Non-pirated content or an alternative to DRM - a different perspective on digital content distribution

The joke about letters kindly provided by the alphabet becomes a reality.

If you do not respect the wise men, then there will be no quarrels among the people. If you do not appreciate precious items, then there will be no thieves among the people. If you do not see the desired object, then the hearts of the people will not worry. Therefore, the control of a wise man makes their hearts empty and their stomachs full. It weakens their will and strengthens their bones. It constantly strives to ensure that the people do not have knowledge and passions, and those who have knowledge would not dare to act. Fulfilling non-doing [by the sage] always brings peace of mind.
Tao Te Ching


The duality, dualism of the theses of the ancient sages warns against extremes, proclaiming the balance of forces in the system as the natural and only solution to the problem - the stability and vitality of this system itself.
')
The latest news headlines about digital content distribution: “Gentlemen from RealNetworks say that without the implementation of DRM (digital content rights management), the Linux community risks being excluded from the consumer market, that is, they will drop out of the herd of users they rob.”
"The Russian Phonographic Association is trying to cut money from restaurants and public institutions for the music they play."

The question is whether this “consumer” market is necessary for “linuxoids”, for the most part, little enthusiastic about popsies, or whether restaurants and other catering establishments will use the “service” imposed on them is not the case.

And the fact that the method of extracting the money that defenders of copyright have chosen for themselves seems vicious and unnatural.

However, there is a more harmonious solution that makes the wolves relatively full and the sheep relatively intact.

Tao recommends not to stand against the wind, but to use its free energy.

The naturalness of any phenomenon or process in nature determines the degree of its stability and involvement in the overall picture of the universe. Unnatural situations themselves are not tenacious and (or) destroy the entire system to the ground.

The process of calculating money should be studied in more detail by physicians: it is possible that at this point a person has both hemispheres of the brain and all available senses, which, of course, is unacceptable when combining responsible operations, say, driving a car, etc.

RIAA, MIAA, the European Committee and the crowd of sympathizing offices like Real Networks are eager to share a notable piece of cake in the form of the vast majority of Internet users who have a pirated movie or musical composition on their computer. Interesting to say, such money! Where is there to think logically, as long as the swallowing reflex does not fail. iTunes, for example, judging by the latest news, has already begun to slightly disturb the right holders of the “too low cost of tracks” in the online store.

By all indications, the measures will be tightened, up to blocking the possibility of receiving the signal of the transmitting channels of household equipment (encrypting the signal to the television monitor).

It is a meaningless struggle, with no end in sight.

Suppose that in our “legal” society, officials and legislators have little idea of ​​whose tune they are singing and play in the fairness of copyright protection in Russia, organizing demonstrative raids on kiosks and flea-market collapses.
I doubt that at least 10% of them have ever used the Internet, otherwise why hasn’t anyone ever shot himself reading some forums and blogs?

With the help of the PR managers from the promoter and the media scaring them, the copying of “licensed” content has been declared piracy and theft.

I think that charging money for a deliberately poor-quality product, failure to provide an alternative license to the buyer, which looks like a cartel plot by record companies, is pure fraud.

However, let's understand from the very beginning for what the user has to pay money, and for which very small money.

Let's start with the music.
Historically, musicians, bards and minstrels performed before the public without any phonograms and other improvers. People paid for the show in real time or did not pay at all if they didn’t like it. Thus, the artist's rating was made up of a simple and primitive audience vote, corresponding to the time and country in the currency, in the hat of Arlekino. Nowadays, this tradition has been preserved - for many “popular” artists who speak excellent Russian, a concert can be held at a half-empty hall, nothing can be done, these are the realities of life.

Anyone who has ever been to a live concert, understands the difference between playing in a hall or a stadium and a track on an audio CD. There are no bright emotions, feelings of participation in the process, feelings and empathy inherent in live performances.

No one applauds, throws bras, doesn’t yell at the nest and doesn’t shake a lighter lighter in front of an mp3 player, whatever it is.

Obviously, how many times less emotions we experience when listening to an mp3 composition, the same time the cost of the copy we buy should be lower than the ticket for a live concert. In my opinion, a dollar for a song is a bust. The overwhelming majority of digital copies of current and recent hits are not worth the money.

The situation with film production is even more pitiable.
Nobody officially offers a dollar for a movie, while the user is not at all sure that the tape is worth its money, which has become a frightening recent trend. Cinema is good to watch in the cinema with a fascinating screen size, loaded with sound and a close knee picture-waving girlfriend. But the quality with which you can now technically play movies does not allow you to compare it with the audience.

