3 ms·
Yes but that's not the same thing. You're arguing in the "physical/digital" debate and I believe evryone will agree that digital is better in most cases. Physic
by rakoo 6y ago
Yes but that's not the same thing. You're arguing in the "physical/digital" debate and I believe evryone will agree that digital is better in most cases. Physically owning something is nice for the memorabilia and for those who still have DVD/CD players but that's not the biggest use case.
The topic here is DRM vs non-DRM'd media. It's orthogonal to the topic of physicality: you can have DRM'd physical media (think Google Nest) and you can have non-DRM'd digital media.
Switching back to the convenience of using digital instead of physical is a disservice to the discussion because it switches the focus on something that is totally unrelated and makes people believe that those who prefer non-DRM'd media are somehow reluctant to adopting streaming platform. I definitely see the convenience of it: I barely have any music files on my computer, I stream it all from Youtube or Soundcloud or Bandcamp. And like you I have spent MUCH more money on artists now that I can stream them than when I bought CDs. But when I want to get the files for offline use I know I'm in good hands because those platforms allow me to do it and have files I can use forever without ever reconnecting to the mothership.
So, to come back the initial point: yes we got scammed, because we didn't read the fine print. We didn't understand that DRM'd media is never bought, it's always rented. We switched from buy-it-for-life to subscribe-until-the-platform-dies
- andrewljohnson 6y agoI think the point is it’s not a scam because these businesses are of value to you overall. That they decided they needed DRM to make sustainable business is unfortunate but doesn’t make it a scam. The words may be scammy in this case, but digital media is better than physical media and you get the good with the bad.
- cycomanic 6y agoYou have an interesting definition of scam. For me "selling" you something by misrepresenting what it is, is pretty much the definition of a scam to me. It does not matter if it had some convenience to me. E.g. If I was sold a new iPhone online (maybe when it was currently not available on the apple store) and I later found out it was used (and I e.g. can't get warranty) I would say I have been scammed, even though it was convenient for me to buy it from some vendor online and I didn't have to wait for it to be back in stock at apple.
- LocalH 6y ago> I believe evryone will agree that digital is better in most cases If you include modern piracy in with "digital", sure. If you only include legal offerings, absolutely not. Even DRM'd physical media that doesn't use the network in any way to authenticate is way better than DRM'd digital media, which you can never truly own, and which exists at the folly of the service operator.
- Tostino 6y agoGP was talking about the format of digital media, not the usual protections put in place on what is currently offered legally. You're back to conflating the two.
- jwalton 6y ago> If you only include legal offerings, absolutely not. I have plenty of ebooks from Baen and Tor, and plenty of music I've bought from a variety of places, all in digital format, all without any DRM. It's not the "digital" part that's bad, it's the DRM part.
- m-p-3 6y agoAnd there are some unsung heros out there breaking those DRM schemes. I feel way more comfortable creating a DRM-free copy of Blu-rays I own, and I don't feel I stole anything from anyone or did anything morally wrong
- Drew_ 6y agoThe OP he's replying to was arguing that "physical media" doesn't suffer from the drawbacks of "DRM media" implying that physical media has no DRM (obviously false).