TechDirt has an excellent write-up today named “Universal Music 'Settlement' With Bolt Makes A Mockery Of The Law; Common Sense”. If you’re not aware, Universal music’s CEO, Doug Morris has been suing video-sharing sites that make use of copyrighted Universal music. Keep in mind, these are usually humorous videos, video diaries, video game captures, etc.. that use music in a fair use manner and are totally legit. No one in their right mind is going to hear “Sexy Back” on a YouTube video and say.. boy, now I don’t have to buy the song!

They successfully got Google to pay out (conveniently after they bought YouTube) by way of equity shares in YouTube! Now, keep in mind that Google/YouTube has done nothing wrong. They’re not responsible for their user’s content. Nor have many of the users done anything wrong, seeing as the music is used in a fair use context, usually not a full song, and actually helps the artist instead of hurting them.

Then they went after MySpace; suing them and winning, again for the same reasons that don’t make sense.

And somehow they then convince Microsoft to pay a type of “Universal music” tax on every Zune unit sold, probably because it could potentially be holding pirated Universal music. What the ——? Check out this quote from the New York Times:

A recent study estimated that Apple has sold an average of 20 songs per iPod — a fraction of its capacity. The rest of consumers’ music files — 95 percent or more — come from ripped CDs, possibly including discs from their own collections, and illegal file-trading networks, the study said.

So what percentage of that 95% is legit files? I’m sure Universal and other record industry executives want to say 0% — but think about it. Most older teens/adults who have iPods aren’t going around and pirating music. Maybe they do the casual thing, and let friends borrow a CD, who rips it, and then gives it back. But ultimately, is that a bad thing? Maybe the next time the person sees an album from that artist, they will purchase it first-hand. Or perhaps they will feel led to purchase the album they ripped, to get the physical album and artwork? Why assume that all of your customers are filthy thieves trying to steal your profits?

So finally, Universal turned its sights on Bolt.com, a site that is probably one of the first social networking sites (that I knew of, at least.) And now they have to sell their company/site to another smaller company, just to make the legal bills work out.

Ugh, when will this just stop? Movie and record executives, listen to me:

People will always steal. No matter what. Even if you put up your best padlock, someone is going to crack it. Give it up, and offer non-DRM’d versions of albums/songs online, in multiple formats. Why do I end up paying 99 cents for a single track in 128kbps MPEG4 format? Why not offer it to me in lossless MP4? Or better yet, 320kbps MP3 or the lossless FLAC format?

Movie studios, just give up. Your Blu-Ray and HD-DVD copyright protection is cracked. Why do you purposefully slow-down modern computers in order to make them support your DRM? By the way, check out this excellent blog post on MSTechToday regarding Vista’s DRM, and how neither Bill Gates nor Steve Jobs likes it.

And this all begs the question: when you buy something, are you buying the RIGHTS to play the song/movie, or are you buying the actual item transacted, such as a file or disc? If it’s just the rights, then shouldn’t I legally be able to obtain that same song in a different format, for little or no cost? If I damage my disc, should I be able to just copy a friend’s and still be legally correct?

Just, ugh. You wonder why people pirate. Because it’s easier to deal with than all of this crap. DRM sucks.