Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lawsuit could be the beginning of the end for DRM

defectivebydesign.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 209 posts

Re: Lawsuit could be the beginning of the end for DRM

#121

Post by benologist »

Yetanfou wrote: post #119
benologist wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd go one step further and build your own private cloud for a bunch of stuff. I did all this easily through a slick web interface for open source software and linux that Synology has created. A lot of this stuff includes apps for phone/tv/etc that you can download for free in stores or even from their own site, and it can be available to everyone in your household for some pretty decent savings - if it still works i…

That is exactly what something like Owncloud/Nextcloud (for which I made those book/publication-related tools) enables you to do: create a 'private cloud' (what a silly word it is, really... cloud). It does some of the things you mention 'out of the box' (file storage, photo uploading) or after installing some 'apps' (note server, music streaming, video streaming, email user agent (not a mail server)). Since it runs…

Same in principal, but Synology have built a lovely, multi-window web interface for a lot of linux and each of those apps, along with their own Android + iOS apps.

https://www.synology.com/en-global/dsm/live_demo

That consolidates a lot of different UIs, signins, permissions etc into a single coherent interface - even terminal commands like configuring firewall, network interfaces, user permissions, all that stuff.

To give you some examples it takes two clicks, a domain and any contrived email address to get a Let's Encrypt certificate. It takes three more clicks to assign it to a web app Synology is serving from that device. You can add SSL to your own reverse-proxied app, also effortless to add, just as easily and enable HSTS with a checkbox.

Their torrent software can watch RSS feeds and download straight into a folder where it's indexed for their video server. Their video client provides a nice interface for browsing but delegates the actual playback to VLC.

Re: Lawsuit could be the beginning of the end for DRM

#122

Post by 6stringmerc »

shmerl wrote: post #52

Anti-circumvention laws should be repealed of course. But so far such attempts didn't go far. If this lawsuit will succeed, things will be easier, but it's a pretty random thing with courts. It might as well fail. What should be done is much stronger pressure on legislators to fix this mess. Most simply don't care about this issue because they don't understand its deep impact, and in result, politicians get away with…

I completely agree that legislators are really at the fault of this, and I do see it as a tug-of-war between two gorillas - Content Lobbyists and Tech Lobbyists - with, well, honest customers and researchers caught in the crossfire.

Re: Lawsuit could be the beginning of the end for DRM

#123

Post by digler999 »

On their website is a banner: "Cancel netflix!". I click on it, and I'm told I should cancel netflix because they put DRM on their HTML5 delivery of movies.

Now look, Im a self-professed pirate. I say screw most DRM and I dont recognize IP law. However, I totally disagree that I should "cancel netflix". What are they supposed to do ? Deliver all their movies DRM-free and see them immediately get copied to torrent sites ? Or else, what , not use HTML5 and require STB/smart tv support to use their product (which ALL have DRM, btw ) ?

Netflix is the good guy, they are pioneers in electronic content delivery. They are fighting to break the monopoly of the movie industry while having to work with them to get content. And they are producing their own content. All for a very reasonable rate.

I will absolutely NOT cancel netflix because they support DRM. What a ridiculous thing to suggest.

Re: Lawsuit could be the beginning of the end for DRM

#124

Post by 6stringmerc »

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #96
6stringmerc wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting perspective, and unfortunately I do not even remotely share the "scope" of the effects being claimed, which is why I time and again argue for effective reform. You've framed this as an incredible societal harm, which I simply don't see from a practical standpoint. I'd feel a lot better about your perspective if you would agree that "effective reform" can be possible in this instance without over-arching s…

> Equivocating DRM with murder is ludicrous to me, it just is from a rhetorical standpoint. Except I didn't say anything of that sort? I mean, I didn't even compare DRM to murder. So what the heck have you been reading?

Yeah, you did in arguing that just because some Murders happen doesn't negate the utility of a law, but you've conflated Copyright which is a Civil matter in trying to discuss freedoms in a grand philosophical sense. I see you and I view the practical implementation of Copyright in the modern era from different perspectives. As in, you work from the premise that Copyright is sufficient in and of itself without the DMCA & DRM, and I patently believe that they were a response to Copyright being exposed as insufficient when something like basic Blu-Ray encoding was broken in seven (7) days. Discounting the dark-side capabilities of technology is, apparently, inherent in your premise. On this we are not in agreement.

