Today Is International Day Against DRM

jrepin writes "Digital restrictions management (DRM) creates damaged goods that users cannot control or use freely. It requires users to give-up control of their computers and restricts access to digital data and media. Device manufacturers and corporate copyrights holders have already been massively infecting their products with user-hostile DRM. Tablets, mobile phones and other minicomputers are sold with numerous restrictions embedded that cripple users freedom. The proposal at table in W3C to put DRM into HTML goes even further. Fight it: use today's today is international Day Against DRM, so spread the word and make yourself heard!" The EFF suggests making every day a day against DRM.

Comments

I remember when google

[Anonymous Coward]

would have made a front page image for something like this...
 
crickets

Re: I remember when google

[Anonymous Coward]

Well it sounds like they were drunk when they made it up colluding rights to restrictions har very clever and what is "use today's today is" what? Anyway. Tis true though. Don't digitally restrict my music and wares man (really). Top Romulan

Re: I remember when google

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm pretty sure you were drunk when you wrote that.

Re:I remember when google

[sticks_us]

Agreed. Google have turned into major scumbags on this.

It's a testament to the power of corporate brainwashing ("Do no evil! Lol") that most "geeks" give them a pass on this and the rest of their shenanigans.

http://www.geek.com/microsoft/google-netflix-and-microsoft-propose-drm-for-html5-1537974/

If we can put an end to DRM

[fustakrakich]

Just think of all the other amazing things we could do.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

If you don't like a product with DRM, don't buy it.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Bigby]

There is nothing wrong with DRM. Personally, I think it is not a good idea for music or games. Those are things that should exist perpetually and for your own personal use.

However, it is short sighted to say that DRM should not exist. I brought this up in the previous DRM related thread, but people don't think of its best possible uses.

- When a doctor is sharing your medical information to another doctor, wouldn't you want control over when/where that medical information can be viewed? Wouldn't you want it to self destruct?

- When you work under SEC rules and have to provide your financial statements to management for compliance, wouldn't you want control over where/when those can be viewed?

Yes, it is a bad idea to treat your customers like thieves. But it isn't a bad idea when 3rd parties are distributing your private information to other 3rd parties.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

And/Or get the t-shirt.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Krojack]

And become Ted Kaczynski v2.0 in the process. Pretty much every electronic device will have some sort of DRM in it soon if it doesn't already.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[gQuigs]

There are legitimate uses of similar technologies for some of the above purposes, INSIDE of a company/government/or similar.

When you get to 3rd parties using DRM it completely breaks down. DRM is not the right tactic there. I don't want an intricate mess of 3rd parties restricting other 3rd parties in what they can do. That is a security nightmare.

> Wouldn't you want it to self destruct?
No. How would you do that? Embed executable code in my medical records? Once someone has my medical records I would prefer assuming that they have them (could have taken screen shots or with an actual camera). Auditing is used quite effectively to find who accessed medical records and fire them.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[femtobyte]

Except, in your examples, existing regulatory/enforcement methods seem to work reasonably well already (like HIPAA regulations). Unlike mass media content being sold to (and potentially copied by) zillions of people, it's pretty trivial to determine who is responsible when your medical records show up on the Pirate Bay. Medical and financial professionals might want to build automated compliance safeguards into their own computer systems to, e.g., automatically delete expired "borrowed" files --- but, unlike DRM, such systems can be *entirely under the control of the computer user* (not forced on them by third parties).

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't buy Televisions from Westinghouse. They're using DRM to restrict over-the-air broadcast reception - the primary purpose of a TV! You have to get a special code from them just to use your TV.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[cellocgw]

However, it is short sighted to say that DRM should not exist.

- When a doctor is sharing your medical information to another doctor, wouldn't you want control over when/where that medical information can be viewed?

I think you're confusing encryption (a Good Thing) with DRM (a Bad Thing). If encrypted, only authorized doctors would have the decryption key. They can access the data when needed. If DRM'd , the moment the controlling body -- think online gaming server -- dies or is obsoleted, no doctor will ever again be able to access your records. Not an ideal situation.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[fustakrakich]

No, I find that circumvention is the more innovative approach and how real progress is made.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't see why either one of those problems aren't solved by normal mandatory access control schemes. Simple token based authentication. Applying DRM would mean you'd try to prevent your doctor from being able to print your record to the printer, or copy and paste it to a word document, or screen shot it. DRM isn't access control, its about context and medium. It doesn't make sense to and prevent your doctor from trying to change the medium your health record is presented to him in.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[mrchaotica]

Including cars! (Your car's ECU is encrypted to try to prevent non-dealer mechanics from working on it.)

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[mrchaotica]

DRM, by definition, means that the owner [of the device] does not have control. This is always inherently a bad thing!

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[dragon-file]

- When a doctor is sharing your medical information to another doctor, wouldn't you want control over when/where that medical information can be viewed? Wouldn't you want it to self destruct?

I believe the doctors sharing information with each other is what happens when one expert consults another expert in their field. Usually this is a good this as two bright minds are usually better than one and If i had some sort of cancer, you can bet your ass I would not mind my doctor sharing information. Not if it saves my life.

By that logic if I was a cocaine addict and one of my friends found out and I told them not to tell anyone and they don't, then no one intervenes, I dont get any help and one day said friend finds me dead in the bath tub from ODing. Sure it would suck if the told my folks and I went to my house to find an army of people trying to get me to stop doing drugs. I would be pissed at my friend but I would learn to get over because they saved my life.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Errol backfiring]

When a doctor is sharing your medical information to another doctor, wouldn't you want control over when/where that medical information can be viewed? Wouldn't you want it to self destruct?

Hell no, imagine all the medical staff who are kept in the dark because time is of essence and the DRM key is not there. Imagine your data leaked in DRM'ed format, so every hacker can have a go at it. Leaking sensitive information is a completely separate problem. DRM is just an envelope. A problematic one for whoever means good, and a laughable one for whoever means bad. Sensitive information should not be leaked PERIOD. Not DRM'ed, not auto-destructing (if you believe that is possible). DRM is no answer to leaks or security issues.

When you work under SEC rules and have to provide your financial statements to management for compliance, wouldn't you want control over where/when those can be viewed?

Off course not. Management is usually digitally challenged, so you can trust management to treat keys in the worst possible fashion imaginable. So they probably cannot read it anyway AND have published the key in a random social network site before you even know there is a key. If you cannot trust management to deal with sensitive information, you have a completely different problem. DRM will not help you there either. The only thing DRM does is break and annoy by design.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Bigby]

Wouldn't you rather block it from being a possibility? Once your records get out, like the Internet, it will never disappear.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Bigby]

I am not confusing them. I work with encryption daily. And you can't restrict who or when something is decrypted with simple encryption/decryption. The point of using DRM in that case is to require 3 variables to decrypt; a key, a timeframe, and a piece of hardware. Even if you use just the 1st two, you require DRM.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

However, it is short sighted to say that DRM should not exist.

- When a doctor is sharing your medical information to another doctor, wouldn't you want control over when/where that medical information can be viewed?

I think you're confusing encryption (a Good Thing) with DRM (a Bad Thing). If encrypted, only authorized doctors would have the decryption key. They can access the data when needed. If DRM'd , the moment the controlling body -- think online gaming server -- dies or is obsoleted, no doctor will ever again be able to access your records. Not an ideal situation.

DRM is encryption + key distribution model.

You can't say that encrypting files and controlling who gets the keys is good without endorsing DRM (because that's exactly what DRM is). In your example the "server" is the entity that makes sure when a doctor get's their licensee revoked due to malpractice they also loose the ability to decrypt you medical records. An alternative system might have all medical imaging devices output encrypted data, which can only be decrypted by dedicated medical image viewing stations (which have the keys pre-loaded), which is exactly how DVD region encoding works.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Runaway1956]

No mod points - this should be +5 insightful.

The only DRM'd item I own, is a dumb phone. It's almost a necessity that I carry a phone, but I'll be damned before I pay anyone $500 or more for a DRM'd piece of hardware. If I EVER buy a smart phone, it will be cyanogen modded pretty damned quick.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Bigby]

You are simply arguing that it is a good thing for people to do with your records as they please. Maybe not in the legal sense, but in the literal sense. A law isn't going to stop a doctor from divulging your personal records to someone you don't want them to. It only stands to try and prevent through the prospect of punishment. DRM could prevent it altogether.

Also, you may personally feel like any doctor can share your info. But what is stopping them from sharing it with others? And what about other people that want it to be more restrictive? Maybe your medical records can be set up with complete freedom to copy.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not seeing where DRM comes in.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Bigby]

You have valid points...

By auto-destruction, I wasn't using it in a literal sense. I was talking about the ability for the possibility of decryption to expire. Where the creator can define the computer equivalent to a literal self destruct. Obviously not as good, but close...

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[GameboyRMH]

Only true for some cars made in the last few years.

Good thing new cars are heavy and ugly as hell or I'd be really upset about it.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[GameboyRMH]

What!? No, the DRM-free lifestyle is great, you become the millionaire playboy of the digital world!

Arr matey, grab yer torrent client and come aboard!

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[GameboyRMH]

- When a doctor is sharing your medical information to another doctor, wouldn't you want control over when/where that medical information can be viewed? Wouldn't you want it to self destruct?

- When you work under SEC rules and have to provide your financial statements to management for compliance, wouldn't you want control over where/when those can be viewed?

I would absolutely not want DRM on either of these things, it's the wrong solution. What you're looking for here is encryption.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Culture20]

"DRM Does not work that way!!" - Morbo (paraphrased)

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[nabsltd]

Don't buy Televisions from Westinghouse. They're using DRM to restrict over-the-air broadcast reception - the primary purpose of a TV! You have to get a special code from them just to use your TV.

This is one of the very few cases where DRM benefits the consumer, as it keeps the price of the TV lower. Westinghouse does this so that they only have to pay patent royalties for the tuner technology if the tuner is actually used.

Once the tuner is activated, it is permanent until a complete reset of the TV. Even with a reset, the same code will re-activate the tuner, as it is only tied to the serial number. So, yeah, it's a very weak form of DRM, but it's not much of a problem as far as real world use is concerned.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[femtobyte]

(a) if the existing enforcement regime is already blocking these events (so leaks are rare or unheard of), then "don't fix what ain't broke"
(b) by adding restrictions, I may be hindering my doctors from doing things I'd want them to --- "sorry, the radiologist couldn't read your scans; can you re-send the file with permissions for the radiology department, and $400 for our lost hour of troubleshooting?"
(c) by encouraging DRM to protect "my" data, I'm also encouraging others to do the same against me --- they won't be in control of their computers, and I won't be in control of mine. I'd rather protect other people's freedoms (even admitting the possibility they might do wrong) to protect my own.

DRM is the "Pascal's Wager" approach to security. For an infinitesimal chance of stopping "really bad" hypothetical things from happening (which may just be "unpleasant," not "really bad"), how much will you cripple your real ability to work?

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[nabsltd]

And you can't restrict who or when something is decrypted with simple encryption/decryption.

And, DRM doesn't solve this problem, either, as DVDs, Blu-Rays, and Amazon e-books all show.

The point of using DRM in that case is to require 3 variables to decrypt; a key, a timeframe, and a piece of hardware. Even if you use just the 1st two, you require DRM.

What you are saying is that DRM is designed to prevent someone who has access to the decryption key from decypting except if "authorized". If you "work with encryption daily", you would see why it is impossible for DRM to ever restrict access to someone who really wants it. Yes, it will stop casual people, but it will never actually protect your data. In fact, because the decryption key is easily available, DRM actually makes it less likely that your data will remain protected.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Sloppy]

When a doctor is sharing your medical information to another doctor, wouldn't you want control over when/where that medical information can be viewed? Wouldn't you want it to self destruct?

You're describing some kind of science fiction fantasy, not DRM. DRM, as we currently know it today, means that neither your own doctor or the other doctor, is able to view the medical information at all, unless they pay some third party (not you) for some kind of tech license, and passes that cost on to you. And then the licensing body (not you) decides what can be done with the information.

If we had DRMed medical records, every patient would have to ask their doctor to store a second copy of all the records, outside of the broken DRM system, so that the information would actually be accessible when it's needed.

The DRM fantasy industry has had ample opportunity to come up with a non-stupid DRM scheme. They have a 100% failure rate: EVERY SINGLE TIME that DRM has been used, it has interfered with customers and providing incentive for them to cut off revenue, and there have been only a few (edge!) cases (DivX) where the DRM prevented misuses. It's all expense and never provides any benefit. Every time. If DRM failed only 99% of the time, maybe we could chalk it up to growing pains, but right now all evidence points to it being a complete scam.

Imagine an industry where, after a few decades and many many products, 100% of the time it turned out to be fraud. DRM is right up there with astrology. That's how seriously we should take it, and it is an outrage that our government is for it, rather than neutral toward it (the conservative, pre-DMCA approach) or outlawing it (the progressive approach).

