EA Brushes Off DRM Complainers As Fringe 0.2%

from the listening-to-your-customers dept

It would appear that gaming company EA got the wrong message concerning DRM after its Spore DRM debacle. While EA eventually backed down, it certainly did plenty to damage its own reputation in the gaming community. Hell, when we recently posted an article about EA that had nothing to do with DRM at all, a bunch of commenters used the post to complain about EA's DRM policy anyway. That suggests a Metallica-like reputation problem.

So, how is EA dealing with this reputation issue? Apparently by dismissing it as nothing to be concerned about. A whole bunch of our readers sent in this story about an EA exec claiming that only 0.2% of users would even notice the DRM used in Spore -- basically suggesting that the complaints were hyped up and out of proportion to the issue. That's sort of missing the point. While some users who complained might never actually encounter problems with the DRM, that doesn't mean that they're comfortable with the idea that EA has significantly limited how they can use a product that they purchased. Even a quick review of the history of DRM would show EA execs two things: it does nothing to stop piracy, and it seriously gets in the way of legitimate users, no matter how artfully designed.

Filed Under: customers, drm, reputation, spore
Companies: ea

xkcd Speaks Truth To DRM: You're A Criminal Either Way

from the and-so-it-goes dept

People sure do love xkcd. I saw the latest comic last night, thinking it was amusing, but I've never been this deluged with submissions from people saying that we absolutely need to post it here. Either way, it does make the universal point about why you shouldn't buy anything that includes DRM. Since any change to the DRM (such as shutting down DRM servers) means you'll probably need to break the law to actually keep using the content you thought you "bought," at some point, people realize they're going to be considered a criminal either way and just vote to pirate stuff in the first place:

Filed Under: criminals, drm, xkcd

Surprise, Surprise: WalMart Changes Its Mind, Keeps DRM Servers Running (For Now)

from the and-again dept

A couple weeks back, we noted with surprise Wal-Mart's decision to turn off its DRM servers with little warning. After all, both Yahoo and Microsoft had tried to do the same thing, but eventually backed down in front of rather public backlash from customers. It's hard to believe that no one in charge of Wal-Mart's music offering was aware of that. But, still, the company tried to shut down the DRM servers. And, surprise, surprise, there was widespread backlash. So, not surprisingly, Wal-Mart has backed down and promised to keep the DRM servers running for the time being.

Filed Under: drm, servers
Companies: microsoft, wal-mart, yahoo

Norway To Move Forward In Trying To Force Apple To Open Up iTunes

from the this-ought-to-be-interesting dept

What began as a minor squabble over the terms of service that went with iTunes in Norway quickly blew up into a bigger deal, with Norway blasting Apple for locking songs bought via iTunes only to the iPod via FairPlay DRM. While we can understand the frustration that some might have about this, it is still a user's choice to buy from iTunes, knowing that the music won't work with other digital music players. It's why I don't buy music from iTunes, for example. And these days, we're seeing more open competitors hit the market, such as Amazon's MP3 store. Thus, Apples use of DRM hardly seems like a reason for the government to force the company to open up.

However, that's exactly what's happening with Norway, as the government is moving forward with a case against Apple that might force the company to either open up FairPlay or shut down iTunes in Norway. If the latter is the end result, it's difficult to see how anyone actually benefits. If Apple wants to limit its own market, that's Apple's decision. It doesn't make sense for Norway to get involved.

Filed Under: drm, itunes, norway, open
Companies: apple

Who Said DRM Is Necessary For Video Games? Not According To These Execs...

from the how-dare-they! dept

There have been a variety of highly questionable stories over the past few months claiming that piracy was somehow killing the PC gaming industry -- even as stats were showing that the industry is actually thriving. A lot of this came to a head over the last month, with the EA Spore fiasco -- with folks in the comments still insisting that EA had no choice and that video game companies somehow need to include DRM or they would go out of business. That's clearly not the case for a variety of reasons: (1) no DRM actually stops piracy so if piracy is costing game companies, the DRM isn't making much of a difference and (2) companies like Stardock have shown for a long time that you don't need DRM to be a success. Recently, we heard about execs from two more video game companies hitting back and explaining why DRM isn't needed.

The first, pointed out by a reader named Dave, is a guest post at Penny Arcade by the CEO of Three Rings, Daniel James, where he explains why DRM is pointless:

The business model of putting bits in a box and charging to experience said tasty bits is forever broken. Furthermore, to prevent the copying of bits is futile and ultimately destructive to the goal of any modern digital business, which is to conscript enthusiastic 'users', and from them, customers....

Money can't buy you love, but love can bring you money. In software the only sustainable way to earn money is by first creating love, and then hoping that some folks want to demonstrate that love with their dollars....

DRM takes a big poo on your best customers -- the ones who've given you money -- whilst doing nothing practical to prevent others from 'stealing' your precious content juices. Worse, it makes these renegades feel nice and righteous about sticking it to 'the man'. Stop trying to persuade people to love you more by hitting them a rusty pipe. Put down the pipe, and give up on DRM.

Then, reader Tyler Hipwell alerts us to an interview with the founders of Good Old Games, a video game company that sells old, out-of-print PC games for very low prices... and without DRM. Basically, the company recognizes the marketplace it's in and doesn't freak out about DRM or piracy (like so many others in the video game space):

"The games we offer are probably already easy to get on torrent sites, but we believe gamers would prefer to buy their products legitimately than pirate them. They just need a good reason to buy those games and we give them those reasons by selling games at low prices, optimized to run on modern operating systems and adding great bonus materials."

