3 ms·

I disagree, please provides examples of commonly used and almost completely transparent DRM. I use several major business software packages. I run the program.

I disagree, please provides examples of commonly used and almost completely transparent DRM. I use several major business software packages. I run the program. It loads and I use it. I put a DVD or Blu-ray into my player. I play the disc. I watch the movie. I'm not a big gamer myself these days, but I've rarely heard anyone complain about Steam's DRM in years.

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 9y ago
So ... DRM is completely transparent if it doesn't get in your way when you only do what the DRM allows you to do? That's a whole lot like you are completely free to do whatever you want to do, as long as it's what we told you to do, isn't it?
- Silhouette 9y ago
  That's a whole lot like you are completely free to do whatever you want to do, as long as it's what we told you to do, isn't it? Well, since that's fundamentally what copyright is about... yes. What were you expecting?
  - zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 9y ago
    I guess I was expecting something that explains your argument? I mean, unless I completely misunderstood you, you justified DRM by saying that it was ok because it doesn't get in your way ("it's transparent"). And now you are essentially saying that if it did get in your way, that would also be ok, because that's the purpose of DRM. Or in other words: Whether it does get in your way is completely irrelevant as to whether or not you think DRM is acceptable. So, what was your argument, then?
    - Silhouette 9y ago
      I mean, unless I completely misunderstood you, you justified DRM by saying that it was ok because it doesn't get in your way ("it's transparent"). With the extra qualifier that what you're doing is actually permitted/legal, yes, that's essentially my point. That condition rather changes the meaning, though. Indeed, the difference it makes is essentially the point of having DRM in the first place.
      - zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 9y ago
        > With the extra qualifier that what you're doing is actually permitted/legal, yes, that's essentially my point. Now, the question is: What do you mean by "permitted/legal"? Permitted by general copyright law, or permitted by the part of the DMCA that specifically makes it illegal to circumvent or share information about how to circumvent DRM?
icebraining 9y ago
I use several major business software packages. I run the program. It loads and I use it. Without knowing which DRM they use, this example is irrelevant. I put a DVD or Blu-ray into my player. I play the disc. I watch the movie. This is a classic WORKSFORME. New Blu-rays are released with new versions of the DRM, which don't work with older players unless they're connected to the Internet to update their firmware - and if it exists. Search for "can't play avatar blueray" and you'll find many people for whom it's not even close to transparent. I'm not a big gamer myself these days, but I've rarely heard anyone complain about Steam's DRM in years. If you beat them for a while, eventually people stop complaining. I don't know about you, but growing up, not being able to lend games between friends was unthinkable. Steam robs new players of this communal experience, excluding poorer kids from social groups because they can't play the games everyone else has. It's not just not transparent; I find it vile.

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 9y ago

So ... DRM is completely transparent if it doesn't get in your way when you only do what the DRM allows you to do? That's a whole lot like you are completely free to do whatever you want to do, as long as it's what we told you to do, isn't it?

Silhouette 9y ago
That's a whole lot like you are completely free to do whatever you want to do, as long as it's what we told you to do, isn't it? Well, since that's fundamentally what copyright is about... yes. What were you expecting?
- zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 9y ago
  I guess I was expecting something that explains your argument? I mean, unless I completely misunderstood you, you justified DRM by saying that it was ok because it doesn't get in your way ("it's transparent"). And now you are essentially saying that if it did get in your way, that would also be ok, because that's the purpose of DRM. Or in other words: Whether it does get in your way is completely irrelevant as to whether or not you think DRM is acceptable. So, what was your argument, then?
  - Silhouette 9y ago
    I mean, unless I completely misunderstood you, you justified DRM by saying that it was ok because it doesn't get in your way ("it's transparent"). With the extra qualifier that what you're doing is actually permitted/legal, yes, that's essentially my point. That condition rather changes the meaning, though. Indeed, the difference it makes is essentially the point of having DRM in the first place.
    - zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 9y ago
      > With the extra qualifier that what you're doing is actually permitted/legal, yes, that's essentially my point. Now, the question is: What do you mean by "permitted/legal"? Permitted by general copyright law, or permitted by the part of the DMCA that specifically makes it illegal to circumvent or share information about how to circumvent DRM?

icebraining 9y ago

I use several major business software packages. I run the program. It loads and I use it. Without knowing which DRM they use, this example is irrelevant. I put a DVD or Blu-ray into my player. I play the disc. I watch the movie. This is a classic WORKSFORME. New Blu-rays are released with new versions of the DRM, which don't work with older players unless they're connected to the Internet to update their firmware - and if it exists. Search for "can't play avatar blueray" and you'll find many people for whom it's not even close to transparent. I'm not a big gamer myself these days, but I've rarely heard anyone complain about Steam's DRM in years. If you beat them for a while, eventually people stop complaining. I don't know about you, but growing up, not being able to lend games between friends was unthinkable. Steam robs new players of this communal experience, excluding poorer kids from social groups because they can't play the games everyone else has. It's not just not transparent; I find it vile.