If Macrovision CEO Fred Amoroso ever decides to give up business for comedy he might have a promising career ahead of him. The Internet is still laughing at his response to Steve Job’s open letter on DRM. Fortunately for Amoroso the humor was probably lost on the Hollywood executives the letter was intended to reach.
While music industry executives remain skeptical that they can make a buck in a DRM-free world, Amoroso is certain that his company needs DRM to survive. That’s because Macrovision’s business is DRM. By definition, the company survives by instilling fear in the hearts of entertainment industry executives. The last thing Macrovision needs is some upstart telling entertainment companies that DRM isn’t really necessary. Unlike Apple, Macrovision has nothing to sell but fear itself.
Read Amoroso’s response to Jobs and it becomes clear that Macrovision’s world-view is one where all of the problems currently facing the entertainment industry can be solved by MORE DRM, not less. He suggests that consumers will ultimately get what they really want when their media is completely locked down (preferably by Macrovision technology). Which is why he goes so far as to offer to take control of Apple’s FairPlay DRM system. Well, that and the fact that Macrovision hasn’t had much success in the music business.
While Macrovision hasn’t hit it big with the music industry, they’ve made a fortune from the motion picture industry. As the Mother Of All DRM Companies Macrovision has been selling copy protection technology to Hollywood since the early 80’s.
Some of the youngsters reading this may find it hard to believe, but in the early days of home video the film industry was quite certain that the VCR would kill the movie business. In 1982, then MPAA president Jack Valente told Congress:
“I say to you that the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone.”
With the president of the motion picture association using that sort of rhetoric it’s not surprising that studio heads were quick to implement any copy protection scheme available. Macrovision was more than happy to sell Hollywood a system that purportedly prevented mullet wearing pirates from illegally dubbing Flash Dance and other movie hits of the day. Macrovision’s technology has been ingrained in the home video business ever since.
In retrospect we know that that the VCR didn’t kill the movie business. In fact, it’s well documented that home video lead to an avalanche of profits for film companies.
We also know that Macrovision’s technology didn’t stop piracy. According to the MPAA’s recent estimates 81 million illegal DVDs were seized in 2005. That number doesn’t take into account all of the bootleg DVDs that were actually sold, or losses due to Internet file sharing. It’s clear that there’s an awful lot of piracy that Macrovision’s technology isn’t stopping.
Inexplicably studio executives continue to cling to Macrovision’s copy protection voodoo to this very day. As Hollywood migrated to DVDs in the late-90’s Macrovision rode along with an updated version of its technology. More recently Macrovision’s technology has been integrated into DVR devices like TiVo.
While Macrovision’s technology hasn’t done much to actually stop piracy, it has had a considerable impact on how consumers use legitimately purchased media products:
- In the early days of home video Macrovision lead to distortion of the picture on incompatible VCRs. Macrovision was also known to cause some VCRs to inadvertently scramble broadcast television programming that was simply being passed through the recorder.
- Some Macrovision protected DVDs won’t play on computer DVD drives. Consumers wishing to watch Macrovision DVDs on their PC are forced to use illicit software to bypass the Macrovision restrictions. Is this a violation of the DMCA or simply fair use?
- More recently Macrovision warnings have been popping up unexpectedly on TiVos. The warnings tell viewers they have between 24 hours and 7 days to watch the program they’ve recorded. Despite Amoroso’s claims to the contrary, something tells me this is not what consumers really want from their DVR.
It’s pretty clear that Macrovision’s legacy is one of ineffective copy protection and consumer dissatisfaction. All the more reason why industry insiders should question Amoroso’s conclusion that more DRM will lead to a “transformation in home entertainment that can be as significant as the introduction of the PC”.
A balanced assessment of the history of the home video business would suggests the following:
- New technologies create new business opportunities that more than make up for any losses due to piracy.
- Copy protection schemes do little to prevent piracy.
- Copy protection systems succeed only in annoying legitimate paying customers while pirates continue to steal.
But that’s not the sort of talk that sells DRM systems, so you won’t hear any of that from the CEO of Macrovision.
With any luck it’s only a matter of time before Hollywood finally wakes up to the truth and realizes the futility of DRM.