that it can be illegal to take a bunch of bits from one part of this 600-million-processor computer to another, I sort-of scratch my head, and say that making things like that illegal is not really very encouraging to future engineers and scientists.

    Make of that what you will; but I’m all for Ubuntu and Shuttleworth’s approach to progress.

  62. Tony Agudo says: (permalink)
    April 10th, 2007 at 11:32 pm

    @The Freelance Traveller:
    I’ve checked out Baen Books’ free library quite a while back, and I certainly like it. In fact, it has caused me to look first for books published by them whenever I go to a bookstore. Other book publishers would do well to look at Baen’s business model carefully. And your comment about the black market book trader not trading Baen books should be a small revelation to pro-DRM advocates.

    I got here originally via Groklaw too. Penguinistas travel in the same circles :D

  63. Dept. of "Yeah, What He Said" « Creative Title Here says: (permalink)
    April 11th, 2007 at 2:19 am

    [...] 10th, 2007 · No Comments Mark Shuttleworth on why Digital Rights Restrictions Management (DRM)-encumbered content JustDoesn’t Work. [...]

  64. Jacques says: (permalink)
    April 11th, 2007 at 11:36 am

    Thanks for this great article. I would add that I do really think that they not only want to control the way we use information, they want to control the way we think.

  65. DRM’s dying days at FM Tech says: (permalink)
    April 11th, 2007 at 10:51 pm

    [...] The lawsuits are shortsighted and have inflicted enormous PR damage on the music industry, which is now widely regarded as being avaricious and unwilling to embrace the future. As Shuttleworth says on his blog: “The content owners need to be thinking about how they turn this networked world to their advantage, not fighting the tide. [They also need to be thinking about] how to restructure the costs inherent in their own businesses to make them more in line with the sorts of revenues that are possible in a totally digital world.” [...]

  66. one in the know says: (permalink)
    April 12th, 2007 at 1:32 am

    “If you live outside the US, and have ever tried to buy a small-run por^W documentary movie from the US you’ll know what I mean by brain damage: it doesn’t play outside the US, and the demand in your region is not sufficient to justify a print run in your region-coding, so sorry for you.”

    The funny thing is that actually those por^W documentary movie publisher do it exactly right. Yes, in fact those dirty skin flicks (in general) do come without any regional coding. Isn’t that good news? Mr. Shuttleworth, you can order immediately! ;-p

  67. Latest computer news » Archive » Turning Firefox to an Ethical Hacking Platform says: (permalink)
    April 12th, 2007 at 6:20 am

    [...] Mark has a great post on the foibles of DRM. His verdict? DRM simply does not work. It never has. It’s an old way of attacking an old problem. [...]

  68. node-0 » Blog Archiv » Warum DRM nicht funktionieren kann II says: (permalink)
    April 12th, 2007 at 11:05 am

    [...] Mark Shuttleworth erklärt in seinem Blog etwas näher, welche Gefahren und Probleme auf die Verfechter von DRM warten und warum jeder DRM-Ansatz über kurz oder lang scheitern wird – übrigens nicht nur aus rein technologischen Gründen, sondern auch, weil DRM-Maßnahmen den Erwerb und die legale Nutzung von Inhalten unnötig verkomplizieren und derart unattraktiv machen, dass sich interessierte Kunden die Inhalte wohl auf anderem Wege besorgen werden: [...]

  69. Tomas Riveros says: (permalink)
    April 12th, 2007 at 1:54 pm

    I couldn’t agree more with you, Mark.
    I’m impressed that one of the strong leader of today (and tomorrow) technologies is thinking ahead of time in the way that customers want to be treated.
    Your ideas about DRM are incredibly well-thought and correct.
    I, as a customer, don’t want to be treated like a thief.
    I am currently using suse as my desktop os, but after reading a few of your posts, I think we need more people like you to lead the linux efforts, hence, I will be switching to (K)Ubuntu soon as a mean to give ubuntu (and canonical) support through using (and advocating) it.
    Thanks for giving us hope that there is at least one person that is thinking sane enough to realise what good and what’s wrong for the industry.

