4 ms·

The simple solution is to not download this stuff, period. The above sounds like rationalizing copyright infringement.

yebyen 8y ago
You sound like a DRM apologist. There are real damages caused by DRM, for instance the fact that if everyone behaves according to the law, then nobody can ever make or receive archival copies of works that have gone out of copyright again. Even if everyone who produces media, holding the copyrights and distributing it with restrictive DRM is dead at some future date and the requisite 80 years have passed, if all content consumers behave legally then we STILL can't make legal copies of the now public domain works because DMCA says we are circumventing a copyright protection mechanism (on works that are out of copyright, the DMCA makes no exception for them.) Copyright was supposed to be a limited term but according to the law today, even if no further extension acts are signed, rights holders such as Sony are empowered to ensure their work may never legally enter into the public domain. Their mechanisms need not even be strong to have the force of law behind them. That's a travesty. I didn't down vote you, but I strongly disagree that this is any kind of "solution" you propose, just bury your head in the sand, "you don't need to be in touch with culture, or propagate it forward in time... forget about that media, it was meant for the sheeple."
mirimir 8y ago
I'm happy to pay for stuff. But I'm not willing to pay for stuff that may disappear because some third party did or didn't do one thing or another.
Youden 8y ago
Or, since they're taking the position that you're not buying the media but you're buying a "license", you can purchase it and then pirate a DRM-free copy. But really, when copyright is so blatantly one-sided against the people, why should the people be expected to wholly support it? I'm not advocating for ignoring it completely but some rules are just ridiculous. For example ripping. DMCA says that circumvention of technical protections is illegal. If I buy a Blu-Ray, why shouldn't I be able to rip it and add it to my Plex library? What harm does that inflict? Then there are more dubious questions like is it okay to pirate if there's no legal option? My opinion is yes, it's totally okay. If there's no legal means through which to give the copyright owner money, I'm not "taking" anything away by obtaining it without doing so.
- sokoloff 8y ago
  Copyright includes the right to not distribute your work (IMO and under the law). Suppose person A takes an intimate digital photo of person B (with their consent). Person A does not offer to sell it to you. It’s still improper for you to take a digital copy. I think the media companies have that same right in their copyrighted works. I realize that wasn’t your main argument, but feel it important enough to mention. I agree with your position on the first 3 paragraphs.
  - yebyen 8y ago
    When copyright was invented, there was no such thing as DRM and they still thought it was important to build in something called Fair Use rights. Those are totally out the window now. Nobody ever conceived that someone could distribute thousands of copies of a work to theater houses, and we'd all be walking around with portable recorders in our pockets. I'd say that the law needs an update, but historically whenever that has happened, it has not gone at all in the direction I'd have liked. The people who dreamed up Copyright laws never imagined that we'd come up with these ridiculous schemes where a content creator (copyright holder) can simultaneously distribute copies and not distribute them. They intended for it to be a limited protection, where copies would be permitted after some finite period of time, so that valuable cultural contributions would not be lost after 100 years when almost nobody cared anymore, except for a few librarians and some people who are yet to be born. But in 100 years, when Blu Ray discs are out of copyright, humans may not remember what a Blu Ray player was (or they could be centrally EOLed by fiat and you will not be able to play content from Blu Ray discs anymore, by some technical disabling) and still, without changes to the law as it currently stands, you will not be able to take a copy for preservation even if you had the technical means or wherewithal to know how to build it. The law was never intended to be used to permanently restrict the sharing and flow of information.
  - teddyh 8y ago
    > Copyright includes the right to not distribute your work (IMO and under the law). Suppose person A takes an intimate digital photo of person B (with their consent). Person A does not offer to sell it to you. It’s still improper for you to take a digital copy. That scenario has absolutely nothing to do with copyright law, and it is disingenuous of you to suggest otherwise.
probably_wrong 8y ago
Honestly I see it closer to civil disobedience, where people simply refuse to follow laws that they consider against their best interest. And I think it's hard to argue that it's working - like John Oliver said when 'talking' to the 90s, "we have stopped paying for our music, and we got away with it!". I see your point though,and I'm slightly annoyed that you're downvoted for it.
- mirimir 8y ago
  Yes, civil disobedience. And yes, it didn't really work for music. Instead of absurdly expensive CDs, we have inexpensive streaming services that provide no actual files. And log and sell usage data.
  - detaro 8y ago
    On the other hand, it has been quite a while since I wanted to buy some specific music and couldn't find an option to buy it as audio files somewhere.
  - drngdds 8y ago
    It worked great for music. You can download DRM-free music and keep it forever. This only happened after Apple and friends tried putting DRM on their downloads and people didn't want to put up with it.
    - jsjohnst 8y ago
      > This only happened after Apple and friends tried putting DRM That wasn’t Apple’s choice, to get the rights to the music, they had too. Once they were a juggernaut in the space, they successfully forced the music industry to change. I’m still waiting for that to happen with movies and tv shows, but I’m unoptimistic it’ll happen any time soon.

