When You Have A 'Chief Content Protection Officer,' You're Doing It Wrong
from the protection-vs.-enablement dept
The problem, of course, is that this assumes a key point: that content needs "protection." It wipes out even the possibility that there may be better strategies than focusing on trying to do the impossible and "protecting" content. It's sort of like an entire department tasked with demanding the tide never come in. Perhaps the MPAA could take some of that money it's used for "content protection" (whose crowning task so far has been to get Homeland Security to seize a bunch of domains on an extremely questionable legal basis) and instead put it towards encouraging and enabling new, useful and profitable business models. I guess it's just easier to have a whole department based on playing victim, rather than being proactive and helping filmmakers adjust to the market.