Comments on: Lessig’s ‘Free Culture’ Now Available with DRM

By: dPsychc

dPsychc — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 00:24:11 +0000

Fuck up all DRM goods… downlaod them again and again and distribute them like hell

By: dugong

dugong — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 13:03:11 +0000

Don’t purchase anything with DRM, that is the best way to throw that technology out. Simple as that.

There is no material with DRM that people NEED. I repeat, there is nothing you need that has DRM. You may WANT something with DRM. That is your problem.

The media company controls you because you want what they have (movies, music, books, etc). Do not desire what they have, and you eliminate their control over you.

By: DIzzIE

DIzzIE — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 10:07:11 +0000

@6 Daniel
“Lawrence Lessig is the pirate’s absolute BIGGEST influential ally when it comes to anti-DRM, pro-piracy, etc.”

Are you shitting me?

A couple quotes from Lessig’s books I pasted a few months ago:

“Control, as I have argued, is not necessarily bad. Copyright is a critical part of the process of creativity; a great deal of creativity would not exist without the protections of the law. Without the law, the incentives to produce creative work would be vastly reduced. Large-budget films could not be produced; many books would not get written. Copyright is therefore an integral and crucial part of the creative process. And as it has expanded, it has expanded the opportunities for creativity.”
(Lessig, The Future of Ideas, pp. 107-08, 0375726446)

“A free culture is not a culture without property; it is not a culture in which artists don’t get paid. A culture without property, or in which creators can’t get paid, is anarchy, not freedom. Anarchy is not
what I advance here.

Instead, the free culture that I defend in this book is a balance between anarchy and control. A free culture, like a free market, is filled with property. It is filled with rules of property and contract that get enforced by the state.”
(Lessig, Free Culture, xvi, 1594200068).

Lessig is a reformist who seeks to preserve the illusion of ‘ntellectual property’ albeit in sheep’s clothing. Replacing standard copyright with some flavour of CC does nothing to question the notion of licensing itself, and thus it still supports (c)ongealment of otherwise unbridled data flows, the enclosure of information.

Lessig does nothing but advocate bigger cages and longer chains. Fuck that.

Copyleft/right are two sides of the same one sided coin. Reject all licensing.

By: pink panther

pink panther — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 10:05:39 +0000

First the library at Alexandria, and now this … great loss to the world of information, locked in DRM.

By: kidTHATthinks

kidTHATthinks — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 09:03:50 +0000

im not Ben, but I hope that post works for you anyway :p

its how i see that.

and i see that i made few spelling mistakes, english is not my native language, but i think you still can understand what i wanted to say ;)

By: kidTHATthinks

kidTHATthinks — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 08:58:22 +0000

quote1: “A agree with Daniel, the article and especially the title does come across as an attack Lessig.”

its called irony. look it up

quote2:”what does piracy have to do with filesharing?

Ben?

tell us please”

DRM is protection used as stated, primary against pirates(that is expresion used by ppl who created and forcing DRM), but also have extendive negative effect on people who purchased the product.

torrentfreak is, as you can find in ABOUT: TorrentFreak is a weblog dedicated to bringing the latest news about BitTorrent and EVERYTHING that is closely related to this popular filesharing protocol.

hope you get the point…

By: DarkStar

DarkStar — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 07:03:25 +0000

A agree with Daniel, the article and especially the title does come across as an attack Lessig.

Come on Torrentfreak, this is nowhere near up to your usually excellent editorial levels. Definately one of theworst written articles I’ve ever read on this great site.

By: http://www.dignova.com

http://www.dignova.com — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 06:36:05 +0000

“The only people who are negatively affected are honest customers, since pirates will get their DRM-free version off BitTorrent anyway.”

what does piracy have to do with filesharing?

Ben?

tell us please …

By: Jay

Jay — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 05:39:50 +0000

Lessig makes a very interesting read. Gives you a good overview of the evolution of the law, and it’s ‘quirks’. He is sure no advocate of piracy, but is not slow to point out that some of the big media industrial complex players started out with behavior that would today be classified piracy.

I find it hard to read books on a PC … but thanks to the freedom engendered by Creative Commons you can read the book on your phone for free (libre and gratis). If you have internet for you phone you will be reading in a couple of clicks.
http://www.booksinmyphone.com/?list=book&id=lesl01

All hail Lawrence Lessig!

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 01:35:03 +0000

one of the wroste writen articles on torrentfreak… makes me sad panda

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 00:33:36 +0000

@15
Care to discuss and plan things with others on how to take action, perhaps in a small-scale way?

By: Graham

Graham — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 00:28:13 +0000

Again I say Idiots.
Has anyone read this book? I just finished it, it is not against DRM, it is against Copyright Law in its current form.
He never said that authors protecting THEIR work was bad, he said it was that protecting work long after its commercial viability is hurting culture.
Please shutup.

By: minimal

minimal — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 22:14:29 +0000

@Daniel

Man, this is very clearly attacking the hypocrisy that attaches DRM to an anti-DRM book, not an attack on Lessig himself!

Good points otherwise though.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 20:54:20 +0000

DRM violates consumer privacy as well, having to connect a “server” to open content that you paid for (referring to some music and movie paid-for downloaded content) is ridiculous and a waste of bandwidth

By: Dingo_RG

Dingo_RG — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 16:43:42 +0000

“The only people who are negatively affected are honest customers, since pirates will get their DRM-free version off BitTorrent anyway.”

I think that this statement is completely wrong.

People who buy products with illegal DRM restrictions and
submissively accept it are not more or less honest than people who disagree with these unjust restrictions and decide to do something about it.

DRM restrictions violates your rights of private property and fair use of that which you paid; and this must be rejected.

In this point, I think that people who buy these products with DRM are responsible of supporting this nonsense and illegality… If the people don’t buy DRM products these unjust restrictions would not exist.

By: randallwaterhouse

randallwaterhouse — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 15:51:25 +0000

I’m seconding the comment that says it’s actually pretty simple to put PDFs on the Kindle. I get what the original author is saying though.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 15:49:49 +0000

Actually, you can put any (non-DRM) PDF on the Kindle without violating any DRM. You could also put up the text or HTML versions of the book without any issues

By: Ben Jones

Ben Jones — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 15:27:29 +0000

Daniel, no one, especailly me, was intending to attack Lessig. If anything, the point of the piece is that its usually not down to the authors about DRM, but the middlemen instead.

DRm is looked upon as the solution to a problem that doesn’t exist, not in the way people think of, and that was the point of the article; they even slap DRM on books *ATTACKING* DRM

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 15:26:49 +0000

Daniel’s right, this guy is very good. I’ve read about him and I’m going to read his book sometime, hopefully.

By: Daniel

Daniel — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 15:09:00 +0000

@8 Meaning what exactly? I can think of many reasons why attacking your allies is a bad idea, and not very many for the opposite.