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[nabsltd]

By auto-destruction, I wasn't using it in a literal sense. I was talking about the ability for the possibility of decryption to expire.

Which is impossible unless the data is actually destroyed, in which case nobody has access to it anymore. I don't think I want my medical records unavailable to anybody just because the consulting doctor got delayed, or somebody entered the wrong password too many times.

But, as long as the data is stored somewhere, it can be decrypted (since the key is available), even if the "DRM system" isn't the one to do the decrypting. Since no DRM system has ever survived a thorough attack (some haven't been cracked because nobody cared enough to bother), I can't understand why anybody would suggest using DRM to try to ensure that data doesn't get revealed.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[bestalexguy]

I think you're confusing encryption (a Good Thing) with DRM (a Bad Thing). If encrypted, only authorized doctors would have the decryption key. They can access the data when needed. If DRM'd , the moment the controlling body -- think online gaming server -- dies or is obsoleted, no doctor will ever again be able to access your records. Not an ideal situation.

I think you're confusing a situation in which the sender trusts the receiver blindly (encryption is OK) with another when the common goal is partial.

"Doc, if you want to sell my MRI to Evilpharm at least make an effort and rip my MKV"

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[femtobyte]

DRM could prevent it altogether.

Given the track record of past DRM schemes (100% failure rate), that's a pretty iffy claim. You could also say "DRM could give you a pony that farts solid gold rainbows --- why don't you want DRM?"

But what is stopping them from sharing it with others?

The doctor being a professional. If that fails, regulations and enforcement of those regulations. But, if your doctor is really out to harm you --- you're pretty much screwed anyway. Why not go to a doctor who you trust to do their job appropriately, without you micro-managing their every action?

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Sloppy]

A law isn't going to stop a doctor from divulging your personal records to someone you don't want them to. It only stands to try and prevent through the prospect of punishment. DRM could prevent it altogether.

No, it can't. If the doctor wishes to nefariously leak the information, then the DRM will not stop him. Worst case, he can take a photograph of the screen (not that it's likely to require anything so extreme). He can read it aloud while another person (or robot) in the room listens.

If DRM actually solved some kind of problem, you could maybe make a case that the enormous costs of it were balanced by .. something. You could say that it's worth it to use force against doctors to require them to use crippled (yet strangely more expensive) computers which serve a higher agenda (no leakage) than the computer owner's agenda. But after a few decades of the scammers trying to come up with a working application, they still don't have even a demo!

This is like saying taxpayers ought to be forced to pay astrologers, before you have shown evidence that astrology works. Show the evidence that astrology might not be bullshit (you don't need to prove anything, just provide some evidence), and then we can have the cost/benefit debate. Right now, it's nothing-for-something, an objectively stupid tradeoff where breaking even is the best possible scenario, and most paths lead to loss.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem with DRM is not whether it is 'nice'. The problem with DRM is that the only way to actually enforce it is to make sure that no one in the world has unmonitored access to a computer.

That's not whiny libertarian "don't steal my guns" crap - that's a basic observation of the definition of "turing complete." At the end of the day, you can allow people to use computers without constant supervision and external contol, or you can have DRM that actually works. But the two concepts are, by definition, incompatible.

The "third-parties will access your private data" concern is a red-herring, because DRM is not the same as access permissions. My doctor is supposed to have access to my medical records, my banker is not. If my banker breaks into my doctor's network, or my doctor decides to sell my medical records to a drug company, we can deal with them as criminals and mitigate their crimes.

The last thing we need is a system that might decide that my nurse is up to no good and delete my medical records the day I show up in the emergency room and have a 15 minute window between life and death, which is the exactly the kind of technical difficulty you are asking for with the ideas you proposed. As a systems administrator, I'd strongly encourage you not to ask for that problem.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a huge difference between implementing DRM and only implementing DRM. That is, your TV costs a little extra because it contains a Netflix client which implements DRM, but it also plays non-HDCP content fed to it through the HDMI port, or can maybe play files off a USB drive. So you can buy a non-DRM video (or pirate DRMed videos) and play it on your TV, and it'll work, even through the manufacturer bought into DRM. That's distasteful, but not really a serious problem.

When most people say they "don't buy DRM" they generally mean the don't buy DRMed media (or software). The devices would benefit from being freed of DRM too, but at least they still work with normal content. And being able to work with normal content is what's important. If there's some additional parasitic cost, it's bearable, as long as in the end, you still have a working system. And the device can work during a transition from DRM back to normal. Don't underestimate that. There are plenty of people who already bought some DRMed media who maybe don't buy any more, and they might want their old media to keep working before they get around to obtaining (whether legally or not) repaired DRM-free copies of it.

That's why it'd be ok to buy a Blu-Ray player, as long as it can play something other than Blu-Rays. As long as it's good for something, then you can just compare the value of the something to whatever the pricetag is. I know a guy who plays GoT on his Blu-Ray player, because it's the only thing he has, that'll play the .mkv files that I give him every week. As long as he doesn't buy Blu-Ray discs anymore (that would be self-defeating), then some day maybe HBO can sell him the .mkv files that he currently has to get for free, and there's a theoretical everyone-wins path forward.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[blahplusplus]

"If you don't like a product with DRM, don't buy it."

Problem is most people buying products are addicts. Diablo 3 and starcraft 2 are a case in point.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[houghi]

When a doctor is sharing your medical information to another doctor, wouldn't you want control over when/where that medical information can be viewed? Wouldn't you want it to self destruct?

No. I would not want it to be self destruct. I would want there to be rules and punishment if he gives it to the wrong people.

When you work under SEC rules and have to provide your financial statements to management for compliance, wouldn't you want control over where/when those can be viewed?

Yes and I want people to be punished if they disrespect the rules.
With the examples that you give, you are looking for a technical solution for a social problem. And that is why DRM will not work.

When I was a wee boy, I counted some sweets to see if my sister had not stolen anything. My mother asked what I was doing and I told her. She then said the wisest thing in the world: "Counted sheep are eaten by wolves too."

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Ravaldy]

Encryption has nothing to do with DRM other than it can be used as part of securing DRM. BigBy's comments are fine and accurate in my opinion. DRM stands for content you don't control. If you don't control it you can't easily transfer it or copy it.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Ravaldy]

I think you're just trying to twist words and meaning of what he's saying.

Encryption prevents 99% of people from stealing data the same way DRM prevents 99% of people from accessing piracy. If you didn't buy BF3, then you didn't get to play BF3 online. And if you did, your experience was CRAPPY to say the least. I would say that DRM accomplished exactly what they meant it to in the case of games.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[femtobyte]

So, DRM can "benefit" the consumer --- so long as you first carefully arrange to artificially set up a problem to "solve" (price of the TV being higher despite the functional and non-functional TVs being *exactly the same* in hardware, with one artificial limitation set). Wow, if we can artificially create a lot more problems, think about how many consumer benefits we could generate by fixing them!

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[MobyDisk]

You don't need to be online to read medical records. That kind of DRM isn't appropriate. And DRM doesn't prevent anyone from accessing piracy, except honest people who choose not to do it.

It sounds like you have a proposed use case for DRM on medical records. I'm not sure it is even possible to do what you suggest, or even a good idea to do so. But flesh out the idea and include some technical details or all you will get is snarky attacks on it.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[bzipitidoo]

You aren't aware that you don't own medical records about you? Your doctors and hospitals own that. Nor do you own arrest and conviction records about you. The public owns that. And should own that.

What's wrong with doctors sharing info about their patients among themselves? They absolutely have to do that, to do their jobs! In addition to the permissions they already have to seek, you want to force your doctors to go through a lengthy technical process to get permission every single time they need to access their records about you? Still want to, if you have to pay for the time it takes them to do that? Maybe you'd also like to have them sit through unskippable FBI warnings about medical malpractice and HIPAA laws, and the like, every time they need to access records about you? What if all the local doctors decided to boycott you? If you demand all that, I hope my doctor wouldn't accept you as a patient!

DRM doesn't prevent anything. It's a technical attempt to force us all to not participate in highly beneficial natural workings of the universe, so that these workings can be reserved for a privileged few. These privileged dangle before us all the prospects of becoming one of them, to keep us hoping. For almost everyone, it's a lie, and an entirely too seductive one, to judge from the number of people who fall for it. Lot of people wistfully hope to become the next J. K. Rowling, or Justin Bieber, refusing to face up to the extreme odds against it, particularly for those who lack the talent and drive. Lotteries, bad as they are, are a better deal than that. At least you don't have to work yourself to death to buy a few lottery tickets.

Sharing is a fact of nature, and cannot be stopped by technical means, or by legal means. Nor should we or do we want sharing prevented. We engage in this activity known as "education" in which we freely share our knowledge with our children, and not only out of pure altruism, but for very good practical reasons, such as the functioning of Democracy. We should not meekly submit to this ugly vision of fascist control of every scrap of information.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[david_thornley]

DRM is encryption + key distribution model.

However, it's a very specific kind of key distribution model, in which the user has only limited use of the key (and typically also the plaintext). That's a sufficiently common and distinctive mode to deserve its own name. Its typical use case is to allow the user to use the data in some form without being able to copy it effectively. That's different from normal crypto, which use cases are typically authentication and preventing eavesdropping.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[david_thornley]

No, it isn't always a bad thing, just most of the time. There are uses.

Certification: a device may be certified for some purpose, no changes allowed. The ability to change the software is basically the ability to break the device, which you really don't want.

Liability: being unable to do something may mean you aren't liable for something bad that happens.

Allowing some functionality in a screwy world: there was an example in one comment about a television sold with the tuner disabled, so that it could be sold for less money. Similarly, some companies won't sell products like videos in a non-DRMed format, and being able to access those is often a good thing. This category could be eliminated if the world was more sensible, but changing the world here is a very long-term and uncertain project, while accepting DRM is a certain and very short-term solution. Sad but true.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[msoftsucks]

Under HIPAA and other electronic health records laws and initiatives, your medical records do not belong to you, and you have a very small say so in what happens to them. There are laws that dictate how long a doctor must keep your records on file. The direction of the healthcare industry is to move towards a clearinghouse model for medical records. It will be the clearinghouse who dictates who has access and to their final disposition. Obamacare just speeds this up through the use of insurance exchanges. Massive data warehouses are currently being created in order to do data mining on the medical records.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

- When a doctor is sharing your medical information to another doctor, wouldn't you want control over when/where that medical information can be viewed? Wouldn't you want it to self destruct?

- When you work under SEC rules and have to provide your financial statements to management for compliance, wouldn't you want control over where/when those can be viewed?

That's not what the term "DRM" is used for.

No HIPAA-compliant system would ever use the term "DRM" to refer to the feature you mentioned.

No financial compliance/reporting system would ever use the term "DRM" to refer to the feature you mentioned.

In both of your cases, both the sender and the receiver of the data are highly motivated to keep the data confidential.

In stark contrast, "DRM" was developed exclusively for the case where the receiver of the data has no such motivation.

No company in their right mind would use the term "DRM" to refer to a product benefit that provides secure, private, authenticated data transmission.

Your complete misunderstanding and misuse of the term "DRM" warrants re-modding your post down to 0. There's nothing "interesting" about the incorrect usage of terminology.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[sethradio]

No, it isn't always a bad thing, just most of the time. There are uses.

Certification: a device may be certified for some purpose, no changes allowed. The ability to change the software is basically the ability to break the device, which you really don't want.

Liability: being unable to do something may mean you aren't liable for something bad that happens.

My device belongs to me. If I want to tinker with my device, even at the risk of breaking it, THEN IT'S MY DAMN CHOICE! Even if I am liable, it's still mine

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[KingBenny]

i got a better one, any time someone gets fined with excessive amounts over downloading something then just collectively refuse to buy it. The loss of revenue would stop trolls in their tracks in less than two years. This would require a sense of community and solidarity ofcourse

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

There is nothing wrong with DRM.

You got that backwards, I'm afraid. In the real world, there is nothing good about DRM.

Re:If we can put an end to DRM

[Ravaldy]

It's not just a proposal, it's here. In old age houses they use online systems the government can access to make sure they are recording medication and care given to patients.

And Yet ...

[Anonymous Coward]

And yet there's nothing we can do to stop the ridiculous attempts at draconian DRM. Anything to prevent used games? Always On? Sell a game then require DLC in order for it to live up to the ads for the game?

Fuck 'em all. Torrents ahoy!

EA retaliates

[TWiTfan]

EA retaliates with International "Fuck You, You're Going To Buy Our Games Anyway" Day.

Re:EA retaliates

[Anonymous Coward]

Every day for me is 'do not buy DRM day'. Except when there is a steam sale :)

Re:EA retaliates

[SengirV]

Not anymore. Stick to your guns.

