Ernest Miller pursues research and writing on cyberlaw, intellectual property, and First Amendment issues. Mr. Miller attended the U.S. Naval Academy before attending Yale Law School, where he was president and co-founder of the Law and Technology Society, and founded the technology law and policy news site LawMeme. He is a fellow of the Information Society Project at Yale Law School.
Ernest Miller's blog postings can also be found @Listen to the weekly audio edition on IT Conversations:
The Importance Of ... Law and IT.
Feel free to contact me about articles, websites and etc. you think I may find of interest. I'm also available for consulting work and speaking engagements. Email: ernest.miller 8T gmail.com
Check out IdeaFlow by Renee Hopkins Callahan for the latest on innovation trends and practices. On her radar screen: the creativity of bipolar children, Democrats' call for an "Innovation Agenda", grocery store innovations, creating a culture of business experimentation, and more.
Spend less time traveling and more time selling with GoToMeeting. Hold instant Web conferences in just a few clicks.
Free 30-day trial.

Jeevan Jaisingh is an assistant professors in the Dept. of Information and Systems Management at HKUST Business School in Hong Kong. He has recently published a very interesting paper on SSRN. Link to the 24-page paper here: Piracy on File Sharing Networks: Strategies for Recording Companies.
Here's the abstract:
In this paper we study the impact of selling music as downloads, on piracy, and the strategies recording companies should adopt to increase profits. We find that total music sales and profit of firm is higher, and total piracy (demand on file sharing network) is lower, when the firm sells a downloadable version. We look at the firm's optimal choice of Digital Rights Management (DRM) protection, and find that revenue decreases with increased protection, and so it is optimal for the firm not to employ any DRM, in the absence of network effects. Listening to music or watching video protected by DRM is cumbersome to users. They have to download license files, there are restrictions on the number of times the file can be copied, and restrictions on the type of devices that can play the file. As a result there is a disutility to the legal consumer, because of which the firm charges lower prices. Loss in revenue due to decreased prices cannot be compensated by the increase in demand, and hence revenue decreases with higher protection. When network effects (NE) is high, and a nominal search cost is above a certain threshold, then non-zero protection becomes optimal. This result is exactly the opposite of what was found in previous research (Conner and Rumelt 1991), where protection was found to be optimal in the absence of NE, and zero protection was optimal if NE is high enough.Having read the paper, there are a number of questions I have about some of the assumptions and models, but overall it is a very engrossing paper.
There are also some interesting asides as well. For example,
The German media conglomerate Bertelsmann has announced recently that it is to begin offering “nofrills” and luxury versions of CDs in a bid to combat piracy. Bertelsmann will offer three versions of its CDs, a =9.99 version, with only the title printed on the disc and nothing else; a =12.99 version, which will look like a regular CD, with a cover and liner notes; and a deluxe version costing =17.99, which will include video clips and other additional material (Philips 2004). This provides anecdotal evidence which supports our result that versioning is an appropriate strategy to fight piracy. The versioning we considered was providing a no-frills version through downloads, while the strategy Bertelsmann is adopting is providing a "no-frills" version of the CD, however the intuition for both is the same. Bertelsmann’s record label, BMG, hopes that the move will boost sales by up to 25 per cent (Philips 2004).Definitely a paper I'd like to see some responses and extensions to. A highly recommended copyfighter read.
Well, I tried itunes, because they said (and i foolishly believed) thay had "flexible" drm.
as someone who knows digital artists and is one himself, I am very annoyed by the fact that i was not even allowed to sample it, let alone make an original music video or even change its format!
some have said "well just embed it into the os so you can do what you want"....
I'm sorry, i dont want you poking around in my os and messing with my permissions, that is how you destroy a viable os.
Especially with a unix like osX.
the last thing i need is a set of files, or worse, my entire operating system, not allowing me to modify them because someone else wants to administer my system for me.
If this were not the music industry, they would be charged under hacking laws or private property laws for trespassing on other people's computers and at best fined several billion dollars.
sorry for the terrible spelling, my machine is lagging lately and i'm typing blind, i see not what i write until minutes later.
Tracked on July 31, 2004 06:32 AM
DRM lowers sales from Blogcritics It's proof time! A professor at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology has written a paper on how... [Read More]Tracked on July 31, 2004 06:37 PM