Slashdot Mirror
Federal Trade Commission To Scrutinize DRM
Ars Technica reports that the FTC is getting ready to take a hard look at gaming DRM, setting up a town hall meeting to be held on March 25th. They're currently recruiting panelists, and they say the meeting will, in part, "address the need to improve disclosures to consumers about DRM limitations." The controversy over DRM came to a head in 2008 with the release of Spore and the multiple subsequent class-action lawsuits focusing on the SecuROM software that came with the game. Ars Technica says the town hall meeting will also look at "legal issues surrounding DRM" and "the potential need for government involvement to protect consumers."
These kind of stories swing both ways, and we've had literally dozens of "Finally the pendulum swings the other way moments" that have amounted to nothing more than blips across the radar... But I can't help but optimistically wonder if this is the start of a trend fighting back against corporate abuse of us, the customer? For several years now, I (and probably you) have been inured to new stories about corporation X doing new thing Y to screw customer z, and the news story hasn't even batted an eyelash because we're not surprised. Now the RIAA is backpedaling, and DRM is getting an appropriate scrutinizing. =) Its a good start to 2009!
Video games are by far the worst candidate for this discussion imho.
There is very little case law protecting consumer fair use with video games, as compared with audio and video.
This is a heavy bet on weak prospects.
Assuming the FTC does determine a need is required for video games, this will provide definitive and hefty leverage to expand it to music and video media.
If it does not, and it's a high likelihood the FTC determines it does not, it will be MUCH harder to press the issue on, for instance, the fact that blu-ray media will black peoples' screens at random due to undocumented HDCP issues.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
Truly a case of Uncle Sam's left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing, considering the recent creation of a Copyright Czar.
At least Apple is moving in the right direction, announcing yesterday that it will drop DRM from it's tracks.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4811674a28.html (and elsewhere)
The problem with socialism is that they always run out of other people's money. - Margaret Thatcher
I'm sure the government knows exactly what its doing. They will have a bunch of town hall meetings, do a lot of research and studies, collect a lot of money from large corporations and then come up with a centralized DRM server that everyone will be required by law to use.
http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/12/20/178259
Go read it. Seriously. The author has many good point, and this panel only highlights the points he makes.
The /. comments on this article are spot on, in the sense that most of them are knee-jerk reactions predicted all along the article. Sad.
At the very least, the FTC should make it illegal to advertise any product infected with DRM as a "sale" as opposed to a "rental" or "lease". As it's impossible to own them, that's false advertising.
Yes, that means that everyone from Wal-Mart to the local mom-and-pop would have to change their advertising, in-store displays, and receipt printouts. That's a problem for them to work out with their suppliers, though.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
When I hear that the Government wants to look into something to protect the Consumer I know it's going to be bend over time for the Consumer as the Government gets together with Business to screw us all over. DRM and all of that crap needs to go away but it won't, it'll get the government gloss over to mollify those of us who are angry, they'll give it a better Orwellian name and call it a day.
Enjoy your Karma, after all you earned it. Feel your Karma Joe, feel it burn.
I think you could make the argument that a recession makes for extreme competition, and its quite likely that it could turn out that DRM simply has to be dropped because a) it requires more money to actually DRM enable a product, particularly in testing, and b) there might be enough of a critical mass of consumers shopping for content based on the absence of DRM.
We won't really have a complete victory, though, until we see Microsoft drop entering those silly license key numbers for its products.
This is my sig.
Lately that's meant that industry heavies are busy trying to stuff the panel with their own 'experts', doesn't it?
And then three months after this is all done with, we'll start seeing stories about how a quarter of the panelists have been discovered as previously employed by one of the RIAA's shadow groups, in addition to several other panelists receipt of airline tickets to hong kong (as well as an all-expenses paid week there for a meeting) as well as other weakly disguised "gifts" being scrutinized.
What amazes me is they continue to get away with this same old game, time and time again. This wouldn't be a problem if the followup had some teeth to it. What do you do when this all comes to light after the event? Remove them from the panel? Fat lot of good that does after they've "made their recommendations" etc.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
There is very little case law protecting consumer fair use with video games, as compared with audio and video.
I'd have thought that was an argument in favour of starting with video games.
OK, so all DRM is bad, but the real horror stories (malware, limited installs, mandatory internet connections) have been with games.
The Spore case is a particularly clear example of DRM pissing off legitimate consumers while failing to deter (and possibly encouraging) large-scale illicit copying.
Also, whereas issues with Audio/Video DRM are normally to do with caselaw-based "fair use" rights such as format-shifting, the problems with video game DRM have been more fundamental "fitness for purpose" variety. I'm not defending audio/video DRM, but pragmatically speaking, audio DRM seems to be dying off by itself and "your lousy game broke my perfectly standard PC" is going to get more public sympathy than "why can't I watch HD content on Linux?".
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
Bit I want to purchase it. I want the game and the publisher wants my money. I just don't want it bundled with the DRM. We're both losing out here!
But if I complain, and if they listen, and they release without DRM, we'll both be richer! Win, win!
What does the MAFIAA have to do with gaming DRM?
When Windows XP was released, some big customers were worried about depending on an external instance for authorization.
Microsoft appeased them by releasing the "Corporate Edition" that didn't require remote authorization.
Guess what happened?
The "Corporate Edition" got pirated. Once again, those who pirate the software are bothered less than legitimate customers...
C - the footgun of programming languages
FAIL.
I bought Game X. I installed Game X. I consented to Game X I never knew that I was also installing SecureROM. It never tells you on the package nor in the EULA nor in the installer. That's unauthorized computer usage. That's completely criminal.
Consenting to something does not mean I'm consenting to everything.
I find being offended by me offensive.
That is because you have been desensitized to the abuse your received.
About a week after my son's second birthday, I formatted his hard drive and gave him a copy of Ubuntu Linux. He sat down and installed his OS with no help and no problems. You, presumably a full grown adult, had to call the manufacturer to get help installing your OS. You were reduced to a lower level of competency than a two year old child.
The reason that you could not accomplish the same task as a 2 year old must be attributed one of the two factors that was different. 1) The person doing the install. Or 2) The OS being installed.
Now, while I like to think that my kid is exceptionally smart, I don't for a second believe that your intelligence is less than a 2 year old. That leaves the fact that you did have a problem with the software, and just didn't realize it.