In these early days of wireless entertainment, it appears content providers have effectively deployed a variety of Digital Rights Management solutions to protect their wares.
But many believe all those “solutions” are actually a problem.
Behind-the-scenes haggling over royalties continue between MPEG LA, which holds patents for Open Mobile Alliance-supported DRM technology, and industry associations such as the GSM Association. The groups have been at odds since January, when MPEG LA-a licensing clearinghouse-proposed royalties the GSMA blasted as unreasonable and excessive.
The standoff hasn’t stifled the race to deploy DRM offerings, however. In their haste to move music and other mobile content to market as quickly as possible, carriers are embracing a variety of anti-piracy solutions.
While there have been reports of peer-to-peer file-sharing between wireless users in more advanced wireless markets, experts generally agree anti-piracy software has been effective.
“There’s hardly a problem to speak of,” Steve Mayall, mobile music editor of MusicAlly, an online digital music publication, said of illegal wireless file sharing. “You could almost say that mobile operators have gone a bit too far (in deploying DRM protection), but that’s not to say that there aren’t going to be potentially threatening ways mobile phones could be used” to transfer files illegally.
It stands to reason, of course, that piracy isn’t a major factor in these early days of wireless content. Few handsets are equipped to store more than a few full-length songs, and full-track, over-the-air download services are just coming to market.
But unlike the Internet world-where DRM providers are constantly playing catch-up with piracy sites and downloaders-content providers and wireless services providers typically have solutions in place before content is available. The types of file-sharing that does appear to be happening is inefficient and cumbersome-and far more difficult than illegally downloading tunes from the Internet.
Sharing memory cards to copy content requires both time and proximity. And Bluetooth technology is a poor vehicle for sharing music, taking several minutes to transfer a single song. Mayall, in fact, said Bluetooth-powered piracy “is probably less insidious or harmful than swapping cassettes was 20 years ago.”
Regardless of their efficacy, however, the ever-increasing number of proprietary DRM solutions may serve only to slow the wireless content market in the long run. Consumers are less likely to purchase content that can’t be moved from a phone that uses one type of DRM to a PC or home entertainment system that employs another.
MPEG LA holds a pool of licenses for OMA-supported technologies from several companies, including Intertrust Technologies Inc. Intertrust struck its own deal with Vodafone Group plc earlier this month, however, leading some to believe the MPEG LA and the wireless industry aren’t likely to find common ground anytime soon.
Because Intertrust’s technology is OMA-approved, Vodafone’s DRM solution will be included in any eventual standard. But other carriers are opting for proprietary anti-piracy solutions in order to bring wireless content to market.
“I think everybody’s got a handle on (content protection) right now,” said Talal Shamoon, chief executive officer of Intertrust. “The biggest threat facing the market, ironically, is people tailoring the DRM for different models.”
Intertrust is working with other technology providers and consumer electronics companies in an effort to facilitate cross-platform interoperability. Beginning next year, Sony Corp., Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. Ltd., Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and Royal Philips Electronics are expected to begin introducing devices based on the DRM standard Marlin. While Marlin holds much promise in allowing users to move content between devices, it’s unlikely to solve the growing fragmentation in the wireless DRM space.
Bruce Sunstein, a Boston-based patent attorney, believes the free market eventually will determine a standard DRM technology for wireless content.
“There are lots of competing standards, but if you’re a content provider, I’m not sure it matters,” Sunstein said. “For a while we’ve got kind of a Babylon of standards, but over time that will get sorted out over which are easiest to use while still giving some protection to content providers.”
And unlike PC users, mobile consumers aren’t likely to access illegal file-sharing sites from their handsets anytime soon. Mobile operators have complete control over their networks, and won’t risk close relationships with content providers by allowing subscribers to visit torrent sites.
But as more advanced wireless technologies are deployed, and as more content comes onto networks, would-be pirates will find more opportunity to obtain music and video illegally. While technology companies may have the early lead in locking down mobile content, content providers and operators must find ways to make DRM solutions flexible and user-friendly.
As the Internet has shown, many users who can’t easily discover content and purchase it legally at reasonable prices will find ways to access it illegally.
“People will pay for content,” Intertrust’s Shamoon said. “The challenge for operators, the challenge for content providers, the challenge for technology companies is to convert people from being pirates to being paying consumers.” RCR
