homeshark
join:2001-03-09
Saint Petersburg, FL | smart
they r smart |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
|  Reason #3 is the best reason
3. Anyone selling content on CD is already selling unprotected files anyway. With the exception of debacles like the Sony rootkit, 99+% of all CDs sold contain unencrypted files. This means that anyone who sells content on CDs is making unprotected content available and that putting those files online is as easy as ripping them to MP3 files, a pretty simple task these days. What boggles my mind is record companies and publishers who are willing to make content available unprotected on CD but for some reason insist on copy protection for digitally downloaded files. Assuming that the facts are correct that 99% of CD's for sale are really DRM free, then that does make one wonder why downloaded copies aren't also DRM free.
--
--
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
swhx7
Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia
·RoadRunner Cable
| What would DRM-less digital world look like?
Imagine if record and movie companies started offering DRM-less files for sale. What would happen?
I think that if prices were reasonable, people would pirate less and buy more. If you could get, for example, any song as a mp3 for 50 cents or a wav for $1, and movies in Divx for $5 or DVD for $9, why would you go to the trouble of setting up sharing software and sneaking around the enforcement? Instead of sharing people would say "Buy one yourself" and it would be affordable enough, and a good enough value for the money, that lots of people would do so.
I especially like #5. said by list :
In addition to the many costs of implementing DRM for content there's a cost that is often overlooked: The sales you lose because people don't want to buy DRM'ed content or have incompatible players. This is huge. I would buy a lot if there were just regular stores online where you just pay and get standards-based files for low prices, but I won't deal with anything that requires installing software or tries to lock files to the computer or any other BS like that - and a lot of other people have the same attitude. |
|
George Kidd
join:2001-08-09
Vancouver, BC
| In the Old Days
Well lets see... Back in 1981 those games for the Apple ][ generally had copy protection on them also. Problem was the game itself was quite rudimentary, especially by today's standards. Most of the Hackers of the time bought the disk not for the game content but to enjoy the Game of Cracking the Copy Protection. Usually the copy protection only lasted about a day at the most. Fortunately there was a good supply of game disks being rolled out.
Companies then even spent millions of dollars on copy protection which some noob bypassed within a day usually.  |
|
amungus
Premium
join:2004-11-26
America
clubs:
| reply to swhx7
Re: What would DRM-less digital world look like?
...eMusic.com would happen...
regular MP3 files, no drm, and cheap.
Now, if they had the same major label support that iToons or Napstar, or Rhapsuhdee do, they'd be huge...
problem? ..the major labels are still too scared....
why? they refuse to believe that it actually works!!!
»www.techdirt.com/articles/200607···06.shtml
score 1 for these folks for realizing what a waste of time and money DRM can be. |
|
milnoc
join:2001-03-05
H3B
 ·TekSavvy Solutions..
| Already figured it out
I already figured a lot of this out last summer when I prepared my CRTC application for a Category 2 digital television license. The proposed service will be a Canadian public access channel called "The Canadian Public".
In the application, I indicated that I was going to distribute as many of the TV shows as possible on BitTorrent with no embedded DRM or copy protection schemes. The catch? I'm leaving in all of the commercials.  But that's it! The files themselves will be ordinary AVI files encoded in XVID and MP3.
DRM and copy protection schemes are a real pain for any computer system. They steal processing power, they render the content incompatible on other devices, and they sometimes compromise the stability of an individual's property i.e. their computer. I want no part of that. |
|
ninjatutle
Premium
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA | 1 Reason to Keep DRM
Rentals. |
|
GigahertZ420
join:2001-10-02
Fairbanks, AK
| Plays for maybe?
Just look no further than Microsoft's own, "Plays for sure" fiasco.
»blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/index.php?p=364
They get a bunch of vendors to support their plays for sure format and then the Zune comes out and it's not even compatible with their own format. Where does that leave all these companies that made devices for this proprietary format? Holding the buck that's what. They might as well have put a boat anchor to their leg.
