Gaps in Existing DRM Technology
DRM is complex technology, and in this early phase of its
development, designers have chosen to focus on features of most immediate
concern to their customers, mainly media companies, who have mainly been
focusing on piracy prevention and simple distribution schemes that emulate
physical media distribution models. Another concern at odds with the complexity
of DRM is the cost of deployment, particularly any unit costs of bundling DRM
functionality in with platforms and consumer devices.
Meanwhile, P2P networks have only recently come into
being. Therefore, many DRM technologies in existence today have various gaps in
their ability to be integrated into P2P networks. Here are some of the most
important of those gaps, which should represent opportunities for DRM technology
designers in the future.
DRM schemes designed by consumer device makers typically
have just enough functionality to satisfy IP owners while keeping unit costs at
a minimum. The best-known example of this is the CSS (Content Scrambling
System) for DVDs, which was designed by two consumer electronics makers (Toshiba
and Matsushita) and accepted by movie studios with the promise of a stronger
future solution that has yet to materialize.
Cost of DRM has also been an issue beyond the world of
consumer devices. In general, DRM is virtually unique in the technology world,
in that it is a complex technology that encumbers the user without any direct
benefit (unlike, say, burglar alarms, which protect people from theft of their
own physical assets); the biggest challenge in the market has been to find those
participants in the content value chain who would be willing to pay for it.
(The media industry in particular has been reluctant to make investments in DRM
technology compared to, say, the software industry.) This problem should recede
over time as DRM becomes more and more bundled into value-added services that
have tangible benefits for users.
The problem of the cost of DRM should recede over
time as DRM becomes more and more bundled into value-added services that have
tangible benefits for users.
Many DRM schemes permit access to content only on a
specific device, instead of supporting space shifting and other reasonable usage
expectations. For device and platform vendors, the reasons for this are
obvious: why support usage of content on competitors' platforms? Some DRM
schemes allow usage on up to a fixed number of devices or software of the same
type but not of different types.
For IP owners, the reasons for supporting device
tethering derive from the media industry's traditional product orientation: the
principle that two different formats of the same content -- for example, the DVD
and VHS versions of the same movie, or the print and eBook versions of a book --
are separate products and should be paid for separately. Most corporate IP
owners, which use content for purposes of knowledge management, marketing,
collaboration, etc., would not agree with this.
IP owners also feel that device tethering is sometimes
necessary to curb infringement; for example, if a college textbook is published
in eBook format using a DRM technology that allows reading on up to 10 eBook
readers, then a class of 20 students is likely to collectively purchase as few
as 2 copies. Admittedly, device tethering is a legitimate response to the
imperfection of reasonably-priced user authentication, such as passwords that
can be shared as opposed to more expensive but more effective biometric
authentication devices.
Most DRM schemes only support single levels of
distribution, or they support the limited form of Superdistribution discussed
above. As early DRM vendors found out, support for true Superdistribution
requires far more complex technology than that required for single-tier
distribution. Yet web services, cross-platform functionality, and other
technologies that have appeared since the mid-1990s can ameliorate this
problem. Standards for rights and web service descriptions will especially help
remove the complexity of Superdistribution with DRM.
Even with single-tier distribution schemes, a serious
barrier to growth in the DRM market has been how expensive, time-consuming, and
complex it is to integrate DRM technology with all of the necessary surrounding
functions, including: content production and packaging, user identification,
transaction processing, and CRM (customer relationship management). Launching a
new content e-commerce initiative has been so complex that integration costs
dwarf that of off-the-shelf software, including DRM packaging software.
Furthermore, the capital outlay required even with off-the-shelf software is
prohibitive for smaller IP producers, including many who might be interested in
making content available over P2P networks.
A serious barrier to growth in the DRM market has
been how expensive, time-consuming, and complex it is to integrate DRM
technology with all of the necessary surrounding functions.
Once again, replacing licensed software with services,
and standardizing the interfaces to those services so as to minimize integration
effort, will help solve this problem. There have been many attempts to build
DRM service provider businesses; most have failed because the kinds of prices
that IP owners have been willing to pay for services did not measure up to the
service providers' high cost structures. But the success of a handful of
current DRM-related service providers in niche markets points the way to a
brighter future for service-based architectures.
Conclusions: Developing the Market
We conclude this white paper with some thoughts on how
DRM can grow to support integration with P2P networks. Some of the problems
that must be solved are technological in nature; others are problems of
perception rather than reality; but most are more matters of economics than
anything else.
Of the technological problems, the largest one is
Superdistribution. Early DRM technologies such as IBM's Cryptolope attempted to
support Superdistribution but failed because of all of the functionality that
needed to be built from scratch, on both the server and client platforms, to
support it. Nowadays at least some of the required functionality (e.g., network
authentication and e-commerce) is standard and widely available, and such
functionality is becoming available through standard web-service interfaces.
But it is still a daunting technical challenge to implement Superdistribution
without undue complexity and disruption of user experiences -- to say nothing of
prohibitive cost. DigitalContainers is a DRM technology vendor that is
addressing these challenges today.
