Slashdot Mirror
DMCA bad for Apple Users
Aguazul writes "TidBITS has published a really strong article on the DMCA and on how this is bad for Apple users, with some good links and suggestions for action. The author, Adam Engst, is regularly voted the most influential person in the Mac world outside of Apple, so this is a serious wake-up call to Apple users everywhere."
The content-production companies have the money, so they therefore have the power over government. We're going to get Digital Rights Management, Ecrypted CPUs, Pallidium, DMCA and the like whether we like it or not. This means Apple can either comply, or go out of business.
Whilst the DMCA is undoubtedly bad, it's not just about Apple users - it's bad in full. Bad bad bad, bad to the teeth, bad bad bad bad bad bad!
Can't we all get together on this just for once?
Apple is known as *the* creative people's platform, look at how many sound engineers use Logic or ProTools on Mac, enumerate Avid's video users, Photoshop's/MacOS hardcore DTP'ists...
Now if they can't use some existing copyrighted work in private to flex their creative muscles, they won't be creative anymore...
(I wrote "is known as", it doesn't mean I actually endorse this vision)
Trolling using another account since 2005.
One has to wonder: if you produce something on your Mac, are you going to be able to tap into all that DMCA pay-as-you-play goodness, or are you going to need a DRM-authorship liscense to distribute your wares that is only affordable to the largest media companies? Something to think about...
bah! It's not about bad for Apple users. It's bad for everyone.
What I find funny is how the author thinks that because Apple doesn't have a DMCA-capable OS, that is going to miss out on the "next big thing". I don't know about everyone else, but I am actively encouraged by Apple's stance. Yes, "don't steal music", but no, don't fsck users simply to placate the gorillas in the MPAA and RIAA. Until a system comes along that lets people who have legitimately bought CDs to "rip mix burn", Apple are firmly on the side of the users. Unlike the MPAA and RIAA, they give a shit about their customers.
Anyway, as a result of MS's stance, I look forward to the article about "how the DMCA is bad for windows users".
Also, now is as good a time as any - get your ass over to the Copyright Office and let them know how the DMCA has legitimately infringed on your fair use rights. They've just opened up to submissions: "The purpose of this rulemaking proceeding is to determine whether there are particular classes of works as to which users are, or are likely to be, adversely affected in their ability to make noninfringing uses due to the prohibition on circumvention"
-- james
That's called "bending the truth". For your friend to have had a possession of iDVD without having purchased a mac with a DVD burner in built, he must have pirated the software.
Apple's application of the DMCA wasn't because he had modified the software. It was because his need to modify the software arose only due to pirating iDVD.
Apple's application of the law in this instance is entirely defendable.
-- james
Actually, you can buy, as I did, an upgrade copy of iDVD2 for $19.95, (which is actually the full version), and install an aftermarket DVR-A04, which is recognized by iDVD. iDVD does not recognize an external DVD drive, and will not launch if a internal drive is not found. The software patch for an external drive, as I recall, was created by one of the fellows at Small Dog Electronics, who heeded Apples warning, and stopped providing said software. This may or may not be about DCMA, but Apple chose to portray it as such, as the story goes.
Thought so.
Consumers cannot vote with their money because the elections are rigged by false advertising. How many people, for instance, know about the effects of DRM and DMCA? How many of those few know that those laws are, in fact, bad for the customer? Ironically the coming DMCA of the European Union is named and openly hyped as a "consumers' right bill". Yeah, it's about consumers' rights alright. Taking them away, that is.
This is sort of besides your point, but why on earth couldn't he get the iDVD (legally (I don't support piracy)) for his excisting mac and buy a DVD burner? MS is a convicted monopolistic force, but I think we ought to be glad Apple is small compared to MS. They controll - as proved by this post - the users choise of hardware and software and dictate unfair (though legal) policies on consumers.
/.ed), but it's probably not because it's 'the right thing to do.' They probably just find it a profitable view (or they're building market share.)
To keep this slightly on-topic, I think it's great that Apple is taking a stand (haven't read the article,
There are no nice companies. IBM might support Linux and play by the rules, but their just looking after their market share.
Look a monkey!
To be perfectly honest, this is the real reason that they asked the update to be pulled. Kinda comes back to Apple's mantra - if it can't work reliably, it can't work. They didn't want iDVD etc out there with a whole lot of untested DVD burners.
