4 ms·

All contracts set up what you are allowed and not allowed to do, DRM is just a way to enforce the contract in this analogy the DRM is the police. However the OP

All contracts set up what you are allowed and not allowed to do, DRM is just a way to enforce the contract in this analogy the DRM is the police. However the OP is right if you stay in a hotel and wreck the place or don’t want to leave they’ll call security or the police and they’ll kick you out and that’s their DRM. If anything the DRM argument itself is a straw man and a fallacy unless you are willing to forgo property rights all together.

falcolas 8y ago
DRM restricts you above and beyond what is allowed by contract or law. The law says you have limited rights to use copyrighted materials in the pursuit of review, remix, and archival. DRM doesn't allow you to do that without breaking the law.
- scarface74 8y ago
  You have that right for what you purchased. You’re not buying media from Netflix.
  - BugsJustFindMe 8y ago
    > You have that right for what you purchased. I'm pretty sure that US copyright law makes no such distinction.
    - dogma1138 8y ago
      Not only does it make that distinction (broadcasting and streaming vs owned copies) but the entire premise is false. You may use fair use as a protection against a copyright claim but in not wa shape or form is anyone compelled to facilitate the fair use of their content.
      - falcolas 8y ago
        Fair use is a positive right - it's a right given to individuals by the same Act in which copyright is created. Companies are restricting that right through the use of DRM and the laws which prohibit breaking DRM. This is poor behavior, and against the spirit of US law that carved out those exceptions, if not the letter.
        dogma1138 8y ago
        No it’s not, you don’t understand the law. Fair use (in the US) it’s a protection of the first amendment however no one is obligated to facilitate that right what it means is that the courts cannot be used to subdue your right to use the content under fair use. I don’t have to sell you to content in the first place, I don’t have to make it available for easy copy, I mean just 40 years ago we didn’t even really had home video on VHS, was I obliged to give you a copy of the film and a telecine machine so you can make a copy? What about paintings? Am I obligated to allow you to take a photograph? Well you better call the police on like every gallery and museum out there... Heck live events specifically have rules against filming, go into the movies or many shows with a camera and see how receptive they’ll be to that.
  - falcolas 8y ago
    You have that right for any copyrighted work; purchase is not involved in the transaction. "the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright" Later interpretation of the law by courts has included backups in this. As for lease versus ownership, the right to backups has been applied - by the courts - to software with "you're just leasing this" clickwrap agreements.
    - dogma1138 8y ago
      You have the right however it doesn’t mean that the copyright owners need to facilitate that right or even support it all it means is that they cannot use the legal system to subdue that right. There is an easier way of going about it and that is not giving you access to the work in the first place. As you know tha las isn’t specific to work you “own” a copy of but all work in general. Am I obliged to give you a copy of my work because you want to use it in fair use? Ofc not...
- dogma1138 8y ago
  No it doesn’t the law doesn’t says that you should be allowed to make copies for fair use it allows you to make fair use of your copies if the copies are protected it’s not in any violation of any law.
  - scarface74 8y ago
    Nowhere in the law does it force content owners to make that easy....
    - dogma1138 8y ago
      Make what easy? I said fair use is a protection agiast claims copyright law has zero provisions mandating physically allowing someone to make a copy of your work on those grounds all fair use clauses do is restrict you from using the legal system to achieve that.
  - falcolas 8y ago
    From someone with more legal background than I: "In addition to making a backup copy of software, it is legal to make a backup copy of a CD or DVD so that you can continue to enjoy the copyrighted material if your original copy fails." https://info.legalzoom.com/copyright-law-making-personal-copies-22200.html https://info.legalzoom.com/copyright-law-making-personal-cop...
lgeorget 8y ago
DRM usually enforces many more restrictions than necessary to protect the copyright holder's rights, though. For instance when it prevents you from playing a music track on your OS because the only music player able to play the track doesn't support it.
- scarface74 8y ago
  DRM for music you buy hasn’t been a thing in the industry since 2008.
- dogma1138 8y ago
  So do most contracts, no one forces you to consume DRM protected content. The fact that a particular instance of DRM is bad is really not relevant and if we are honest about you are likely deflecting since people who are against DRM are against it period they aren’t against bad DRMs and they don’t want to cooperate with the industry to make good ones.

