Slashdot Mirror
The History of Hacking DRM
phaedo00 writes "Ars Technica writer Nate Anderson has penned an in-depth look into past DRM-crackings and what the future looks like for people who are vehemently anti-DRM: 'Like a creeping fog, DRM smothers more and more media in its clammy embrace, but the sun still shines down on isolated patches of the landscape. This isn't always due to the decisions of corporate executives; often it's the work of hackers who devote considerable skill to cracking the digital locks that guard everything from DVDs to e-books. Their reasons are complicated and range from the philosophical to the criminal, but their goals are the same: no more DRM.'"
"I know several people who are pro-drm...they are joe consumer incarnate. They don't follow the issues, they are unaware that their is even any type of debate over this subject"
And I am a technical proponent of DRM.
Do I like it? Fuck no. It gets in my way. Its annoying. I occasionally lose data.
And who do I blame?
The Fucking Information Wants To Be Free internet-fuckwad cabal.
I don't blame the companies. I have a well known name in the type of software I put out and I've generally put out my works at lower than the 'professional' packages -- without protection. Who's work do I find on eBay? Mine or the big guy? I'm more likely to get ripped than the big guy because I only charged $30 for my stuff where the other guy is selling theirs for $130 -- I've heard pirates tell me that its not like its that big of a deal because its not 'professional' software (and the only difference is the price).
Gotta tell you, the last upgrade I put out with DRM on it -- sales increased 400%. Its not that big of a market to attract the crackers, and by the time they get around to it, I'll have moved on to another system of DRM (I could care less if someone is trading an older package...too far down the long tail for my needs).
If it weren't for the whole crowd screaming Software Piracy Is Not Theft, I'd be totally for unDRM'd software. My old software is put out free and I'm starting to give away the source to software that isn't too close to the current code base...but until a maturity comes over software users, I'm totally pro-DRM.
"Failed market" is an economic term. Informally it means a market where the usual workings have broken down for some reason so it's no longer operating efficiently.
For instance operating systems are a failed market because network effects make it economically unviable to break the Windows monopoly.
In the absence of copyright (and a way to practically enforce it - DRM), creative works would be a failed market because supply is infinite, therefore pushing prices down to zero. The creator of the creative work gets nothing in return for production of that good so, the market has failed.
Failed markets are very common. A market is quite a fragile thing, which is why we have lots of regulation designed to protect it and bracket it (like anti-trust law). I would say many of the more stupid errors of the 20th century were due to inappropriate application of a market, which then failed .... the UK rail privatisation is a good example of that.
Failed markets aren't necessarily unprofitable. In the case of failed DRM then the 'failed market' becomes unprofitable in the classical sense because nobody makes any money. In the case of operating systems it's obviously very profitable for the dominant monopoly.