6 ms·

The physical book comparison is interesting. Imagine there would be a way to publish physical books with DRM that all publishers would embrace. You open such a

by type0 9y ago

The physical book comparison is interesting. Imagine there would be a way to publish physical books with DRM that all publishers would embrace. You open such a book without authorization and it's all gibberish. To read it you would need to have bought a special strip that you lay over the pages in order to read (don't matter the technical aspect, it's gedanken-experiment so let's consider such a strip magic for now). You buy this strip and enter a user agreement to only use it for yourself (you are not allowed to lend it - even to your children), it could easily be reverse-engineered but no-one would do it because that would be a felony. No sane person would agree to such state of affairs but somehow now because our books are digital it's all off a sudden okay with almost everyone?

pdkl95 9y ago
RMS has been warning[1] about that specific problem for decades. Unfortunately, very few people listened. Now we have the additional problem of people already giving up property rights for shiny digital baubles. -sigh- [1] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html
- scrollaway 9y ago
  I'm getting a little exhausted in every thread about DRM and the likes to read about how "people don't listen to RMS". People don't listen to RMS because he makes no effort to be listened to and constantly takes absolutist stances which only harm what he defends. In the case of DRM, many people have been talking about this problem for a long time. It's not a matter of consumers not listening, it's a matter of alternatives not developing in the market. DRM in video games is a lesser problem as alternatives did develop. Steam, the #1 platform, doesn't enforce DRM. GOG and Humble Bundle have been running their platforms on mostly DRM-free games. Who do you fault for alternatives not developing/not catching on in the ebooks/video world? Consumers for making the wrong choices? Companies for not trying hard enough? Governments for not regulating consumer rights?
  - pharrington 9y ago
    Stallman's a philosopher, so his precision and consistency in how he interprets the digital world is actually mandatory. Do you know the time limits for how long your games can run in Steam's offline mode?
    - jdormit 9y ago
      I'm pretty sure you can just go to the steamapps directory and run the .exes directly
      - pharrington 9y ago
        The DRM happens in the game's steam_api.dll, which the game executable is linked to.
        anigbrowl 9y ago
        Could you just make your argument instead of hinting it? Not being a gamer or a full-time developer I have no desire to go off and spend hours figuring out the intricacies of how Steam works to see whether I agree with your assertions or not. You claim that DRM happens in this particular library. OK, and the practical consequences of that are...?
        zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 9y ago
        ... that the claim made above that Steam doesn't enforce DRM is wrong?
        TeMPOraL 9y ago
        The practical consequences are that Steam games will call into steam_api.dll to verify whether or not they should run, and will refuse to launch if Steam says so. E.g. if you're logged out of Steam, you'll be asked to log in. Whether or not you can launch a game without an Internet connection active depends on whether or not Steam will allow you to. This DRM scheme is probably not very solid, though, as I recall replacement versions of steam_api.dll bundled with some bootleg titles.
- narrator 9y ago
  There's a whole subreddit devoted to Stallman's correct predictions: http://reddit.com/r/stallmanwasright http://reddit.com/r/stallmanwasright
chiefofgxbxl 9y ago
That would mean that even the concept of a library would be illegal, right? A neighborhood library lending books out to people, under this DRM-mentality scheme, would be illegal, because everyone should have to buy their own copy of the books, not borrow from others. How did the libraries get by this? Do they agree with the publisher to pay a premium price for the book, seeing as they'll lend it out? Or were the publishers OK with this model because it meant more exposure of their content to users, who may in turn want to own their own copy?
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  > How did the libraries get by this? I think the answer is, libraries predate publishing industry. They existed much longer than print. Governments worldwide managed to secure the role of libraries while publishers were still figuring out their business model. OTOH, audio and video recording, and all the digital media, popped up when publishers already knew how to make money with creative works - hence they managed to secure their moat quicker than society could respond.
zeta0134 9y ago
I think the biggest trouble, and the thing DRM-protected content producers have latched on to, is that the vast majority of our population will follow the path of least resistance. If it's easier for the average consumer to purchase an eBook on their Kindle than it is for them to find and purchase the same physical book in a store, they will often do so irregardless of any difference in value, perceived or otherwise. By making the DRM-protected purchase the easiest, most frictionless method of initial acquisition, consumers are encouraged (often without realizing the risks) to buy DRM protected content, simply by being presented with an opportunity to do so. I think the only thing we can really do to solve this problem is what we've been doing: educate our fellows, shout it from the rooftops, and work to make consumers aware of the rights they're giving up when they purchase content protected by DRM.

