publishing @ 19 Oct 2006 08:31 am by bigfish
Granted, computer books don’t operate on the same level as Jay-Z and Coke. But we do face the same challenges of having our work pirated on file-sharing networks. As expressed in an earlier post, we’ve been thinking that we might be better off taking an “if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em†attitude. Trying to track down the perpetrators and force them to cease and desist is like an online game of Whack-a-Mole, beating down one illegal copy only to have it pop up elsewhere. For a small publisher like No Starch Press, maybe there’s something to be gained in having our name spread far and wide without our having to lift a finger or spend a cent. It would be foolhardy, however, to let it go completely unchecked. Which brings me to this article from the online version of today’s The Wall Street Journal.
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB116113611429796022-_5EZVscJYWWFqv1AmPvXCiOjJms_20071018.html?mod=tff_main_tff_top
I’m not sure I like the idea of duping P2P users into downloading promotional materials when they think they’re getting a song file. Is that really going to endear the record companies to these potentially legit music consumers? I know I get irritated when I click a link to an article I want to read and am forced to navigate through an advertising page first. I don’t think a fan will boycott his favorite artist just because he got sacked with marketing junk on his way to a free song clip, as long as that approach is used in moderation.
The Wall Street Journal piece mentions niche companies that specialize in creating these so-called decoys. I can’t tell if they’re also responsible for planting them on the various P2P networks or if they only do the creative work. Two of the companies cited, SparkArt and BuyDRM, appear to be in cahoots; I found a May 2005 press release about their collaboration on “the Dr. M product which provides content owners and licensees an integrated viral marketing vehicle to expose their new content to users the worldwide.†Neither the SparkArt nor the BuyDRM websites provide much in the way of corporate information. I suspect they are trying to avoid unwanted retribution by people who find their services shady or just plain annoying. A third company mentioned in the article, MediaDefender, has even less on its site – just a generic email address and link to job openings. Doesn’t it make you wonder what they’re hiding? And why they’re hiding it? The chief executive of MediaDefender even said that “many of his clients in the entertainment industry don’t want to be identified.â€
So, while copyright holders deserve to have their property respected, I don’t think decoy files are the right answer. So, what is? In the book world, there is still a strong desire among customers to have a full, legally obtained hard copy of our products, even if they’ve already gotten an illegal version online. The same can’t be said of a 3-minute hip-hop song. We have that going for us.
We’d like to hear your ideas for making peace with online pirates. Can we find opportunities in the face of adversity and, if so, how?
Patricia,
It’s hard to read an article like this knowing the real business behind p2p and seeding promotional content and how well it works.
This is a business model that, GASP, is the prevailing business model in the space. For example it’s how Kazaa makes ALL of their money.
It’s also, oddly enough, how many record labels choose to promote new releases and artists because the know that there are so many users in P2P networks.
In the case of the Jay-Z promotion over 5 Million people viewed this FREE CONCERT and both Jay-Z and Coca-Cola, two of the biggest brand names in America/The World, were quite pleased with the result. No, we did not receive a single complaint from a single user. Who would complain about free media just because it’s encrypted with DRM?
This article in the WSJ was misleading because in actually the MediaDefender approach was not only NOT associated with the free concert promotion but, IMHO, in inefective way to prevent piracy and just build ill will with users. I do not support Spoofing one bit. We are not associated with MediaDefender and we believe they, like OverPeer, won’t be around long.
If you would like to view the case study on what actually happened please do so here:
http://www.buydrm.com/cs_intent.html
That being said unless you are actually a P2P user and have experienced a piece of content managed by KEYOS/ Dr. M, it would be hard to comment on it so negatively.
Your allegation that we are “trying to avoid unwanted retribution by people who find their services shady or just plain annoying” is not only shocking but patently false.
http://www.dr-m.com Has been active since 2004 when we launched the product.
Additionally if you visit:
http://dr-m.licensekeyserver.com you will see that it directs you to our website.
The reason we do not provide information on our website about this product is because we have a dedicated site for the product. Myself and Naveen oversee every Dr. M Implementation which to date has included many of the bigger names in music like:
AudioSlave
Disturbed
YellowCard
Dashboard Confessional
Madden Football 2006 with EA Sports
and others.
I agree with you DECOY FILES are a bust and the wrong approach. However products like Dr. M and KEYOS offer P2P users access to free media without endangering the content owners rights or the user’s legitimate use of the content.
Last of all, I think your comment about p2p user’s not being willing to acquire a legitimate copy of a “3-minute hip-hop song” is not only insulting to Artists like Jay-Z but it’s just plain false.
Beyonce’s last album was available on her website using a pre-order system. When a user bought the album they got a free encrypted version of Deja Vu as a bonus. Even though this song was all over p2p networks and available in many unauthorized locations, her fans still bought the album and downloaded the WMA file and activated the license in droves.
More info here: http://www.buydrm.com/cs_aat.html
Maybe these are models you should consider. You could be using Audiobook versions of your writing in WMA form with DRM and offering customers snippets or free consumption of the content for a trial period with an upsell when it expires.
Regards,
Christopher
Christopher,
To paraphrase Jay-Z: We’ve got 99 problems, but DRM ain’t one.
The arguments against using DRM aren’t simply moral or political; DRM-free media is what customers want, and it’s what they should demand. And supplying it is just a good business decision for media distributors. But that choice is one publishers will have to reach individually. It’s a matter of respect for the customer, I suppose.
We believe that customers should own their digital purchases, just as they own the physical goods they purchase. The Sony BMG rootkit debacle points to the potential PR nightmare companies face when they try to control how folks use their media: DRM deserves its shady reputation. But we’re hearing more good news about its inevitable demise.
As Nick Carr writes,
“At heart, digital rights management (DRM) is a business strategy, not a police action. And that strategy may be reaching the end of its natural life.”
http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2006/12/curtains_for_mu.php
The EFF has more to say here:
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/005039.php
I think (and hope) you’ll find that your customers will be increasingly less complacent about DRM-encrypted files, whether they’re “free” or not.
Tyler, No Starch