Is it legal to even SAY guns anymore? Pointed sticks perhaps?

Re:EA retaliates

[SirGarlon]

EA makes every day "Fuck You, You're Going To Buy Our Games Anyway" Day.

Re:EA retaliates

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not sure they limit that to just one day.

Re:EA retaliates

[Anonymous Coward]

No, no I am not...
Doesn't mean I won't play them. And these days i prefer to actually buy my games.

Re:EA retaliates

[Phrogman]

Ah but for me, every day is "Don't buy an EA game day" already. Likewise anything from SOE :P

Re:EA retaliates

[cheatch]

Do you consider steam as DRM?

Re:EA retaliates

[Anonymous Coward]

LOOK OUT!! He's got a pointed stick!!!

Re:EA retaliates

[centipedes.in.my.vag]

Won't someone think of the children?!

Re:EA retaliates

[fast turtle]

I'm the same way but I've gone even further. I no longer buy anything at all due since I'm one of those FLOSS Neck Beards - Yep I don't even buy shaving cream/soap/blades anymore and the main reason, I can't afford them due to health reasons. God Damn Health care in the states. If you aint rich or covered by some type of health plan, you damn well better not get sick because it'll cost you over $100k for anything serious (requires ambulance/paramedics)

Re:EA retaliates

[ciderbrew]

yes; but bloody Skyrim, Batman (bought whilst drunk - makes me sick to see the microsoft DRM load up too) and dishonored at a great price. All made me falter from the pure path i'd kept on it for so long.
I don't like being tracked and having your games progress shared. I don't like to see the amount of time wasted when I log in. Single player only.
HOWEVER, I used to spend a fortune on games and now I've only bought a few. and as consoles have held back the PC games minimum spec, I've not bought new hardware either.

I don't torrent a thing. It really is a lost sale and i'm better off for it.

Re:EA retaliates

[jitterman]

Yes, actually. When I bought Skyrim on DVD, it would NOT install directly - it *always* downloaded from Steam. In playing many games (Bioshock: Infinite being the most recent) it logs into Steam prior to launch no matter what I do. Again, I bought retail rather than via Steam. I haven't tested trying to run either in a disconnected state, so I don't know if the login failing would cause either not to launch, but even just automatically logging in bugs me.

Re:EA retaliates

[ciderbrew]

^ Arrest that man he's thinking about children.

Re:EA retaliates

[cornicefire]

And the public says, "I would rather have a cool game built by people who are paid and given health coverage than pirate something." So EA wins. People are willing to pay for content and if DRM stops the freeloaders, DRM helps the legit customers who pay full freight.

Re:EA retaliates

[BobNET]

Fuck You, You're Going To Buy Our Games Anyway

Yeah, probably,

Re:EA retaliates

[MitchDev]

Only if they're cooked over an open flame and basted in BBQ-teriyaki sauce...

Re:EA retaliates

[Anonymous Coward]

Shhhh, remember to not break the circlejerk.

Re:EA retaliates

[LordLimecat]

Guess what the publishers have decided on as one of the costs for their games?

Again, if you dont like it, dont buy it. But you dont get to set the rules on games that someone else writes and publishes.

Re:EA retaliates

[Anonymous Coward]

if DRM stops the freeloaders

I was not sure whether you were serious but after looking for a few seconds at your comment history, you seem to be.

Please, can you name one bigger game from the last years that was not available cracked few days after the release?

The only thing that is not cracked is multiplayer and this doesn't need DRM as it can simply be secured server side by a simple number the user has to enter once at install time.

Re:EA retaliates

[westlake]

EA makes every day "Fuck You, You're Going To Buy Our Games Anyway" Day.

Exhibit A:

Best Sellers in PC-compatible Games

We begin with the Slashdot tradition of promoting an event on the day of the event.

There are four events scheduled, one in Bangladesh.

The FOSS Bangladesh are suspending their website (www.fossbd.org) with an image banner, focusing the Day Against DRM-2013 and its cruel effects on IT world, activated from today, 30 April, 2013. Join us on a roadside stands as a Human ties with banners, plackerds and festoons in front of the TSC area at "Raju Circle". As it to exposes the Day Aganists DRM and why we are against DRM and DRM on HTML5.

Day Against DRM - May 3rd, 2013

You cannot make this stuff up.

There will be the inevitable petitions to the W3C and handouts outside the Microsoft Store in Seattle and that is pretty much it.

I was pleased to discover that the EFF page for the International Day Against DRM links to 2009's Windows7 Sins. campaign.

Who can forget --- Windows 7 Sins --- The Video?

Re:EA retaliates

[dragon-file]

Not gonna lie. I can't remember the last EA game I purchased. Their games are actually better after crackers (not necessarily white ones) get their hands on them and release them back into the wild DRM free or severely put in its place.

Re:EA retaliates

[dragon-file]

if DRM stops the freeloaders

Please, can you name one bigger game from the last years that was not available cracked few days after the release?

Ooh! Ooh! I love Q&A games.... hold on..... This one's tough..... well I give up, I can't think of any games that aren't cracked in a day or two... Wait does this mean that DRM only hurts the people who pay for the game and might actually drive people to download illegally?

(NOTE: Don't answer. It's a rhetorical question. The answer is yes)

Re:EA retaliates

[GameboyRMH]

Why do you make an exception for Steam? It's just another DRM scheme. Stop making this exception, it's funding a company that uses DRM like any other. In fact it is funding the inventor of always-online DRM lest you forget.

Every day's been DRM-free day for me for...probably over a decade now.

No exceptions.

Re:EA retaliates

[cheekyjohnson]

Even if DRM did stop copyright infringers, it would still likely harm actual customers.

Re:EA retaliates

[ciderbrew]

Companies know DRM is wrong and they are never front about the DRM they use. The DRM itself hides a lot once installed on you're machine. All the cloak and dagger stuff makes it very untrustworthy in the first place.

Re:EA retaliates

[dragon-file]

As far as I am aware, the only types of games that are the most pirate proof are the online only schemes like Guild Wars, WoW, World of Tanks, Warplanes, Warships.... etc.

These types generally have server side authentication which allows only one license to connect at a time.

Re:EA retaliates

[Anonymous Coward]

Orig AC here. Yes I do. It does not let me resell my game. It does not let me give it away. I am the only one who can 'lease' it. It is DRM and it works exactly like it should. Limiting my resale... It is borderline 'always on'. You can play tricks with offline mode. But at some point you have to authenticate it (a DRM scheme otherwise why would they bother to care?).

I'm just a sucker for the sales...

Re:EA retaliates

[steelfood]

No, that's Blizzard. EA celebrates that only once every time they kill a popular franchise.

Re:EA retaliates

[Anonymous Coward]

I cant help it I am a sucker for a video game sale...

Re:EA retaliates

[nabsltd]

In fact it is funding the inventor of always-online DRM lest you forget.

Steam doesn't require you to be always online. Although Steam is a form of DRM, the advantages to the customer far outweigh the disadvantages:

• Download to multiple machines using the same Steam login
• Re-download at any time after purchase
• Add physically purchased games to Steam for the best of both worlds

The only thing you can't easily do is sell a used Steam game, but if you wait and buy on sale, the prices are low enough that you never need to sell for the money, and storage space (either shelf or disk) isn't an issue, either.

Re:EA retaliates

[Anonymous Coward]

I seriously doubt people are worried about what kind of pay or benefits that the developers get. Wal-mart wouldn't be the top retailer if customers were worried about employee pay and benefits. I doubt it's got anything to do with the public wanting to stop freeloaders either. Most of the public probably don't even know what DRM is. They probably don't even know what intellectual property is.

Re:EA retaliates

[Anonymous Coward]

Guess what the publishers have decided on as one of the costs for their games?

Again, if you dont like it, dont buy it. But you dont get to set the rules on games that someone else writes and publishes.

I do get a kick out of that type of arrogance. "You don't get to set the rules"... well, neither do game publishers. I don't like piracy and other inconveniences either but no one is entitled to distort a market for their own self entitlements or step on my liberties. Why should I suffer DRM because of the bad behavior of other people? Anyways.. bottom line? that little arrogant position of yours is all fine and dandy but the ultimate 'power of the purse' still lies with the purchaser so you better get used to it.

Re:EA retaliates

[Anonymous Coward]

HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS

Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.

Re:EA retaliates

[Anonymous Coward]

And the public says, "I would rather have a cool game built by people who are paid and given health coverage than pirate something.".

False choice. The correct wording would be: "I would rather buy a cool indie game build by people who are paid and given health care and who don't cripple their games with DRM than pirate something."

US-centric

[codeButcher]

I agree with the EFF's stance in the last sentence of the summary, because by the time it is "today" in the US, the day is pretty much over in the rest of the world (depending on). Especially on a Friday....

But if one wants to have a specific day to agitate for something, maybe give some advance warning? Also, a better though-out plan than "spread the word and make yourself heard" might also be useful.

Need DRM Labeling Law

[n2hightech]

Simple solution that politicians would have a hard time saying no to. All products that have DRM should be forced to display a DRM warning message on the outside of the packaging in print, TV and on line advertising. The message should explain in simple terms what the DRM does. IE - requires on line connection all the times, Requires Disk in drive all the time, prevents back up copies...etc. There should be stiff fines for selling products with DRM and no warning label. Then let the market decide. DRM is toxic to computers and users. So the proper warning is the right thing to do.

Re:Need DRM Labeling Law

[Anonymous Coward]

Simple solution that politicians would have a hard time saying no to

Politicians say no to labeling laws all the time. Seems that for all the "gung ho capitalism is awesome" types, they'd rather all the customers be kept in the dark about what they're buying.

Re:Need DRM Labeling Law

[WizardFusion]

This should be the first step.

Re:Need DRM Labeling Law

[wagnerrp]

Seems that for all the "gung ho capitalism is awesome" types, they'd rather all the customers be kept in the dark about what they're buying.

Which is really a shame, as the only way capitalism actually works as intended is when the individual customer is sufficiently intelligent and informed to act as the regulating force in the market, and only take actions that are in their long term best interest.

Re:Need DRM Labeling Law

[femtobyte]

Which is one of the reasons capitalism *doesn't* work. Information and disinformation are both products with value to different parties. Information helps the consumer and working class. Disinformation helps the wealthy and powerful. Guess which one gets produced the most, when production levels are set by the wealthy and powerful?

Re:Need DRM Labeling Law

[jd2112]

Simple solution that politicians would have a hard time saying no to. All products that have DRM should be forced to display a DRM warning message on the outside of the packaging in print, TV and on line advertising. The message should explain in simple terms what the DRM does. IE - requires on line connection all the times, Requires Disk in drive all the time, prevents back up copies...etc. There should be stiff fines for selling products with DRM and no warning label. Then let the market decide. DRM is toxic to computers and users. So the proper warning is the right thing to do.

So it will end up like those 'this product contains substances known to cause cancer by the state of California' warning labels that are ignored because they are on everything.

Re:Need DRM Labeling Law

[femtobyte]

Those labels ended up useless because the law was only enacted *after* virtually every product in some categories was made with carcinogens. But DRM is not yet ubiquitous --- there are still plenty of music, videos, and books sold without DRM. If people went to the grocery store and saw one variety of cheese marked "may cause cancer!" next to three varieties not marked "may cause cancer!", which do you think they'd prefer?

Re:Need DRM Labeling Law

[Lord Bitman]

... grab a random DVD off the shelf behind you. Look at the back of the box.

So, the market has spoken?

Re:Need DRM Labeling Law

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a shame you can't Google a product before buying it, and would rather violently impose a cost on those of us who do.

Re:Need DRM Labeling Law

[Anonymous Coward]

So the wealthy and powerful got you to write that post?

Re:Need DRM Labeling Law

[Anonymous Coward]

The most popular stuff all has DRM however, so it's the same as DRM being ubiquitous. Besides average Joe will never distrust the big brands.

Re:Need DRM Labeling Law

[femtobyte]

The most popular stuff has DRM --- do you mean like the DRM-free Apple iTunes store? Or Amazon.com's DRM-free MP3's? Or the DRM-free books and CDs you find on store shelves? Or the DRM-free websites you read every day? Yeah, those are all just niche players with no popular impact on the market.

Re:Need DRM Labeling Law

[Anonymous Coward]

You think that post will get as much awareness as an international advertising campaign? It won't and that's her point.

Re:Need DRM Labeling Law

[Anonymous Coward]

Today at least I've seen zero ads and one communist rant. A wealthy person's ability to produce disinformation does not decrease your own ability to obtain useful information from peers. That's why freedom of association is best buddies with freedom of speech; it lets the consumer decide for themselves who to trust, instead of forcing them to trust an already-corrupt government to suddenly stop lying to them.

A DRM-labeling law would be written by the exact same people who GAVE us DRM. "This product receives an F in digital rights management because it's completely vulnerable to pirates."

