Do my kids inherit my movie/tv shows that I bought or does the license die with me?
Seems a rather safe bet Apple will be here after I die.
I was fooled to buy drm media, but I don’t see the harm, yet.
Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies
311–320 of 479 posts
Re: Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies
#312Physical media lets you have privacy without logging when you watch media, what media you consume, how many times you consume it, or how long you consume it. You can enjoy it offline, and in 20 years long after the studio that licensed it is gone. You can give it to a friend or loan it out. Or sell it. It is yours. Meanwhile DRM media we pay full price for, or if the content is only available via streaming we pay for…
I agree with you wholeheartedly, but I was wondering if you have a source on the claim that studios know every second you watch one of their films. Specifically, I was under the impression that Apple wasn't phoning home with users' watching habits. Do you have a source on that? (I'd like to update my mental model if so)
Re: Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies
#313Earlier quoted context omitted.
My understanding WRT buying a movie on iTunes was: 1. If you download the movie, you will always have the ability to play the movie you downloaded . 2. As long as Apple has the rights to distribute the movie, you will be able to re-download it again 3. If Apple loses the rights, and you don't have your own backed up copy , it's lost. It's the same for Audible books; which is why I always d/l and backup any movie or b…
Luckily this has been true for Apple so far. But there is still the chance in the future that they stop supporting the DRM (either voluntarily or involuntarily). Just look what happened to Microsoft's ironically named "PlaysForSure" DRM. They shut down the DRM servers in 2008 and made everyone's "purchased" content unplayable. edit: I double-checked how Apple FairPlay DRM works to make sure I wasn't mistaken. But no,…
Right, so THIS aspect I totally agree with: If someone says "Buy", it must be possible for you to hand down a copy of that to play to your great-great-grandkids. That means it can't be turned off or lost because your account is cancelled; and shutting down DRM servers should require unlocking all DRM'd content first. Otherwise "Buy" really was a lie.
Re: Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies
#314On a PC you can use a Legato capture card and record anything that makes it through the HDMI, DRM free, up to 4k/60 and up to HDR10 and it has a pass-thru so you can watch on a monitor/tv as you record. They're mainly used in game broadcasting, like on Twitch. There are also numerous audio recording apps that will record audio that is being played from a DRM source, actually any source. I actually purchase physical books as I can't stand reading on a lit screen for hours on end. As a wise investor once told me, if you don't physically hold it, you don't actually own it. I have copies of everything I've purchased digitally that is worth keeping, and I have no moral qualms about doing so. I paid for the content. They got their money.
Re: Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies
#315> "Apple contends that '[n]o reasonable consumer would believe' that purchased content would remain on the iTunes platform indefinitely," Weasel-worded legal arguments like this is why I don't use Apple Music, Spotify, Youtube Premium or anything where the final product is not a DRM-free file sitting on my hard drive. As much as Blockbuster is considered a dinosaur, you could buy and sell used games and movies there.…
Does this criticism apply to pay-for-access services like Spotify? Spotify is what it is, and has the content it has, and you aren't paying for any future content or access, only for what's there this moment. This seems pretty transparent.
Re: Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies
#316Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes but that's not the same thing. You're arguing in the "physical/digital" debate and I believe evryone will agree that digital is better in most cases. Physically owning something is nice for the memorabilia and for those who still have DVD/CD players but that's not the biggest use case. The topic here is DRM vs non-DRM'd media. It's orthogonal to the topic of physicality: you can have DRM'd physical media (think G…
> I believe evryone will agree that digital is better in most cases If you include modern piracy in with "digital", sure. If you only include legal offerings, absolutely not. Even DRM'd physical media that doesn't use the network in any way to authenticate is way better than DRM'd digital media, which you can never truly own, and which exists at the folly of the service operator.
GP was talking about the format of digital media, not the usual protections put in place on what is currently offered legally.
You're back to conflating the two.
Re: Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies
#317Physical media lets you have privacy without logging when you watch media, what media you consume, how many times you consume it, or how long you consume it. You can enjoy it offline, and in 20 years long after the studio that licensed it is gone. You can give it to a friend or loan it out. Or sell it. It is yours. Meanwhile DRM media we pay full price for, or if the content is only available via streaming we pay for…
> We got scammed. Well, depends on how you look at it and how comfortable you are forgetting about how it looked before you could buy online. I pay for convenience which is a service rather than tangible good. If I need a book for my research, I would prefer to have access to it immediately rather than wait two weeks to get it from overseas. My time is valuable and the pause on the project or inconvenience of not hav…
I get where you are coming from but I don’t really care what you buy movies for and I don’t really understand what that has to do with this topic. This isn’t a wishy washy political or abstract technical topic. Its a legal interpretation.
Did you really need to reiterate yourself three times? Are you even really trying to participate in the conversation here are you trying to derail?
Re: Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies
#318On a PC you can use a Legato capture card and record anything that makes it through the HDMI, DRM free, up to 4k/60 and up to HDR10 and it has a pass-thru so you can watch on a monitor/tv as you record. They're mainly used in game broadcasting, like on Twitch. There are also numerous audio recording apps that will record audio that is being played from a DRM source, actually any source. I actually purchase physical b…
As far as I am aware that capture card won't capture HDCP content? So anything that uses Widevine or similar DRM will not work. There are options for capture cards designed to bypass HDCP but it's a bit more involved.
Are you saying you haven't had any issues with HDCP?
Re: Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies
#319Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We got scammed. Well, depends on how you look at it and how comfortable you are forgetting about how it looked before you could buy online. I pay for convenience which is a service rather than tangible good. If I need a book for my research, I would prefer to have access to it immediately rather than wait two weeks to get it from overseas. My time is valuable and the pause on the project or inconvenience of not hav…
I used to be somewhat skeptical of the convenience claim. A former colleague argued that the attraction of Napster was more about convenience than price which I didn't really buy. But if we look at the popularity of streaming services today versus owning even DRM-free music, that would seem to support the convenience theory. (It hasn't taken off for books to the same degree but I'd guess that's in part because the va…
Your opinion on convenience is not relevant to this case.
Re: Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies
#320Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes but that's not the same thing. You're arguing in the "physical/digital" debate and I believe evryone will agree that digital is better in most cases. Physically owning something is nice for the memorabilia and for those who still have DVD/CD players but that's not the biggest use case. The topic here is DRM vs non-DRM'd media. It's orthogonal to the topic of physicality: you can have DRM'd physical media (think G…
> I believe evryone will agree that digital is better in most cases If you include modern piracy in with "digital", sure. If you only include legal offerings, absolutely not. Even DRM'd physical media that doesn't use the network in any way to authenticate is way better than DRM'd digital media, which you can never truly own, and which exists at the folly of the service operator.
> If you only include legal offerings, absolutely not.
I have plenty of ebooks from Baen and Tor, and plenty of music I've bought from a variety of places, all in digital format, all without any DRM. It's not the "digital" part that's bad, it's the DRM part.