9 ms·

The answer is that it's technologically impossible to prevent third parties from using your work if you publish it. DRM doesn't solve this problem, but claims

The answer is that it's technologically impossible to prevent third parties from using your work if you publish it. DRM doesn't solve this problem, but claims to do so. As a result, genuine users suffer from DRM.

grahamel 10y ago
Exactly that. I have issues watching copy protected dvds on my playstation where if I pause the film for a short while the copy protection kicks in and I can't watch the film, instead have to restart and fast forward to when I'd paused. That's content protection preventing me - a purchaser - using it properly.
- kiallmacinnes 10y ago
  So, I have to ask! What makes you sure this is copy protection? It sounds more like a bug or fault rather than DRM.
  - themihai 10y ago
    Even if it's not the DRM fault here there are plenty of other examples. E.g. You can't copy/backup a DVD on your computer/stick/cloud so once the DVD format is deprecated(i.e. Macs no longer have a DVD-drive) or the DVD is lost you can't play it anymore. Not to mention the convenience. The latest wonder from the DRM promoters is the HDCP: People with 4K TVs can't play 4K TV content anymore because of this new "feature"[0]. Apparently the only sane solution is to hack the HDMI cable. [0] http://www.howtogeek.com/208917/htg-explains-how-hdcp-breaks-your-hdtv-and-how-to-fix-it/ http://www.howtogeek.com/208917/htg-explains-how-hdcp-breaks...
  - grahamel 10y ago
    True, it's likely a bug from either the disc or the player but if they weren't attempting DRM I wouldn't have the issue. Inconveniencing legitimate users because you can't implement the protections without it breaking isn't the way to go. I know I can download a copy of a film, push play/pause and it will just work. I know if I buy a dvd I'll have to sit through unskippable piracy messages and ads and not be sure the film will play after pausing.
    - plttn 10y ago
      How do you know that without a doubt it isn't just a bug in the software unrelated to whether or not DRM was implemented?
      - grahamel 10y ago
        because when I do the same on a non DRM disc it doesn't happen
  - AnthonyMouse 10y ago
    > It sounds more like a bug or fault rather than DRM. Even if it isn't the DRM, it still is. Because the player could be open and someone could fix the bug if it weren't for the DRM.
sbuk 10y ago
"DRM doesn't solve this problem" Again, no wish to goad, but why?
- nevon 10y ago
  Because it's literally impossible. If you want someone to be able to read your text or view your image, in the end the light has to reach the viewer's eyes, and that means it can be recorded. At best, DRM can be an annoyance. It can never stop unauthorized redistribution of material.
  - jsymolon 10y ago
    Don't Copy that Floppy. Perfect example from the 80's, an arms race to prevent copying of software, which ended up doing what ? Software still got copied while increasing the publishers cost. Now 30 years later, efforts to preserve are stymied by copy protection on failing hardware. In an ironic twist, the protection broken by the pirates is salvageable.
    - 794CD01 10y ago
      How can you expect anyone without a time machine to explain what it ended up doing? For example, we live in a world where companies like Adobe or Autodesk can sell software licenses for thousands of dollars. Would that be true if software piracy became the norm decades ago? Would we be better off one way or the other? Who can say?
      - undersuit 10y ago
        What if piracy was never invented and we all just paid our dues. What a happy little libertarian utopia. >Would that be true if software piracy became the norm decades ago? How many decades ago? I built my first computer and installed pirate Windows and Photoshop versions back in 97. Warcraft had questions you had to answer during installation that were answers from the lore in the manual. Do you think people in the 80s with the first personal computers would see their friend use a new software and then wait 4-6 weeks for their own floppy disk to arrive in the mail?
eveningcoffee 10y ago
Yep. For example there is a image with power lines here https://backchannel.com/the-internet-really-has-changed-everything-here-s-the-proof-928eaead18a8 https://backchannel.com/the-internet-really-has-changed-ever... I liked to see the image as the whole. Had it been made not directly viewable by the publisher I would have had great pain to make it happen. Now I just opened it on another tab.
gsnedders 10y ago
> DRM doesn't solve this problem, but claims to do so. If you actually listen to any of the arguments being made on the W3C mailing lists, none of the pro-DRM sides have actually argued such an absolute stance, because they're not stupid and can see DRM regularly getting broken. The argument primarily centres on "casual piracy"—some technically illiterate user sending a copy of "something fun" to their friends—and not on eliminating piracy or preventing third parties from using your work.
- JustSomeNobody 10y ago
  Is fixing "casual piracy" even going to make a dent in their spreadsheet? I doubt it.
  - gsnedders 10y ago
    It sounds like they believe there are more potential sales there than there are from other forms of pirates. (Whether that's true or not is anyone's guess!)
  - clarry 10y ago
    Such "casual piracy" is legal in my country, at least when it comes to music (and we pay for the priviledge, unfortunately). Publishers shouldn't mess with my rights.
lucaspiller 10y ago
There was a post on Reddit recently which is a great example of this. Somebody said that Netflix didn't support their monitor as it was too old (i.e. didn't support HDCP). One of the comments suggested to get a HDCP stripper, a simple device for $10, which will disable the DRM. https://www.reddit.com/r/Anticonsumption/comments/55r7i4/your_monitor_is_too_old_to_view_this_content/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Anticonsumption/comments/55r7i4/you...
- ewzimm 10y ago
  Yes, all DRM is easy to bypass right now, but it works as a way to get studios on board with digital distribution. This brings up an interesting point. The main argument against DRM is that it is a slippery slope which will lead to more violations of freedom. But the problem with slippery slope arugments is that they're often unsubstantiated. We often don't know what the long-term effects of something will be. What if DRM is actually serving the opposite purpose? By appeasing studios with weak protections, it may be preventing stronger digital locks from being developed. It could be that if the FSF and other anti-DRM organizations are effective in removing current standards, the industry will respond by developing something even worse, leading to an ever-stronger DRM arms race. I'm not saying that I know this will be the result either, just that we don't really know what the effects of defeating standard DRM interfaces will be. The only real solution I can imagine would be to get content distributers not to want DRM, which is a very hard proposition. They have the money and the power, and they won't stop until they get what they want.
  - pdkl95 10y ago
    > DRM is easy to bypass right now That's because DRM isn't and never has been about preventing copying. The intent has always been to transfer power from consumers to the studios and tech manufacturers. It doesn't matter if the DRM can be defeated by some subset of consumers as long as the idea that you don't have the right to us your purchases as you see fit. As long as this erosion of property rights and the doctrine of first sale becomes normalized and you start believing in artificial scarcity, DRM will have served it's purpose. This is why it's so important to never compromise and accept any form of DRM. Compromise only shifts the Overton window[1] making change harder in the future. > it may be preventing stronger digital locks from being developed Even if "stronger digital locks" was the goal, you don't prevent future locks by allowing them today. > the industry will respond by developing something even worse They already do that. > They have the money and the power So they can use some of that money to develop their own players if they want to push DRM. There isn't any reason browser authors and the public in general should subsidize selfish businesses. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window
skybrian 10y ago
SnapChat became popular because it restricts what people can do with a post. Its users don't seem to be suffering. So it seems that there is demand for this sort of thing from many users.

