Warner Music and DRM Are So Cute Together

Kind of old news, but after Jobs' open letter about DRM and digital music, Warner Music chief, Edgar Bronfman responded in defense of DRM saying:

"DRM and interoperability are not the same thing. Warner Music believes very strongly in interoperability. Consumers want it and consumers should have it."

"But there cannot be so much protection that you create a poor consumer experience, and we need to find a better balance than exists today."

He's right. DRM is different from interoperability. You can embed copyright protection software without preventing these digital music files from being played on devices other than one company's. Seems like Jobs avoiding that little piece of information. Bronfman has a point. In a perfect world there'd be some protection from the copying of intellectual property. But again, I've outlined reasons in previous posts about the benefit for the artists. You still have holes in your argument, Bronfman. For every DRM technology there is a crack, so instead of flushing away money on these technologies, come up with something more effective, and profitable. And he sees that in mobile devices, which he commends Jobs for realizing in the iPhone. By making the process of downloading music on a cell easier, they think there's a new, profitable market that could open up. I think they're correct in a sense. People might have a more powerful inclination to pay for music if they're on the run and are attracted to a new technology. But how long will that last? For me, I don't think I'd be any more swayed to purchase than I am already now. They'll sure make a profit from the devices themselves, but after awhile people will treat it as they would their own computer.

Anyway, it doesn't look like Warner Music is any closer to ditching DRM than they were before the EMI situation.