They stopped going to the cinema, sobbing MIAA.
Is it not because seeing the downloaded movie in AVI, the viewer understands that because of "this", you should not go to the cinema? For the past three years, the films that I went to, after looking at the computer beforehand, it was nothing at all, but they were worth it — it was all the Matrices and all the Rings. And I’m happy to buy licensed DVDs of these films if they are sold in our city.

Everything else that fell into the DVD from friends and acquaintances was not worth the time spent in minutes, and most of the films I said goodbye after the first 30 minutes of viewing.
As a representative of the media, a television worker and directly media content producer, I would say that the RIAA, MIAA and all the others are absolutely wrong in their claims.

Moreover, there are thoughts about filing a lawsuit against the right holders and sellers of the original content and here's why. Do the authors and their copyright holders offer me the opportunity to return the money for the disc sold if I was not satisfied with the recorded content? No, technically, the disk is scratch-free, “readable,” “quality,” and “don't buzz, young man.”
Why on earth?

Until I see what is there, I can’t make sure that I need it and is ready to leave the carrier for myself, but I can’t do it in the rewind mode in the store - I need time, a chair, a mood, and what else. I have to create the necessary conditions in order to understand and relive the echoes of emotions associated with a painting or a musical composition, which could be in a movie theater or at a concert. Nothing funny - the soul is alive with feelings.

You can not copy, donate or sell the process of watching a movie in a movie theater. You can not copy, donate or sell your own presence at the concert. These sensations are one-time and exclusively individual. Do you want to repeat? Buy a ticket for the money and go again. And here is a digital, albeit incredibly high-quality, but a copy?

I can, theoretically, buy Mona Lisa and hang it in a frame on the wall, but only once, because she is the only one. I can’t practically afford it myself, unfortunately, but I can copy its reproduction as many times as I want, give, sell and so on. By the way, modern printing makes it possible to achieve an almost indistinguishable copy, but it will not cover with oil. I think the allegory is clear.

Why can not I sell, donate, copy the disc? Because it contains the only license agreement with which I must agree? On what basis?

I do not buy RIGHTS to own the content of this disc, they can not be bought, copyrights ALWAYS belong to the authors. I buy the ability to play content in private property - my inalienable right. The opportunity with which I can do what I consider necessary, which I absolutely have the right to resell, donate or copy in the same way as a reproduction of Mona Lisa.

IMHO, the holders of at least two different lost profits.
The first is the illusory figure that they are trying to collect from the "illegal" copies of the "thieves" of the population of the planet.

The second is the real losses from a one-day, low-grade product, the popularity of which is easiest to inflate, prohibiting and raising the price of carriers.

I am sure they don’t think about the third digit now - why the bad. But everything can end sadly - the people will stop “hawking” if they press tightly - no one wants to be a fool for their own money.

The mechanism is very simple. Last year, KT published an article on social relations: only about seven to ten steps from one individual; through acquaintances, his acquaintances, to any other on the planet. Is it possible to imagine how fast the copy of films and musical compositions in such conditions spread between familiar ones, which means that the gross popularity is growing, without which pops and consumer goods will be bent in a week?

The unnatural inability to copy and transmit digital content to the surrounding society, regardless of the reasons, will destroy the most delicate part of the music industry - pop music and consumer goods. Who will know about what is now fashionable to listen and watch? Who will go to the concert of an unknown artist or to the cinema at random, by name?
You will not reconsider all the ratings of radio stations and television commercials, personal playlists will not say anything, and then "let's argue about the taste of oysters with those who ate them." Underground, non-commercial creativity, lacking in quality, obviously aggressive and antisocial, will come onto the scene.

The joint experience and discussion of creative works brings people together despite the distances - the site of any fanclub of any group is a vivid example.

The inability to share what we have, regardless of the reasons, will destroy this sphere of human relations. Those who have ever “visited friends” in Europe will not allow them to lie - fake joy and strictly limited menus discourage the first time. Familiar Germans and Dutch people speak rather coldly about these properties of their compatriots, and while living in Russia for some time, they are most of all proud of the mass of acquired friends and connections.

Fiscal and punitive measures against ordinary users most likely will not lead to anything. There is nothing encrypted by one person that does not decrypt another. It is impossible to artificially create a deficit where it cannot be by definition. Simple FTP collectors of software were not in the yard - people left for completely legitimate file-sharing servers like rapidshare or megaupload - try to bring them to responsibility for image storage, especially since in retaliation on most of these resources access to American IP-addresses is severely limited. I'm not talking about the IRC settlers and the Chinese filedown, catch and cover that is almost unreal. And file servers in home networks?