It was pulled after a whole lot of support issues cropped up on the Apple support website. Which is fair enough.
-- james
Quite true.
The thing is the software does not support other drives. If another manufacter wants to sell a DVD burner then they have to either do one of two things if they want it to work with Macs.
1. Write their own
2. License someone else (even iDVD). No one has obtained a license to bundle iDVD therefore it is not sold or supported to work with it.
It doesn't surprise me at all that it would go down fast under a vigorous slashdotting, but not because it's run on Macs but because it's run about Macs.
Servers cost money. So anyone building a website will try to use the minimum server power they can get away with. Microsoft will run massive banks of servers because they expect lots of people to connect to them for security patches, bug fixes, security patches, product information, bug fixes, technical support, and security patches.
So here's TidBITS, a site run for the Apple community (which is admittedly small), which only expects traffic from those people who use and appreciate Apples. So they run it on just a few machines. They normally only need one or two.
But then they posted a general interest story, someone told Slashdot about it, and boom! Instant DoS Attack! Find me a one-machine server that has that kind of instant scalability, and I'll buy one.
You cannot truly appreciate Dilbert until you read it in the original Klingon.
It was Other World Computing (OWC) not Small Dog.
Small Dog knows better.
OWC has done some stupid things in the past.
Try buying an upgrade version of Office, Windows or Photoshop to save money without having an earlier version installed. Are you going to be miffed if that doesn't work either? It's not the company's fault if you try to save money by trying to get around their requirements and it doesn't work.
Problem #1: iDVD issues.
You can't buy iDVD without buying a new Mac either. So your friend probably pirated iDVD.
Apple sells Macs. That's how they make money. As an incentive to buy a high-end Mac, Apple throws iDVD in as a free pack-in with systems that have a DVD burner. Apple doesn't include iDVD with every Mac, just the ones with DVD burners. iDVD(unlike the rest of the i-apps) is not free. Apple didn't invest their money in developing iDVD just to have a thousand other companies give it away with DVD drives that take sales away from Apple's bottom line.
If you want a DVD burner, get one from Pioneer($400). If you want encoding software, Apple is more than happy to sell you DVD Studio Pro, which works with any DVD burner($1000). If you want DVD burning software, Roxio has a kickin' version of Toast 5($100). Just don't expect to get freebies when you haven't paid your dues. The above solution will only cost you $1500. A new Mac with DVD burning capability can cost as little as $1000(check ebay or smalldog for an old G4/733 system with a SuperDrive).
Problem #2: Editing video.
You don't need iDVD to edit digital video.
What you really needed was iMovie, which is included for free with every Mac. It's also available for download from Apple.
Then you can burn VCD's with Toast or dump the video back to the PC and burn with whatever PC burning software you like.
Problem #3: Replacement parts.
Apple sells replacement parts, including SuperDrives.
If you wanted one that badly, and wanted it to work with your questionable copy of iDVD, then you should've gotten a "replacement" SuperDrive.
Of course, this wouldn't be cheap, but at least it would work. And you'd have to pay Apple for their product. What a concept.
Problem #4: Entitlement.
You assume Apple owes you something. They don't.
Apple makes the whole widget. If it breaks, get a replacement part. If you just want to upgrade, well, go buy a new widget. It's their business, and it seems to pay rather well. Get over it. They don't owe you a damn thing. Especially not when you're expecting them to give their livelihood away for free.
Problem #5: The DMCA.
The DMCA is a problem.
Of course, in this instance, the DMCA was doing exactly what it was supposed to do - protect a copyrighted work. Software is a copyrighted work, iDVD included. If Apple(who owns the copyright) says that you can't use it that way, then you can't use it that way! It's their decision. There was a validity check in the software. To bypass that without permission from the copyright holder is wrong. (This applies to DVDs too, since you can make a bit-for-bit copy as a backup, and you can still use it on your PC. You can even make a disk image. You just can't break CSS.)
The End...
I'm sorry if this sounds a bit harsh, but it's rather irritating to see all these jackals leeching off of one of the few companies that's actually trying to do something right(or at least different). Support them with your dollars if you want to use their product. If you don't want to pay, don't use it.
Matt
Many products disappear because no one wants them. For starters, the Edsel, New Coke, IBM's PS2 line and Microsoft Bob.
