Steve Jobs recent open letter, "Thoughts on Music," has reignited the tensions between the copyright and tech sectors. The controversial piece is puzzling given his admission that the current state of affairs in the industry is serving customers well "with a continuing stream of innovative products and a wide variety of choices."
Mr. Jobs proposes that record labels should no longer require online music service providers to maintain an effective DRM system as part of licensing contracts. He argues this is necessary to bring about interoperability of all music downloads onto all digital devices. This, he says, will result in more innovation that benefits both the recording industry and consumers alike. No surprise, Jobs is supported by Dave Goldberg of Yahoo. Goldberg recently stated that DRM is just too complicated for users. Hmmmmmm.
However, Jobs’ proposal is short-sighted.
Although his open letter is limited to the music industry (probably not a coincidence given his position on the board at Disney), it certainly has implications for copyright owners generally. Sure, DRM has not, does not, and will not end piracy. But, copyright owners have never claimed that it would. Rather, it is effective means of keeping honest people honest.
And, since its enactment, the DMCA has provided necessary incentives for copyright owners to put their works online by giving them the ability to protect it against unauthorized uses. Even Mr. Jobs admits this. DRM isn’t mandatory, but to the extent companies like Warner Music Group and EMI believe it is necessary to protect their investments, then that option should be available. It should be available for the author, game developer, film producer and software developer as well. It stands to reason that without this option, copyright owners will be less willing to offer their works online which will in turn result in less innovation and entertainment for consumers- and lots of unpleasant licensing negotiations.
Even though Jobs proposal did not actually suggest that Congressional action is necessary, that is the direction it is headed. And if this debate makes its way to Capitol Hill, it is almost certain that Congress will not be able to resist the temptation to "solve" other business and technology issues.
It seems that maybe the real motivation behind the letter is Mr. Jobs focus on "the technical expertise and overhead required to create, operate and update a DRM system…" Okay fine- good reason. RENEGOTIATE! Just next time please keep in mind the old saying, "Think before you speak."