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.
