Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies

#411

Post by passivate » Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 9:27 PM UTC

iso1631 wrote: post #89

dataflow wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you define abandonware?

I would require copyright holders to renew their copyright. 5 years for free, then $1 for the 6th year, $2 for the 7th, $4 for the 8th, $8 for the 9th, $1m for the 25th, etc.

Does the clock reset if you update the original work? With rolling releases, who determines when the clock officially starts? Also you'd have to account for industries where copyright/trademark/patents could overlap on products. While a nice idea, I imagine it would become a bureaucratic nightmare to implement as a law. But nevertheless, we need to think about new ways to fix the current broken system.

Re: Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies

#412

Post by m-p-3 » Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 9:27 PM UTC

LocalH wrote: post #294

rakoo wrote: post #215

Earlier 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.

And there are some unsung heros out there breaking those DRM schemes. I feel way more comfortable creating a DRM-free copy of Blu-rays I own, and I don't feel I stole anything from anyone or did anything morally wrong

Re: Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies

#413

Post by barbacoa » Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 9:29 PM UTC

BruiseLee wrote: post #207

cblconfederate wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine a bank marketing itself as "No reasonable consumer would believe that their deposits will remain in the bank indefinitely" This is a really awe-inspiring, a complete rejection of the concept of ownership

Actually that is correct in many countries (including US). After a period of inactivity (typically 3-5 years) the bank is required to turn over the money from inactive accounts to the state. This process is called escheatment. I'm not joking.

I had 19¢ in a bank account I that sat dormant for 4 year. Still there when I logged in and started using the account again.

Re: Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies

#414

Post by tgsovlerkhgsel » Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 9:36 PM UTC

lrvick wrote: post #57

Physical 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…

AACS (the BluRay copy protection system) is making a lot of effort to change what physical ownership means, and I'm pretty sure many TVs and players are working on "improving" on the privacy aspects too. One of the nastier aspects is that inserting a new disk can permanently modify your drive to no longer work with your player software, because the content industry no longer trusts that software.

https://hackaday.com/2014/09/08/unbricking-a-bluray-drive/

Re: Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies

#415

Post by passivate » Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 9:44 PM UTC

lrvick wrote: post #125

criley2 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Physical media doesn't automatically provide privacy. There are players which do track what blu-rays you put in them. Blu-ray players are internet enabled and include advertisements, which obviously can have tracking as well. Also you are tracked by the banks and stores you make the purchase from. You bought a Blu-Ray at Target on a Discover card. Target tracked it and sold it. Discover tracked it and sold it. Compan…

I literally bought many hundreds of used CDs and had them shipped to https://murfie.com/ to rip for me and give me FLACs automatically, because that was the only way to get lossless drm-free music I wanted legally. I even wrote a python library to automate the process since I had so much music I wanted to obtain legally that I needed bulk access. I spent thousands of dollars and many hours trying to play by the rules…

You took a risk on a business (murfie) when you sent them your property. Sometimes, the risk materializes, and that was unfortunately the case for you. You will have to utilize the legal system to retrieve your property, just like every other person.

>If I could just download DRM-free music/movies/games directly, take my money. Since that is usually not a thing, what other options do people that want freedom and privacy have?

When you pirate copyrighted content, you're sending a strong signal - that there is demand for that content. Rather, you may want to consider rewarding creators who release their works under a license you agree with. An aggregate effect could potentially trigger an industry shift away from DRM. As it stands, it may be that your favorite creators are not in that list, but that is just the reality of the current situation.

>In the end I still got screwed.

When people point out that the creator got screwed when people download Avengers or Game of Thrones, others are quick to point out that they would never have paid for the content. Its all about context and perspective! :)

Re: Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies

#416

Post by xyst » Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 9:44 PM UTC

my strategy around buying films now is to only buy blu-ray + digital copy. iTunes is hands down one of the better places to watch digital films (free 4K upgrade, when available), but the behind the scenes of how they handle "ownership" is dubious at best. If programming has taught me anything, it's to always have a backup (in this case a blu-ray copy).

Re: Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies

#417

Post by rafale » Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 9:51 PM UTC

barbacoa wrote: post #413

BruiseLee wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually that is correct in many countries (including US). After a period of inactivity (typically 3-5 years) the bank is required to turn over the money from inactive accounts to the state. This process is called escheatment. I'm not joking.

I had 19¢ in a bank account I that sat dormant for 4 year. Still there when I logged in and started using the account again.

It's not an inactive account if it is being logged in.

Re: Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies

#418

Post by ineedasername » Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 9:53 PM UTC

lofi_lory wrote: post #282

ineedasername wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to work in the industry: Print really isn't much more expensive to produce than ebooks, so there's not a huge different in cost. A hardcover will cost around $3-$4 in printing costs. Even still, ebooks can be a good deal. To use a recent example that wouldn't yet have any digital discounts, there's the John Boehner book [0]. As of this comment, it has an MSRP of $29.99. The Kindle version is $14.99. At actual…

Thanks for the insights! Still I think ebooks are a different product. At least in my head. I have a different emotional relationship with a physical book. The information within isn't in competition with the endless a "wealth" of information available legally or not. For text books piracy is a victimless "crime" in my case, as having a digital copy or not, is independent from financial loss above a certain price tag…

In the case of text books, if you can't afford it then pirating it can actually be a net-benefit to society. You weren't going to contribute to the economy through purchasing it, but by learning from a pirated copy you increase your knowledge & potential value to society.

Re: Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies

#419

Post by passivate » Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 9:56 PM UTC

eutropia wrote: post #347

lrvick wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I literally bought many hundreds of used CDs and had them shipped to https://murfie.com/ to rip for me and give me FLACs automatically, because that was the only way to get lossless drm-free music I wanted legally. I even wrote a python library to automate the process since I had so much music I wanted to obtain legally that I needed bulk access. I spent thousands of dollars and many hours trying to play by the rules…

I doubt the piracy moralist you replied to will respond with an apology for calling you a thief and a criminal; but I really appreciate that you explained your situation. It's unreasonable to lump all people who pirate media into some cesspool of common criminality -- each use-case is different. Sure, there are people who aggressively collect more pirated content than they could ever hope to personally consume and re…

That goes to a deeper philosophical question on social contract theory. There are laws that I may not agree with. I may chose to break them out of protest or civil-disobedience - but then I can't also claim immunity from the state's action when they uphold the laws.

Re: Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies

#420

Post by beckman466 » Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 9:57 PM UTC

ectopod wrote: post #96

beckman466 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Physical 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. I am so excited for my great-great-great-great ... grandchildren to find a layer of plastic DVDs in the earth’s crust 25 generations from now /s. Seriously, Blu ray discs and DVDs are such a waste of resources.

How does the energy use compare of stamping out a DVD and of streaming a movie to your TV? Especially if it's a film you (or your children) watch repeatedly. The answer is not obvious. According to [1], mailing a DVD and streaming a film use about the same amount of energy. This doesn't include the energy cost of manufacturing the DVD, but stamping out plastic disks is cheap, so it can't be too high. On the other han…

> DRM is killing the planet.

Agreed. Thanks for the link. I think I could've stated my point clearer. I am against DRMed streaming/video, and I'm against DVDs. I still want people to be able to make movies and get paid, yet the above two options are unsustainable e.g. when considering the use of plastic for DVD's, and the high energy costs of streaming movies from a data center.