  70. Ermanno Bonifazi says: (permalink)
    April 12th, 2007 at 10:29 pm

    Great sentence Mark: “Someone will find a business model that doesn’t depend on the old way of thinking, and if it is not you, then they will eat you alive”

  71. DJ Gentoo says: (permalink)
    April 13th, 2007 at 4:57 pm

    Great post. The main differences between Windows XP and Vista are more eye-candy and less consumer rights. The former, the Ubuntu team did in a tenth the time it took MS, along with some other great features (thanks!) but the latter…
    I got here from defectivebydesign.org. I crusade against Vista`s fatware at any chance.

  72. Il DRM non funziona | Ben Detto! says: (permalink)
    April 14th, 2007 at 10:36 am

    [...] Mi è piaciuto molto leggere uno degli ultimi interventi di Mark Shuttleworth (il patron di Ubuntu) sul suo blog; il titolo del post è estremamente significativo: “Note to content owners: DRM does not work” . [...]

  73. Windows Vista DRM = rootkit? - scruffydan.com/blog -not associated with reality says: (permalink)
    April 15th, 2007 at 8:18 pm

    [...] Ah the joys of DRM. Spending resources to make a computer more complicated, less secure, and less useful, all in a futile attempt to stop piracy. The sooner DRM dies the better. [...]

  74. Mark Shuttleworth zu DRM - Digitale Allmend says: (permalink)
    April 16th, 2007 at 8:58 pm

    [...] Mark Shuttleworth, zentrale Person von Ubuntu, hat ein treffenden Artikel zu DRM in seinem Blog veröffentlicht. Der Artikel beginnt passend mit: There are some ideas that are broken, but attractive enough to some people that they are doomed to be tried again and again. [...]

  75. Martin says: (permalink)
    April 17th, 2007 at 8:41 pm

    DRM has been and will always be a futile exercize as it will always be possible to copy music. To solve it, the industry has to address 2 problems: accessibility and cost. The solution is in making it easier to listen and pay for your music, than to copy it. If I had a personal device connected to the net with essentially the entire world catalogue instantly available at a nominal price (for example a cent a play), my device need not necessarily contain any memory as I would be happy to pay every time I listen to a track. If it is as easy as that, it would be too much effort and rather pointless to copy it from someone else. I have no proof, but from what I see around me I imagine that the vast majority of people do not pay for their music. I do believe people inherently do not like stealing – and if everyone pays a tiny amount the labels and artists will get orders of magnitude more money than currently. Forget the copy protection, make it easier to get and pay and allow us not to be criminals.

  76. My Broadband ADSL Blogs says: (permalink)
    April 20th, 2007 at 9:21 pm

    Damn Restrictive Midget…

    Let’s face it: I love my broadband connection, and I want to make the most of it.
    ……

  77. Wag of the Finger: DRM : Tech.Chick.Blog says: (permalink)
    April 25th, 2007 at 4:01 pm

    [...] April 25th, 2007 | Filed Under Wag of the Finger Tags:apple, apple macbook, dell, drm, ipod, macbook Yeah, yeah, I know. I could give the Wag of the Finger to DRM every day, and I’d be justified in doing so as its sole purpose is to screw us. [...]

  78. Motorcycle Guy says: (permalink)
    April 26th, 2007 at 12:06 am

    This is one of the best anti-DRM arguments I’ve ever read.

  79. Nicholas Wheeler says: (permalink)
    May 2nd, 2007 at 5:39 pm

    Nice post, Mark.

    The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

    – Benjamin Franklin

  80. Why the AACS key is not about piracy. « David’s Linux Blog says: (permalink)
    May 8th, 2007 at 7:58 pm

    [...] Edit: Oh, and Mark Shuttleworth has it again: DRM doesn’t work. Who’d have guessed that the leader of the fastest-growing Linux distribution would understand the digital media market?  I’m glad someone has some sense. [...]