Network identity is a problem of both perception and
technology. Universal network identification schemes like Microsoft's .NET
Passport have a "Big Brother" perception problem that may be exaggerated. The
same is true for user tracking technology vis-`-vis privacy. On the other hand,
federated (interoperable) network identity, a la the Liberty Alliance, is
seriously difficult to implement in today's heterogeneous trust environments.
Technology problems related to meeting reasonable usage
expectations, such as device and format portability and rights specification
interoperability, derive largely from economic considerations. As mentioned
above, one of the biggest challenges in the development of DRM has been getting
participants in the content value chain to pay for it.
The two types of participants most closely involved in
designing DRM schemes have been platform/device vendors and IP owners. IP
owners, as mentioned above, have long thought in terms of "products" instead of
"content," leading them to feel that purchasing content in one format should not
allow the purchaser to access that content in other formats. And device
vendors are not at all motivated to create DRM technology that allows users to
access content on other types of devices.
Aside from advocacy groups like the Electronic Frontier
Foundation and DigitalConsumer.org, who attempt to assert content usage rights
through lobbying of legislators, case support, and other such activities,
third-party DRM vendors are the ones that are actually motivated to build
technology that supports users' reasonable usage expectations as well as other
features that promote the integration of DRM with P2P networks.
Third-party DRM vendors are the ones that are
actually motivated to build technology that supports users' reasonable usage
expectations as well as other features that promote the integration of DRM
with P2P networks.
There have been countless "standalone" third-party DRM
technology vendors over the past several years, but very few of them have
succeeded, due to several factors, including unrealistic revenue expectations,
lack of understanding of content business models, and of course, inadequate
technology. To understand how these vendors might find customers, we should
answer the question: who stands to gain from the proliferation of DRM-enabled
P2P networks?
The answer lies in the fact that P2P network usage
promotes use of network bandwidth, equipment, and services; in fact, numerous
recent statistics have shown that the majority of bandwidth on the Internet is
used by a small percentage of users who mostly engage in file sharing.
Therefore, we suggest that network hardware/software makers and internet service
providers (ISPs) are the best potential sources of interest in and funding of
DRM development for P2P networks.
Network hardware and software makers' interest in
embracing DRM is hampered somewhat by the open nature of the Internet and the
W3C's lack of interest in DRM, but network equipment makers have been looking at
DRM, though they have yet to become active in the market. For example, Cisco
designed a DRM protocol called OCCAM (Open Conditional Content Access
Management) in 2001, but the company appears to have no interest in developing
products around it.
The major Internet service providers have largely avoided
DRM; one reason for this is that noninvolvement in DRM has enabled them to stay
aloof from various legal liability issues. However, recent activity related to
the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, such as the music industry's subpoena of Verizon over the name of a Verizon Online user suspected of music piracy, may be
sending a signal to ISPs that noninvolvement breeds liability too, therefore
they should participate in the market and start looking at the service provider
opportunities it can afford. Major ISPs are naturals to support DRM-enabled P2P
networks and provide value-added services to their participants, as a way of
garnering revenue from their heaviest users instead of (or in addition to)
monitoring bandwidth usage and charging tiered pricing, as a few have begun to
do over strong user objections.
Major ISPs are naturals to support DRM-enabled P2P
networks and provide value-added services to their participants, as a way of
garnering revenue from their heaviest users.
Of course, the development of some of the technologies
mentioned in this white paper should also encourage startups, as well as more
established vendors, to build various types of new content-related services that
can grow the market.
Finally, we should emphasize that standards can help
hasten and lower the cost of solutions to many of the problems mentioned above.
There are several existing standards efforts that related to DRM integrated with
P2P, as previously mentioned. The problem with many of them is that they are
design with much broader areas in mind than that of DRM and P2P networks,
meaning that approval processes take longer and applicability is not as
straightforward. P2P-related trade associations (e.g., P2P United) are
beginning to appear; unfortunately, they engage in anti-DRM posturing for
political purposes. Such groups need to get beyond polemics, understand the
opportunities for everyone available in DRM integration with P2P networks, and
start representing the P2P community in relevant standards initiatives alongside
the independent DRM vendors that can most directly impact the market.
About the Author
Bill Rosenblatt, president of GiantSteps Media
Technology Strategies, has 20 years of experience in technology architecture,
business development, and marketing; publishing; new media; and online
education. He has been a business development executive at a leading technology
vendor, an IT executive at major publishing companies, and chief technology
officer of an e-learning startup. He has expertise in digital media
technologies such as content management, digital rights management, streaming
media, and publishing systems. Bill is the author of several books, including
Digital Rights Management: Business and Technology (John Wiley & Sons,
2001), and he is Managing Editor of the Jupitermedia newsletter DRM Watch (www.drmwatch.com).
About GiantSteps Media Technology Strategies
GiantSteps Media Technology Strategies is a management
consultancy focused on the content industries that help its clients achieve
growth through market intelligence and expertise in business strategy and
technology architecture.Clients have included publishing companies, news,
entertainment, and professional information providers, and digital media
technology vendors ranging from early-stage startups to Global 500 firms.
Contact:
phone: +1 212 956 1045
email:
info@giantstepsmts.com
Web:
www.giantstepsmts.com
About DigitalContainers LLC
Events
IE 7
Firefox 2.0
