The Might of the Digital Dollar; A Bill Of Rights

Time will keep moving, and with it, the experiences that enrich life as well as the technology that enrichment can sometimes rely on.  I was perusing the internet today when my browser, as it often does, brought me to the Kindle. Newly refurbished rumors of a 2.0 device  have…kindled… my drive to get one (though i’d gladly wait for the new one, especially if it is cheaper and aimed at the oh-so-elusive collegiate market that I happen to consider myself a part of).  I was explaining the device to my mother ( especially since I have a birthday coming up this sunday… two decades and such) and she couldn’t quite grasp the concept of such a device. The oft-used phrase “the ipod of books” was brought up, and she seemed to grok that – she was even intrigued by the wireless purchase device, and she said she would be interested to see one in person.

It was then that I began to think; what media isn’t digital anymore? Movies, games, music, pictures,  and finally books are available digitally, and yet, the way in which we deal with this media is dealt with in increasingly old-school terms; Laughably, in many cases. For instance; An mp3 is not what it is, according to the fine people at the RIAA. While the Mp3 is a specific amount of data that, when played through a compatible player, unfurls as a song, and is therefore a song, the RIAA states that the ownership of the Mp3 is only a physical representation of a service contract one has made with the “true owner” of the media, and can only be used in a way in which complies with this true owner. This is obviously panic, as in the days of analog, the idea of pirating a piece of media, while not unheard of, was certainly a little more unorthodox. Meanwhile in our futuristic computer-space world that we appear to live in, I can click two, maybe three buttons and have an exact copy of a particular piece of media, or thousands of copies, if I want. They fear piracy, and so, we are all pirates. ( A side story; My father is vehemently against my downloading of anything over the internet, yet will not hesitate to purchase a 5 dollar copy of “The Dark Knight” in Times square out of a plastic bag. I mean, so long as someone is getting paid, right? ) A quick google search of “DMCA” will load unto your ocular lens’ a cache’s worth of hypocrisy. We, as consumers, ultimately hold the power when it comes to our purchasing, and yet we continue to bend over to the whim of the restrictive tendencies of the powers that be controlling our, thats right, our, new media. The Hackers had a code of Ethics, and so shall we.

Tech Crunch recently suggested such a bill of rights to the internet, but what of digital media? Here are some of my More specific suggestions to such a bill of Rights.

I Maintain Personal Ownership of  My Digital Content.

When I go to Amazon, or Itunes, Or (more realistically) the Zune marketplace, I am asked to give my credit card information, and many times more. I do not assume that this place is a scam, nor do I think that they will steal away with my personal information and run off with the $64.21 that I have to my name. Similarly, the providers of this digital media should not assume I am going to run off and make 100 copies and sell it on the street. When you give me content, it leaves your hand, and goes to mine. This is the final line, and as far as you are concerned, there is no longer any hold or sway you have over it. Which brings me to the next point;

No restrictive measures will be placed on my paid content.

DRM. The bane of every digital consumer. Why is the Song I bought at itunes, or zune, not able to be played on my Rhapsody player? or vice versa? Why can’t I just load it to my phone, or my watch, or play it within any major player? No, a “clean” standard should be derived for every major media type (Mp3, Mp4, ebook for example) and at the very least, a version of the requested media in such a format must be able to be purchased DRM free. This should be playable on any device or player that will support the format, regardless of where I got the content from. There are exceptions to this one rule, which leads me to:

I will Subsidize costs for hybrid Ownership/Altered media.

One features I use with very liberally is the use of the Zune Pass, which allows the (mostly) unrestricted download of the entire Zune Marketplace catalog. For fifteen dollars a month, I download roughly 100 dollars worht of CD’s. The Difference? If I ever stop this subscription, which I can do at any time, these songs downloaded using this service (distinct from ones actually purchased during the subscription)  are no longer available to me. Truth be told, I use this service more to sample music, and more of my music purchases hav been made from this service than from any other service. You could extend this to ad-supported media as well; I will watch ads to make my content free, so long as I am given a choice to pay for non-ad supported content.

I will not be bundled.

This seems not as important, but there is distinction; If I only want track 9 from CD X, or Episode 2 from Season 4 of Scrubs, I should only have to pay for the content I require. Hell, if I only want the blooper reel, I should only pay for that. Speaking of payment;

I refuse to use Monopoly Money.

My home team, Microsoft, is guilty of this very charge; there is no reason why any sensible adult should have to translate their good, hard-earned money into pre-sectioned points, such as the system that the Microsoft online environment implements. This is racketeering, plain and simple. If I only want one item, and it only translates into 79 of your points, that is all I need. I am not going to get 400 points because that is the lowest you offer. I get 79, or I download it elsewhere. (better yet, I get to pay using real dollars!)