Re:Need DRM Labeling Law

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it works as intended when unintelligent and willfully ignorant people die in poverty because they didn't protect themselves from DRM.

ERROR!

[centipedes.in.my.vag]

A required security module can not be activated. Your comment can not be posted.
SecuROM has determined a debugging or an emulation tool is running. Please refer to the following procedure to remedy:

• Please deactivate these tools before starting the program. It's not necessary to uninstall them.
• If the problem persists, please send a SecuROM analysis file to...

Re:ERROR!

[jones_supa]

We only see scrambled mess of characters in place of your message.

Re:ERROR!

[MrNemesis]

This witty riposte is not currently available in your region.

Sorry about that.

Re:ERROR!

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait, that's not normal for slashdot posts?

Re:ERROR!

[Anonymous Coward]

SecuROM has determined a debugging

We can't even clean up our games! Alright, lets play dirty then.

Let's get meta

[Nidi62]

There are too many awareness days to keep track of, and most of the time you don't even hear about them until the day is almost over. What we need is an International Day Day, so that we can let people know what days are the international awareness days for what topics.

Re:Let's get meta

[TWiTfan]

Obviously, we need to create an awareness day for awareness days.

Re:Let's get meta

[N0Man74]

There already is one. Obviously it needs more awareness... Perhaps we can make a day for that too.

Re:Let's get meta

[ciderbrew]

That was two weeks ago.

Of course the EFF hates DRM-- They're Google

[cornicefire]

The EFF is heavily supported by Google and DRM breaks Google's business model. Is it any surprise that the EFF is saying this. But as Linus Torvalds says, DRM is just the same problem as cryptography and secure communication. If we want to have privacy and cryptography, DRM is just an extension of it.

Re:Of course the EFF hates DRM-- They're Google

[ledow]

That's like saying that the OpenGL group is heavily supported by ATI and nVidia, and the suggestion to remove GPU's from computers in favour of a little man who draws the screen for you breaks their business model.

It doesn't mean that having the little man ISN'T a stupid idea, or that ATI/nVidia should be ignored for their opinion.

Assume for a second that Google *are* anti-DRM. Assume it has nothing to do with their business or (equally) is SOLELY because it affects their way to make money. Who are they going to support? Probably groups that are anti-DRM. Who listens to the EFF? People who want the opinion of an anti-DRM organisation.

Thus is Google support for EFF something that should be expected anyway, or is the EFF some huge front to push on Google's behalf? You can't really draw any conclusion from the facts given.

If two linked items seem unfairly biased or somehow malicious, try to reverse the positions and see what happens.

Re:Of course the EFF hates DRM-- They're Google

[serviscope_minor]

The EFF is heavily supported by Google and DRM breaks Google's business model. Is it any surprise that the EFF is saying this.

Really, you're being silly. The EFF is older than google and has always been against this sort of thing. If you're going to make wild claims then you need to provide evidence to back it up.

Merely relying on an over developed sense of cynicism isn't actually evidence.

ut as Linus Torvalds says, DRM is just the same problem as cryptography and secure communication.

Linus Torvalds has said many silly things. I have no idea if he said this, but either way associating his name to it does not increase its credibility.

DRM is not the same as secure communication. In secure communication you're trying to prevent eavesdroppers listening in. With DRM you're trying to get unencrypted data to your target without them being able to intercept it.

Re:Of course the EFF hates DRM-- They're Google

[cornicefire]

1) So what if it's older. They get huge bushels of cash from Google and the Brin foundation today. And so they dance like any hired gun. http://boingboing.net/2011/12/10/give-to-eff-today-and-your-do.html 2) Maybe the reason you don't know this is because your invite got lost: https://www.eff.org/event/eff-mixer-google 3) DRM is secure communication. The pirates are the eavesdroppers. Get a frickin clue. And Torvalds's logic is solid. Locking up my love letter so only my spouse can read it is the exact technological challenge as locking up my artistic creation so only the non-pirates can view it. http://www.linuxtoday.com/developer/2003042401126OSKNLL http://news.cnet.com/Torvalds-says-DRM-isnt-necessarily-bad/2100-7344_3-6034964.html Quit being a sap for leeching business models. The EFF and Google just want to manipulate you into hating DRM so the money will keep flowing to them. DRM doesn't break the Internet, it breaks Google's business model. They're not the same thing.

Re:Of course the EFF hates DRM-- They're Google

[TheRaven64]

So, the EFF is Google, which is why we're talking about the EFF opposing a Google-backed extension to the HTML5 spec? Google is really messed up, in that case...

Re:Of course the EFF hates DRM-- They're Google

[Overzeetop]

I can't decide of you're being sarcastic, or are just a massive troll for big content aggregators/owners.

Cryptography for private communication is keeping private things private. Cryptography for DRM is artificially limiting a commercial product in an attempt to maximize profit. Very, very different applications

Google's desire to limit/oppose DRM is somewhat perpendicular to either of these - they want access so they can provide search services that are as comprehensive as possible, and offer content-relevant advertising. They don't actually care what is in the content, as long as they can align their advertising services with whatever it happens to be.

Re:Of course the EFF hates DRM-- They're Google

[dkleinsc]

If we want to have privacy and cryptography, DRM is just an extension of it.

It isn't really the same thing, though.

Privacy and cryptography: Alice uses Alice's computer to securely communicate with Bob's computer (and presumably Bob on the other end), without Eve listening in on the conversation. For example, the goal of key-based cryptography is that only Bob can understand Alice's messages and be sure they're from Alice, while only Alice understands Bob's messages and is sure they're from Bob.

DRM: Bob uses Alice's computer to securely talk to Bob's computer, without Alice listening in on the conversation. To completely prevent Alice from listening in, Bob has to cooperate with the hardware manufacturer and OS author to prevent Alice from knowing or controlling what her own computer is doing.

It's that last part that makes DRM a problem. And to make it even more of a problem: What could be used by MediaCorp to force Alice's computer to communicate information to them about her computer's activities could just as easily be used by Russian mobsters to do the same thing.

Re:Of course the EFF hates DRM-- They're Google

[serviscope_minor]

1) So what if it's older.

Well it means that they were provably against such things before google came on the scene. Therefore google appear to have not modified the EFF's behaviour.

And so they dance like any hired gun.

[citation needed]

i.e. put up or shut up.

Show one thing where the EFF have gone against their stated goals as a result of google's influence.

3) DRM is secure communication. The pirates are the eavesdroppers.

There's no notion of "pirate" in the cryptography world. Please make some attempt to stick to established terminology otherwise understanding you is quite difficult.

The eavesdropper is the same as the recipient. That's the difference. Eve and Bob are the same person.

Locking up my love letter so only my spouse can read it is the exact technological challenge as locking up my artistic creation so only the non-pirates can view it.Locking up my love letter so only my spouse can read it is the exact technological challenge as locking up my artistic creation so only the non-pirates can view it.

Not even slightly. Pirates aren't eavesdroppers. Your spouse is the pirate. DRM is an attempt to make it readable but not copyable by your spouse.

Quit being a sap for leeching business models

That's an odd allegation.

Quit being a sap for leeching business models. The EFF and Google just want to manipulate you into hating DRM so the money will keep flowing to them.

I disliked DRM before google even existed. It was called copy protection then.

Re:Of course the EFF hates DRM-- They're Google

[Anonymous Coward]

1) It's absurd to think that the EFF changed its attitude about DRM because of Google's cash. Also, what does that link have to do with them "dancing" for Google?

2) Again, so what? Two organizations agree on something. Why does that mean that one is coercing the other? The EFF is a principled organization. I'm guessing Google will probably change their attitude to be more evil over the next decade, but their recent actions have indicated this has not happened yet.

3) This is hilarious. Eavesdropping on an A->B communication implies that both A and B want privacy. If one of them doesn't want it, this is a question of trust between A and B. Do you think you cheating wife is totally innocent, and it was the other man completely at fault when she sleeps with him?

Re:Of course the EFF hates DRM-- They're Google

[LordLimecat]

I smell ad hominems of multiple varieties.

Re:Of course the EFF hates DRM-- They're Google

[Culture20]

The EFF is older than google and has always been against this sort of thing

So what if it's older. They get huge bushels of cash from Google and the Brin foundation today. And so they dance like any hired gun.

If you they were going against their original charter, I would agree with you, but EFF is acting within character for the EFF. Google gave EFF money so that EFF could continue doing EFF-y things like oppose DRM on principle.

DRM is secure communication.

Only in the same way transporting gpg encrypted files zipped up with the keys and passphrases that can decrypt said files is secure communication. DRM is an attempt to restrict who has the keys while simultaneously spreading the keys.

Re:Of course the EFF hates DRM-- They're Google

[ajlitt]

Not to mention the (optional) DRM Google provides for Android apps.

Kept that one quiet didn't you.

[oobayly]

At least IPv6 day was mentioned before hand.

Nice summary, a bit misleading

[cjjjer]

Digital restrictions management (DRM) creates damaged goods that users cannot control or use freely

The last movie I watched via XBox Video probably had DRM up the ying-yang but it seemed to work ok, what damage are you talking about?

Re:Nice summary, a bit misleading

[SirGarlon]

what damage are you talking about?

May I borrow that video?

Re:Nice summary, a bit misleading

[Coren22]

Were you able to copy that movie to your tablet to watch it on an airplane?

Re:Nice summary, a bit misleading

[Technician]

Now load that video onto your kid's ipad so he can watch it on your next long road trip.

Ever try to play your instant queue videos from Netflix on a road trip? Sorry, must stick to simple copy protection instead and take DVD's.

Re:Nice summary, a bit misleading

[TheRaven64]

Will it still work when you want to play it on another device? Or when you (or someone who compromises your account) do something that annoys Microsoft and your XBox Live account is deleted? Can you watch it when you're bored because your Internet connection is down? Can you watch it while you're travelling on a train or a plane on your tablet or laptop? What about on the next tablet or laptop you buy, from a different vendor?

Re:Nice summary, a bit misleading

[LordLimecat]

When you're purchasing or renting a product, its important to make sure you know what youre purchasing or renting, and what it can / cant do.

I rather imagine that what parent paid for was the right to watch a video on his XBox, one or more times.

Im not sure if people are being obtuse when they make these kind of arguments. I think everyone gets the whole "DRM is dangerous" argument, and the arguments that it corrodes freedom. Stick to that and cut the stupid arguments.

Re:Nice summary, a bit misleading

[LordLimecat]

Ever tried to use a Music CD to file your taxes?

Thats the logic you're employing. Parent never paid for the right to do any of those things, he paid for the right to watch a video on his xbox.

Re:Nice summary, a bit misleading

[globalist]

Where does it say you should be able to? That's like expceting to be able to play a CD on your turntable if your CD player is broken... Nope sorry it was never meant to work that way. The sense of entitlement of this anti-DRM rabble just boggles the mind...

Re:Nice summary, a bit misleading

[Anonymous Coward]

Digital restrictions management (DRM) creates damaged goods that users cannot control or use freely

The last movie I watched via XBox Video probably had DRM up the ying-yang but it seemed to work ok, what damage are you talking about?

The last DRM-crippled game I bought (retail DVD, from Target) was GTA IV. I am unable to run it on my game machine, which normally has no Internet access because I don't surf from it and don't do MMOs. Even when I followed all of the instructions for offline activation using another machine that was connected and entered all the correct keys, it did not work. It has three layers of DRM: SecureROM, Microsoft Live, and Rockstar's Social Club. Even after I cleared everyone off and connected my game machine to the Internet to activate like 99.9% of the users probably were doing, I was still unable to save games because that requires registration with and a connection to the Rockstar Social Club system. Even after I applied Rockstar's patch to 1.07 to disable the Social Club always-on requirement, which they added due to all the complaints they got, it STILL DIDN'T WORK, failing with a cryptic "WS10" error message. I was unable to get any assistance from Rockstar, because their ticketing system - guess what - requires registration with their DRM social club system.

DRM screws legitimate customers. I will never buy another one of Rockstar's titles because of my experience with their DRM.

Re:Nice summary, a bit misleading

[TheRaven64]

That's like expceting to be able to play a CD on your turntable if your CD player is broken

No, you have that backwards. I know a number of people who recorded their LPs onto CD-Rs, and there are services that will do this for you if you don't have the equipment, time, and patience to do it yourself. And then they've ripped the CDs and used them with portable media players. Then this functionality was subsumed by mobile phones, and so they copied the tracks there. So why do you think that expecting a recording to outlast a generation of technology (or even a single vendor's product) is suddenly a new thing?

Re:Nice summary, a bit misleading

[globalist]

The CD itself will not play on your turntable, because it was not meant to. It's not about aging of technoloogy at all. It's about different products and it's also the ARM (Analogue Restrictions Management), stupid! :P If you buy a movie on XBOX Video, what makes you think it should be playable on your iPad? The iPad has its own venue for movie purchases and it's called iTunes. If you don't like it then buy something that plays anything from anywhere. But please don't try to dictate how others should do business and/or consume entertainment.

