Macrovision Corporation, best known for its long history of DRM implementations, (on everything from VCRs to software copy protection), has [a href="http://www.macrovision.com/company/news/drm/response_letter.shtml"]responded to Steve Jobs open letter[/a] regarding DRM. With ample experience and despite the obvious vested interests, it's great to hear their point of view. In the letter they acknowledge the 'difficult challenges' of implementing DRM that is truly 'interoperable and open'. (Hilatrious, because, DRM is by design, NOT 'interoperable and open'.)
At the same time they also feel that DRM 'will increase electronic distribution', if implemented properly, because 'DRM increases not decreases consumer value', such as by enabling people to rent content at a lower price than ownership, and lowering risks for content producers. Their response is basically a steaming load of deceptive bullshit. The reality is, current DRM implementations often leave users with the bad end of the deal.
What do you think? Should people give DRM manufacturers more time to overcome the challenges and get it right?