grahamel 10y ago

Exactly that. I have issues watching copy protected dvds on my playstation where if I pause the film for a short while the copy protection kicks in and I can't watch the film, instead have to restart and fast forward to when I'd paused. That's content protection preventing me - a purchaser - using it properly.

kiallmacinnes 10y ago
So, I have to ask! What makes you sure this is copy protection? It sounds more like a bug or fault rather than DRM.
- themihai 10y ago
  Even if it's not the DRM fault here there are plenty of other examples. E.g. You can't copy/backup a DVD on your computer/stick/cloud so once the DVD format is deprecated(i.e. Macs no longer have a DVD-drive) or the DVD is lost you can't play it anymore. Not to mention the convenience. The latest wonder from the DRM promoters is the HDCP: People with 4K TVs can't play 4K TV content anymore because of this new "feature"[0]. Apparently the only sane solution is to hack the HDMI cable. [0] http://www.howtogeek.com/208917/htg-explains-how-hdcp-breaks-your-hdtv-and-how-to-fix-it/ http://www.howtogeek.com/208917/htg-explains-how-hdcp-breaks...
- grahamel 10y ago
  True, it's likely a bug from either the disc or the player but if they weren't attempting DRM I wouldn't have the issue. Inconveniencing legitimate users because you can't implement the protections without it breaking isn't the way to go. I know I can download a copy of a film, push play/pause and it will just work. I know if I buy a dvd I'll have to sit through unskippable piracy messages and ads and not be sure the film will play after pausing.
  - plttn 10y ago
    How do you know that without a doubt it isn't just a bug in the software unrelated to whether or not DRM was implemented?
    - grahamel 10y ago
      because when I do the same on a non DRM disc it doesn't happen
- AnthonyMouse 10y ago
  > It sounds more like a bug or fault rather than DRM. Even if it isn't the DRM, it still is. Because the player could be open and someone could fix the bug if it weren't for the DRM.

sbuk 10y ago

"DRM doesn't solve this problem" Again, no wish to goad, but why?