The same dumb big movie studios are also the one's that forced the rediculous DRM in the HD-DVD and BlueRay format. Once customers start figuring how their getting screwed on the new formats I doubt customers will support either of the formats unless it's in their best interest long term. |
|
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Reason #3 is the best reason
said by TKJunkMail  :Assuming that the facts are correct that 99% of CD's for sale are really DRM free, then that does make one wonder why downloaded copies aren't also DRM free. The fact is correct. In fact, you really can't have a DRM-encumbered CD. If you tried to make one, it wouldn't work with existing CD players. Some approaches have been tried, but they all have been laughably easy to defeat, most by disabling auto-run.
As for why downloadable copies aren't DRM-free, blame the RIAA. They still think that "Internet = Piracy" so they'll resist any efforts to put music online unless they can somehow control what gets done with the file and when. To do this, they need DRM.
In reality, no DRM scheme is perfect. At some point, the audio has to be decrypted to play it. This means that the DRM-ed file can be decrypted, put into a DRM-free format, and uploaded. For example, a user could connect one computer's Line Out port to another computer's Line In and use Audacity to record the audio. Or a person can simply buy a copy of the CD that the music also appears on and rip that.
In any case, the DRM just provides a tiny speed bump in the way of someone who wants to pirate the music. Putting that tiny speed bump in place costs quite a lot and it only really winds up impacting legitimate customers. Of course, not many would argue that the RIAA is acting along logical reasoning. |
|
heathcpe
join:2002-03-19
Brandon, MS
| DRM Pisses Me Off!
I buy tracks from Napster fairly regular, and I have a portable player that will play DRM'ed tracks. Last weekend I wanted to add some new tracks I had payed for on my player, but it would not synch and acquire a license. I look at the properties of the track to see if the license is valid and what do you know. It says I can not synch this track. WTF???? I payed for this track and if I want to play it on my fracking toilet then I will. I get frustrated, blood pressure goes up, and I start bitching to my wife how these ass holes are screwing everyone. Then turn around burn the CD, and RIP it back to mp3 and put it on my fracking player. It took my half an hour to do what should have taken 5 minutes.
F**K DRM!!!
F**K Napster!!
F**K iTunes!!
MP3's are cool.
F**K RIAA!!!
I'm out! |
|
cableties
Premium
join:2005-01-27
 ·Verizon FIOS
| reply to George Kidd
Re: In the Old Days
Choplifter! Knight Of Diamonds! Wizardry and Ultima series! Bards Tale! Drol! Apple panic! all on one disc!
Not that I did any of those cracks, per say, I liked having a bunch of games on one floppy side (SSDD, DSDD...). 5.25" floppy with a hole puncher = double sided goodness!
 |
|
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
| reply to swhx7
Re: What would DRM-less digital world look like?
Exactly. Would you rather go searching among dozens of misnamed files, possible viruses, and low-bitrate/low-quality copies just to find the one good, clean version of a song on a free P2P network? Or would you rather find a good, clean copy immediately that you could purchase for $1.
Actually, I think that the recording industry could meld the original Napster, iTunes, and AllofMP3 and come up with a winner.
Have a centrally controlled network (Napster) where people could share audio, but limit the bitrate (say to 96kbps). Think of this as the equivalent of hearing a song on the radio. It's good and will get you interested in the song, but if you really want the song, you could purchase (iTunes) higher quality versions of the songs at a rate determined by the format/bitrate (AllOfMP3) with all of the files free of DRM. So someone who thinks 128kbps is good enough would pay one rate and someone who won't listen to anything lower than 256kbps can pay a bit more.