Not treating your customers as criminals? Giving them reasons to buy? Providing extra reasons to pay? Pricing the games reasonably? According to some video game companies, those are all impossible.

Filed Under: drm, pc games, video games
Companies: good old games, three rings

Reason #9,358 For Not Buying DRM'd Music: Wal-Mart Shuts Down DRM Servers

from the and-again dept

Following the misguided lead of both Microsoft and Yahoo, it appears that Wal-Mart has decided to turn off its DRM servers, basically screwing over anyone who trusted Wal-Mart to make sure that music bought from Wal-Mart would keep working. What's amazing is that Wal-Mart would do this after seeing the backlash that made both Microsoft and Yahoo eventually back down (with Yahoo even going so far as to offer refunds). Wal-Mart, on the other hand, just told people they have a week to burn their music to a CD and re-rip it -- or they lose it entirely. Obviously, by this point, you should know that buying DRM'd music is a mistake, because you're leaving the music in a situation where the company you bought it from can "turn it off" at some point, but what's more amazing is that Wal-Mart would make the exact same mistake after seeing what happened to both Yahoo and Microsoft.

Filed Under: drm, servers
Companies: microsoft, wal-mart, yahoo

Will Spore DRM Become EA's Rootkit Moment?

from the increasing-parallels dept

With the news coming out that some purchasers of the video game Spore have filed a class action lawsuit against EA for its inclusion of SecuROM DRM, it's reaching the point where you have to wonder if this is becoming EA's "rootkit" moment. The parallels are there. Both involved an overly draconian form of DRM that severely limited how a "purchased" product could be used. Both involved hidden files installed on a computer -- and both resulted in massive backlash from consumers, and a very slow response from the company. And, of course, the rootkit resulted in class action lawsuits as well. At some point, perhaps, companies will start to realize that treating your customers as criminals is probably a bad idea.

Filed Under: backlash, class action lawsuit, drm, rootkit, spore

EA Finally Realizes People Are Upset Over Spore DRM

from the taken-by-surprise? dept

It only took two weeks since the massive backlash against EA for the DRM and account limits it included with Spore for EA to recognize that maybe it needed to respond. This morning, EA agreed to up the install limit from 3 times to 5, claiming they may also make exceptions in some cases, and also released a patch allowing for multiple user names. While it's nice that the company finally responded, this is still a pretty weak response and doesn't address the core issues.

Also, it's odd that it took the company this long to respond. EA claims that the controversy caught them "off guard." If so, then they clearly haven't paid much attention. We were among many sites that talked about the DRM problem back in May, which got tons of angry comments. Other sites that discussed the DRM got similar angry comments as well, so the only way this should have caught EA off guard was if they weren't paying any attention whatsoever to what various gamers were saying.

Filed Under: drm, spore, user accounts
Companies: ea

Apple Trying To Patent Not Letting You Use Your Nike+iPod With Non-Nike Shoes

from the this-raises-some-questions dept

I know plenty of folks (including my wife) who have purchased the Nike+iPod device to use with non-Nike sneakers. The device puts a sensor in your shoe, which communicates with a separate dongle connected to your iPod (or built in to the new iPod Touch), and tracks your running stats, which you can then upload. Many Nike sneakers have a little cutout underneath the insoles where you can stick the sensor, but you can buy (or make) a little pouch and connect it to shoelaces on non-Nike shoes. However, not only is Apple thinking about ways to stop this -- it's trying to patent those ways. It's got a patent application in for smart garments which would create basically a DRM for devices -- forceably pairing a device like the Nike+iPod sensor to a specific shoe.

This seems odd for a whole variety of reasons. First, it seems positively silly for Apple to do this, as it severely limits the market for the devices, and lessens the value of the iPod. You can see why Nike might ask for it, but it's hard to see why Apple would implement it. Second, however, is that this seems highly questionable as a patent. I mean why would you patent something that makes your product less desirable? Would Apple actually sue someone else (say, Microsoft) for doing the same thing? That would (oh no!) force Microsoft to make its product more useful and more valuable. Finally, as a patent, how is this not "obvious"? It seems like a bad idea to implement, but that doesn't make it non-obvious. If any engineer wanted to create such a system, it wouldn't take much thought at all. The whole thing seems rather pointless.

Filed Under: drm, ipod, nike+ipod, patents, running, sneakers
Companies: apple, nike

There They Go Again: Movie Industry Takes Yet Another Shot At DRM

from the wasting-time,-money-and-energy dept

It seems that every few years the entertainment industry thinks that if it can just create a better new form of DRM, all its business model problems will be solved. Usually, it talks about how DRM will somehow enable new business models, when all it really does is remove value from content, shrinking a market, annoying legitimate customers -- all while doing absolutely nothing to slow down unauthorized downloading. It's a huge waste of time, money and energy, but the entertainment industry still doesn't realize it. Because here we go again. The movie industry is working on yet another DRM standard, which it insists will be much better than everything before, because it will be more open and interoperable. But, the problem is that it will never be as open or interoperable as no DRM. Until the industry recognizes that, it will continue to throw away more money and more time when it could actually be focusing on improving its business.

Filed Under: business models, drm, movie industry, open, standard