Walmart Caves On DRM Removal 215
cmunic8r99 writes in with an email he received from walmart.com yesterday evening about the pending shutdown of their DRM services (which we discussed a while back). Walmart has reconsidered and won't be shutting off its DRM servers after all. They are still moving to an all-MP3 store, but won't break all the DRMed music its customers have already downloaded; this because of "feedback from the customers."
Wal-Mart (Score:5, Insightful)
Only did this so that people wouldn't sue them.
Presumably... (Score:5, Insightful)
... they have a list of who bought which track. Wouldn't it be simpler to just send them non-DRMed copies of things they've already bought? At the very least, they could offer a discount for people re-buying tracks in a non-DRMed format.
Feels like a Scooby-Doo ending. (Score:2, Insightful)
"I would have gotten away with it, if it wasn't for you meddling kids!"
Re:Wal-Mart (Score:5, Insightful)
this because of "feedback from the customers."
Only did this so that people wouldn't sue them.
You say tomato, I say fruit. Whatever.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Presumably... (Score:3, Insightful)
Even if walmart has to pay the record companies out of its own pocket, what's the break even point? You pay for a bunch of MP3s once or you pay to maintain servers forever. At some people, the MP3 option becomes cheaper.
LK
Re:Presumably... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Feels like a Scooby-Doo ending. (Score:5, Insightful)
All this means is that they will wait another year or maybe two before shutting down the DRM servers. They will in the end, there is no doubt.
Do you seriously think the DRM servers will be running in 20 years? No way.
While I'm in agreement, Walmart could certainly use that year or two in order to attempt to convince the labels to allow Walmart to remove the DRM from users' purchases. I think it'd be in their interest: they'd be able to shut down the DRM servers, they wouldn't take a big PR hit, and this episode would be much less likely to affect future music sales. Walmart is certainly willing to use their leverage to squeeze suppliers, and they probably have enough leverage with the labels to at least give it a try.
Would they get anywhere? Hell if I know.
Re:Feedback ... (Score:5, Insightful)
They'll just quietly try it again in a year. Mark my words.
Re:Wal-Mart (Score:5, Insightful)
What's your point? Walmart was looking out for their bottom line? You don't really think Walmart is in business because they get warm fuzzy feelings selling cheap shit to cheap people, do you? A lawsuit would have been an expensive waste of time for everybody involved, and they almost certainly would have lost. It was clearly in Walmart's best interest to avoid it.
That's the way it's supposed to work.
retarded walmart hate (Score:3, Insightful)
someone are just plains stupid i guess.
virtualization hole (Score:3, Insightful)
Apologies for marginally off topic, but couldn't I write an 'audio driver' for Xen, Bochs, .... which took the samples intended for the sound card and store them to a file; un-drming anything? Same for DVDs? Where does this stand with DMCA? I'm not reverse engineering anything....
Now, if we can get off Windows (Score:4, Insightful)
Hopefully they can pull their web developers' collective head out of their collective ass and make a web store that works on something other than internet explorer and windows.
Seriously, is this 1995 or something?
Whoops! (Score:5, Insightful)
Now *this* is good news.
Why? Because you can bet that Wallmart execs are not at all happy about having to pay for and run a bunch of servers that are no longer making them any money. You can bet that just opened their eyes to the downsides of DRM, and that some people at the top are now asking the music labels some tricky questions, namely "how long are we supposed to keep paying to run these damn things now?".
Wallmart will not want to be left in this position again, and I can see this causing them to put some real pressure on the music labels to drop DRM.
It also means that Wallmart, Apple and Amazon are all pushing for non DRM music. All together that's some pretty hefty leverage!
Re:DMCA exemption (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Feels like a Scooby-Doo ending. (Score:3, Insightful)
The sooner they turn the servers off, the better. The public needs to learn that DRM means that they don't own copies of the media, despite what marketing would have them think.
Re:"Feedback" as in ... (Score:5, Insightful)
The discussion gets circular at some point, they are working for control because they think that will get them more money.
A buzzphrase that may or may not still be vocalized by executives is 'data driven decisions'. In practice a good many decision are still made according to gut feelings, or very thin data, or totally invented data. In part this is because getting good data is hard to do and even harder to find clear meaning in.
Here at Slashdot you have a demographic that should be more math oriented than most and yet you have people, this thread is a good example, writing about the financial and legal consequences of the Wal-Mart Corporation running or not running DRM servers. This is without a day's legal education in their lives and with no more financial experience than balancing their own checkbook. And with no clear actual numbers on which to base any of their conclusions.
So just like the above Slashdotters, music execs went with their gut feelings. They expected digital formats to work like every other format in the entire history of their business model. I don't blame them. All of the non-DRM music stores coming online seems to suggest their minds are changing. If these stores make for the music industry I'm sure DRM for music will be mostly abandoned.
Re:Presumably... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Wal-Mart (Score:5, Insightful)
Horse shit. Walmart spends more on toilet paper for their in-store restrooms in a month than a lawsuit over this would have cost them. Plus I'd be willing to bet that there is fine print in the user agreement for all those DRMed tracks somewhere that says words to the effect of "we can turn it off any time with a few days notice and its your problem not ours".
It probably really was customer feedback and the fact that this was making Walmart look bad. Bad press is far more damaging than some piddly ol' nickel and dime lawsuit.
Re:retarded walmart hate (Score:1, Insightful)
someone are just plains stupid i guess.
Indeed.
Re:retarded walmart hate (Score:3, Insightful)
They should have done the right thing the first time, without getting yelled at. They got caught doing something stupid, and had to take their hand back out of the cookie jar. It would have been better if we didn't have to beat them into doing the right thing.
Re:Feedback ... (Score:3, Insightful)
The good thing is that this will be a great example to smaller organisations (basically.. everyone) that DRM is a waste of money for the proprietors as well as a PITA for clients.
Re:Heh.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Such is the human condition, I guess. People are more interested in dicking people over that are more fortunate than them than improving their own situation. Go to a bar with a shuffleboard table, and you'll see everyone is more interested in knocking the other guy's puck thing off than scoring points for himself.
Re:Wal-Mart (Score:3, Insightful)
Might it have something to do with you knowing that it is hot, i.e. using your common sense? I will probably be modded flamebait, bit it seems to me that most people in the US of A simply have lost their common sense. While having non-hot toasters, do you also wait with getting the bread from it? Because, you know, it might be hot and you can feel a burning sensation? Well if you do, the obvious choice is of course to sue the maker of the toaster!
Re:Feels like a Scooby-Doo ending. (Score:3, Insightful)
I think there is a lesson in this to the companies that sell DRM crap that depends on servers. It's a one-time purchase with a recurring cost to the seller. Ultimately, DRM is a losing proposition to the retailer - if you run the DRM servers long enough, you *will* lose money.
It's basically a ponzi scheme - to cover the cost of running the DRM servers, you have to keep finding new sales to prop up the running expenses on the old sales. Eventually you run out of new sales and you lose money.
The incremental cost / track of running those servers is miniscule, but as old sales add up you still have to pay for bandwidth, iron, and power to service them.
Seems that DRM based on servers is bad for retailers as well.
Re:Wal-Mart (Score:2, Insightful)