The purpose of DRM is not to prevent copyright violations (2013) • Hacker News Board

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

#31

Post by petepete » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 8:16 AM UTC

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…

Popcorn Time being shut down by the MPAA is the reason there's no simple app for your mum and aunt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popcorn_Time

Unfortunately now there are so many streaming platforms piracy will gain in popularity again. Lots of people don't mind paying for one or two, but probably not five or six. Especially when some just have one or two good programmes.

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

#32

Post by DeWilde » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 8:16 AM UTC

shmerl wrote: post #9

kingcharles wrote: post #8

All of that article is wrong. I used to work in DRM. I implemented, I believe, the first DRM for practically every major and minor record label in Europe and North America. The only reason any of them stated to me that they required DRM was to prevent copyright infringement. Yes, I pointed out the insanity of their solution. The firm I worked for didn't have the muscle of the one that came on our heels (Apple) and ma…

Stated intent ≠ real intent. I doubt they'll openly admit real crooked reasons behind it. That's besides simple stupidity of some possibly indeed thinking that DRM increases their sales.

Especially in large corporations where each level of the hierarchy lives in a bubble of sort, meaning that the people OP interacted might have actually believed it was to prevent piracy while the people in that corp some level above them had a different motive to getting DRM pushed.

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

#33

Post by watermelon0 » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 8:17 AM UTC

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…

Even public trackers have 4K HDR / Dolby Vision / Dolby Atmos content, which is more than you get for example from Netflix (outside of their own catalog.)

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

#34

Post by danuker » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 8:17 AM UTC

phendrenad2 wrote: post #26

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 t…

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

Depends on the value of your time. If you get paid less in the amount it takes you to learn all that (like living in a 3rd world country), then it's not worth the $15.

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

#35

Post by oriolid » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 8:17 AM UTC

kube-system wrote: post #27

dilyevsky wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Not really. The speed bumps affect everyone, but it's enough that one person or group cracks the DRM and makes the result available for everyone.

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

#36

Post by darawk » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 8:20 AM UTC

This article is clickbait. The headline makes a bold claim, and then the article goes on to say: The purpose of DRM isn't to prevent copying, it's to prevent unlicensed reproduction. That is, it says 'copying' in different words, by trying to talk about things adjacent to copying, like forcing ads to play. Yes, content owners want to enforce all kinds of other things with DRM, but the fundamental thing is control of playback and distribution (aka copying).

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

#37

Post by oriolid » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 8:20 AM UTC

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…

> The people who made the disks got paid, too.

Interesting point. Did the people who made the content get paid too? And is the value of the DVD in the physical object or the content?

#38

Post by matheusmoreira » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 8:28 AM UTC

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…

There are certainly groups who sacrifice quality to minimize file size. Sounds like you downloaded a file from one of those. There are people out there who care so much about quality they will splice different sources together because some specific section is better in some obscure release for some reason. You also have blu-ray remuxes if you want the exact original.

Netflix manages to generate compression artifacts in 90% black frames, to say nothing of highly dynamic footage. Satellite TV is even worse, it actually hurts to watch. Makes me feel like an idiot for actually paying for this.

#39

Post by danuker » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 8:30 AM UTC

etaioinshrdlu wrote: post #13

kingcharles wrote: post #8

All of that article is wrong. I used to work in DRM. I implemented, I believe, the first DRM for practically every major and minor record label in Europe and North America. The only reason any of them stated to me that they required DRM was to prevent copyright infringement. Yes, I pointed out the insanity of their solution. The firm I worked for didn't have the muscle of the one that came on our heels (Apple) and ma…

Yeah, I find that looking for a conspiracy here absolutely hilarious. Why can't it just be as simple as copyright holders really, really, really hate piracy, and are definitely willing to make a technical mess to do it? They hate piracy because it does cost them. How complicated does it need to be?

> They hate piracy because it does cost them.

https://torrentfreak.com/eu-piracy-report-suppression-raises...

> “In general, the results do not show robust statistical evidence of displacement of sales by online copyright infringements,”

#40

Post by ddtaylor » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 8:33 AM UTC

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…

Strange I have the exact opposite experience. All of the content I get from TPB and other sites is often much higher quality than what I seem to get when I go "legit" on Netflix and such. I rarely use Netflix now because I really enjoy pressing the right arrow to skip past parts of content I don't find interesting (b-roll, fades, filler content, etc.) and Netflix does a pretty poor job of this whereas VLC just works.