  81. Ray Privett says: (permalink)
    May 9th, 2007 at 5:04 am

    Dear Mr. Shuttleworth:

    A few words from the operator of a little movie theater in New York City (where we are using more and more FLOSS, including (K)Ubuntu):

    You say that moving around chunks of celluloid has no place in today’s movie world. Of course, your perspective echoes that of Mark Cuban and Todd Wagner, who through their U.S. based 2929 companies have advocated and moved toward the simultaneous release of movies on DVD, cable television, and theatrically (with bittorrent-esque plans in the works). These plans of course are implemented through 2929′s Landmark Theater chain, HD-NET television, and Magnolia Films.

    Certainly, such “day and date” releasing holds some wisdom. However, few movie theater operators see that wisdom, unless they are vertically integrated – as 2929 is – with the distribution and / or production entities that would stand to benefit most from day an date. Of course, such vertical integration is illegal in the U.S. because of the famous 1948 Paramount decision (although that decision has not been enforced since the Reagan era, which has paved the way not only for Cuban’s endeavors but also the growth of certain parts of Sony and also of sectors of Rainbow Media [Bravo / IFC, etc], to name only some of the most obvious examples).

    But let’s backtrack a moment. Let’s step away from the economic imperatives, and revel at the artworks.

    You say the physical constraints of celluloid have “no place in today’s era of instant, global, digital distribution.”

    With due respect, not only are you wrong, but I hope that this perspective remains wrong for a long time to come.

    One of the great pleasures of some movies is seeing them through celluloid projection. Without getting into the physics and chemistry of it, the presentation to and effect upon the spectator is different – and often intentionally so. Why should we force filmmakers to abandon those tools of creating and shaping our experiences? Perhaps those tools will be used less, much as analog audio tape and vinyl have been used less for audio recording and duplication, respectively. Perhaps, in time, unambiguously superior digital formats will emerge, next to which 35mm will assume a quaintness similar to that which 8mm and 16mm hold today next to 35mm. But, today, 16mm and 8mm endure as formats that can be and are used to interesting ends in our exhibition contexts to this day. Are they minority? Sure. But should there be a place for them? Absolutely. Similarly, should there be a place for 35mm celluloid film creation and exhibition today, and into the future? Absolutely. Perhaps not the same dominant place that 35mm holds in most cinemas today (not including my theater, where we show maybe 50% 35mm, 50% relatively high video formats). But let’s not abandon a useful and glorious mode of display just because a certain digital encoding is more cost effective (and, when both formats are available, often inferior).

    Digital distribution methods offer many exciting new possibilities for moving image exhibition in the future. Cuban and co are hustling toward that future in fits and starts, as are their peers (and it is quite relevant that the 2929 companies’ “day-and-date” program seems to have stagnated after all sorts of beginning ballyhoo, though competing programs have remained on track. Other important aggregation endeavors are also heading toward that future, including aggregators AppleTV, Netflix Digital Download, Amazon/TiVo, Blip.TV, and the magnificent Democracy Player (aka Miro; and could someone please do something like this in KDE?). The Ubuntu project evokes endless exciting possibilities for this future, such as Edubuntu providing good video editing software to classrooms. Ubuntu Studio, Ubuntu Multimedia Center, and MythTV, and other projects also offer great hope.

    But please, let’s not tell all musicians to burn their grand pianos and buy electronic keyboards. Let them play their instruments, too.

    Ray Privett
    Pioneer Theater (and other stuff)
    New York City
    USA
    North(ern) America

    Mark Shuttleworth says:

    Thanks for a wonderful comment that reminds us of the art in the entertainment! With hindsight,  I agree wholeheartedly that the world would be impoverished if it lost celluloid entirely. I imagine that aficionados will savour 35mm for a very long time, and that the celluloid itself will become increasingly rare and valuable. In a digital age, real things have an entirely new allure and substance. I hope that you are able to sustain your business and passion despite the inevitable shift towards an all-digital distribution model.

  82. Der Bummelstudent » Blog Archive » DRM doesn’t work says: (permalink)
    May 9th, 2007 at 10:34 am

    [...] http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/96 [...]

  83. Ray Privett says: (permalink)
    May 9th, 2007 at 1:11 pm

    I hope so, too. Thanks. And thanks for giving me some of the tools I will need to make it through that transition.