I Will Pay for Good Media.

One of the amazing things coming out of the digital age is the idea that we are all not just money-grubbers trying to get everything for free. Look at the RadioHead “In Rainbows” experiement, where they allowed the album to be downloaded for free, with the stipulation you return to give what you thought it was worth. While so far the average amount donated is less than a whole album ( around 8 dollars) so many more people listened to the music than ever would have before, how can it be deeemed a failure? At the very least, a few people paid more than the album, a bunch paid less, and some paid none at all- but all of them got to hear music they otherwise would not have, and a band got their music out to so many more ears.

Any more to think of? I am here.

Shop’n'Freude, and Other Observations on Consumerism.

I recently(ish) got a job at the consumerist, as an intern sorting the almighty tipline. I have been a little successful so far, a few of my posts bubbling to the surface in a sort of panic-induced joy. I mean, if I am doing a bad job, not   of them will get to the front page, right? So, in what little time I have of solitude, I have been meditating on what would make a good story, or more generally, what it means to exist as a consumer – what is customer service, what is good customer service, what is a lie, and what is true? What laws does one lose when they enter a retail establishment, and what responsibilities do businesses have to the consumer, and vice versa?

This came to a boiling point- more appropriately, a climax- when I was visiting a friend who had recently came back from Iraq. He was telling a story (to someone else- my ears are giant) about how a thrifty retailer was selling a t-shirt for 19 bucks, and the shirt meant you got one free lapdance. Apparently, there were rules about lapdances, and someone had a lot of shirts. My mind didn’t bother trying to deduce the specific situation, as much as all the thoughts and feeling coalesced into a single bubble of thought.

The Lapdance shirt had you paying more money for a greater output. Therefor, why not pay less for lesser output? Well, that’s walmart. But what about a severely lowered payment for a severely lesser outcome- in fact, a direct bad think would happen to you? What if you could pay for something in shame? The Horrible amalgam of retail outlets and Shadenfreude: Shop’n'freude. (Schadenbaums also acceptable).  This may be my one great idea, so bear with me.
The idea is that the prices would be so low, because you are literally paying in shame.  Everything at SNF would have two prices: one would be the regular, big-box retail outlet price, sales et all. Beneath that, however, is a color-coded pricing system that is only available to those precious SNF card club holders.  The colors respond to discounts, so that one item (For example, a 56′ HDTV) would have a ridiculously low cost ($300), but more importantly, the color would also respond to a specific list of acts of shame that would be wrought upon you (You are forced to strip into your underwear, cover yourself in KY, and make a slip-and-slide out of the linoleum floors until skin rubs with tile). Things need not be as horrible- Want that shirt for 50 cents? Ok – but the person ringing you out has to give an open palm slap to your face. Have a Nice day.

Here’s the genius of the idea: It’s all videotaped. Live streaming video, like porn, DVD’s put out of all the best ones, Even a bi-weekly tv-show hosted by Bob-fucking-saget! Jesus Christ, it’s the shame of fear factor except now it’s NATIONWIDE, and everyone’s grandma is lining up to get ass-smacked with a piece of Ham to afford the newest iphone! It’s wonderful, delightful, delicious chaos that is marketable and would ruin walmart. Can you imagine? The Retail outlets trying to adopt SNF’s new world order, with target opening “Grievance Lanes” to accommodate the writhing masses, demanding to walk paces around the store with their pants around their ankles to get milk for a nickel? Each one trying to out-do the next one, with people darting to blue-light specials covered in Tar, or maybe Jam, just awaiting whatever the next challenge will be, so ready to forgo their self respect for the new Miley Cyrus CD? Wouldn’t even be illegal. All SNF club-card members would have to sign a waiver, forgoing them for suing SNF, and knowing that they are getting these prices because they are agreeing to perform these acts, and can absolutely buy them at the normal price if they so choose. They forgo all rights to their image, and understand that they could be used in television -fuck it, people wanna be on TV! They’d come dressed and Mimes, or Luchadore, or any god damn costume and perform the ” Walk with a banana between your thighs” trick over and over again, hoping to get introduced by BOBFUCKINGSAGET!  And what about returns! What exchanges only, yea, but what if something is out of stock, nothing able to replenish it? Oh man, that’s a special. Charge a ticket for that, because he gets to enact out the revenge on the establishment! Oh, yeah, a little revenge! Buy it up, America!

It’s everything that we hate about America, and it’s everything we’d love to watch.  It’s beautiful, it’s horrible, and it’d be a fucking goldmine. So who’s up? Who’s got the balls to take us this low? C’mon people, I just lost myself in a whole rant! This should be addressed.

Jobs are Fun.