I think this would be a hit. Of course, I'm also enough of a realist to know that the RIAA would never allow such a service to survive. |
|
Biskit
join:2003-02-07
Fenton, MO
| reply to ninjatutle
Re: 1 Reason to Keep DRM
Yes, possibly, but if, as one other user pointed out, content was affordable, most would just buy the DVD or CD instead of renting anyway. If I could buy a DVD for 7 or 8 dollars I would do that instead of renting for 4 or 5. The way my wife returns movies I could have bought 4 copies anyway!! |
|
fcisler
Premium
join:2004-06-14
Riverhead, NY | ...
Offer me the ability to buy a track OR a CD, at a reasonable price, AND with NO DRM and in FLAC format (or other lossless), and i'll probally buy 90% of the stuff i download now.
128K AAC or MP3? Pfft....i wouldent even CONSIDER buying it |
|
ninjatutle
Premium
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA | reply to Biskit
Re: 1 Reason to Keep DRM
$5/month with Yahoo Music Unlimited is dirt cheap. |
|
kd6cae
P2p Shouldn't Be A Crime
join:2001-08-27
Lancaster, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| the industry should just try nonDrm'd files!
I keep saying the industry should just give undrm'd files a try. It's obvious it would work, and both sides involved in this mess would win. And the **AA's could aford to do it! When you buy a CD, you're not told on what brand of CD player you can play your purchased CD in, or how often you could transfer your CD between players, so why should computers be any different? Rather than restricting what you can play your purchased content on, imagine if the **AA's offered downloads of digital content with NO DRM, via high speed servers connected at major internet backbones? Even users of usenet wouldn't mind purchasing from the RIAA if they had that kind of flexibility! So why won't the industry realize, that if they'd just give this a try, both sides would win, consumer's would get content at fast speeds, at good prices, and the industry would get money as well. It's a win win situation, yet the industry doesn't realize this? How can we get them to realize the obvious here! |
|
MooJohn
join:2005-12-18
Milledgeville, GA
·Windstream
| reply to George Kidd
Re: In the Old Days
I had Copy II Plus. Imagine - a commercial program dedicated to breaking the copy protection of other programs. Computing was awesome in the 80s!
I honestly did use it for backup purposes. Back then you never were sure when a drive may eat a disk, esp. the 5.25 variety. By the time the IIGS came out I had two 5.25s and two 3.5s, a laser mouse (required gridded reflective mouse pad), 2 megs of memory, and a TransWarp GS card that took it from the stock 2 mHz to 7! Those were the days
I'd still like backup copies of game CDs for the same reason -- especially since games require the damn disk just to play, even though all the content is on the HD already.
--
John M - Cranky network guy |
|
swhx7
Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to ninjatutle
Re: 1 Reason to Keep DRM
You have a point as long as you are talking about DRM as an option. In other words, DRM may have a place in a market where you can buy the unencumbered file for one price and a DRM'd one (rental) for less. The rental option would be suitable for listening to decide what one likes, and purchase for long-term copies.
The article fails to consider this possibility of multiple options in the marketplace. It's written as if it's "all or none". Of course the copyright cartels are stuck in the "all DRM all time" mentality.
Although DRM might have a place as an alternative that people could choose, the "try before you buy" could be provided just as well by giving away low bitrate files and selling the better ones, as Jason Levine points out above. |
|
Doctor Four
My other vehicle is a TARDIS
Premium
join:2000-09-05
Dallas, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to Jason Levine
Re: Reason #3 is the best reason
Since when did the RIAA act along logical reasoning?
They never have. Of course they're too blinded by
dollar signs to see that DRM in any form is a colossal
failure.
Even the BMG/Sony Rootkit fiasco is a lesson they've
failed to learn. One that will surely be repeated.
DRM itself is nothing but high-tech snakeoil. If it
can be heard or seen, it can be copied.
--
"The trouble with computers, of course, is that they are very sophisticated idiots." - Doctor Who (from Destiny Of The Daleks) |
|
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
| I didn't say they were acting along logical reasoning. I said not many would argue that they were. I was going to say that no one here would argue that they were, but then I remembered Taylor. |
|
