Copyright Protection - when is enough ... enough?
With online media content becoming more main stream, its easy to see why entities such as the RIAA and the MPAA want in. The problem that seems to be happening is that these entities feel if their content is so easily distributable then they need away to protect their assets by deterring online piracy through any number of copyright protect schemes. Now I'm not saying that they don't have a right to add copy protection but I'd have to say that it's probably the biggest mistake they continue to push. The bottom line is that copy protection has been around for a while now and in general has proven to be very ineffective in deterring piracy and seems to stop actual money paying consumers from using their media.
Now I say these things because in short over the last several years they've proven true, any new copy protection for media has been broken and distributed within days to weeks after it release, hence piracy continues. Copy protection is actually more likely to stop paying consumers from enjoying the product they pay for, a good example of this is video games that require, online registration to activate or don't work due to other software that is installed on a certain systems. Now as a fellow consumer, I've got to say that when your copy protection schemes, make it easier to pirate your product than trying to used the purchased product, you've created a bigger problem. If you think about it copy protection only works under the assumption that if someone can't get it for free they'll end up buying it; this concept doesn't really work in the real world. For the most part anyone who would pirate media, probably wouldn't pay for it in the first place, so trying to force them to is pretty much pointless. So what could these companies do to protect their "property" well obviously digital copy right schemes have proven ineffective, even with millions in development; the main downside however, doesn't affect the companies that are trying to make more profit, but the paying consumer. They pay for everything that allows these companies to run an operate, so in return these corporate entities have wasted a lot of time and money on something I personally think its not saving any money and only adds more cost to the consumer.
Now I say these things because in short over the last several years they've proven true, any new copy protection for media has been broken and distributed within days to weeks after it release, hence piracy continues. Copy protection is actually more likely to stop paying consumers from enjoying the product they pay for, a good example of this is video games that require, online registration to activate or don't work due to other software that is installed on a certain systems. Now as a fellow consumer, I've got to say that when your copy protection schemes, make it easier to pirate your product than trying to used the purchased product, you've created a bigger problem. If you think about it copy protection only works under the assumption that if someone can't get it for free they'll end up buying it; this concept doesn't really work in the real world. For the most part anyone who would pirate media, probably wouldn't pay for it in the first place, so trying to force them to is pretty much pointless. So what could these companies do to protect their "property" well obviously digital copy right schemes have proven ineffective, even with millions in development; the main downside however, doesn't affect the companies that are trying to make more profit, but the paying consumer. They pay for everything that allows these companies to run an operate, so in return these corporate entities have wasted a lot of time and money on something I personally think its not saving any money and only adds more cost to the consumer.

0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home