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

DRM Is Toxic to Culture

meshedinsights.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 263 posts

Re: DRM Is Toxic to Culture

#161

Post by cygned »

zokier wrote: post #134
cygned wrote: post #65

Lately, I wanted to buy an eBook. I usually buy prints, but this time I needed it as soon as possible. Upon searching, every book store told me, I would need to install some Adobe stuff on my computer to read the file. I am neither a fan of Adobe nor of the idea of being locked in to an application to view a book. After realizing that there is no other digital way, I simply bought the printed version and waited the t…

Reading Kindle books does not require any Adobe stuff. You can just read them on your browser, or via a Kindle app on your PC/device. Sure, it is still DRMd, but at least the UX on the happy path is halfway decent.

My option would be to buy it on Apple's iBooks. My tech setup is Apple-only, so that would be okay, even though there's DRM. Same story as with Amazon basically.

I basically have to choose my golden cage. That's frustrating.

Re: DRM Is Toxic to Culture

#162

Post by icebraining »

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #160
icebraining wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Playing devil's advocate, is a lot of tax money spent on protecting copyright? Aren't most infringers "caught" by private companies hired by the industry, who then send DMCA takedowns, letters to ISPs and file civil lawsuit?

Tax money is not the only way that society spends resources on enforcing rules. Those DMCA takedowns, for example, need to be processed by hosting platforms and ISPs, so they have to pay people for doing so, and that's then necessarily part of the price that you pay for ISP service, or that, I dunno, youtube video makers get less revenue from their videos. Just because the state doesn't spend tax money on it, doesn't…

Good answer, thanks.

Re: DRM Is Toxic to Culture

#164

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC »

anigbrowl wrote: post #151
pharrington wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DRM happens in the game's steam_api.dll, which the game executable is linked to.

Could you just make your argument instead of hinting it? Not being a gamer or a full-time developer I have no desire to go off and spend hours figuring out the intricacies of how Steam works to see whether I agree with your assertions or not. You claim that DRM happens in this particular library. OK, and the practical consequences of that are...?

... that the claim made above that Steam doesn't enforce DRM is wrong?

Re: DRM Is Toxic to Culture

#165

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC »

anigbrowl wrote: post #157
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> DRM sets conceptually equivalent restrictions on protected media as leases set on rented property. Not even remotely. At best, copyright law sets conceptually equivalent restrictions on licensed works as leases set on rented property. DRM sets conceptually equivalent restrictions on infested media as a gun-wielding robot that's installed in rented property with cameras in every corner that feed into the robot and w…

Hyperbole isn't helpful. DRM is simply the mechanization of the already-existing social relations. The coercion was already there, it's just automated now.

No, it is not, that is exactly the point. There are tons of use cases that would be totally unenforcable legally, but are constantly being enforced through DRM nonetheless.

Re: DRM Is Toxic to Culture

#166

Post by DanBC »

0xbear wrote: post #126
eropple wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Freely copied recorded music shifted the value back to live concerts. Overall, I get what you're saying and I don't disagree with the premise (though I'm ambivalent about the conclusion), but the word "shifted" doesn't usually mean "eradicated"--most live concerts net vanishingly little money and that's a real impact on creators. Whether that's a net societal good or not can be argued about, but "shifted", IMO, pai…

Most other distribution methods for those artists have also been shown to net vanishingly little money. If you can't make money with a live performance, you sure as heck aren't making any selling CDs through a record company.

Have you ever played live in a band?

Re: DRM Is Toxic to Culture

#167

Post by cygned »

asdfpoiuqwer wrote: post #131
cygned wrote: post #65

Lately, I wanted to buy an eBook. I usually buy prints, but this time I needed it as soon as possible. Upon searching, every book store told me, I would need to install some Adobe stuff on my computer to read the file. I am neither a fan of Adobe nor of the idea of being locked in to an application to view a book. After realizing that there is no other digital way, I simply bought the printed version and waited the t…

Did you consider pirating the e-book? To check the ethical box, I would've just used the pirated e-book version immediately and ordered a hard-copy.

Yes, I considered it out of my frustration, but I always try to give back for good work.

Re: DRM Is Toxic to Culture

#168

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC »

anigbrowl wrote: post #147
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the really weird part is that while the propaganda puts it as "protecting property", it really has exactly the opposite effect. When you buy a physical book, that book is indeed your property, and you can do with it whatever you want. Now, with DRM-infested ebooks, you are actually just licensing it for very restricted use. You might as well be claiming that making private home ownership illegal would strengthen…

That's all true, but these analyses always seem to skate over the fact that the copyright system exists because without it it's hard for authors to get paid. Don't talk to me about a world free of intellectual property rights unless you can also offer practical suggestions for what creative people are supposed to live on while they're working. Regrettably, the cult of celebrity has blinded people to the fact that cul…

> That's all true, but these analyses always seem to skate over the fact that the copyright system exists because without it it's hard for authors to get paid.

What made you think that I objected to copyright?

Re: DRM Is Toxic to Culture

#169

Post by TeMPOraL »

anigbrowl wrote: post #151
pharrington wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DRM happens in the game's steam_api.dll, which the game executable is linked to.

Could you just make your argument instead of hinting it? Not being a gamer or a full-time developer I have no desire to go off and spend hours figuring out the intricacies of how Steam works to see whether I agree with your assertions or not. You claim that DRM happens in this particular library. OK, and the practical consequences of that are...?

The practical consequences are that Steam games will call into steam_api.dll to verify whether or not they should run, and will refuse to launch if Steam says so. E.g. if you're logged out of Steam, you'll be asked to log in. Whether or not you can launch a game without an Internet connection active depends on whether or not Steam will allow you to.

This DRM scheme is probably not very solid, though, as I recall replacement versions of steam_api.dll bundled with some bootleg titles.

Re: DRM Is Toxic to Culture

#170

Post by zanny »

RandomOpinion wrote: post #129
zanny wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free software would not go anywhere. The only difference is, without a right to repair law for software in a post-IP world, people writing software may or may not choose to withhold source code. But the trick is anyone who ever gets that source code can (unless under an NDA or contract not to) distribute it all they want. And the receivers of software will be able to distribute it however they want. The profit motive…

> ...all it takes is one leak to end your monopoly I don't know about that. Most significant software packages require ongoing maintenance (bug fixes, security patches, compatibility with other software) and add new features over time. A one-time leak certainly would be damaging but not necessarily fatal since most businesses want to have assured support and upgrades.

The difference is that before the leak only one entity could provide the support.

After the leak, anyone can.

Prices would adapt to the reality, and the original vendor would have a hard time demanding the rates they are used to when suddenly faced with competition. Especially competition that kept changes open, which instills more confidence in consumers of the software.

Post reply on HN