Comments on: DRM Needs To Be Banned Because It’s Toxic

By: Bluegeese

Bluegeese — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 01:00:00 +0000

Sorry, bit of a typo there – I meant “can be owned by only one person and is locked to a device …”

By: Bluegeese

Bluegeese — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 00:57:00 +0000

I agree, particularly with regard to e-books. A paper book can be loaned out to friends and acquaintances, passed on to a secondhand bookstore to be resold, handed on from one generation to the next, or housed in a library and borrowed by hundreds or even thousands of people. Likewise with a DVD movie or music CD. A DRM-locked product, on the other hand, can be owned and is locked to a device and therefore can’t be loaned unless you lend out the whole device, which is ridiculous. Therefore DRM restrictions bind e-products way beyond what is both common and lawful usage with their material counterparts. I find this frustrating and reprehensible.

By: deadsteve

deadsteve — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 01:19:00 +0000

DRM screws my TIVO Desktop

I am stuck using lame ass windows media player

It makes mot shows un watchable durring the “streamin” state

By: Scary Devil Monastery

Scary Devil Monastery — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 08:43:00 +0000

Actually I take one exception to that - information once published is free and attempts to restrict this fact are futile. But you can exert control over information only you are privvy to - it's called "keeping a secret". Your ATM pin code, your personal passwords and the image of your naked body probably all belong to that domain. The mistake made by the copyright industry is the assumption that you can publish a secret and still make it abide by the same rules.

By: Sarah J.

Sarah J. — Wed, 19 Oct 2011 15:30:00 +0000

I think it’s fair to say there’s a de facto ban on the security method. People simply don’t pay for DRM, except when there’s no other choice, or they simply don’t know or don’t care. I think that our innate sense of fairness tells us that information should be free, and that that’s a hard thing to repress.

By: Scary Devil Monastery

Scary Devil Monastery — Wed, 19 Oct 2011 09:31:00 +0000

Prohibitions I concur, are NOT the way.

Transparency would be though. If you bundle DRM with the software then you should at the very least be extremely specific with in what way said DRM will suborn your computer.

By: Scary Devil Monastery

Scary Devil Monastery — Wed, 19 Oct 2011 09:27:00 +0000

“It’s pretty easy for me, as an ordinary consumer, to download a copy of a program that one of you tech-savvy types cracked.”

My point exactly. Once a solution has been created it is usually available for everyone. Same as with science all it takes is for one person to solve the problem and then suddenly everyone else is able to.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 18 Oct 2011 23:57:00 +0000

It’s pretty easy for me, as an ordinary consumer, to download a copy of a program that one of you tech-savvy types cracked. If a firm wants to make life more difficult for their consumers, that’s their problem, and they’ll bite the bullet for it.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 18 Oct 2011 20:02:00 +0000

If the DRM is not banned /as fully forbidden/ it will allow companies to promote it by artificial price management. As it happened. If for example they sell a DRM-ed song for a dollar, and not protected one for 10… you see. And nobody can prevent this to happen. So it will never be free market with fair concurrence between protected and unprotected variants of the goods.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 18 Oct 2011 20:02:00 +0000