Re: Lawsuit could be the beginning of the end for DRM

#125

Post by nickpsecurity »

digler999 wrote: post #123

On their website is a banner: "Cancel netflix!". I click on it, and I'm told I should cancel netflix because they put DRM on their HTML5 delivery of movies. Now look, Im a self-professed pirate. I say screw most DRM and I dont recognize IP law. However, I totally disagree that I should "cancel netflix". What are they supposed to do ? Deliver all their movies DRM-free and see them immediately get copied to torrent sit…

I agree. I think a barrier to distribution helps certain business models that are legit. Especially with the backdrop that most of the public don't care enough to change the situation. Ten years from now, overly-broad laws in copyright and big distributors owning rights will still exist. The work of groups like Netflix... even Redbox... are a nice compromise until something better comes along. I'm impressed Netflix got as far as they did.

Re: Lawsuit could be the beginning of the end for DRM

#126

Post by 6stringmerc »

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #101
6stringmerc wrote: post #6

The link is to a reasonably thought out and worded perspective from that of a technology industry participant. As noted within, there are some guiding principles which establish the basis for perspective and action. As in, the Free Software Foundation wouldn't be interested in participating in the for-profit software market. For a counter-point, when this case first broke and I was able to study the implications from…

By the way, something to think about regarding your suggested solution to the "John Deere problem": John Deere will simply start selling smart tractors. You know, a large machine with a strong motor and everything. And with a computer controlling it. But without any software. Or with only very basic software. You cannot actually do anything useful with it unless you install some tractor apps. Which you can licence. F…

The workaround is to buy a Kubota or a Lamborghini or another equally suitable brand without the knee capping. Is this not a reasonable market-forces-problem-solving perspective?

Also, just to belabor the point, once a person purchases the John Deere under First Sale Doctrine they are completely entitled to replacing the computer with a third-party controller. Thus, that's Fair Use of the vehicle one purchased. Legally, in this context, John Deere can not claim that DRM was circumvented because the rights were terminated upon sale of the physical item.

Re: Lawsuit could be the beginning of the end for DRM

#127

Post by 6stringmerc »

digler999 wrote: post #123

On their website is a banner: "Cancel netflix!". I click on it, and I'm told I should cancel netflix because they put DRM on their HTML5 delivery of movies. Now look, Im a self-professed pirate. I say screw most DRM and I dont recognize IP law. However, I totally disagree that I should "cancel netflix". What are they supposed to do ? Deliver all their movies DRM-free and see them immediately get copied to torrent sit…

I appreciate you pointing this out, because it's a very spurious attitude. It is ridiculous, and thank you for explaining why you see it that way.

Re: Lawsuit could be the beginning of the end for DRM

#129

Post by 6stringmerc »

abritinthebay wrote: post #107
6stringmerc wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm all for it! I want the law clarified, not completely tossed out. The expression "throwing the baby out with the bath water" is what I somewhat believe to be at play here.

> I want the law clarified, not completely tossed out I'm honestly fine with either, but yes, either way it's a win.

I look at 1201 and 512 as intertwined. Either both exist and balance each other out, but taking away one or the other seems genuinely unfair to me.

My perspectives tick off both camps, Content & Tech, because I see both of them using the same dirty playbooks and hiding their motives behind talk of "artists" or "customers" or whatnot.

Re: Lawsuit could be the beginning of the end for DRM

#130

Post by Sleaker »

nathanlied wrote: post #59
6stringmerc wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm all for it! I want the law clarified, not completely tossed out. The expression "throwing the baby out with the bath water" is what I somewhat believe to be at play here.

I agree fully. We need a big, BIG revamp of copyright laws, but that's "The War", this is -a- battle in that war, and in order not to fully alienate the 'other side', we must be aware that large-scale commercial copyright infringement, with our current system, is really, really bad. Getting the courts/legislators to make the anti-circumvention clause only apply to commercial efforts, instead of absolutely anyone and…

DRM doesn't solve copyright circumvention at all. Accessibility to content is what does that.
Post reply on HN