A Need for Regulation – Common threads between The Long Tail and “A Bite Out of Apple? iTunes, Ineroperability, and France’s Dadvsi Law”

As Chris Anderson states in The Long Tail, “It’s the Internet that has become the ultimate discovery vehicle for new music.” Deana Sobel’s article “A Bite Out of Apple? iTunes, Interoperability, and France’s Dadvsi Law” examines how that “ultimate discovery vehicle” has led to an ultimately-contested copyright problem – a topic Anderson addresses as well.

The iTunes example Sobel uses is an elaboration on Anderson’s observation that big companies like “Disney and Metallica may be doing all they can to embrace and extend copyright” in the digital age.

Sobel examines the Dadvsi Law’s attempt to remedy the challenges of simultaneously promoting interoperability to please consumers, while discouraging unauthorized copying – to please creators. The Law does so by “establishing guidelines…to order companies to disclose source codes… and impose fines against copyright infringers.” However, Dadvsi shows favoritism by placing the “burden of proof” on creators. All that a creator needs to do to avoid disclosure is claim a reason “that publication of the source code would seriously undermine the safety and effectiveness of [its] DRM (digital rights management).”

Sobel asks, “Is the real purpose of DRM really to prevent unauthorized copies, or is it to enable companies to limit the interoperability of their products?” Anderson addresses the probability of diverse purposes with: “Once you think of the curve being populated with creators who have different incentives, it’s easy to extend that to their intellectual property interests as well.”

Sobel cites an example of a consumer advocate who perceived that “iTunes Music Store is trying to kill off… interoperability, in order to boost its own profits.” Whereas, Apple’s Steve Jobs defended iTunes’ use of closed source as simple compliance with the music industry, “who require strong DRM to prevent illegal copying.”

Overall, Anderson and Sobel relate through their recognition of a need for regulations in the digital age.

Sobel sees a “struggle to define the proper scope of government regulation” and thinks governments “would do well to define specifically what DRM holders can do with their DRM.”

Similarly, Anderson writes, “I hope marketplace and regulation will more accurately reflect [that some creators care about copyright and some don’t, as the current law doesn’t distinguish between them].”