nevon 10y ago
Because it's literally impossible. If you want someone to be able to read your text or view your image, in the end the light has to reach the viewer's eyes, and that means it can be recorded. At best, DRM can be an annoyance. It can never stop unauthorized redistribution of material.
- jsymolon 10y ago
  Don't Copy that Floppy. Perfect example from the 80's, an arms race to prevent copying of software, which ended up doing what ? Software still got copied while increasing the publishers cost. Now 30 years later, efforts to preserve are stymied by copy protection on failing hardware. In an ironic twist, the protection broken by the pirates is salvageable.
  - 794CD01 10y ago
    How can you expect anyone without a time machine to explain what it ended up doing? For example, we live in a world where companies like Adobe or Autodesk can sell software licenses for thousands of dollars. Would that be true if software piracy became the norm decades ago? Would we be better off one way or the other? Who can say?
    - undersuit 10y ago
      What if piracy was never invented and we all just paid our dues. What a happy little libertarian utopia. >Would that be true if software piracy became the norm decades ago? How many decades ago? I built my first computer and installed pirate Windows and Photoshop versions back in 97. Warcraft had questions you had to answer during installation that were answers from the lore in the manual. Do you think people in the 80s with the first personal computers would see their friend use a new software and then wait 4-6 weeks for their own floppy disk to arrive in the mail?

eveningcoffee 10y ago

Yep. For example there is a image with power lines here https://backchannel.com/the-internet-really-has-changed-everything-here-s-the-proof-928eaead18a8 https://backchannel.com/the-internet-really-has-changed-ever... I liked to see the image as the whole. Had it been made not directly viewable by the publisher I would have had great pain to make it happen. Now I just opened it on another tab.

gsnedders 10y ago

> DRM doesn't solve this problem, but claims to do so. If you actually listen to any of the arguments being made on the W3C mailing lists, none of the pro-DRM sides have actually argued such an absolute stance, because they're not stupid and can see DRM regularly getting broken. The argument primarily centres on "casual piracy"—some technically illiterate user sending a copy of "something fun" to their friends—and not on eliminating piracy or preventing third parties from using your work.

JustSomeNobody 10y ago
Is fixing "casual piracy" even going to make a dent in their spreadsheet? I doubt it.
- gsnedders 10y ago
  It sounds like they believe there are more potential sales there than there are from other forms of pirates. (Whether that's true or not is anyone's guess!)
- clarry 10y ago
  Such "casual piracy" is legal in my country, at least when it comes to music (and we pay for the priviledge, unfortunately). Publishers shouldn't mess with my rights.

lucaspiller 10y ago

There was a post on Reddit recently which is a great example of this. Somebody said that Netflix didn't support their monitor as it was too old (i.e. didn't support HDCP). One of the comments suggested to get a HDCP stripper, a simple device for $10, which will disable the DRM. https://www.reddit.com/r/Anticonsumption/comments/55r7i4/your_monitor_is_too_old_to_view_this_content/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Anticonsumption/comments/55r7i4/you...

ewzimm 10y ago
Yes, all DRM is easy to bypass right now, but it works as a way to get studios on board with digital distribution. This brings up an interesting point. The main argument against DRM is that it is a slippery slope which will lead to more violations of freedom. But the problem with slippery slope arugments is that they're often unsubstantiated. We often don't know what the long-term effects of something will be. What if DRM is actually serving the opposite purpose? By appeasing studios with weak protections, it may be preventing stronger digital locks from being developed. It could be that if the FSF and other anti-DRM organizations are effective in removing current standards, the industry will respond by developing something even worse, leading to an ever-stronger DRM arms race. I'm not saying that I know this will be the result either, just that we don't really know what the effects of defeating standard DRM interfaces will be. The only real solution I can imagine would be to get content distributers not to want DRM, which is a very hard proposition. They have the money and the power, and they won't stop until they get what they want.
- pdkl95 10y ago
  > DRM is easy to bypass right now That's because DRM isn't and never has been about preventing copying. The intent has always been to transfer power from consumers to the studios and tech manufacturers. It doesn't matter if the DRM can be defeated by some subset of consumers as long as the idea that you don't have the right to us your purchases as you see fit. As long as this erosion of property rights and the doctrine of first sale becomes normalized and you start believing in artificial scarcity, DRM will have served it's purpose. This is why it's so important to never compromise and accept any form of DRM. Compromise only shifts the Overton window[1] making change harder in the future. > it may be preventing stronger digital locks from being developed Even if "stronger digital locks" was the goal, you don't prevent future locks by allowing them today. > the industry will respond by developing something even worse They already do that. > They have the money and the power So they can use some of that money to develop their own players if they want to push DRM. There isn't any reason browser authors and the public in general should subsidize selfish businesses. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

skybrian 10y ago

SnapChat became popular because it restricts what people can do with a post. Its users don't seem to be suffering. So it seems that there is demand for this sort of thing from many users.