3 ms·
> They themselves tend to be pretty understanding of the whole anti-DRM thing and contribute to FOSS technology more than most companies, but they cooperate wit
by ailideex 10y ago
> They themselves tend to be pretty understanding of the whole anti-DRM thing and contribute to FOSS technology more than most companies, but they cooperate with DRM content because that actually is the difference between them being in business and not.
Is it really though ? I mean ... their content still get pirated. Everybody's content gets pirated, yet most of them are still in business.
- TallGuyShort 10y agoMy main point is that they're in business because they can get licensed to distribute the content because they'll accept DRM. Try being a DRM-free alternative to Netflix that I think is worth $8 a month. Good luck. It's not that DRM changes a ton with consumers, it's all about getting the producers onboard. For better or worse, most of the best content producers (at least the management) are insisting on DRM. Anecdotally, I do see a whole lot less piracy than I did 10 years ago. I think things like Spotify and Netflix / Hulu provide enough of what people want with the right business model and enough freedom that the peasants aren't willing to revolt. Which can be a good thing - fewer computers get AIDS from Kazaa. It's analagous to most governments. Some people want 100% anarchy. But almost no one's trying to overthrow the government because 60% freedom is good enough for most people and not worth war. But maybe I'm just less hip than I used to be.
- ailideex 10y agoFair enough.