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

141–150 of 209 posts

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

#141

Post by abawany »

superuser2 wrote: post #29
kakarot wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Orrrr support a non-DRM publisher. Ya know

Fuck no. Life is too short and literature matters too much to pass on good books and read worse ones just because of their publishers' DRM politics. Don't reward DRM-encumbered ebooks, sure. If you want to punish the publisher, just buy it used on paper or go to the library. But read the books you wanted to read in the first place.

I kind of do a variant of this. I buy used paper books and then send them to bookscan.us for scanning. Et voila: non-DRMed ebook. Oftentimes, the price of this activity, ignoring the time element, is lower than the price of the DRMed ebook.

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

#142

Post by Crito »

roywiggins wrote: post #133
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…

Netflix shows are all on torrent sites anyway. I'm not sure they would actually lose anything if they dropped the DRM.

From my perspective, Netflix and other legal streaming services have dealt quite a blow to the torrent scene. I'm sure there are private trackers that are alive and well, but the scene in total seems diminished even from a few years ago.

Personally I prefer to do my 'piracy' the old-fashioned way: at my local public library. Better selection than all but the most elite torrent sites...

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

#143

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC »

6stringmerc wrote: post #126
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. Legal…

> 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?

Why is it a problem at all then? Doesn't this option to buy a different product exist currently?

> 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.

Well, there is actually a huge pile of problems buried here. Namely, the pile of problems that proponents of DRM tend to not understand. Or to not even be aware of.

Are you saying that only replacing the computer would be allowed? Is it crucial that the computer is swapped out? Or is the computer also part of the machine that you own, so you should also be allowed to modify the computer itself however you like? I'd like to understand where you think the line should be drawn between what pieces of the physical thing that you buy that you are allowed to modify as you like, and which pieces are off limits, if any?

Also, it would be helpful if you could give some short indication of what you know about the inner workings of computers and software, so I don't end up explaining stuff to you way above or way below your level. Do you know some assembly? Digital circuitry basics? Theoretical computer science/halting problem? Complexity theory basics? Cryptography?

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

#144

Post by __s »

roywiggins wrote: post #138
6stringmerc wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not saying it's right, but in practical terms, I'm rather certain they would lose all their contracts with major studios / content holders. They're in such a tough & unique position.

Oh, for sure- it's not like it's Netflix that cares, its the contracts they have with content owners. I guess they could turn off DRM for the show they produce but that sounds like a technical hassle for no gain.

Some gain. Some attempt could be made to then compare piracy rates of netflix's non-drm vs drm content. They'd be showing good will to those who side with "Cancel Netflix"

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

#145

Post by catdog »

mankash666 wrote: post #78

DRM exists to counter piracy. Without DRM, the publishers/authors have to rely on the end customer, who, more often than not, will encourage piracy either by sharing our not buying through official channels The concerns raised are against corporations' clumsy implantations and you have to make your case heard against them.

> DRM exists to counter piracy.

That's wrong. DRM ensures that piracy provides a better experience because it simply works under any circumstance.

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

#146

Post by 6stringmerc »

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #143
6stringmerc wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. Legal…

> 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? Why is it a problem at all then? Doesn't this option to buy a different product exist currently? > Also, just to belabor the point, once a person purchases the John Deere under First Sale Doctrine they are completely entitled to replacing…

My first computing experience was with the Mac 512k at age 5. I grew up in an Apple household and then discovered how behind I was with not knowing DOS. We became a Windows household in the age of Dell vs. Gateway PCs. I learned how to work on machines, replace hardware, work through software conflicts, and got a job at 16 working in a small office making broken things into Frakenstein boxes. Taught myself HTML from books. I can whistle the 28.8 modem handshake from memory. Went from QBasic to C++ using the Borland compiler. Went to University on a CS scholarship and hated having to work in Unix and play with algorithms instead of focus on modern skills. So I quit and went over to English, and turned my attention to using my technology skills to enjoy the burgeoning and blossoming nature of computer assisted art.

Honestly I don't care for your thinking that you're going to explain anything to me, because it's obvious that my attempts to explain artistic creator perspectives are follies.

So, in turn, it'd be helpful if you could give a short indication of what your creative experience is to set a parity of baseline: Have you published a creative work? What instruments do you play? How good are you at drawing? Have you ever been on a film set, professional or otherwise? How have you distributed your creations? How much have you made from them?

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

#147

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC »

6stringmerc wrote: post #124
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 DM…

> Yeah, you did in arguing that just because some Murders happen doesn't negate the utility of a law

OK. Your claim was that I equivocated DRM and murders. So, given what you are saying here, that would mean that I have said something to the effect that "just because some DRM happens, doesn't negate the utility of (copyright?) law"? Could you please provide a citation of where I said that?

See, I would be happy to discuss your actual arguments, but I won't even try if you insist on strawmanning my position.

Also, if you want this discussion to go anywhere, I expect that you refrain from derailing it by insisting on discussing form over content. If you understand an analogy, I expect you to discuss based on what you understood, instead of starting a discussion on how I should have expressed my argument to make you like its form better. I write what I write in order to be understood. Analogies aren't perfect, that's what makes them analogies. The point of an analogy is to show commonalities, despite all differences. If you understand an analogy, it has served its purpose, and any argument as to how I should have expressed myself instead therefore is completely pointless and only serves to derail the discussion. If you actually don't understand what I mean to say, ask, and I'll be happy to try and explain. If you disagree with the content, explain why you disagree with the content.

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

#148

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC »

6stringmerc wrote: post #124
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 DM…

> Discounting the dark-side capabilities of technology is, apparently, inherent in your premise.

This, BTW, pretty much betrays that you don't understand the arguments of the other side at all.

The core of the opposition to DRM and in particular to the criminalization of the bypassing of DRM is precisely because of the dark-side capabilities of technology.

There are more dark sides to technology than the ones that you are considering. It's not that people aren't aware of the dark sides that you are thinking of. It's not even that they don't care about them. It's that they think that the other dark sides are way, way scarier in their long-term consequences.

edit: typo

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

#149

Post by ndesaulniers »

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…

> 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.

Then why don't they release their own content without DRM? It's because they favor DRM just as much as "the bad guys."

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

#150

Post by phire »

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…

As other's have pointed out, they are contractually required to use DRM by the content providers and it's not really effective anyway.

But what really annoys me is: I want to watch netflix on my TV, it's a little too far from my Computer so I have a Raspberry Pi hooked up to it. The Pi is fully capable of running netflix, it can run a webbroswer with html video support and decode 1080p mp4s. But because the raspberry pi foundation refuse to lock down the firmware and provide a safe area for the Widefire DRM plugin to run, netflix refuses to run.

I pay for netflix. Why should I have to buy a locked down device like the Chromecast to use it?

Post reply on HN