When it comes to DRM, video service operators (VSOs) have a choice, and they should exercise it. The quality of DRM infrastructure will directly influence the competitive strength of a video service, but this key consideration has yet to be adequately appreciated in today’s industry.
Most CE devices or browsers offer only one natively integrated DRM client, leaving VSOs with the perception that certain DRM choices are inevitable based on target platforms and method of delivery. For example, in the context of Microsoft, the use of PlayReady is favored, and likewise for Chrome, one might feel bound to Widevine. But the reality is that the DRM decision is up to VSO. In fact, alternatives are not only available, they are viable and oftentimes offer more flexibility to meet both immediate and long-term business needs.
As a multi-DRM system vendor, Verimatrix wants to make it clear that VSOs have the option to go beyond the confines of native DRM and player frameworks and have the freedom to choose their best-suited protection and playback approach. We developed the infographic below based on our recent white paper, “Native vs Downloadable DRM: The Long-Term Implications of Short-Term Choices,” to clearly break down what can be a make-or-break decision for VSOs. You’ll see that while leveraging seemingly “free” native protection may seem sensible at first look, differentiation can be much stronger with the downloadable option in the long run.
At its core, the argument between native vs downloadable DRM is a debate about VSO choice and control. Click here to watch a new on-demand webinar during which Avni Rambhia of Frost & Sullivan, János Barta from the TV Service Center of Deutsche Telekom Europe and myself weigh the pros and cons of each approach.