Re:Nice summary, a bit misleading

[sethradio]

May I borrow that video?

Hardy Har Har!

DRM?

[Tvingo]

I can't say I've ever been affected by DRM because I just don't buy software or games anymore. Why complain about all these things having DRM, just don't buy it. Simple enough solution. If you aren't buying crap with DRM why complain about it? They'll figure out DRM is a problem real quick if no one is buying their shit.

Re:DRM?

[Anonymous Coward]

Except they won't. Any declines in sales are blamed on piracy, and used as an excuse for strong copyright laws.

Re:DRM?

[Anonymous Coward]

Entitlement complex. That's why.

Re:DRM?

[Desler]

Well, yes, that's because they can point to the 10,000+ active peers on a torrent for their good. You whine abouy DRM then pirate it then wonder why they blame piracy. It's the perfect scapegoat. If the people against DRM would stop downloading the goods they'd have no way to blame piracy.

Re:DRM?

[tepples]

If you aren't buying crap with DRM why complain about it?

Because manufacturers make affordable products only for the majority of users, not the minority of users. If only a slim minority of users abstain from works and devices that use digital restrictions management, manufacturers of devices and publishers of works won't see DRM-free as a selling point. Eventually, it'll become impossible to publish a work to a wide audience without DRM, as has been the case for TV video games since the mid-1980s when Atari introduced code signing on the 7800 and Nintendo introduced the CIC on the NES.

Re:DRM?

[jitterman]

The GP was not claiming to be pirating, they just stated they don't buy any of it any longer. In this case, they're doing exactly what you suggest people do.

Re:DRM?

[Desler]

No that's not what I said. I said "don't download it". If you don't bu, but then subsequently pirate it they will always be able to use piracy as a scapegoat.

Re:DRM?

[jones_supa]

Well, yes, that's because they can point to the 10,000+ active peers on a torrent for their good. You whine abouy DRM then pirate it then wonder why they blame piracy. It's the perfect scapegoat. If the people against DRM would stop downloading the goods they'd have no way to blame piracy.

I've been noticing this too. When pirates say that their response against DRM is to pirate everything, they are actually just making the vicious cycle stronger. Pirates are trying to say "DRM sucks", but they are actually saying "we love to pirate". And there's your problem. Your message as the content consumer is not clear. You could make your intentions much more unambiguous by either not buying anything, or the best option which is to buy DRM-free content. Carrying your money to the good guys has more impact than just making unlimited free copies for nothing.

Re:DRM?

[Anonymous Coward]

Your other post made it sound you were saying that anyone who opposes DRM must be a 'pirate'. Additionally, they wouldn't stop blaming 'piracy' even if almost everyone stopped infringing upon copyright to begin with; they'd just claim that the downloaders went underground or some other such nonsense.

BTW O'Reilly offers (DRM-free eBooks) -50% today!

[Anonymous Coward]

I know, this a shameless plug, but I'm not otherwise associated to them but just being a very happy customer and thought that someone here would be also if they just knew real benefits they offer for anyone who doesn't like to buy books with DRM-strings attached. Check the site details about the offer :)

Alternatively...

[Darth_brooks]

You could go to O'Reilly and celebrate by buying any of their 50% ebooks. It jumps to 60% if you're like me and load up your shopping cart like a madman whenever their stuff goes on sale...

Re:Alternatively...

[Anonymous Coward]

Shameless plug but thank you for that. Just bought 5 books, and also signed up for a couple upcoming webcasts. Happy to support a company that supports anti-DRM efforts.

Re:Alternatively...

[jones_supa]

Thank you for the recommendation.

Re:Alternatively...

[crashcy]

Thanks, I had a few books on my wish list. Good excuse to make the purchase.

Isn't an Xbox a DRM system?

[cellurl]

This is bogus. As others have said, "DRM done right doesn't get in the way". I don't see how anyone can build any software without DRM. Sure, I love Open Source, but businesses need stuff that works the way they want. We want to pay some money, have lots of competition and plan our businesses. I publish all kinds of free stuff, I pirate [some] movies, but I understand the balance here and don't advocate Anarchy (no DRM, steal everything) mentality.

Pirate our Speed Limit App. I am sure its out somewhere. We planned for it...

Re:Isn't an Xbox a DRM system?

[Anonymous Coward]

As others have said, "DRM done right doesn't get in the way".

I feel that DRM is only done right when it doesn't exist.

but I understand the balance here and don't advocate Anarchy (no DRM, steal everything) mentality.

No one advocates anarchy or stealing.

Release....

[Anonymous Coward]

Release.... THE STALLMAN

happy to see this day.

[nimbius]

but saddened it doesnt carry the same clout on websites like SOPA did.

today you might want to check out the open source app store for android (https://www.F-Droid.org) and kick your facebook account to the curb.
LinkedIn is a recruiters dream, not an employment tool and is mostly spam anyhow.
http://www.freeshell.org/ offers affordable email and web storage so you can start to ditch google.
godaddy.com doesnt care about your privacy (but we all know this.) maybe check out places like http://www.dreamhost.com/
your local book store will be more than willing to sell you a fresh paperback or luxurious hardbook copy of that e-book amazon just nicked from your device.
Lastly, maybe try linux if you havent? just search for it (https://www.duckduckgo.com is a good alternative engine that doesnt spy on you) and find a flavour you like.
while youre browsing, you might want to check out the EFF's suggestions to make sure you limit tracking and increase security
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/04/4-simple-changes-protect-your-privacy-online

Products with DRM have become necessities of life

[tepples]

In some countries, products with digital restrictions management have become necessities of life. For example, some countries require citizens to file income tax returns using software that runs only on Windows, an operating system that ships with media players supporting MPAA-approved video DRM. And with payphones being retired in many areas, it's becoming more and more of a necessity to own a cellphone, and the vast majority of cellphones ship with bootloader DRM or MPAA-approved video DRM or both.

Digitl Rights Management

[Whatanut]

How has nobody pointed out yet that DRM stands for Digital Rights Management? Or did I just woosh it?

Re:Digitl Rights Management

[Anonymous Coward]

How has nobody pointed out yet that DRM stands for Digital Rights Management?

That wooshing sound isn't a joke going over your head, it's a concept going over your head. DRM restricts YOUR, the buyer's, rights. The people pushing DRM aren't managing their own rights, they're managing YOURS. For instance, they restrict your historical right to resale of goods.

If you buy something with DRM you bought nothing; you merely rented it.

Never forget that corporations are liars.

The Right to Read

[SCHecklerX]

Always the visionary:

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html

Re:The Right to Read

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no "slshdot" in your email address...

Re:The Right to Read

[Anonymous Coward]

It's just extremely well obfuscated. Spammer-bots can't even see the hidden ninja 'slshdot' in the first place.

Re:The Right to Read

[Anonymous Coward]

tl;dr

Re:The Right to Read

[Anonymous Coward]

Right to read is clearly a concept copylefted right out of an European constitution, from a section dealing with social rights. No patriotic American can ever embrace such a devious vehicle of socialism.

Translation Today is whiny brats against rules day

[Anonymous Coward]

"Digital restrictions management (DRM) creates damaged goods that users cannot control or use freely."
Then DON'T BUY THEM. No one has forced you at gunpoint to use iTunes. Buy DRM free good.

"It requires users to give-up control of their computers and restricts access to digital data and media."
But also allows you to buy product at prices significantly lower than would be possibly if piracy could not be checked. Essentially effective DRM makes it so people like me can pay $1 for something instead of $20 because it keeps people like you from pirating it.

"Device manufacturers and corporate copyrights holders have already been massively infecting their products with user-hostile DRM."

THAT's not inflammatory (or accurate) at all. SOME people have done that (i.e. Sony rootkit). They should be sanctioned.

" Tablets, mobile phones and other minicomputers are sold with numerous restrictions embedded that cripple users freedom."

THEN DON'T BUY THEM. Buy a Linux laptop instead. No one has forced you at gunpoint to buy an iPad. BUT, don't be shocked when you can't buy "Awesome software product X" for your Linux laptop. The software manufacturer is in BUSINESS to make money and employ computer programmers like me and you. They are naturally going to release where they make the most money. That may be a DRM controlled platform. If you don't like it, go into business against them and release "Amazing Software Product Y" and release it for Linux. Good luck,

" The proposal at table in W3C to put DRM into HTML goes even further. "

FINALLY. Maybe this will mean my company can finally release its software using HTML5. Until we are able to release to HTML5 and protect our IP we refuse to participate in that market.

Signed,

A 20 year veteran software developer and business owner that employs 70 software engineers

a rose by any other name

[RichardJenkins]

calling it 'restrictions' is petulent and confusing. without a verbose disclaimer about what you mean and why youve corrupted the name it becomes confusing.

arguments against DRM are just as valid whilst avoiding cheap shots.

Re:a rose by any other name

[serviscope_minor]

calling it 'restrictions' is petulent and confusing.

Why? It doesn't actually manage rights it manages restrictions.

Rights are things you are allowed to do legally. A software program cannot affect what you are legally allowed to do.

Restrictions are things which you are prevented from doing: precisely what DRM does.

It is a far more informitive name.

Re:a rose by any other name

[VortexCortex]

calling it 'restrictions' is petulent and confusing. without a verbose disclaimer about what you mean and why youve corrupted the name it becomes confusing.

arguments against DRM are just as valid whilst avoiding cheap shots.

What an ignorant Pirate!

Seriously, "When. In. Rome."
Really, we're showing a massive amount of restraint here, instead of just calling out anyone using DRM. For example: If you use DRM, then you're actively raping our childrens' and grandchildrens' and great-grandchildrens' minds. DRM is a Disgusting Racist Movement that aims to set Greedy Corporate Publishers apart as an artificial race of self entitled elitists to the detriment of all the real humans who create content: DRM permanently steals the public domain that all those lazy bastards got rich by exploiting. They didn't invent English, or Humor or ANY Literary Element, or Musical Themes or the concept of Instruments or even Movies -- Hell Hollywood is in California because the Movie industry wanted to STEAL Movie camera technology without Paying Patent fees to New England businesses! We give you copyright laws that last for THREE Generations of Humans! And this is the thanks we get from You Immortal Amoral Ingrates?! You give us DRM to ensure that even after 70 years or more beyond the author's life -- A time when EVERYONE alive now will be dead -- when the copies should finally be legally able to be remixed and added back into culture, that no copies will be able to be made at all thanks to your bullshit Digital Racist Movement?! I guess Immortals don't have to worry about having Kids labeled as FELONS because they shared cartoon clips with different backing music to their friends for a laugh.

You see, they're fighting dirty. Equating copyright infringement with theft -- "you wouldn't steal a car" -- and calling us the equivalent of Murderous Pillaging Rapists. We're beyond rational discourse here buddy. You must not do politics much. Whomever has the catchiest mud to sling wins. It's not about stooping to their level. We've got high-minded arguments too for the intellectuals, but we DO NEED simple antagonistic and UGLY comparisons to help sway the common man's mind and spark discussion.

"Oh, you've corrupted the name of Digital Rights Management, ehuuuue." You low down yellow bellied good for nothing Theif. Get bent Pirate. Bend right over as they steal your culture, and squeal your pathetic high minded complaints as they forcibly screw you from behind all the while demonizing you and your friends and family and children, and give the fascists fuel for the police state.

You might think that's the right thing to do, but it's not me. If they fight dirty, I fight dirtier.

Re:a rose by any other name

[RichardJenkins]

But without a big explanation, it doesn't look like you're attemping to point out that the actual name is a deceptive ploy to obfuscate what DRM does. It looks like you've made an embarrassing mistake.

People love writing off people who make silly mistakes as nuts.

Look at my post above - typed it on a phone, full of typos and grammar errors. If I was trying to argue something important there, anything that could be interpretted as error on my part invites ad hominem attacks which are always good for swaying the opinion of the masses.

Re:a rose by any other name

[GameboyRMH]

So the straightforward, descriptive name "Digital Restrictions Management" confuses you, but the sugared-up Orwellian name "Digital Rights Management" doesn't? o_O

Re:a rose by any other name

[Anonymous Coward]

Garbage by any other name would still smell as foul.

Calling it "Digital Rights Management" is what is confusing.

There are many cases of disguising the true intent of something by giving it a misleading name. How about ACTA... really not about counterfeiting and really not about Trade.

DRM is all about restrictions, not rights. Restricting people from skipping ads on DVDs they've bought. Restricting people from purchasing media from cheaper markets (the global economy is all about corporations getting cheaper labor and gouging certain markets, individuals are prevented from shopping around). Restricting people from exercising their RIGHT of first sale. Restricting people from using what they have paid for the way they want to use it.

