4 ms·

DRM is a set of technical policies: The user may install the software X times. Y users may use the software at once. This video stream will not decode properly

DRM is a set of technical policies: The user may install the software X times. Y users may use the software at once. This video stream will not decode properly without the private key embedded in chip ABC. This DVD will only play in DVD players that have region code Z. This game requires a persistent network connection in order to crunch game logic and stream assets. If these policies are not guaranteed to provide any insight into the arrangements of the license, then how can we say with confidence that the DRM is indeed a license enforcement mechanism at all? If the DRM is designed in such a way as to permit only 1 install ever, and yet a perusing of the legal license finds no such wording, then the DRM is not (accurately) enforcing the license and (so far as I can tell) cannot be said to be enforcing it.

CurtMonash 14y ago
If your complaint is that the presence of aggressive DRM means that the seller/licenser isn't really adhering to the stated or implied license, then the correct remedy still isn't to change the wording from "buy" to "license".
- aspensmonster 14y ago
  My primary concern with DRM is its anti-user behaviour, whether such an attitude is codified in the license or not. I believe it should not be allowed at all because I believe it violates natural rights that the users of software and hardware have. Setting aside the fundamental philosophy, I'd say I probably agree with you regarding the wording; namely, that the term "buying" must be removed needn't be the remedy. I think Algorias put it well by instead stating that the term "license" must be included in the marketing, whether one states "buy a license to this product" or else elects to shorten it to "license this product." In either case the licensed nature of the product is at least introduced, even if it doesn't come with "Defective by Design" warning labels.

CurtMonash 14y ago

If your complaint is that the presence of aggressive DRM means that the seller/licenser isn't really adhering to the stated or implied license, then the correct remedy still isn't to change the wording from "buy" to "license".

aspensmonster 14y ago
My primary concern with DRM is its anti-user behaviour, whether such an attitude is codified in the license or not. I believe it should not be allowed at all because I believe it violates natural rights that the users of software and hardware have. Setting aside the fundamental philosophy, I'd say I probably agree with you regarding the wording; namely, that the term "buying" must be removed needn't be the remedy. I think Algorias put it well by instead stating that the term "license" must be included in the marketing, whether one states "buy a license to this product" or else elects to shorten it to "license this product." In either case the licensed nature of the product is at least introduced, even if it doesn't come with "Defective by Design" warning labels.