The DMCA and DRM are not mainstream political issues and, most likely, will never be mainstream. That is, elections will not be decided by candidates' stance on this single issue. It just isn't that important to most people.Before someone launches a derogatory rant about the "stupidity" of the American voter, ask yourself why someone with two kids and a mortgage should worry more about copying CD's than about taxes, schools, roads, police protection, etc.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
I personally have a G4 which came with the standard dvd-rom drive, and I upgraded the drive with the pioneer DVR-A04 (the drive iDVD looks for) and it works just fine. So you don't *HAVE* to upgrade to a new mac, you just have to know what to buy.
i did. and, of course, it's very tough to find some fine print that says it requires a super drive.
Yeah, very tough. I mean, you'd have to read the FAQ or the item description at the Apple Store.
From the iDVD FAQ:
When it comes to burning DVDs, iDVD 2 is designed to work only with the iMac and Power Mac G4 computers with SuperDrive. DVD Studio Pro can be used with the SuperDrive as well as with third-party DVD-R drives on Macintosh computers that don't ship with a DVD-R drive.
Can I use iDVD 2 with other CD-R or DVD-R drives?
No. iDVD 2 is designed to work only with the Apple SuperDrive available on certain configurations of iMac and Power Mac G4 computers.
From The Apple Store:
System Requirements
Apple is obviously trying to hide this information by putting it in plain sight, those damn sneaky bastards...
apple has a nifty os & apps just to sell the hardware. just like m$ has a crappy os to sell office software..
Yes, and McDonald's uses free toys to sell Happy meals, and Sports Illustrated uses the swimsuit issue to sell magazine subscriptions, and cereal manufacturers use toys and junk to sell puffed corn and/or colored marshmallows, etc. The difference between all of these (Apple included) and Microsoft is that freebies that people actually want are being used as a competitive advantage instead of monopoly power. And this is the way things are supposed to work - convince me to buy something by offering something I actually want. Apple clearly has it right, because lots of people seem to want to use iDVD. It's not Apple's fault that you went about getting it the wrong way.
I read him a little different than you did, it's not the next big thing, it's survival he's worried about. He has realized is that Apple as a creative platform is doomed if the "Content Cartel" has it's way. He understands that everyone loses when content can not be coppied because it perishes and we are all that much poorer in the future. He also tells us the currently proposed means of achieving the goal of copy protection also furthers goals of entrenched content providers by limiting the number of new entrants through propriatory formats, patents and the DCMA's anti-circumvention clause. What he's put together from all of those broad, bad for everyone laws and methods, is very specific bad news for a company like Apple who's market has primarily been the artisians that create in the first place. He has realized that Apple is getting put on the outside of the "copy enabled" world because Apple represents too large a source of likely competition to the Cartel.
It's hypocritical of Apple to wake up now after so many years of feeding the cartel that will eradicate them. For years Apple has been more expensive than other computer platforms because, in part, they were paying licensing fees for the privalidge of creating works of art in propriatory formats. The time to object was long ago when the deviding lines were made between those who could create and those who could not. By pushing its own patents and copyrights, Apple has strengthened the had that now threatens to crush it.
The obvious solution the author overlooked is free software and formats. He does not even mention them as he wallows in the "artist must be paid" logic that inevitably favors the cartel. From the Rosetta stone to VisiCalc, the authors were paid to create. The conditions the authors worked under were determined by the society they lived in. If we seek to screw others and think it's right to do so, we can expect to be screwed. When we seek to exclude, we create the conditions of our own exclusion.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Why did you take out the PayPal link at the end? Especially in an article about the content cartel dinosaurs. Here it is again:
If you liked this article, go ahead and send the guy a few bucks. You accomplish TWO goals with you donation: 1) you prove that voluntary payments work, and 2) you make a donation to the EFF (you know, the one you've been meaning to make for a long time now).
I sent him a few bucks already.
"Copyright law is only tolerated because it is not applied to the majority of minor offenders"
;-) caches you will start getting sob stories appearing of how Junior was thrown in the cells and fined several grand merely because he couldn't wait to listen to the new -->insert band here<-- album.
I can't for the life of me remember where this quote came from, but it's true. If they start going after every kid with some mp3s of his favourite band instead of concentrating on those with 50GB music, film, pr0n
It's a shame that it will take things like that to initiate the public backlash, but rest assured, it will happen.
We can only hope that it starts before it's too late.