You sound like a DRM apologist. There are real damages caused by DRM, for instance the fact that if everyone behaves according to the law, then nobody can ever make or receive archival copies of works that have gone out of copyright again. Even if everyone who produces media, holding the copyrights and distributing it with restrictive DRM is dead at some future date and the requisite 80 years have passed, if all content consumers behave legally then we STILL can't make legal copies of the now public domain works because DMCA says we are circumventing a copyright protection mechanism (on works that are out of copyright, the DMCA makes no exception for them.) Copyright was supposed to be a limited term but according to the law today, even if no further extension acts are signed, rights holders such as Sony are empowered to ensure their work may never legally enter into the public domain. Their mechanisms need not even be strong to have the force of law behind them. That's a travesty. I didn't down vote you, but I strongly disagree that this is any kind of "solution" you propose, just bury your head in the sand, "you don't need to be in touch with culture, or propagate it forward in time... forget about that media, it was meant for the sheeple."

mirimir 8y ago

I'm happy to pay for stuff. But I'm not willing to pay for stuff that may disappear because some third party did or didn't do one thing or another.

Youden 8y ago

Or, since they're taking the position that you're not buying the media but you're buying a "license", you can purchase it and then pirate a DRM-free copy. But really, when copyright is so blatantly one-sided against the people, why should the people be expected to wholly support it? I'm not advocating for ignoring it completely but some rules are just ridiculous. For example ripping. DMCA says that circumvention of technical protections is illegal. If I buy a Blu-Ray, why shouldn't I be able to rip it and add it to my Plex library? What harm does that inflict? Then there are more dubious questions like is it okay to pirate if there's no legal option? My opinion is yes, it's totally okay. If there's no legal means through which to give the copyright owner money, I'm not "taking" anything away by obtaining it without doing so.

sokoloff 8y ago
Copyright includes the right to not distribute your work (IMO and under the law). Suppose person A takes an intimate digital photo of person B (with their consent). Person A does not offer to sell it to you. It’s still improper for you to take a digital copy. I think the media companies have that same right in their copyrighted works. I realize that wasn’t your main argument, but feel it important enough to mention. I agree with your position on the first 3 paragraphs.
- yebyen 8y ago
  When copyright was invented, there was no such thing as DRM and they still thought it was important to build in something called Fair Use rights. Those are totally out the window now. Nobody ever conceived that someone could distribute thousands of copies of a work to theater houses, and we'd all be walking around with portable recorders in our pockets. I'd say that the law needs an update, but historically whenever that has happened, it has not gone at all in the direction I'd have liked. The people who dreamed up Copyright laws never imagined that we'd come up with these ridiculous schemes where a content creator (copyright holder) can simultaneously distribute copies and not distribute them. They intended for it to be a limited protection, where copies would be permitted after some finite period of time, so that valuable cultural contributions would not be lost after 100 years when almost nobody cared anymore, except for a few librarians and some people who are yet to be born. But in 100 years, when Blu Ray discs are out of copyright, humans may not remember what a Blu Ray player was (or they could be centrally EOLed by fiat and you will not be able to play content from Blu Ray discs anymore, by some technical disabling) and still, without changes to the law as it currently stands, you will not be able to take a copy for preservation even if you had the technical means or wherewithal to know how to build it. The law was never intended to be used to permanently restrict the sharing and flow of information.
- teddyh 8y ago
  > Copyright includes the right to not distribute your work (IMO and under the law). Suppose person A takes an intimate digital photo of person B (with their consent). Person A does not offer to sell it to you. It’s still improper for you to take a digital copy. That scenario has absolutely nothing to do with copyright law, and it is disingenuous of you to suggest otherwise.

probably_wrong 8y ago

Honestly I see it closer to civil disobedience, where people simply refuse to follow laws that they consider against their best interest. And I think it's hard to argue that it's working - like John Oliver said when 'talking' to the 90s, "we have stopped paying for our music, and we got away with it!". I see your point though,and I'm slightly annoyed that you're downvoted for it.

mirimir 8y ago
Yes, civil disobedience. And yes, it didn't really work for music. Instead of absurdly expensive CDs, we have inexpensive streaming services that provide no actual files. And log and sell usage data.
- detaro 8y ago
  On the other hand, it has been quite a while since I wanted to buy some specific music and couldn't find an option to buy it as audio files somewhere.
- drngdds 8y ago
  It worked great for music. You can download DRM-free music and keep it forever. This only happened after Apple and friends tried putting DRM on their downloads and people didn't want to put up with it.
  - jsjohnst 8y ago
    > This only happened after Apple and friends tried putting DRM That wasn’t Apple’s choice, to get the rights to the music, they had too. Once they were a juggernaut in the space, they successfully forced the music industry to change. I’m still waiting for that to happen with movies and tv shows, but I’m unoptimistic it’ll happen any time soon.