falcolas 8y ago

DRM restricts you above and beyond what is allowed by contract or law. The law says you have limited rights to use copyrighted materials in the pursuit of review, remix, and archival. DRM doesn't allow you to do that without breaking the law.

scarface74 8y ago
You have that right for what you purchased. You’re not buying media from Netflix.
- BugsJustFindMe 8y ago
  > You have that right for what you purchased. I'm pretty sure that US copyright law makes no such distinction.
  - dogma1138 8y ago
    Not only does it make that distinction (broadcasting and streaming vs owned copies) but the entire premise is false. You may use fair use as a protection against a copyright claim but in not wa shape or form is anyone compelled to facilitate the fair use of their content.
    - falcolas 8y ago
      Fair use is a positive right - it's a right given to individuals by the same Act in which copyright is created. Companies are restricting that right through the use of DRM and the laws which prohibit breaking DRM. This is poor behavior, and against the spirit of US law that carved out those exceptions, if not the letter.
      - dogma1138 8y ago
        No it’s not, you don’t understand the law. Fair use (in the US) it’s a protection of the first amendment however no one is obligated to facilitate that right what it means is that the courts cannot be used to subdue your right to use the content under fair use. I don’t have to sell you to content in the first place, I don’t have to make it available for easy copy, I mean just 40 years ago we didn’t even really had home video on VHS, was I obliged to give you a copy of the film and a telecine machine so you can make a copy? What about paintings? Am I obligated to allow you to take a photograph? Well you better call the police on like every gallery and museum out there... Heck live events specifically have rules against filming, go into the movies or many shows with a camera and see how receptive they’ll be to that.
- falcolas 8y ago
  You have that right for any copyrighted work; purchase is not involved in the transaction. "the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright" Later interpretation of the law by courts has included backups in this. As for lease versus ownership, the right to backups has been applied - by the courts - to software with "you're just leasing this" clickwrap agreements.
  - dogma1138 8y ago
    You have the right however it doesn’t mean that the copyright owners need to facilitate that right or even support it all it means is that they cannot use the legal system to subdue that right. There is an easier way of going about it and that is not giving you access to the work in the first place. As you know tha las isn’t specific to work you “own” a copy of but all work in general. Am I obliged to give you a copy of my work because you want to use it in fair use? Ofc not...
dogma1138 8y ago
No it doesn’t the law doesn’t says that you should be allowed to make copies for fair use it allows you to make fair use of your copies if the copies are protected it’s not in any violation of any law.
- scarface74 8y ago
  Nowhere in the law does it force content owners to make that easy....
  - dogma1138 8y ago
    Make what easy? I said fair use is a protection agiast claims copyright law has zero provisions mandating physically allowing someone to make a copy of your work on those grounds all fair use clauses do is restrict you from using the legal system to achieve that.
- falcolas 8y ago
  From someone with more legal background than I: "In addition to making a backup copy of software, it is legal to make a backup copy of a CD or DVD so that you can continue to enjoy the copyrighted material if your original copy fails." https://info.legalzoom.com/copyright-law-making-personal-copies-22200.html https://info.legalzoom.com/copyright-law-making-personal-cop...

lgeorget 8y ago

DRM usually enforces many more restrictions than necessary to protect the copyright holder's rights, though. For instance when it prevents you from playing a music track on your OS because the only music player able to play the track doesn't support it.

scarface74 8y ago
DRM for music you buy hasn’t been a thing in the industry since 2008.
dogma1138 8y ago
So do most contracts, no one forces you to consume DRM protected content. The fact that a particular instance of DRM is bad is really not relevant and if we are honest about you are likely deflecting since people who are against DRM are against it period they aren’t against bad DRMs and they don’t want to cooperate with the industry to make good ones.