Diogen, doesn't Sony's reversal on Sony's BMG DRM stand help the pain even just a little bit?
No.
They don't go DRM-free because they think they f*cked up. They do so because it might make them more money. Big difference.
Here is an example.
A few years ago the Canadian QuickTax made by Intuit had a new copy protection that employed writing some code into the MBR (Master Boot Record). Some multi-boot PCs had problems (most of mine are of this type). Three month later they admitted to have screwed up, offered a clean copy, offered support for that year version for 10 years free, promissed to never use it again.
This is "to come clean" in my books.
When Rusinovich discovered the Sony's rootkit:
1. First official statement - they have done nothing wrong.
2. Code gets installed only to play the CD on the PC - lie, it was installed even if you cancel out of the first window with the license agreement (!!!)
3. It doesn't do any damage - lie, exploit was ready in about 2 weeks.
4. It doesn't call home - lie, it does, regularly.
To get the uninstall program you had to give Sony your address (!!!).
And if the uninstall wasn't done properly, you lose your optical drive at best, the whole setup - at worst.
In the end Sony blaimed it on BMG legacy...
This is "not to come clean" in my books.
And can we not be fair and point out that it is the studios who are pressing for DRM on HDM and not Sony?
Well, Sony is a studio.
But I have no problem with this. It will be broken, I know it, they know it.
Casual copying might be slowed down a bit. And doesn't their latest DRM-free music idea suggest that they allow for the very thought that DRM might be stupid from the start?
Diogen.