Slashdot Mirror
The Perils of DRM — When Content Providers Die
An anonymous reader writes "If you purchase music or movies online, what happens if the vendor goes out of business? Will you have trouble accessing your content? The question came up recently after HDGiants — provider of high-quality audio and video downloads — filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. A consumer says his content became locked inside his PC. Walmart customers suffered a similar fate last year when the retailer shut down its DRM servers (a decision they reversed after many complaints). And if Vudu dies? Your content may be locked in a proprietary box forever. Time to start buying discs again?"
I never stopped! With a DVD I have "Digital Copy" on EVERY DVD without having to use the stupid number system and ask for permission, and it's legal. I don't have to rely on a content provider to stay in business, and I don't have some company somewhere with self interest telling me what devices I can and can't play back the content on. Well, I do, but I don't have to listen to them.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
...if what you "bought" was shallow crap that you will have lost interest in in six months, who cares if the DRM servers shut down after a year? And that describes 99% of the market.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Maybe if the content providers would have used a sound business model that actually ATTRACTS customers instead of alienating them, they wouldn't have died in the first place?
Funny may not give karma, but +5 Informative never made anyone snort coffee out their nose.
Exactly, why should we do the "right" thing when we are just going to get screwed for it?
An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
http://xkcd.com/488/
The analog hole will always be there for audio and video. Yes, it's a pain to buy a DRM'd song then hook up ye olde tape recorder to your speaker output before the vendor files for chapter 11, but it does work.
I'm more worried about games and other content that are different each time you use them.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
All of those things stop lasting because of your influence upon them or because of your actions. Things do have a limited lifespan, but not an artificial one. A DRM company going under isn't because of your influence - it's because of their action.
Imagine LG going out of business and taking all of our LCDs, TVs, cell phones, etc with them.
From the desk of Captain Obvious: they cannot give you back money if they are defunct.
Every provider of digital content should be required to offer one of two options:
1. DRM-free content only - it is up to the consumer to keep backups of his contents or
2. a life-long guarantee for DRM-protected content. This has to be protected through third-party agreements in case the original provider goes out of business.
Yes, option 2 is costly but nobody has to use DRM in the first place.
Because that shallow crap is yours. It's the right that's at stake here, not the economical value or arts value.
Is it OK if I go through your home and throw away the things I think are crap?
One man's crap, another man's treasure. I don't know whether my daughter in the future would like to have a copy of Lipps Inc. "Funkytown" or Video Kids' "Woodpeckers from Space". But if she does, they're there. And playable -- not subject to whether a company has gone belly up or not.
Today there is no incentive to get rid of DRM (if you listen to RIAA/MPAA).
If you go bankrupt there is no incentive to incur extra costs to disable the DRM on media that your former customers purchased.
And there is no legal ramification for not doing it either.
With time being infinite, the chance of a company going bankrupt is also infinite. Thus the chance of your DRM media paper-weight'ing over time is infinite.
Good luck.
Overall, it looks like some MPAA members are aware that there's a negative impact on sales from fear of losing access if the provider goes out of business. The RIAA, as usual, has no clue and blames it all on piracy. If the US economy totally tanked, with 78% unemployment and nine states declaring themselves People's Republics, and we faced 30,000% hyperinflation, the RIAA would declare all their projected lost sales were due to piracy. When the RIAA finds themselves in the dark, their first step is to insist all the Grues have peg-legs and parrots.
Who is John Cabal?
a) Buy it digitally again, but if you can, make sure it is a copy that is
clean in DRM terms.
b) Buy a hard copy. For anything I buy, this is always my approach. A
physical copy of something has a much higher chance of lasting years, or more
or less indefinitely if I keep it and am able to back it up. I don't do the
micropayment for digital downloads thing, and most likely never will. I'm not
paying tangible funds for something that could get lost in a power surge.
Hard copies are a little more durable, especially if, as I said, they're
backed up.
c) If you want to go the digital route, and a) isn't possible, pirate it.
Although I don't have huge moral problems with piracy, (as I generally feel
that, on balance, most content producers will generally at least break even on
any given pirated work, and usually make a large profit, even with piracy) my
general policy is that if I like something enough to really seek it out, I
will generally like it enough to buy a physical copy from Amazon and give the
artist something for their trouble. If it is an artist who I like a lot, and
who I'd conceivably buy from often, (such as Shpongle, if I had more money)
I'd possibly even write to the artist and ask them if they could make their
wares available from their own site, so that I could be sure that the lion's
share of my money was going directly to them, where I intend it to go.
In some cases (old/obscure stuff) piracy is going to be your only option, as
you may not be able to find the work via retail channels; however again, if
the work in question is something you really value, use piracy as a last
resort. If a creative person produces something which enriches your life,
then in my opinion they deserve to be paid for it.
All those examples cite causes not artificially produced to end the use of your product. If the monitor dies after 5 years, it's (hopefully) not because a conscious decision from the maker. If your tires wear out, it's due to the use, not because Michelin decided to add a rot-fast compound to the rubber. The DRM is a completely different beast. Ask yourself if any of the examples you mentioned are the equivalent of a dead man's switch like DRM is.
"I think it would be a good idea!"
Gandhi, about Internet Security
>There should be some legislation that either forces companies to unlock your DRM'd content or give you back the money.
better idea - 'buyer beware': you buy DRMed stuff, be aware you can get hosed.
Result: nobody buys DRM stuff and it dies out. better to stamp it out than encourage it with 'rescue' legislation.
Translation: Buy DRM and suffer the consequences.
Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
I believe Valve said that they would link a chunk of code that would unlock all your Steam purchases if they ever went out of business.
There will always be a way for companies to get around statements like this that they have made: In bankruptcy, sell the "IP" to someone else.
And at any rate, is there really any evidence we should believe such statements?
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Ah, and therein lies the catch. According to copyright law, and the *AA, they do not sell you a copy of the video. They sell you a limited license to use the copyrighted work. With DRM, that license includes provisions for arbitrarily removing access to that work whenever they want.
ERROR: SIG NOT FOUND (A)bort, (R)etry, (F)ail?:
Millions and millions of people think the music industry sells music at a reasonable price. Where do you think the music industry got all of its money?
Stupid kids spending their parents' money on Britney Spears and Miley Cyrus albums.
If the company evaporates without setting up a way for me to continue to use the things that I paid to use, then the directors of that company are guilty of theft, moreso than pirates, and should be prosecuted accordingly. OTOH, if they are able to set up a good transition, meh.
Just Say No, it's that easy.
We live in a society where the value of man has been reduced to the products he owns and consumes. This is a mantra which has been instilled since childhood and thus we have all been buying consumer products as an extension of our personality since we had money to burn. This is NOT an easy habit to break.
To the All Party Parliamentary Internet Group,
re Digital Rights Management
Gentlepersons,
I am an author in a Commonwealth country, with recent experience in the trade-offs in copyright law and the relevance of digital rights management to publishing and can comment usefully on the subject.
I was the coauthor of a technical book, "Using Samba", published in the United States and Canada by O'Reilly and associates. Despite being made available electronically for no cost, the book was the outstanding seller in its class, and made me substantial royalties.
The History of "Using Samba"
This book was published without any form of explicit DRM, in a format suitable for printing from personal computers, with no limitations on distribution of personal printing, and with a license reserving only commercial printing rights to the publisher.
There was an implicit form of rights management, in that only commercial printers have equipment capable of printing and binding on sufficiently thin paper to make a manageable book: if printed on conventional photocopier paper, the book is over three inches thick. Printing small sections for reference on photocopier paper is perfectly practical, but large-scale printing is not.
This effectively reinforced the reservations in the license: printing for profit is both illegal and impractical, but personal printing, excerpting and copying is unrestricted.
The net result is that the book was widely used as a reference, and the on-line readers bought the physical book for its more convenient form in great numbers. O'Reilly has since published a non-trivial number of other books in this manner.
This experience allows me to speak to the questions the inquiry is interested in:
1. Whether DRM distorts traditional trade-offs in copyright law
An explicit DRM scheme affecting the electronic copies of the book would have negative value. It would in fact restrict the easy distribution of the book, making it less popular and discouraging persons from depending on it. This would lead directly to lessened sales of the printed book, and a reduction in my and my publisher's income.
Copying of the electronic form is encouraged by myself and the publisher, and the printing, use and wide distribution of extracts is desirable, as it causes sales of the entire work.
The author's rights management of ordinary commercial copyright law protects my publisher and I in countries which honor copyright. In those where copyright does not exist or is ignored, the cost of publication and shipping are such as to mitigate any counterfeiting printing attempts: the counterfeiters cannot profit by shipping them outside of the country, and so are limited in the damage they can do.
2. Whether new types of content sharing license (such as Creative Commons or Copyleft) need legislation changes to be effective
Using Samba was successfully published under a free content license, under the copyright regimes of the United States and Canada, without any required or desired change in that law. I do not see a need for changes.
3. How copyright deposit libraries should deal with DRM issues
Copyright and other deposit libraries, such as the National Libraries of the U.K., Canada and the United States should seek and retain unrestricted copies, offering suitable statutory protection to the authors or publishers.
4. How consumers should be protected when DRM systems are discontinued
Upon the expiry of the copyright, the deposit libraries should make the originals available for a nominal fee.
Upon the failure or discontinuance of a DRM scheme, the publishers should retain the option of republishing under a different scheme under ordinary copyright law. On cessation of publication, the co
davecb@spamcop.net
Just boycott the shit. Problem solved. Serious, just don't buy it. I don't. Organize a boycott. Someone with popularity and charisma start a campaign. Start educating the ignorant masses that they are being raped, and that the rape will never end.
Those of you who see what is going on - what are you doing about it? Do you buy STEAM, iTunes, and all the rest of the DRM's crapola out there? If so, YOU ARE the problem. Do you email, write, or phone the companies responsible to bitch and bellyache every time something doesn't work the way you want it to? If not, YOU ARE the problem.
It certainly isn't fair that some of you give your money to the rapists, then come to forums like this to whine about how unfair it is. Don't unload on slashdot, or the myriad of other forums where people vent. Call the bastards who sold you garbage, and bitch. And, stop giving them your money. Why on earth do you give a man money, so that he can sit beside the pool at his mansion with his buddies, dreaming up new ways to rip you off, while the maid fetches another round of drinks?
Boycott all of them. MPAA, RIAA, all of them. Don't buy ANYTHING that has DRM.
Write your congressman, write your senator, write the White House. I have fired off no less than three emails to Obama regarding "digital rights" since he was elected. If 200 million more Americans were to do the same, we would get his attention. Hell, if only 10 million Americans flooded his mail box with concerns over DRM and other infringements on our rights, he would have to take notice.
Start talking and acting to break the monopolies that RIAA and freinds have. Stop bitching. Stop sending them your money.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Or, you can get a gun.
What good's a gun going to do if he's not there when the thieves come?