Also, in the case at hand, the non-DRM AAC files (not MP3s, thank you David) are, well, non-DRM. So DMCA can’t work with DRM, since there is none to begin with! I don’t believe that stripping the identifying data from the AAC files — in about three seconds someone will create a program to do this, if it doesn’t already exist — violates DMCA anyway, since there is no DRM. So how does your DRM + DMCA argument work here? That dog won’t hunt.

What it can do, however, is draw people to its store and away from P2P, which isn’t entirely free if you try to put a price on viruses and spyware.

At best, the identifier might convince some quantity of users to uncheck the “share my music” box in their P2P client.

At worst, it will be used by the RIAA as evidence that not only the person hosting the songs is at fault, but so is everyone who’s name is imbedded in those files. This isn’t quite as easy as it sounds, because in order to get those names it would have to DOWNLOAD all the files. Many of those files would contain no information, some of them may be altered, which would require some effort to determine, and some would only provide evidence of one act of infringement. The RIAA tends to go after the high quantity offenders, so this all seems fairly impractical.

Noel:

If someone comes up with DRM that does NOT require special legal protection which tramples on the First Amendment (e.g., DMCA) I would be more neutral about DRM.

On the other hand Noel neither you nor Solveig or the other IPCentralians have ever tried to explain how DRM could be compatible with the First Amendment, or to address the very real concerns that those who are concerned about the erosion of our basic freedoms have with the DMCA…

The world is bigger than your obsession with Tim. You will be a more effective advocate for content ownders or whatever it is you’re advocating for if you get over this obsession and focus on how you can protect your constituency’s interests. Content owners could care less whether Noel thinks Tim has an inflated reputation (no disrespect intended, Tim!). They care about knowing what works to protect their interests. Picker’s proposal won’t work, no matter what direction Tim’s career takes.

I”m not sure why Tim does not consider DRM and the DMCA (or other copyright enforcement mechanisms), since neither alone is meant to deter piracy. They’re supposed to work together. Rather Tim seems to focus on one at a time, such as here, and argues that DRM alone does not stop piracy.

Tim also analyzes one patent at a time and asks how it contributes to innovation rather than a dataset of patents, so I’m not surprised to see him take a similar approach with DRM.

For example, I can read a book in the US or I can read it in England. The content industry has imposed region codes so if I buy a DVD here, I can not watch it in England.

I can buy the book today and read it five years from now. The content industry is claiming that if I “miss” watching a program that I paid for, I can not use technology to save if for future viewing.

From my point of view, the pirates are the content producers who seize every means to restrict the rights of consumers.

In the case of the recent release of the keys to high definition DVD encryption, one person uploaded the hex number to the internet. Shortly afterward, it was on hundreds of thousands of web pages around the world, and I’m sure on p2p networks as well. The same would be true for a single copy of a new album. This has also happened. The last U2 album was stolen (one copy) prior to release and uploaded (once) to the internet, and from there spread worldwide.

Tim’s statement isn’t just an argument, it is what actually happens in real life. To deny it is to reject reality.

Tim did admit there would be a marginal effect. Fewer copies uploaded in the beginning might slow the spread of the file worldwide by a short amount of time. Obviously there is a finite effect. Finite and infinitesimal. If that’s the basis of your objection, OK, but it is irrelevant in practical terms. Between 0% and 100% it is so close to zero, I don’t understand the quibble.

You claim that there are no numbers between 0-100% (by claiming that DRM is not useful unless it entirely stops piracy), then argue I’m bad at math:)

But in any case, even if I did run around yelling 2+2=7, its better than ranting about some worthless revolution that never and will never happen.