Media vs. Tech

So, I basically had no idea of the comparative size of these industries. Hannibal @ Ars Technica has written an article asking why the tech industry (physical hardware tech) has been kowtowing to the demands of big media with regards to DRM despite the fact that consumers DON'T WANT IT?

In the tech industry, the price of a new fab is currently around US$5 billion, a price that puts such facilities out of reach for all but the biggest players like Intel and IBM. Still, that's 25 King Kongs, or over 350 Brokeback Mountains, or 1,000 five million dollar episodes of a big-budget HBO series like Rome or The Sopranos. My point is that, for even just half the price of a single 65nm fab, the tech industry could buy a few small studios and just start throwing tons of free content at the world. Or, for the full price of a fab, they could fund almost a decade worth of low- and medium-budget content to give away as an inducement for people to buy hardware. [Emphasis mine]

DRM certainly is not a selling point. To elucidate on Hannibal's suggestion, IBM could buy minor studios and say, "continue as you have been with one exception, after the theatres are done with your films, we'll be giving them away in hardware promotions as unencrypted files." They could do the same with HD and kill this whole BluRay vs. HD-DVD debacle. "Buy our HD player and you can play it on your computer, and share it with friends, just pop in the disk or download it, and play, no mess. Our media is cheaper because we don't have to pay an army of lawyers to sue you for enjoying it. Play the movies you buy in any device you want... LIKE OUR BRAND NEW MEDIA PLAYER :-)

raul