Slashdot Mirror


When Would You Accept DRM?

twigles asks: "Following on the heels of Apple closing DVD Jon's end run around its DRM and a British TV station offering DRM'd downloads it seems fair to ask, what DRM would you accept as a consumer? Personally, I take the view that if a song, movie, book, etc. is DRM'd then it isn't truly mine. On the other hand, if a particular piece of digital media is priced correctly (a la' rental fee) would that be satisfactory, or do you feel that DRM in any form is ridiculous?"

5 of 1,288 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Never by mirko · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yes, which is the reason why it has to be reflected upon before it reaches the commercial level.
    BEcause of the Internet, we don't need a comemrcial circuit, we need communication aver what is being made.
    That's why I created GNUArt: To give creators a possibility to get their stuff circulating with no restrictions other than ensuring their contribution would remain known as theirs.
    Now, if the gallery gained popularity it would help benevolents distributing their creations.

    --
    Trolling using another account since 2005.
  2. Re:Yes by optimus2861 · · Score: 5, Informative
    If you're claiming you own the intangible music encoded on that CD or DVD, you're a hypocrite. You just claimed that it can't be owned.

    He's not a hyprocrite; he's exactly right. You can't own music. You can't own the words in a book. You can't own a movie. You can own copies of all those things, and/or you can own the copyright on all those things. When I buy a DVD, I own the DVD, and I own the copy of the content on that DVD. What I do not own is the copyright on that content. The ownership of the two is distinct, and an interest in one does not in any way affect an interest in the other. Just read section 202 of US copyright law:

    202. Ownership of copyright as distinct from ownership of material object

    Ownership of a copyright, or of any of the exclusive rights under a copyright, is distinct from ownership of any material object in which the work is embodied. Transfer of ownership of any material object, including the copy or phonorecord in which the work is first fixed, does not of itself convey any rights in the copyrighted work embodied in the object; nor, in the absence of an agreement, does transfer of ownership of a copyright or of any exclusive rights under a copyright convey property rights in any material object.

  3. Re:Never by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Informative

    You know why there is piracy?Because the big labels screw their customers out of $20+ for a piece of plastic while they screw the artist and through them less than a dollar of it,if anything. I've been their.I watched as a buddies band got screwed and the band members bankrupted because after the label got done with "creative bookkeeping" they handed them a bill for $5000!They paid for the album themselves,Got NO promotion from the label,stayed in fleabag hotels,And sold out every club they played.I watched the local record shops have to restock THREE times because they couldn't keep their albums on the shelves and i know they were doing just as good elsewhere because i toured with the with my former band. The bill had things like "misc promo fees" and "creative artist devlopment" WTF?They fought for three years and never saw a dime!I will care about the poor theiving record and movie companies when it's a cold day in hell!How can you care about a business that whole goal in life is to screw everyone they come in contact with?You sir,Are a dumb@ss.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  4. Re:Never by redheaded_stepchild · · Score: 4, Informative

    Technically, the license of use on the older style of media was exactly the same as what they're trying to do with DRM. They simply didn't have any useful way of stopping you from doing what you wanted. Don't get me wrong, I'm against DRM, but don't try to kid yourself that you ever truly 'owned' the content on your older stuff, either. You were buying licensed content, with all the crap TOU we're dealing with now. If they wanted to, they could have gone after you for every cassette or VHS tape you ever copied. What stopped them was cost/benefit. The only ones who ever got busted were people doing it as large operations. So, it really comes down to more of a misunderstanding about what you had then and what you're getting now. Again, I hate DRM, but you're not helping anyone with this rhetoric.

    --
    Don't use the Troll mod just because you disagree with me.
  5. Re:Never by defile · · Score: 4, Informative

    Don't be so sure of that.

    From DNA Lounge blog:

    In case you were looking for more reasons to hate ASCAP, there's this article about Skip's Tavern here in San Francisco. It's a bar that has live music, with bands who play only original songs. ASCAP came to them and said, "you have bands, and so they must be playing songs on which ASCAP controls the copyright! Pay us $800/year." The bar owner asked for evidence that there was any copyright infringement; in response, ASCAP sued him. They were unwilling to negotiate, so in response, he's no longer doing live music at all.