Copy Protection: The good, the bad, and the ugly

 

My views on copyright protection developed around the release of the first CD I engineered.  A friend generously volunteered his songs as guinea pigs as I explored the creative possibilities of my newly software-based home studio.    After we burned a few dozen copies and printed off some artwork, we did the natural thing and chased down our friends, bugging them to buy the album.   

I asked one of my best friends if he was going to get a copy, but he replied “No, I'll just burn it off somebody.”

I stared at him, stunned.  We weren't exactly charging top dollar for our newly-minted masterpiece, but more importantly, the golden rule of indie rock clearly states that you buy your friends' CDs.  I decided to calmly explain my feelings on copyright protection:

“Are you nuts?  I know where you live.  If I ever hear of you burning a CD that I worked on, I will come to your home and...”

There was more, but it can't be repeated in polite company.  My boots were involved. 

		I've long been a fierce and vocal champion of the seemingly unpopular cause of “buying the software you use”.  I'm glad there is an organization like IMSTA that is moving to mobilize our industry, because I really do believe that education is an essential part of the answer.  People need to understand that software has true value.  Stealing a software compressor is fundamentally no different from stealing a hardware compressor, even if the age of digital duplication and distribution has turned  economic fundamentals like “supply and demand” into antiquated notions. I've been wearing a white hat on the digital frontier for the better part of a decade now, and I've seen every argument. Still, people just don't get it.
Dave Miner

After all, if you can download something via your internet connection and burn it from your computer onto your blank CDs, didn't you just handle distribution and manufacturing?  Isn't that, the downloader may ask, the biggest part of the product anyways?  Changing those misconceptions will be tough.

As an artist, I probably have an easy time with abstract concepts such as a song being a thing of real value.  Because of my tech geek side, the concept of a software's value having nothing to do with the material costs of the CD, box, and manual seems obvious to me.  Finally, having worked on everything from radio spots to video games, I can easily put faces to the teams behind all the media we consume. I know if I want to continue to enjoy any software – be it a movie, album, game, or application – then those fine people would probably like to continue to enjoy a paycheque.

Of course, not everybody will accept that reasoning.  The technology for piracy is too pervasive, and excuses are too convenient.  Software companies are all making millions!  It's too expensive!  If I can't afford to buy it anyways, they're not losing a sale!  I shouldn't have to pay for software that has a bug in it!  I only want to try it to see if I like it! Ultimately, all the excuses boil down to two simple truths:  “Stealing software is easy to do” and “I probably won't get caught”. How then, do we as an industry mobilize against that type of ignorance?  Again, education is probably our best tool.  But we have to remember that whatever countermeasures we use to protect our intellectual property do not unfairly impact our customers.

How many software developers have a customer-friendly policy in place to account for a lost dongle?  Are users treated with suspicion because of the consequences of a reformatted hard drive or a new system?   Are paying customers bluntly told they have to buy a second copy of their software if they want to use it on their desktop and their laptop?  How many people will have a first experience with their newly purchased software consisting of frustration with an arcane authentication system?  What customer protection exists when a product is discontinued, or in a worst-case scenario, a developer ceases operations?

Of course, many developers have flexible, customer-oriented policies that have adapted to the realities of our new digital market.  However, every inconvenienced legitimate user is a more serious problem than a hundred pirates. While trying to convert the masses to recognize the material value of intangible products, we cannot alienate the people who already get it.  However much the business model has changed, we still serve our customers.  We need our customers.

Perhaps controversially, I believe that copy protection has an enormous risk of inconveniencing legitimate users as often as it deters illegitimate ones.  After all, if only one person is able to overcome copy protection, then they can easily distribute a compromised version to an infinite audience, while I'm sure that customer support lines are often flooded with lost dongles and failed registrations. I respect and appreciate the importance of copyright protection.  I don't resent the lock on my front door if I misplace my keys, for instance.  But to return to my central theme:  the business model has changed, and the companies that survive and thrive will be those that best understand and adapt to the realities of an online world.  This new model means that we have to change attitudes about software and about piracy, but we may also have to evaluate our own attitudes about the methods we use to protect ourselves.

A company does not protect its own interests if it does not protect those of its customers.  We must make sure that the methods with which we support the educational endeavors of bodies such as IMSTA take our customers into account.  In the battle against piracy, there is perhaps no argument more powerful than a satisfied customer.

by: Dave Miner

---

© Copyright IMSTA 2007