3 ms·
They are not separate in any meaningful way. From the perspective of content owners, they want DRM because they want to ensure people who consume their content
by 794CD01 10y ago
They are not separate in any meaningful way. From the perspective of content owners, they want DRM because they want to ensure people who consume their content have paid for it. From the perspective of consumers, those who want to circumvent DRM in order to avoid paying for content overwhelmingly outnumber those who oppose DRM on principle to the point that the voices, and more importantly, the money, of the latter are completely drowned out.
- ska 10y agoThey absolutely are completely separable. DRM is one technological approach to enforcing a model on payment for content. There are other models, and other mechanisms to encourage payment or reduce non-payment. To pretend that DRM is unique, or in some way the natural approach is folly.
- 794CD01 10y agoDRM is not the implementation or the technology, necessarily. Those who own copyright want to deny the ability to copy to others, because they fear it devalues what they have. That doesn't make it right, or natural, as if any of that even matters. It just means that a group of people exist who want to be able to enforce copyright. And the opposition to that is, by definition, those who want to be able to make copies of things without the blessing of copyright owners. If DRM were perfect, there wouldn't even be a technology- or freedom- based argument against it.