Protect your investment: buy open. Scoble has written a weblog entry about, among other things, iTunes DRM and Microsoft DRM, and whether you should get an iPod. Scoble works for Microsoft, as do a number of good, sharp, ethical people that I know, and I know him in passing, and he seems to be a good guy. With that disclaimer out of the way, let me say that I think that this blog entry of his epitomizes the sloppiest, worst thinking about digital-media in the field today. From [Boing Boing]

The above is snippet from a post Cory Doctorow has written in response to this post by Robert Scoble. Unlike Cory, I don’t know Scoble, even in passing. However, having worked for a company that was acquired by Microsoft, I can say that Cory is right about one thing: the vast majority of Microsoft employees are both highly intelligent and ethical folks. Cory is right about another thing: their intelligence and commitment doesn’t mean they are right, in fact, they are often incorrect as Scoble is in this case.

In his article, Scoble falls victim to Microsoft’s own internal marketing. The gist of which is this: Microsoft’s digital rights management protocol (WMA) will be adopted by more OEMs/vendors. Therefore, there will be more devices on the market (portable audio players, car stereos, rocket jet packs, etc.) that can play music which uses WMA vs. other technologies such as ACC (Apple’s DRM Solution).

The problem is that Scoble is missing the big picture here, which is what Cory pointed out. The true “choice” consumers should be able to take advantage of shouldn’t be linked to a company at all. Neither Apple nor Microsoft should win in this battle of DRM. What should be created is either a consortium of vendors (ala DVD standards) or better yet, and open standard that anyone could implement. In spite of what Scoble seems to believe, consumers do not win when any one company controls the methods by which they can use their media. Cory raises the example of Betamax vs. VHS. Just for a moment let’s forget all of Microsoft’s past business transgressions, and assume that they are the most consumer loving, benevolent company on earth. Even if that were true today, that does not mean that it will always be true. In fact, history has shown it’s not likely to be true as DRM becomes a more important part of our daily lives. If you need some examples of that, think back to Unisys and .gifs or take a look at SCO and Unix. Even though more companies might someday adopt the WMA DRM solution, that does not mean that it will always offer more choice for consumers.

There really is only one way to ensure true freedom of choice for consumers. Freedom to choose where and when they play the music they have rightfully purchased. That is to remove DRM from the hands of any one single company which could (reasonably be foreseen) to use a monopoly in DRM to their competitive advantage. Make it an open standard. Allow anyone to implement it. Period. Create an industry consortium of vendors committed to furthering and developing the standard and simply give away (or charge a nominal fee) for vendor licensing. That would allow a true, open playing field for device manufacturers and software developers, without being locked into any proprietary systems, and would, in the end, be the only way I can see to offer consumers real choice. But I don’t really think choice is what Microsoft wants to offer consumers anyway.