21–30 of 77 posts
Drm is the opposite of serving users. By definition. The "challenge" is actually to select which privileged users you still want to serve in spite of the not-serving default.
Why not have this downloaded upon first use, the way that Flash and Silverlight have been?
Also, isn't this what users on many Linux distros (e.g. Iceweasel on Debian) will have to do anyway?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'd much rather go through the turnstile, as awkward as it can be if you've got a suitcase, etc, than be forced to watch advertisements during my subway ride... That's quite a false dichotomy, since the service clearly can exist independently of DRM (both technically and economically). Furthermore, this dichotomy doesn't work either in your analogy (there are ads on the subway, and yet I still have to pay) or in th…
I don't think Netflix, Amazon Video, etc, which don't show advertisements, could exist economically without DRM.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think Netflix, Amazon Video, etc, which don't show advertisements, could exist economically without DRM.
Amazon sells music perfectly without any DRM. It doesn't just exist - it brings them tons of profit. GOG sells games without DRM - and having growing profits. And etc. and etc. Your point disproved.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
DRM is never great. Show me one user who actually appreciates DRM itself. What you meant above is that users like the service. They could like it even more if it hadn't DRM garbage attached to it. I.e. DRM has nothing to do with what users like - it always degrades the quality of the service and the digital goods it delivers.
That's like saying nobody likes the turnstile on the subway. Of course not, but it enables the service to exist in the form it does. I'd much rather go through the turnstile, as awkward as it can be if you've got a suitcase, etc, than be forced to watch advertisements during my subway ride...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's like saying the subway turnstile isn't an essential part of the subway. It's only true if you define "essential" in a narrow technical way that ignores the realities of having to monetize the use of products and services.
> realities of having to monetize the use of products and services. Essential means technically and financially essential. I.e. without it the service can't work or can't bring profit. DRM is neither of that. Those who require DRM [publishers] have no technical or financial reasons to justify it. No valid ones at least (all reasons they usually voice are false, and their true reasons they usually don't voice).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> realities of having to monetize the use of products and services. Essential means technically and financially essential. I.e. without it the service can't work or can't bring profit. DRM is neither of that. Those who require DRM [publishers] have no technical or financial reasons to justify it. No valid ones at least (all reasons they usually voice are false, and their true reasons they usually don't voice).
That makes no sense. What "true reasons" do publishers have for DRM that aren't fundamentally financial?
1. Monopolistic lock-in. DRM is more than often used to control the market. It happened with Apple in the past, and was one of the key reasons that music publishers realized that being DRM-free is actually better for them.
This reason also includes DRM derivatives like DMCA-1201 and the like. It's all about control (over the markets, over users and etc.).
2. Covering one's incompetence. DRM is used to justify failing sales (i.e. when execs are questioned about why the product performs poorly, they say "Pirates! But worry not - we put more DRM in place").
3. Ignorance and / or stupidity (many execs have no clue and might believe that DRM actually provides some benefit). This type can be called DRM Lysenkoism.
None of these reasons are valid, all of them are crooked and anti-user, but they are often present in various combinations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's like saying nobody likes the turnstile on the subway. Of course not, but it enables the service to exist in the form it does. I'd much rather go through the turnstile, as awkward as it can be if you've got a suitcase, etc, than be forced to watch advertisements during my subway ride...
What is happening here with the reply links? Apparently you two can still post but nobody else can (at least I cannot). Is that the new policy from a while ago?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Amazon sells music perfectly without any DRM. It doesn't just exist - it brings them tons of profit. GOG sells games without DRM - and having growing profits. And etc. and etc. Your point disproved.
You're assuming that market mechanics for music and movies is the same.