If it's just the Rights part that bothers you, maybe these would be better?
Destroying Rights Methodically.
Digital Rights Mangling.

Digital Restrictions Management really does sum it up best though.

On a side note

[rk]

I'm old enough to remember when the term "minicomputer" was used to describe a computer that fit in a single room. Our desktops were "microcomputers" and our phones and tablets were "science fiction". :-)

Re:On a side note

[xeromist]

I'm not even that old but I know my computer history and that bothered me too. I'll help you escort the kids off of your lawn.

Re:On a side note

[steelfood]

our phones and tablets were "science fiction". :-)

Portable computing's been around since the first portable calculator. The communications part not so much, but certainly the "smart" half of the smartphone, and tablets, are nothing new or revolutionary.

Re:On a side note

[rk]

Comparing a Galaxy Note 2 or an iPhone 5 to the first handheld calculator is vaguely akin to comparing a Saturn V rocket to the Wright Flyer.

Minicomputers

[Anonymous Coward]

These are not the minicomputers you're looking for. Minicomputers are bigger than PCs (microcomputers) but smaller than mainframe or supercomputers. Maybe handhelds should be called nanocomputers?

Re: I remember when google ...apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Naw, he was just APK.
The lack of four-cornered HOSTS file rhetoric is a red herring of omission.

APK

PS ==> chicken butt
...apk

A PC isn't

[tepples]

Isn't an Xbox a DRM system?

The idea as I see it is to use a PC instead of an Xbox 360. Like an Xbox 360, a PC can use Xbox 360 controllers and output video to an HDTV. But unlike an Xbox 360, a PC can run software that respects the user's freedom.

Re:A PC isn't

[cellurl]

ok, lets see, I may agree with you. You want the PC and HTML to not have DRM. If thats what you mean, I agree with you. Keep the pipe open.
So, if I choose DRM model, I must use Silverlight or something outside the browser....
So maybe we agree.

In response

[DiEx-15]

MPAA, RIAA, EA, Sony and all DRM users and makers demand congress to declare a "Piracy Day" where everybody on Earth must pay $1,000 in order to live or face a gabillionzillion dollar fine and eternity in prison.

Whether you use their products or not is immaterial. By God EVERYBODY steals! Everybody is a pirate and must be punished with extreme prejudice! Them dirty Hobbits are stealing our preciousss!!!!

The bill is expected to pass with 100% support and be signed into law since these groups were "nice" enough to pay for their run for office.

Re:In response

[GameboyRMH]

It would be good to start a "piracy day" unofficially (like "420 day") and have large piracy gatherings where we share massive amounts of material over sneakernet and introduce the piracy-curious to the wonders of de-restricted digital goods.

Re:In response

[DiEx-15]

Yeah but... You know the record, movie, game, and TV makers will have a field day passing out Cease and Desist letters like Halloween candy at the business ends of lolsuits on a day like that. It'd be like an unofficial Christmas to them even if they don't celebrate Christmas!

Re:In response

[Anonymous Coward]

proposed date 3/14 as pi-racy day

Restrictions explained

[tepples]

How has nobody pointed out yet that DRM stands for Digital Rights Management?

As you correctly guessed, whoosh. To understand why you whooshed, ask yourself whose "rights" DRM protects. Then see Words to Avoid to see why DRM opponents expand the R to "restrictions".

Re:Restrictions explained

[schnell]

Then see Words to Avoid [gnu.org]

RMS lost his credibility in trying to define anybody else's lexicon with his irritating, self-aggrandizing "GNU/Linux" campaign. You can use his approved NewSpeak if you'd like, but I think the arrogance of anyone trying to tell me "Words to Avoid" is more likely to make me reject their suggestions out of hand.

Re:Restrictions explained

[RabidReindeer]

How has nobody pointed out yet that DRM stands for Digital Rights Management?

As you correctly guessed, whoosh. To understand why you whooshed, ask yourself whose "rights" DRM protects. Then see Words to Avoid to see why DRM opponents expand the R to "restrictions".

Ask yourself whose digital rights are being Managed!

I will probably never buy another Nook. Quite a few Barnes & Noble books I've purchased were supplied DRM-free by the publishers (thank YOU O'Reilly, Baen and Tor!) Nevertheless, I cannot keep backup copies of them in the event that B&N shuts down their servers, because all of the later Nook models hide their book storage in a private space that is apparently inaccessible even when rooted.

In other words, the publisher granted me certain rights, the seller (who doesn't actually even own the copyrights) takes some of those rights away. The only way to avoid that is to bypass the B&N store and download the books to the Gulag file store, because the original My books/Nook Books conveniences were not carried over to any of the later Nook models.

IP is a seductive mirage

[tepples]

Then DON'T BUY THEM. No one has forced you at gunpoint to use iTunes.

Countries do force their citizens at gunpoint to file income tax returns. Some of these countries require that tax returns be filed electronically using software that runs only on Windows.

Tablets, mobile phones and other minicomputers are sold with numerous restrictions embedded that cripple users freedom.

THEN DON'T BUY THEM. Buy a Linux laptop instead.

Good luck making a telephone call from a Linux laptop.

protect our IP

To protect your Internet Protocol address, use a firewall. For other meanings of "IP", see "Seductive Mirage".

Re:IP is a seductive mirage

[Anonymous Coward]

Then DON'T BUY THEM. No one has forced you at gunpoint to use iTunes.

Countries do force their citizens at gunpoint to file income tax returns. Some of these countries require that tax returns be filed electronically using software that runs only on Windows.

Tablets, mobile phones and other minicomputers are sold with numerous restrictions embedded that cripple users freedom.

THEN DON'T BUY THEM. Buy a Linux laptop instead.

Good luck making a telephone call from a Linux laptop.

Then use a LANDLINE. No one has forced you at gunpoint to use a cell phone. Good luck playing angry birds on a 1950s desk telephone.

protect our IP

To protect your Internet Protocol address, use a firewall. For other meanings of "IP", see "Seductive Mirage".

Don't be an asshole. You are perfectly capable of disambiguating which definition of IP I meant. For other meanings of asshole, see "teppies AT gmail DOT com"

The "Seductive Mirage" you speak of has garnered me a net worth of over $5 million US dollars. I think the real mirage is the illusion that slashdot people have that DRM and Intellectual Property is of no value to anyone simply because you find it annoying. You all can have your little debate about it while I laugh all the way to the bank.

Another "day"

[Dunge]

I'm against DRM as everyone else, but this is just another made up "day" who mean nothings.

Steam offline mode

[tepples]

[Some game] logs into Steam prior to launch no matter what I do. Again, I bought retail rather than via Steam. I haven't tested trying to run either in a disconnected state

After you log in to Steam, it downloads the receipts for the games that you've "licensed" and caches them for at least a few weeks. Then whenever you run Steam in offline mode, Steam uses the cached receipts to validate games' licenses. There were some pretty nasty defects in offline mode when Half-Life 2 introduced Steam in 2004, but those have been mostly worked out over the better part of a decade. The ServerManagedPolicy in the Google Play Licensing service works similarly.

Re:Products with DRM have become necessities of li

[LordLimecat]

For example, some countries require citizens to file income tax returns using software that runs only on Windows, an operating system that ships with media players supporting MPAA-approved video DRM.

Which countries are these?

it's becoming more and more of a necessity to own a cellphone, and the vast majority of cellphones ship with bootloader DRM or MPAA-approved video DRM or both.

The vast majority of cellphones have neither of those things and are not smartphones.

Tethering

[tepples]

Now load that video onto your kid's ipad so he can watch it on your next long road trip.

PROTIP: You can use online-only iPad applications on a road trip if you have a mobile hotspot or a smartphone with a tethering plan.

Re:Tethering

[Anonymous Coward]

PROTIP: Mobile data is expensive. It's expensive because it is actually a drain on the system. DRM requires use of an inferior technology, in this case slow cell network instead of the fast and cheap home WiFi or USB (and wired broadband backing).

Re:Tethering

[tepples]

PROTIP: Mobile data is expensive.

Then switch to a carrier with Truly Unlimited 4G(TM).

DRM requires use of an inferior technology

It's the technology that the major movie studios have chosen to use because they believe they can profit from its inferiority. You always have the option to choose DRM-free works from studios other than the major movie studios.

in this case slow cell network

By "slow" do you mean latency or throughput? A movie is noninteractive and thus doesn't rely so much on latency. As for throughput, I imagine that kids aren't exactly videophiles. Back when I used to play with DS homebrew, I was able to coax acceptable quality for CGI, cel, and live action out of MoonShell video (MPEG-1 based, 256x192 pixels, 12 fps, 256 kbps). So what bitrate does a streaming kids' movie on a back-seat tablet need?

Re:Tethering

[Technician]

and your road trip never leave the main highway system. Not all trips into BLM land and backwoods have cell service. Teterning is OK for the interstate system and you get to pay for wireless plans instead of much cheaper home broadband.

Re:Tethering

[Anonymous Coward]

It's the technology that the major movie studios have chosen to use because they believe they can profit from its inferiority. You always have the option to choose DRM-free works from studios other than the major movie studios.

Oh yeah, you can always *choose* to make yourself a social pariah who doesn't watch any mainstream media, lucky there's no such thing as peer pressure, advertising telling you you're an outcast unless you buy Product X and everyone is a rational actor making completely voluntary choices on the market. There's no coercion at all! Honest!

You crass apologists for capital are so fucking stupid it boggles my mind.

It was in the terms of use

[Overzeetop]

Rights restrictions on recognition of the day limited dissemination of the announcement until the day of the event.

Still don't have Diablo 3.

[Anonymous Coward]

I've boycotted this game since it came out. I'd love to play it, but I will not play any "always online" game.

How to recoup development costs?

[tepples]

today you might want to check out the open source app store for android (https://www.F-Droid.org)

What's the best way to recoup the expenses of developing a video game or other application that is distributed under a free software license? F-Droid considers the usual revenue sources for free software in home environments, namely advertisements and non-free add-ons, to be anti-features.

Lastly, maybe try linux if you havent?

Provided your Internet connection isn't capped to single-digit GB per month, you can download and try a live USB image. Just make sure to try all your peripherals and a suspend/resume cycle before committing to using GNU/Linux full-time.

Re:How to recoup development costs?

[jones_supa]

Just make sure to try all your peripherals and a suspend/resume cycle before committing to using GNU/Linux full-time.

Oh. In my experience hardware support isn't a big problem at all these days. You get better inbox driver support even than on Windows, so the random USB gadget you found from the corner of the parking lot might as well work plug'n'play. I don't know why Ubuntu disables hibernation by default as it in practice works just fine. The kernel is really good, all the major problems have shifted to the userspace and the graphical desktop these days.

DRM=Robbert Baron Tactics

[Anonymous Coward]

DRM is nothing more than modern-day robber baron tactics. Companies seem to be given a higher form of recognition than end users.

One of the reasons I'm a heavy non-commercial Linux/BSD user is because I want to be a Morlock and not an Eloi. I want to control my own digital destiny, not some company do it for me.

The Internet is slowly turning into walled gardens what with all the major companies creating little fiefdoms they want users to align themselves with. I would rather create my own services despite it being a bit more expensive and time consuming. I don't like being tracked for monetary purposes. I don't like being told what I can and cannot have on my computer for which I paid good money.

I refuse to own an Apple product, a Google device, anything that relies on a "locked in" marketplace. I'll do without the "cool" tech to have my freedom, thanks.

Re:Translation Today is whiny brats against rules

[alexo]

"Digital restrictions management (DRM) creates damaged goods that users cannot control or use freely."
Then DON'T BUY THEM. No one has forced you at gunpoint to use iTunes. Buy DRM free good.

What do you do when the following happens?

(a) DRM-free products become illegal (due to captured regulation)

or

(b) DRM-free products become unavailable (due to corporations realizing that 90% of the population are similar to the AC parent: either ignorant of the issue or are happy to give up their rights for a discount at the cash register)

Re:Products with DRM have become necessities of li

[tepples]

Which countries are these?

I apologize for not having the information handy. I know it's not the United States, but Google keeps showing US results because I live in the US.

The vast majority of cellphones have neither of those things and are not smartphones.

Phones that run BREW use code signing and don't allow the end user to install his own root certificate. Or are BREW phones "smartphones" to you?

i386 == mini

[tepples]

To me, the dividing line between a minicomputer and a microcomputer is the capability for virtual memory. Desktop computers have been architecturally minis since the 68030 and i386.

GNU/Linux means Linux that isn't Android

[tepples]

his irritating, self-aggrandizing "GNU/Linux" campaign

I don't see how "GNU/Linux" is irritating. It distinguishes the operating systems commonly seen on desktops and servers, which use the Linux kernel and GNU components, from Android and embedded Linux systems, which use the Linux kernel without GNU components.

