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

DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 77 posts

Re: DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

#61

Post by wolfgke »

sp332 wrote: post #9
rayiner wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> majority accepting unethical practice like DRM Are you kidding? DRM is great. I love being able to just pay money to Netflix in return for content. DRM enables that nice, clear-cut transaction. What's the alternative? Judging by the rest of the web, it involves tracking your internet activity and throwing advertising in your face.

Movie rentals existed before Netflix. It's always been technically possible to make illegal copies of movies. But most people would rather have a legal option. Otherwise everyone would skip Netflix and just use the Pirate Bay. Edit: To be clear, I'm saying that people will pay for a legal streaming service even if they could rip it off for free.

Illegal copy from Pirate Bay: free (as beer) and no DRM. Legal copy: you have to pay and endure DRM.

Now let the market decide.

Re: DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

#62

Post by chimeracoder »

grincho wrote: post #39
chimeracoder wrote: post #22

> It will be easier for Firefox users to play DRM-enabled videos because they will not have to download Flash or Silverlight first. Firefox users will be able to choose whether to activate the new DRM system before it is accessed. 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 anywa…

Mozilla employee here, speaking for myself but pretty close to the info source. That's actually what we're looking at doing: the sandbox would be in there, harmless, by default, but the actual crypto module (the "CDM") would download from Adobe upon first need. (And they have committed to support the platforms we support, Linux included.) The exact UI is still up in the air. I could imagine us using the opportunity t…

> I could imagine us using the opportunity to display a message to educate users as to what DRM is and whose phone number to call if they don't like it. ;-)

Please do this!

I understand that Mozilla has been backed into a corner on this, so I get why you'll be adding this (much as I wish you didn't have to). But that doesn't mean forgetting about the issue entirely.

I wouldn't ask this of any of the other major browser vendors, but I like to hold Mozilla/Firefox to a higher standard. :)

Re: DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

#63

Post by aqme28 »

jordigh wrote: post #32

So... how long until we reverse-engineer the CDM and write a free decryptor? Is there any indication that reverse-engineering the CDM would be technologically unfeasible? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_cow_problem

You often don't need to decrypt the content. Nothing is stopping you from screen-recording video that's behind DRM and putting it up on Piratebay.

Re: DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

#64

Post by chimeracoder »

rayiner wrote: post #35
tomp wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also love being able to pay Apple money in exchange for DRM-free music . Also, DRM on video is approximately 0-efficient; pirates will still rip movies and upload them to torrent sites, freeloaders will still find free low-quality streaming movie sites, and the majority of non-technical users wouldn't be able to rip streaming video even without DRM. So: NO.

> the majority of non-technical users wouldn't be able to rip streaming video even without DRM. How hard would it be to make an app that made this easy for non-technical users, without DRM?

How hard was it to make Popcorn Time?

I don't know, but however long, it apparently wasn't prohibitive. And I don't think it'd be tough to clone.

Re: DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

#65

Post by sp332 »

wolfgke wrote: post #61
sp332 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Movie rentals existed before Netflix. It's always been technically possible to make illegal copies of movies. But most people would rather have a legal option. Otherwise everyone would skip Netflix and just use the Pirate Bay. Edit: To be clear, I'm saying that people will pay for a legal streaming service even if they could rip it off for free.

Illegal copy from Pirate Bay: free (as beer) and no DRM. Legal copy: you have to pay and endure DRM. Now let the market decide.

The market has already decided on "both". The people who spend the most money on music are the same people to pirate the most music.

Re: DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

#66

Post by quasque »

shmerl wrote: post #7
rayiner wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> majority accepting unethical practice like DRM Are you kidding? DRM is great. I love being able to just pay money to Netflix in return for content. DRM enables that nice, clear-cut transaction. What's the alternative? Judging by the rest of the web, it involves tracking your internet activity and throwing advertising in your face.

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.

If you're watching streamed video, the DRM is completely transparent. I don't see how that is a degradation in service.

The only way it would be an issue is if you're trying to rip the stream. But if you've paid the provider for streaming only, rather than to download and keep a copy, then that's also not really degrading the quality of service. Similarly, the prohibition on bringing a video camera in to record cinema screenings does not reduce the quality of the cinema experience.

In general, I don't really see a problem with DRM that is temporally bound to the moment of consumption.

Re: DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

#68

Post by shmerl »

tzs wrote: post #59
shmerl wrote: post #23

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.

I believe he's talking about (1) movies, not music, and (2) streaming rental, not download sales.

DRM for movies is not needed the same way it's not needed for music.

About renting vs. sales see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7745797

Re: DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

#69

Post by __david__ »

aqme28 wrote: post #63
jordigh wrote: post #32

So... how long until we reverse-engineer the CDM and write a free decryptor? Is there any indication that reverse-engineering the CDM would be technologically unfeasible? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_cow_problem

You often don't need to decrypt the content. Nothing is stopping you from screen-recording video that's behind DRM and putting it up on Piratebay.

Sure, but re-encoding will degrade the quality. It's much better to just strip the DRM.

Re: DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users

#70

Post by wolfgke »

sp332 wrote: post #65
wolfgke wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Illegal copy from Pirate Bay: free (as beer) and no DRM. Legal copy: you have to pay and endure DRM. Now let the market decide.

The market has already decided on "both". The people who spend the most money on music are the same people to pirate the most music.

Correct. Thus it is a very bad idea to infuriate the people who love music/movies with DRM mechanisms, because otherwise they'll just pirate and not buy.
Post reply on HN