See Full Story
The final curtain may eventually fall on the drama of digital rights management, but for now it's slowly playing out in various courtrooms around the globe. Although DRM issues are not exclusive to Steve Jobs, et al., Apple invariably takes center stage as prosecutors pontificate on the evil of corporate greed, using the iPod/iTunes combo as a favorite example. "FairPlay," says Apple; "Crippleware," counter its critics. After the final act, will anything really change? Perhaps -- but not necessarily because of court orders.
Steve Jobs on DRM -- here's the real deal on Apple and DRM -- straight from Jobs himself.
I rarely post a response to any article but this one needs just gets my attention.
1. Apple did not ask for DRM they wanted to offer no restrictions. The content owners demanded protected content. Of all DRM Fair Play is the least restricted and because of its ability to maintain hardware and software control Apple gives the user a easy to use experience.
2. MS has Plays for Sure but also maintains a closed system. Zune. It and PfS do not run on MacOS, therefore they are also not open systems as the author seems to suggest.
3. We all would like drm to go away, but until the media and goverments decide to take on the content owners we will never have a good system.
4. Apple makes money based on a bad industry model. Fix the model; do not blame Apple or Microsoft.