Re:GNU/Linux means Linux that isn't Android

[RabidReindeer]

It's actually more like Linux/GNU.

The GNU components of Linux are valuable, but relatively few of the applications or system components these days are GNU. Or, I should say, probably as many as used to be, but there are so many more additions to Linux that aren't GNU and never were.

Re:GNU/Linux means Linux that isn't Android

[tepples]

True, the GUI part of GNU (Window Maker and GNUstep) didn't manage to catch on nearly as much as Unity, GNOME, and KDE. But pretty much every desktop Linux distribution relies on GCC, glibc, libstdc++, Coreutils, and Bash.

Re:GNU/Linux means Linux that isn't Android

[melikamp]

GNU is considerably larger than Linux. My paper napkin calculations show the entire kernel to be roughly half the size of gcc. No, not including g++, just gcc. So if a distro is built and distributed with gcc as the default compiler, then it's already more like GNU/Linux. Most Linux-based distros, though, easily come with 10 times as much GNU.

Complain about Secure Boot to the FTC/EU today!

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone reading this should go immediately to their relevant trade commission's complaint website and demand that Microsoft and the UEFI Forum be investigated for anti-trust behaviour.

I see lots of people griping about EA and other game companies, but this type of DRM is *much* more dangerous to us all.

I have a running bet with co-workers as to how long it'll be until Microsoft tries to get x86 vendors to force Secure Boot just like on ARM. I'm guessing it'll be Windows 9.

I don't get it...

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because they want to include DRM options in HTML doesn't make HTML evil incarnate, bad or useless. DRM in some cases is necessary. Not everything on the net needs to be free and open and actually it SHOULDN'T be. If I make a website and I provide content, and I don't want the content to be shared, then including the ability for that content to be protected using just native HTML is actually an awesome tool.

DRM used the right way can be a very effective tool. Used improperly, it will probably burn whatever bridges you are trying to build/rebuild. So, the onus is on the creator of the site to use the DRM functionality properly.

I honestly don't get the resistance of DRM functionality using just HTML. Those that think the internet is free need to understand that websites don't run themselves and that people's IP should be protected without having to resort to additional code bases like Javascript or having to pay for DRM certs to protect media files.

Yep... this might come as a shock... Sites like PornHub are breaking some major copyright rules and if legitimate Porn sites (not aggregate sites) can restrict access to proper paying customers only, it might actually make everyone's internet a bit faster and free up some perv's time slots... xD

minicomputers

[Sloppy]

Tablets, mobile phones and other minicomputers are sold with numerous restrictions embedded that cripple users freedom.

I, for one, was outraged that DEC crippled my PDP-11/34a like that!

..

Everyone, sometimes a word is taken away from us, by hostile forces, totally uncaring about the damage they cause by their disregard for truth and honor. Hacker was one of those words. The ruthless murder of a word taints the grief with excess anger. I don't know what to do about that, except that you must learn how to let it go. It's very hard.

But sometimes a word dies a natural death. Such is the case with minicomputer. Let the grieving begin, but let not bitterness dominate you. It had a good, fair run, not suddenly punctuated by some asshole.

Re:Products with DRM have become necessities of li

[LordLimecat]

"Not allowed to install root certificate and use signal coding" are completely different than "uses DRM".

They may be trust issues, but thats not the same thing.

No DRM? But what about my stuff...?

[Anonymous Coward]

As some one who hopes to end up in the creative industry of making video games, how do I stop people stealing my stuff without DRM?

The following answers are not acceptable:
-Make your stuff so good people will want to give you money: There will always be a LARGE amount of people who just don't want to pay even if they could. If they are going to use my software/ play my games then I want them to compensate me for the time and money i put into it. If I'm making a loss on a game. Then how can I continue to even pay rent/bills.

-Pirating will make you more money: No. Just No. Look here: http://www.greenheartgames.com/2013/04/29/what-happens-when-pirates-play-a-game-development-simulator-and-then-go-bankrupt-because-of-piracy/
See how 214 paid for the game and 3104 didn't. If those 3104 had paid the $7.99 the game devs would have an extra - $24856. This is a fact. People not paying for things they should pay for means you do not make money from it. Debates about whether it is stealing or not are also stupid.

-Pirating is free advertising so it doesn't matter anyway: 'Hey guys, you should get this awesome game. It costs $60 but you can just torrent it for free like I did' is how most conversations I have had with people who pirate things go.

-People only pirate for a demo: The only time i have heard of someone buying a game they pirated is to access some kind of multiplayer that has not been cracked YET. Hell, lots of software have a trial version. Also if I were to pirate a move, then watch it. What is my motivation to then pay for it? I have seen the film. I know how it ends. I'm not going to watch it everyday and when i want to see it, i have a copy already.

Re:No DRM? But what about my stuff...?

[cheekyjohnson]

how do I stop people stealing my stuff without DRM?

I'm not sure how DRM would stop people from stealing your physical property. I'm not even sure how DRM would stop people from downloading the games, applying a crack, and then playing the games.

Debates about whether it is stealing or not are also stupid.

Saying that debates about whether it is stealing or not are stupid is stupid. There, done.

DRM is the symptom IPR is the problem

[argoff]

IMHO, the problem is that these companies with the help of the government want to use intellectual property rights laws to control people. These (IPR) laws are the problem, and DRM is the tool they intend to use to impose them. That's why I don't think fighting DRM will solve our problems. They'll never stop this crap till we cut it off at the root, and stand up against the laws being imposed on us.

Re:Translation Today is whiny brats against rules

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, the tried and true slippery slope argument. Still as invalid as ever.

Regarding (A):
It is totally worth fighting laws that would force DRM on the entire market. This AC (same one who started this thread) never said not to fight that aspect of it.

Regarding (B):
You and others like you are perfectly free to offer a DRM free alternative in the absence of (A). If there really is a market for something, that market will be served. It's a fundamental axiom of capitalism. BUT:
Be prepared to pay significantly more for your DRM free products
Be prepared for significantly lower availability of the latest, most premium or in-demand products.
Be prepared for the 90% of people who just want to pay a buck for the latest stupid Angry Birds derivative to laugh in your face or just ignore your ramblings.

Regarding being an AC: I've been commenting/reading slashdot since the beginning (more than a decade). I have yet to find it useful to create an account here. I have no desire for Karma or to mod others posts.

Fine-grained

[tepples]

he paid for the right to watch a video on his xbox.

The problem as some see it is that DRM mechanisms allow expressing a policy specifically enough that buying "the right to watch a video on his xbox" is even possible.

Re:Fine-grained

[LordLimecat]

So DRM is creating a new type of business model, and anti-DRM folks dont like that.

Ah ok, I understand now.

Play a CD on another brand of CD player

[tepples]

Will it still work when you want to play it on another device?

Where does it say you should be able to? That's like expceting to be able to play a CD on your turntable if your CD player is broken

No, it's like expecting to be able to play a CD on another brand of CD player instead of having to buy another Sony CD player. Imagine if Sony Music Entertainment, Warner Music Group, and Universal Music Group sold their music as exclusive to their own branded players. Game console DRM works in exactly that way.

Re:Play a CD on another brand of CD player

[globalist]

He's bought a movie to be played on his XBOX. If another company made XBOXes then you'd be right to expect the movie to be playable on them. But they don't. It's a format, same as LP vs. CD.

Re:Play a CD on another brand of CD player

[tepples]

It's a format, same as LP vs. CD.

Many companies make record players and CD players. The fact that no other company can make players for a given format is the problem.

Re:Play a CD on another brand of CD player

[globalist]

It's not a problem as long as the format creators are offering a player.

Re:BTW O'Reilly offers (DRM-free eBooks) -50% toda

[Anonymous Coward]

50% of the size? 150% of the retail cost? I'm confused.

Good luck finding a payphone nowadays

[tepples]

Then use a LANDLINE.

If you need to make a call other than from your own house, good luck finding a payphone nowadays. See previous Slashdot stories from 2002, 2011, and 2012.

You are perfectly capable of disambiguating which definition of IP I meant

Which is why I linked to an essay about the definition of IP you meant. Besides, among copyright, patent, trademark, and trade secret, which one of the four did you mean?

Re:Good luck finding a payphone nowadays

[Anonymous Coward]

Payphones do indeed exist though. And since when was this conversation about phones? It's about DRM.

There are a plethora of pay as you go feature phones that do nothing but make calls. Buy yourself a Jitterbug, virgin mobile, etc type phone and just make calls with it if that floats your boat. In the meantime I'll happily use my smartphone. Phones don't need to have apps or other features besides phone calls---so again:

No one has put a gun to your head and forced you to buy a phone that has features besides calling. If the cheapest phone you can find happens to be a smartphone, no one is putting a gun to your head and forcing you to buy or play angry birds.

"Which is why I linked to an essay about the definition of IP you meant. Besides, among copyright, patent, trademark, and trade secret, which one of the four did you mean?"

No you muddied the waters by making a joke that I was talking about IP addresses. As to which types of IP I was referring to? ALL of them except trade secret because that doesn't apply.

As an author, any work I create is MY PROPERTY. I don't care how fucking much you whine, the product of my brainpower is mine to own, and mine alone. Intellectual property protections are the only reasons that I can create products and release them for people to utilize or enjoy, for a price that I set.

Sure, we could talk about how I should create software and "let it be free", but that doesn't keep me afloat in Guinness. And if you get your way and I am not allowed to project my creations from piracy, then I will stop creating them, and so will virtually everyone else.

So again, good luck with that.

Re:Good luck finding a payphone nowadays

[cheekyjohnson]

As an author, any work I create is MY PROPERTY.

The ability to get the government to enforce a monopoly over an idea for you and to try to control what other people do with their own real property and equipment is far different than normal kinds of property.

Re:Products with DRM have become necessities of li

[tepples]

But they have the same effect: an end user cannot make modifications to an application distributed as free software and install the modified application on the device.

Re:Products with DRM have become necessities of li

[msoftsucks]

The UK for one. Here ya go. The US also, Almost all of the US healthcare requires mandatory use of IE.Even the US govt is on this. Most of the govt healthcare websites (Medicare, Medicaid, etc) for fee for service physicians will only work with Windows and IE. No other operating system or browser is supported. Most US insurance carriers web portals such as Navinet require IE and ActiveX. They could have developed their portals using web standards and allowed different browsers and operating systems. Instead MicroShaft has thrown alot of money in the healthcare industry in order to DRM lock it into it's own proprietary junk.

Re:Products with DRM have become necessities of li

[LordLimecat]

The US also

False, you can file by paper, or do it through a web browser. Im sure theres Mac software too.

Almost all of the US healthcare requires mandatory use of IE

Ive had healthcare my whole life. I dont use IE, and havent for ~9 years. Also, this ISNT DRM.

Most of the govt healthcare websites (Medicare, Medicaid, etc) for fee for service physicians will only work with Windows and IE. No other operating system or browser is supported.

Where are you getting your info, I tried googling this and found zero to support that.

Most US insurance carriers web portals such as Navinet [navimedix.com] require IE and ActiveX.

Who is Navinet? Ive had Blue Cross, Kaiser, and United Healthcare. Never had to use IE. I wouldnt call "one small provider" most.

Instead MicroShaft has thrown alot of money in the healthcare industry in order to DRM lock it into it's own proprietary junk.

Baloney. Ive dealt with 4 of the top 10 providers in the US and have never dealt with this. This isnt a grand conspiracy. Im sure Microsoft lobbied for ActiveX at one point, but that ship sailed a long time ago and this IE only thing is a rarity these days.

I'll be sure to rip some copyrighted content...

[pigiron]

and distribute it to all my friends!

A great way to celebrate...

[CCarrot]

...buy a monthly book bundle from Baen! :o)

Anticompetitive balkanization

[tepples]

Anti-DRM folks don't like the sort of anticompetitive balkanization that such a business model has already led to.

See the opportunity

[Ravaldy]

If DRM is that bad, it should be considered an opportunity to compete by providing an equivalent offering DRM Free.

So stop complaining and get to work. There's money to be made.

Royalties to Shakespeare

[tepples]

As an author, any work I create is MY PROPERTY.

You use "work" terminology, so I'll assume for the moment that you're mostly talking about copyright. The issues differ among the various areas of law encompassed by the Had you said "invention", I would have discussed patent; had you said "brand", I would have discussed trademark.

Now should this work remain YOUR PROPERTY even after you no longer exist? For example, should the descendants of William Shakespeare still be receiving royalties? If so, why? And if not, why not?

Should you have the power to censor reviews of YOUR PROPERTY that make brief quotations from your work? If so, why?

Quickly!

[The End Of Days]

Quickly, everyone, to your computer chair to whine ineffectually on the Internet. Someone is trying to stop me from having all the entertainment I want! It's my right!

Next on the geek holiday list, international day against showering.