  84. Lost Highway » DRM, ces 3 lettres que tout le monde devrait connaître says: (permalink)
    May 9th, 2007 at 11:05 pm

    [...] Enfin, le patron d’Ubuntu expose dans son blog pourquoi le modèle des DRM est irrémédiablement ancré dans le passé et qu’il ne résistera pas à l’épreuve du temps. Notamment, les antivols et ce pour des raisons techniques nécessitent d’être lus localement; les logiciels de lecture pourront toujours être cassés, et les clés découvertes par d’astucieux informaticiens. EMI et Apple ont déjà pris conscience de l’inanité des DRM, et ont décidé de revenir dessus. Tout comme la FNAC en France, qui limitait le nombre de copies des morceaux téléchargés sur leur plateforme. Pour l’ancien astronaute sud-africain, les DRM sont hérités d’anciennes réalités économiques, et il préférerait voir les entreprises actuelles s’adapter à l’univers numérique plutôt que de les observer passer leur temps à réfléchir comment l’empêcher d’aller de l’avant. [...]

  85. DRM doesn’t work « Dearth of Ideas says: (permalink)
    May 14th, 2007 at 4:34 am

    [...] May 14th, 2007 Came across this article where Mark Shuttleworth had written about DRM – “There are some ideas that are broken, but attractive enough to some people that they are doomed to be tried again and again”. DRM also known as Digital Restrictions Management (to the opponents of DRM), is a doomed piece of technology brought into the distribution of entertainment in digital formats. When I first heard of DRM, my question was – “If I buy the bloody song, then how is it that I do not own it? How is it that I cannot transfer it from my MP3 player to my computer or elsewhere?”. When I read that I still do not own the damned piece of music, this made me more intrigued about DRM. I read up on artistes (who actually created the damned music in the first place) mention that the digital format of selling music has pretty much left them high and dry. They do not still make much money from the distribution of the music. Many of them do not like such restrictions on their music!. Then why – just cause some major music labels think its right to restrict the way we listen to our music?. [...]

  86. Biting the Hand that Feeds You < Scrogg Croft says: (permalink)
    May 20th, 2007 at 8:09 am

    [...] Zell would do well to look at the music industry as an example of how not to handle alarming change in your industry. Mark Shuttleworth published a very insightful piece that does the best job I have ever seen of assessing the issues at hand in the content business. “Someone will find a business model that doesn’t depend on the old way of thinking, and if it is not you, then they will eat you alive. You will probably sue them, but this will be nothing but a defensive action as the industry reforms around their new business model, without you. And by the industry I don’t mean your competitors – they will likely be in the same hole – but your suppliers and your customers. The distributors of content are the ones at risk here, not the creators or the consumers.” [...]

  87. Mark Shuttleworth: DRM doesn’t work « Top Tech News says: (permalink)
    October 23rd, 2007 at 4:42 pm

    [...] read more | digg story [...]

  88. Mark Shuttleworth » Blog Archive » DRM *really* doesn’t work says: (permalink)
    April 5th, 2008 at 12:26 pm

    [...] that further vulnerabilities in the HD DVD content protection system have been uncovered. As I noted previously, any DRM system that depends on offline key distribution will be cracked. This latest vulnerability [...]

  89. DRM explicado - em Português « erroneous thoughts says: (permalink)
    August 21st, 2008 at 9:59 am

    [...] diminuição na inovação. Mas não se fica por aqui: como Mark Shuttleworth, criador do Ubuntu, fez notar, o DRM aumenta a resiliência do (antigo) modelo de negócio. O que tem o sério inconveniente de, [...]

  90. Weckruf: DRM funktioniert nicht - Bibliothekarisch.de - Ehemals Chaoslinie.de says: (permalink)
    November 19th, 2008 at 7:36 pm

    [...] Shuttleworth, Mark: Note to content owners: DRM doesn’t work DRM doesn’t work via Infobib.de Argumente gegen DRM auf [...]

  91. Shuttleworth Joins Anti-DRM Chorus « Silicon Hutong says: (permalink)
    April 21st, 2010 at 7:16 am

    [...] astronaut and open source supporter Mark Shuttleworth, the man with the money behind Ubuntu Linux, has added his voice to the growing choir of senior executives calling for the end of digital rights [...]