by type0 9y ago

pdkl95 9y ago

RMS has been warning[1] about that specific problem for decades. Unfortunately, very few people listened. Now we have the additional problem of people already giving up property rights for shiny digital baubles. -sigh- [1] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html

scrollaway 9y ago
I'm getting a little exhausted in every thread about DRM and the likes to read about how "people don't listen to RMS". People don't listen to RMS because he makes no effort to be listened to and constantly takes absolutist stances which only harm what he defends. In the case of DRM, many people have been talking about this problem for a long time. It's not a matter of consumers not listening, it's a matter of alternatives not developing in the market. DRM in video games is a lesser problem as alternatives did develop. Steam, the #1 platform, doesn't enforce DRM. GOG and Humble Bundle have been running their platforms on mostly DRM-free games. Who do you fault for alternatives not developing/not catching on in the ebooks/video world? Consumers for making the wrong choices? Companies for not trying hard enough? Governments for not regulating consumer rights?
- pharrington 9y ago
  Stallman's a philosopher, so his precision and consistency in how he interprets the digital world is actually mandatory. Do you know the time limits for how long your games can run in Steam's offline mode?
  - jdormit 9y ago
    I'm pretty sure you can just go to the steamapps directory and run the .exes directly
    - pharrington 9y ago
      The DRM happens in the game's steam_api.dll, which the game executable is linked to.
      - anigbrowl 9y ago
        Could you just make your argument instead of hinting it? Not being a gamer or a full-time developer I have no desire to go off and spend hours figuring out the intricacies of how Steam works to see whether I agree with your assertions or not. You claim that DRM happens in this particular library. OK, and the practical consequences of that are...?
        zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 9y ago
        ... that the claim made above that Steam doesn't enforce DRM is wrong?
        TeMPOraL 9y ago
        The practical consequences are that Steam games will call into steam_api.dll to verify whether or not they should run, and will refuse to launch if Steam says so. E.g. if you're logged out of Steam, you'll be asked to log in. Whether or not you can launch a game without an Internet connection active depends on whether or not Steam will allow you to. This DRM scheme is probably not very solid, though, as I recall replacement versions of steam_api.dll bundled with some bootleg titles.
narrator 9y ago
There's a whole subreddit devoted to Stallman's correct predictions: http://reddit.com/r/stallmanwasright http://reddit.com/r/stallmanwasright

chiefofgxbxl 9y ago

That would mean that even the concept of a library would be illegal, right? A neighborhood library lending books out to people, under this DRM-mentality scheme, would be illegal, because everyone should have to buy their own copy of the books, not borrow from others. How did the libraries get by this? Do they agree with the publisher to pay a premium price for the book, seeing as they'll lend it out? Or were the publishers OK with this model because it meant more exposure of their content to users, who may in turn want to own their own copy?

TeMPOraL 9y ago
> How did the libraries get by this? I think the answer is, libraries predate publishing industry. They existed much longer than print. Governments worldwide managed to secure the role of libraries while publishers were still figuring out their business model. OTOH, audio and video recording, and all the digital media, popped up when publishers already knew how to make money with creative works - hence they managed to secure their moat quicker than society could respond.

zeta0134 9y ago

I think the biggest trouble, and the thing DRM-protected content producers have latched on to, is that the vast majority of our population will follow the path of least resistance. If it's easier for the average consumer to purchase an eBook on their Kindle than it is for them to find and purchase the same physical book in a store, they will often do so irregardless of any difference in value, perceived or otherwise. By making the DRM-protected purchase the easiest, most frictionless method of initial acquisition, consumers are encouraged (often without realizing the risks) to buy DRM protected content, simply by being presented with an opportunity to do so. I think the only thing we can really do to solve this problem is what we've been doing: educate our fellows, shout it from the rooftops, and work to make consumers aware of the rights they're giving up when they purchase content protected by DRM.