Re:Products with DRM have become necessities of li

[tepples]

UK requires benefits claimants to use Windows XP and IE6

IE is bundled with DRM

[tepples]

Also, [requiring Internet Explorer] ISNT DRM.

Requiring Internet Explorer means requiring Windows, which in turn means requiring an operating system that ships with support for MPAA-approved DRM.

Re:IE is bundled with DRM

[msoftsucks]

It is defective by design. I must only use MicroShaft solutions. Locked in to one vendor. Digital Restrictions Management. DRM is not just encryption. It is any technique used to restrict me from exercising my choice. My choice of operating system, my choice of browser and my choice of networking technologies .There are web standards that they could use to develop for a wide ranging os's and browsers. Instead, they use proprietary/DRM'd technologies causing me to be at the mercy of Microsoft. They are restricting me to one crappy vendor's solutions. Why? As much as Microsoft doesn't like it, the tech industry is more than just Microsoft. And now with the Win8 and Win9 Microsoft lockdown, it is more imperative that I move my clients off of Microsoft's solutions as much as possible.

Before iPads were invented

[tepples]

Not all trips into BLM land and backwoods have cell service.

Nor do all kids need to watch a movie in the back seat in the first place. Before iPads were invented, how did children passengers entertain themselves?

Re:Before iPads were invented

[david_thornley]

Nor do all kids need to watch a movie in the back seat in the first place. Before iPads were invented, how did children passengers entertain themselves?

I used to have a box of books for long road trips. They had this really neat feature: I could take them out of the range of any communication system and still read them.

Support alternatives

[paulpach]

I am a game developer. My game is available for ios, android, mac, and pc. So I am giving my perspective on DRM from the other side of the fence.

I do not add DRM to the game.
Piracy, especially in android, is rampant. I die a little inside every time I see someone stealing my work. Meanwhile DRM whispers to me "come and play".
Laws are useless. I could spend my day sending take down notices all over the web. 5 minutes after I take one down, 10 pirates post it in some other place. So I don't do this either.

So what alternatives do we have? lets see...

In app purchase? Hated by a lot of people. Maybe even more than DRM.
Subscription?: Hated
Bundling (humble bundle)?: You can do that once or twice, not a long term solution
Advertising? No revenue.

So yes, go on, oppose DRM if you like. As I said before I don't do it. But don't stop there, think which one of these other business models you do support.
Don't just say "I won't buy this game because of DRM", instead say "I will buy game X instead of Y because of DRM", as that speaks much more loudly.

Re:Support alternatives

[paulpach]

Sorry to reply to myself, the last statement should be:

Don't just say "DRM is bad". If you want to get across and convince content creators like myself, say: "I bought game X instead of Y because Y has DRM". Email them, let them know this is was an important deterrent for you, and actually buy X.

Re:Support alternatives

[MadMaverick9]

Ok - so where is the shop that I can go to with my usb stick and a certain amount of cash and buy your game?

It doesn't exist. That's the problem.

You assume everybody has a credit card. Many people in the world do not. etc etc.

Re:Support alternatives

[Anonymous Coward]

I think if you put no drm at all in your software, you are a little bit of a fool. You've put your stock on display and an "honesty box". The alternatives listed are just scraping more money out of the people who did buy your software, and as you say, not liked. One thing to realise is that although software gets cracked, no matter what you do, some protection is better than none.

I dont see what was wrong with product keys coupled with online/emailed verification at install. That is my design plan. My client base is quite small, it's not complete, but inital trials seem fine - and hey, seemed to work for microsoft and certain shareware software.

I consider it two-factor information about an install.
1. Which copy it was
2. What it's been installed on

It should run on what it was bought to run on, allow legitamate installs as hardware changes, and provide information to track offenders. If a key gets out there are typically so many installs before a key is flagged/disabled and the account holder notified. Keys are enabled at purchase/registration.
I think anyone looking to crack it will still do so. Thats the world - not much I can do about it. If they distribute it, there are legal avenues that I can follow - if it really is worth it. I'll change and improve the versions sold and make new programs to gain more revenue. Software development can be a high-labour low-income business, and it's success of which varies greatly on then people involved.

I akin the some current methods of DRM to be like a hammer manufacturer requireing licence agreements, sending someone to film you and take your hammer away if you use it incorrectly - such as welding it in a piece of art. If the art is damaged, the manufacturer is not liable to due the licence agreement, along any information gathered used at thier discretion.

Installing/running drm software that watches what other things a person is doing to ensure software isn't copies should not be allowed, IMHO. I think Terms of use need limits on what can be decreed, and standardised licence agreements where immediate interpretations can be made to the customer. For example, the concept "Do not copy this software" can equate to pages of licence agreement depending on how it has been written, specific clauses put in place, or sometimes, a bunch of random trademark information. I think this problem is a symptom of duplication ease and first showed itself with the media industry and is just far more blatent in the software world. The limits put out by software vendors today are getting far too broad and is widening as the consumer doesn't know what they agree to most of the time, while the agreements seem to be a game as to what can be gotten away with.

In the end, I see no problem with some DRM - we need a way of cataloging copies and verifying when they are made. However there has got to be some limits on what the customer is required to agree to and have enforced upon them.

Re:Support alternatives

[Anonymous Coward]

A computer store or a friend may help you out there. Still, thats his choice of distribution model.

Re:Support alternatives

[paulpach]

Ok - so where is the shop that I can go to with my usb stick and a certain amount of cash and buy your game?

It doesn't exist. That's the problem.

You assume everybody has a credit card. Many people in the world do not. etc etc.

Brick and mortar retail is essentially impossible for indie developers. However, both google play and apple sell cards for cash in many stores for cash, so there is no need for credit card in the major markets.

We actually added SMS as a form of payment too, but this backfired because people really got worried about the game requiring SMS permission.

Frankly, the whole boxed game is dying, and there is plenty of piracy with boxed games, just as much as with online distributed titles, I don't really see this as a solution to anything.

Moreover, while piracy is rampant in android, it is essentially non existent in ios which has the same methods of payment, so obviously CC requirements are not "the problem"

i386 >> mini :)

[Colin Douglas Howell]

(That ">>" in my subject is a "much greater than", not a right shift. :)

To me, the dividing line between a minicomputer and a microcomputer is the capability for virtual memory. Desktop computers have been architecturally minis since the 68030 and i386.

That's kind of funny to me, since the term "minicomputer" came into vogue in the later 1960s to describe computers like the original PDP-8 (the "Straight 8"). Far from being a virtual memory machine, the PDP-8 was a 12-bit architecture with a minimal instruction set and a very limited address space. Later PDP-8s used bank-switching to expand their addressable memory, as did the later 16-bit PDP-11. In many ways the early minis were architecturally similar to 8-bit and 16-bit microcomputers. Compared to them, the 80386 and 68030 look like ultra-powerful monsters.

Re:Translation Today is whiny brats against rules

[alexo]

Ah, the tried and true slippery slope argument. Still as invalid as ever.

Is it still a "slippery slope" if it already happened?

I live in Canada. We recently got the Copyright Modernization Act (formerly known as Bill C-11), courtesy of Steven Harper.
This sweet little piece of legislation contains an interesting provision: it makes it is illegal to circumvent DRM for any purpose whatsoever. In effect, the presence of DRM trumps any and all "fair dealing" rights (somewhat similar to the American concept of "fair use") that we otherwise have. Even if no copyright infringement has taken place.

Regarding (A):
It is totally worth fighting laws that would force DRM on the entire market. This AC (same one who started this thread) never said not to fight that aspect of it.

While the above is technically not "force[ing] DRM on the entire market", it is close enough for practical purposes.

Regarding (B):
You and others like you are perfectly free to offer a DRM free alternative in the absence of (A).

Again see above. Suppose a young contemporary artist (say, composer) creates an unsurpassed masterpiece. The work is offered in a DRMed format only. Several generations later, the copyright expired and you want to distribute the work. Unfortunately, it was never offered in an unencumbered format, breaking DRM is illegal and the company that has the key either doen't have any incentive to share it with you or no longer exists.

If there really is a market for something, that market will be served. It's a fundamental axiom of capitalism. BUT:
Be prepared to pay significantly more for your DRM free products
Be prepared for significantly lower availability of the latest, most premium or in-demand products.
Be prepared for the 90% of people who just want to pay a buck for the latest stupid Angry Birds derivative to laugh in your face or just ignore your ramblings.

So what you're saying is that it is practically guaranteed that there will be no market for it.

Regarding being an AC: I've been commenting/reading slashdot since the beginning (more than a decade). I have yet to find it useful to create an account here.

Imagine holding an IM, email or forum conversation with a person. There are arguments, examples, points, counterpoints, exchange of opinions, presentation of facts, sometimes (hopefully) re-evaluation of positions...

Now imagine that every reply that you receive may be made by a different person who may, but most likely may not, share the same point of view as one of the previous participants. Moreover, this person may self-identify as the one you were previously conversing with, but you have no way of knowing for sure.

In short, if holding a meaningful conversation with me, or with others like me, is of no value to you, by all means remain an AC.
Otherwise, you are making it harder and less convenient for us to converse with you.

"Digital restrictions management"

[Anonymous Coward]

"Digital restrictions management (DRM)

And, to celebrate anti-DRM day, I strongly recommend changing the standard terminology used for DRM from this:

"Digital rights management"

to this:

"Digital restrictions management"

in all editorial style guidelines.

"Digital rights" are a legal concept, and legal concepts are managed by legislatures and judges, not by technology. A judge's responsibility to manage legal rights cannot be usurped by any piece of technology.

The "M" in DRM refers exclusively to the management of the restrictions that are placed on the customer. This management is always accomplished by crippling the product, and always results in the customer getting less value for his money. (My use of "always" here is not hyperbole. There are no known exceptions to this fact.)

If you encounter a publication that still uses the old, inaccurate term for DRM, then point it out to them, and tell them why the old term is incorrect and how the new term provides a correction.

Re:Products with DRM have become necessities of li

[msoftsucks]

You don't know what you are talking about. Yes you can file by paper, and they will take up to 3 months to pay you. They will tell you that they never received your claims, cheat you and then pay only a fraction of what you're entitled to. If you relied on paper, you would be out of business in a heartbeat. I guess you don't work in the healthcare industry, because if you did, you would know that there is a massive undertaking to move away from paper to all electronic submissions.

And NaviNet is the web portal for over 50 different insurance companies. It includes Aetna, Cigna,Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Horizon, Oxford, Medicare, UnitedHealthCare, and many others. This site is required by doctors, not individuals. If you are a doctor, and accept any one of these insurances, you must do all of your account maintenance using this site. It is mandatory. It is stipulated by the doctor's contract with the insurance carrier. They use this site to check for eligibility, for financials, check information and even electronic prescribing.

As for the illustrious US government, access to the PECOS site can only be done effectively through Windows and IE. This site is used by the doctors to manage their Medicare and NPI enrollments. If you are a doctor, and wish to accept Medicare, you must deal with this site. I have on numerous times, tried to use other browsers on these sites, but they don't work.

I guess being a shill for Microsoft doesn't give you a whole lot of time to read the news. Microsoft has spent tremendous amounts of money in the healthcare industry. It has even formed a joint venture with GE who is a major player in that industry. It has given millions of dollars to the insurance carriers to lock the industry into Microsoft technologies. This is an undeniable fact.

This lockdown is digitally restricting me to using proprietary systems and is preventing me from choosing other technologies. Whether or not it is using encryption to accomplish that is immaterial. It is still DRM.

No competition in players

[tepples]

The problem is that the lack of competition in players for certain popular formats discourages innovation. For example, if Microsoft licensed other manufacturers to make Xbox 360 players, there'd probably be a mass-produced portable Xbox 360 by now. Compare to Android, where numerous manufacturers make players.

Re:Products with DRM have become necessities of li

[LordLimecat]

You don't know what you are talking about. Yes you can file by paper, and they will take up to 3 months to pay you. They will tell you that they never received your claims,

File by certified mail. And you can use web versions, as I said.

cheat you and then pay only a fraction of what you're entitled to.

News to me. You have a source, or are you just spouting?

I guess being a shill for Microsoft doesn't give you a whole lot of time to read the news.

Ok, not having used IE since 2004 and working with a combination of BSD, Linux, and MS makes me a shill for MS. Gotcha.

Lets keep in mind that the parent i was responding to was talking about everyday life, not what wacky restrictions you have to deal with as a healthcare provider. And Im saying that IE is not a necessity for 95% of people. See, as an IT guy, I have the chance to interact with a lot of customers, and suggest Chrome / Firefox (and have for ~8 years now), and know when it does and doesnt work. In most cases, it just works.

I would suggest you reevaluate your black-and-white view of the tech world. Not all people who use MS products are pro-MS fanbois, and not all "requires IE" instances are grand conspiracies.

Stupid...

[adamz_myth]

DRM isn't going away. Get over it.