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

The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

web.archive.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 276 posts

Re: The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

#21

Post by NavinF »

Uehreka wrote: post #14

So tonight I watched a 1080p pirated copy of Spiderman: Far From Home. And I gotta say, it was kinda crap. The sound would randomly cut out, and the compression was absolute ass (it was the perfect artifact to show people when explaining “not all 1080p’s are created equal”, especially when they’re fighting the water elemental) I really do think that DRM has won folks. We have seen the 4K HDR future, and what we find…

I’ve had the opposite experience: If you have a decent connection (1gbps), you can torrent the 50GB Blu-ray in 7 minutes instead of watching the 0.5GB stream on Netflix. The difference in bitrate/quality is massive during fast action sequences where the Netflix version splits into 100 puzzle pieces made of DCT blocks that don’t quite fit together.

Oh and Netflix is one of the better sites when it comes to bitrate. Other streams are full of artifacts even when the camera is panning over a static scene.

Re: The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

#22

Post by kube-system »

devwastaken wrote: post #11
kube-system wrote: post #7

I also don’t think it’s even necessary to prevent copyright infringement to achieve a goal of effectively steering people towards paid sources. I often hear arguments that its “easier to pirate movies than use DRM’d software”. But I don’t think this is actually the case for the average non-tech-savvy person. If you can operate a torrent client or even know what one is, you are much savvier than the average Netflix/Ro…

I thought this was true until I visited an old friend in a trailer park, of which their family would borrow DVDs written with pirated movies. There were many reasons why. No internet, too expensive, no blu-ray player, etc. It was amazing how they could just put in a DVD, and instantly movie for their children. These kids had rarely ever seen an ad on TV in their life. The people who made the disks got paid, too. Mark…

I’m not claiming that piracy doesn’t exist. I’m claiming that those pushing DRM have mostly achieved their goals. They are making good money from the people who have it to spend.

The person in your anecdote likely wasn’t a profitable customer anyway. Their goal is to make money from the masses who have it, not to try to squeeze blood from a stone.

Re: The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

#23

Post by [deleted] »

Uehreka wrote: post #14

So tonight I watched a 1080p pirated copy of Spiderman: Far From Home. And I gotta say, it was kinda crap. The sound would randomly cut out, and the compression was absolute ass (it was the perfect artifact to show people when explaining “not all 1080p’s are created equal”, especially when they’re fighting the water elemental) I really do think that DRM has won folks. We have seen the 4K HDR future, and what we find…

[deleted]

Re: The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

#24

Post by _Algernon_ »

Uehreka wrote: post #14

So tonight I watched a 1080p pirated copy of Spiderman: Far From Home. And I gotta say, it was kinda crap. The sound would randomly cut out, and the compression was absolute ass (it was the perfect artifact to show people when explaining “not all 1080p’s are created equal”, especially when they’re fighting the water elemental) I really do think that DRM has won folks. We have seen the 4K HDR future, and what we find…

You can get 4K HDR blurary rips on torrent. I also just checked for the expanse, and there is a 4K HDR version (presumably ripped from a streaming service) on the torrent site I'm frequenting. I don't think the claimed gap in quality exists.

You just need to know where to look.

Re: The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

#25

Post by consp »

jayd16 wrote: post #10
kube-system wrote: post #7

I also don’t think it’s even necessary to prevent copyright infringement to achieve a goal of effectively steering people towards paid sources. I often hear arguments that its “easier to pirate movies than use DRM’d software”. But I don’t think this is actually the case for the average non-tech-savvy person. If you can operate a torrent client or even know what one is, you are much savvier than the average Netflix/Ro…

If pirate sites were allowed to flourish, they'd surely end up feeling as good as Netflix or better.

Popcorn time was/is pretty much the pinnacle of it so I'd say they got pretty close to being better than the streaming services.

Re: The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

#26

Post by phendrenad2 »

Why the conspiracy theory? It works very well to stop piracy (since it's a hassle to have to pick a bottorrent program, install it, deal with it's annoying popups and ads (because you're a normal user and chose a popular bittorrent client), avoid the popups on the pirate bay, know what a magnet link it, find a player for .mkv files.

It's easier to pay $15 to buy the show on Amazon.

Anyone who disagrees hasn't tried to help their friends pirate things, or shut their eyes to the reality.

Re: The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

#27

Post by kube-system »

dilyevsky wrote: post #12
kube-system wrote: post #7

I also don’t think it’s even necessary to prevent copyright infringement to achieve a goal of effectively steering people towards paid sources. I often hear arguments that its “easier to pirate movies than use DRM’d software”. But I don’t think this is actually the case for the average non-tech-savvy person. If you can operate a torrent client or even know what one is, you are much savvier than the average Netflix/Ro…

How is drm responsible for the absence of such apps? If anything it’s the dmca systems and an army of lawyers

Technical friction is also a factor. It’s much like speed bumps on a road. They don’t prevent people from going 50 in a 25. But they make it more of a PITA, even when a cop also might pull you over.

Re: The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

#28

Post by marcan_42 »

Uehreka wrote: post #14

So tonight I watched a 1080p pirated copy of Spiderman: Far From Home. And I gotta say, it was kinda crap. The sound would randomly cut out, and the compression was absolute ass (it was the perfect artifact to show people when explaining “not all 1080p’s are created equal”, especially when they’re fighting the water elemental) I really do think that DRM has won folks. We have seen the 4K HDR future, and what we find…

Meanwhile the anime fansub encoders are taking Blu-Rays upscaled with crappy linear scalers, using fancy deconvolution math to restore the original resolution material, and encoding the result. You get a smaller file, and if played on a player with decent upscaling (i.e. mpv, which is what everyone uses these days), better quality than the original Blu-Ray. There's also often other processing involved, like de-banding filters to remove banding caused by low bit depth processing in the original material, deinterlacing/inverse telecine, color correction, etc.

It all depends on how much effort the people involved put into it.

Re: The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013)

#29

Post by watermelon0 »

5e92cb50239222b wrote: post #15
devwastaken wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought this was true until I visited an old friend in a trailer park, of which their family would borrow DVDs written with pirated movies. There were many reasons why. No internet, too expensive, no blu-ray player, etc. It was amazing how they could just put in a DVD, and instantly movie for their children. These kids had rarely ever seen an ad on TV in their life. The people who made the disks got paid, too. Mark…

> This is how it goes in other countries, too, where you cannot even legitimately get disks or downloads, much less be able to afford them. Oh yes, thank you for remembering that. It's truly an exception around here. Pretty much all streaming services refuse to accept my money or provide access to 0.1-1% of their catalog (compared to what is available in the US, literally a few to a few dozen shows/movies) for exactl…

Spotify has different selection depending on the country. In the past Spotify was not available in my country, so I had to use workarounds, which meant using accounts from different countries, and jumping between them definitely changed what I was able to play from my playlists.
Post reply on HN