Comments on: Man, I Hate DRM

By: Jason Thompson

Jason Thompson — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 20:07:30 +0000

I had always approached the DRM issue from a personal standpoint. The archival issues had never even occured to me. Fascinating. Yet another piece of ammunition to use in dinner party arguments with the rare pro-DRM members of my social circles.

By: Peter Van Garderen

Peter Van Garderen — Fri, 06 Apr 2007 16:21:25 +0000

Ogg Vorbis is NOT an ISO standard and I doubt it ever will be.

However, as I mention in the article above, MP3 (aka ‘MPEG-1 Audio Layer 3′) is an ISO standard which, for now, is one of the factors that makes it the de-facto format, in particular for the reason you just mentioned.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Fri, 06 Apr 2007 15:20:25 +0000

I know there is a lot of underground support for OGG, but the one thing that turns me off about it is its lack of official standardization. I just had a look at the Vorbis wikipedia entry and the OGG website and I could not find a reference to any ISO standard number for it.

I could very well be wrong, though.

One thing that I think I remember reading somewhere, but can’t find the source for right now, is that Vorbis was eschewing official standardization because they felt that this was much to slow a process, and would hinder the nimbleness of an audio codec. While I agree in principle, for a) corporations and b) preservationists, this may well be a significant drawback. As either of those bodies, I would like to see an organization with some weight behind it as the maintaining body and some guaranteed longevity and a minimal amount of documentation, over technical superiority, nimbleness, and a group of people that could lose interest and/or fold up overnight. Having the source code available is a very good incentive, but I feel it needs to go one step further in order to be seriously considered for archival purposes.

If it did go through ISO (or similar) standardization, I would jump on it in a heartbeat.

By: Peter Van Garderen

Peter Van Garderen — Fri, 06 Apr 2007 14:57:33 +0000

Thanks for that correction Andrew. Yes, I guess I meant to say Apple’s .m4p format which, as you point out, is the non-proprietary MPEG-4 AAC or .m4a format but with Apple’s Fairplay DRM encryption tacked on.

It appears that many other MP3 manufacturers are beginning to support AAC. However, after Apple, Creative is probably the largest MP3 player manufacturer and they have yet to come around. The Creative Zen Vision:M player that I bought just a few months ago only supports MP3, WMA and WAV audio formats.

Nevertheless, AAC is the other legitimate candidate, along with Ogg Vorbis, to replace MP3 as the de-facto standard for music files. Thanks for pointing it out.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Fri, 06 Apr 2007 13:58:26 +0000

Just one small correction: WMA is proprietary to Microsoft, but AAC is not proprietary to Apple. The DRM that Apple uses (Fairplay) IS proprietary to them, but AAC itself is an open standard maintained by the MPEG group. (technically it is called “MPEG-4 Audio”) This is why many devices play AAC files (including Microsoft’s Zune.)

MP3 is a very patent-encumbered file format, and the quicker it dies, the better the world will be. AAC is more open, maintained by an actual standards group, and doesn’t cost per-track royalties when distributing songs encoded in it.

By: Jen

Jen — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 15:45:27 +0000

Peter,
Thanks for the review on DRM and mp3 files. An interesting take on it from the view of an archivist!

By: CW

CW — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 03:56:03 +0000

Thanks for this great summary of the problems with DRM and music!

By: Peter Van Garderen

Peter Van Garderen — Mon, 02 Apr 2007 22:08:59 +0000

Wow, that was quick. I guess EMI read my blog post today and decided immediately to release their catalog without DRM restrictions. This blogging thing is really cool. Seriously, good for EMI. This will help their business AND the fans of their bands.