3 ms·

Get rid of copyright and the industry response will just be to move everything to the cloud. You don’t even get a device, just a thin client. Things will be mor

by api 3y ago

Get rid of copyright and the industry response will just be to move everything to the cloud. You don’t even get a device, just a thin client. Things will be more locked down, not less. People want information to be free and have largely price anchored on free, but information of any quality is extremely labor intensive and expensive. That radical mismatch between desire and reality has and will continue to twist the market into weird and increasingly hostile shapes.

Zambyte 3y ago
You can't see or hear media in "the cloud". It has to be downloaded to your device to do that. "Streaming" is just downloading + (usually) DRM enforced deleting, which is exactly what the person you're replying to is saying will improve when we repeal DMCA.
- api 3y ago
  DRM can get much more restrictive, such as being locked down to only special purpose devices produced by the publisher or distributor / streaming service. So imagine requiring a Netflix dongle to watch Netflix, etc. Without the DMCA these things would just get built like Yubikeys with internal HSMs that require clean room practices to unlock. That'll be combined with watermarking so if you do pirate it and leak it they sue you by tracing it back to you. My real point is the second part: quality media of any kind is very expensive and labor intensive to produce. Piracy can result in only two possible things: (1) even more restrictive and arcane DRM, or (2) the media you like just stops getting produced at all. If people flatly refuse to pay and insist on pirating, option (2) is the final endpoint. You just won't get the product because nobody will make it. Free is a lie. When you insist that things must be free, you're lying to yourself. When companies tell you it's free, they are lying to you (usually to get you hooked for surveillance or later monetization).
  - joquarky 3y ago
    > Without the DMCA these things would just get built like Yubikeys with internal HSMs that require clean room practices to unlock. There is always the Analog hole¹, and I don't think that can ever be resolved. You only need one A/D conversion where quality is paramount and after that you have DRM free copies. > the media you like just stops getting produced at all. This is a sacrifice I'd be willing to make if it means eliminating DRM and other schemes that do NOT promote the progress of science and the useful arts. ¹ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_hole https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_hole
    - api 3y ago
      > This is a sacrifice I'd be willing to make I feel like I must not understand your point, because this seems odd to me. You’re saying it’s better to have no high quality media at all than to have any form of DRM? If it makes you feel any better, I think this is where we are headed because as you correctly point out DRM doesn’t really work. The future is cheap trash produced almost for free by AI, crowdsourced filler like TikTok, or ads and propaganda funded by someone other than the consumer to push a message. The period from the birth of recorded media to the birth of easy digital reproduction will be remembered as this weird golden age when massive amounts of incredible recorded art, film, and music were produced because there was an economic model for it. I used to have the “information wants to be free” view until I saw how much effort goes into producing any form of media of any quality. It’s not easy or cheap at all and if it’s not funded it won’t happen.
      - yunwal 3y ago
        > You’re saying it’s better to have no high quality media at all than to have any form of DRM? I get your point, but there’s plenty of high quality media produced without financial incentive or with alternate funding schemes (donations, gov grants, patronage). I think hyperbole weakens the argument here.

by api 3y ago

Zambyte 3y ago

You can't see or hear media in "the cloud". It has to be downloaded to your device to do that. "Streaming" is just downloading + (usually) DRM enforced deleting, which is exactly what the person you're replying to is saying will improve when we repeal DMCA.

api 3y ago
DRM can get much more restrictive, such as being locked down to only special purpose devices produced by the publisher or distributor / streaming service. So imagine requiring a Netflix dongle to watch Netflix, etc. Without the DMCA these things would just get built like Yubikeys with internal HSMs that require clean room practices to unlock. That'll be combined with watermarking so if you do pirate it and leak it they sue you by tracing it back to you. My real point is the second part: quality media of any kind is very expensive and labor intensive to produce. Piracy can result in only two possible things: (1) even more restrictive and arcane DRM, or (2) the media you like just stops getting produced at all. If people flatly refuse to pay and insist on pirating, option (2) is the final endpoint. You just won't get the product because nobody will make it. Free is a lie. When you insist that things must be free, you're lying to yourself. When companies tell you it's free, they are lying to you (usually to get you hooked for surveillance or later monetization).
- joquarky 3y ago
  > Without the DMCA these things would just get built like Yubikeys with internal HSMs that require clean room practices to unlock. There is always the Analog hole¹, and I don't think that can ever be resolved. You only need one A/D conversion where quality is paramount and after that you have DRM free copies. > the media you like just stops getting produced at all. This is a sacrifice I'd be willing to make if it means eliminating DRM and other schemes that do NOT promote the progress of science and the useful arts. ¹ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_hole https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_hole
  - api 3y ago
    > This is a sacrifice I'd be willing to make I feel like I must not understand your point, because this seems odd to me. You’re saying it’s better to have no high quality media at all than to have any form of DRM? If it makes you feel any better, I think this is where we are headed because as you correctly point out DRM doesn’t really work. The future is cheap trash produced almost for free by AI, crowdsourced filler like TikTok, or ads and propaganda funded by someone other than the consumer to push a message. The period from the birth of recorded media to the birth of easy digital reproduction will be remembered as this weird golden age when massive amounts of incredible recorded art, film, and music were produced because there was an economic model for it. I used to have the “information wants to be free” view until I saw how much effort goes into producing any form of media of any quality. It’s not easy or cheap at all and if it’s not funded it won’t happen.
    - yunwal 3y ago
      > You’re saying it’s better to have no high quality media at all than to have any form of DRM? I get your point, but there’s plenty of high quality media produced without financial incentive or with alternate funding schemes (donations, gov grants, patronage). I think hyperbole weakens the argument here.