Well, what to do unhappy holders?

Do not stand against the wind!
Do not try to prevent the natural process of distributing copies of the world, seeping like water in the rock. How much money is spent on copyright protection today? Did they solve the problem?

But the solution lies on the surface, it is not necessary only to invent and apply frightening terms of theft and piracy to users.

What do users do by sharing digital copies? Provide 100% communication with all content, advertisers will say. The file downloaded or copied from a friend will definitely be viewed, otherwise why waste space on it on the hard drive?

Is it not wiser, instead of paying for fiscal measures, lobbying governments and parliaments, to leave the user alone and offer him a free, high-quality format for storing music and movies, but carrying the advertising component? DVD authoring allows you to place at the beginning of watching some videos that can not be rewound - a warning from the FBI, for example, that we’ll be all there. What prevents to place commercials, especially since the circulation of a DVD disc is known, and the number of copies that will be made from it is fully evaluable (they think the MIAA and RIAA somehow consider their losses) - this will be the number of direct contacts of the advertising message with the consumer - what is most important in the advertising business. Well, after that targeting, wholesale offers, new forms of presentation and so on.

I doubt that on the real, correct, "branded" disks there is an advertisement for Orion and Shinko home theaters, accompanied by a Russian SLC.

Example - license (License series NK number AB 346882) The Rundown (Amazon Treasure) with Dwayne Scala Johnson. It is written on a beautiful stamp: “Not for the Maskva retail chain,” that is, a pirate. Filibusters are also not interested in illegal copying, as well as “official” content rights holders. By selling DVDs, they discourage "lost profits" from copying. They do not try to row against the current, but use its kinetic energy. I saw three images of the aforementioned film on the web None of the commercials are cut off - why, then you will have to rebuild the project, what is the point of doing this because of two minutes of advertising? Yesterday in the store I asked to put a diske (Underworld 2) for viewing for the sake of interest. At the very beginning - SMS service with their cretan songs. There were no licenses on the box. The natural process proves its stability.

This is the answer to the question - how to “correctly” earn on digital content and its distribution. I am sure that the cost of placement in blockbusters will cover all the “losses” from copying, advertisers will still be in the queue if the law restricts the duration of advertising to three minutes at the beginning.

Existing video audio formats do not allow using this method without preparation. But the amount of money that is spent on content protection can be directed to the development of an appropriate digital media format, for example, a single for all container file containing the work itself and a fixed or online advertising.
Of course, this place will require sane lawmakers, who are required to limit additional advertising time and preserve the integrity of the composition of additional articles in the Law on Advertising.

A natural picture of the relationship of the entire feed chain from the viewer to the authors is being formed. Artists as received their fees, and receive. Distributors advertise, justifying the fact of ownership of content.
Advertising agencies maintain a rating and naturally regulate over-gangs of one-day groups. Pirates "spread" digital content, solving the problem of the last mile and all these "Not for Maskva." By the way, the monstrous “18 films on one disc” will disappear - it will simply be unprofitable to sell them, if there is a legal opportunity to buy movies in good quality and for a penny. The cost of the downloaded disk image for many of our compatriots is still quite high, with the exception of closed local servers, and in the proposed scheme, the need to maintain such resources decreases and becomes uncritical. By the way, at present this is a reason for tough competition - it is enough to write an application to the K control (or P, what control they have there is crushing counterfeit disks with tractors) on the competing network and it will be quickly covered, leaving the “cushy”, baited, connected users to "Torn apart" to the applicant. By the way, in Novosibirsk, Novotelecom takes money for the use of internal resources, I think it is trying in this way to “prepare for war” with the other rather big city networks. Another superfluous essence.

I think that with advertising in audio content it would also be possible not to spoil the listener's nerves and so on ... Not to use audio ads in principle. Embed banners in audio player interfaces in the manner of Asi. Since the music can be downloaded from everywhere - here and banners tightened. The means of dealing with them is already the fifth thing: the patrimony of the vile hackers who deprive the right holders of imaginary billions. Imaginary, because as soon as the bulk of musical silage becomes free, no one will download it - no one really needed it. For this, no one will get very quickly to look for patches that fix banners - what's the point, some people in general still sitting on Windows ME. Well, what are there "vareznye" lotions ...

By the way, banners are a tool for tracking ratings and user preferences, and programs showing them of a spy plan can be done legally, human rights activists are silent - everything can be downloaded.
This idea may seem unpleasant to someone, but with certain refinements it is much more worthy than the concept of DRM.

- = One of my earlier articles on Overdoze.RU = -