3 ms·

Providing DRM free music has nothing to do with providing DRM free movies.

• caw 14y ago
  I agree. The models are different. While a music artist can somewhat justify piracy rates via concerts and merch, there's no concert equivalent of a $300 million blockbuster movie. The future is probably going to be in moderate DRM, like Steam for games. I think they're getting there with something like Ultraviolet, but I'm not too familiar with the the whole scheme; I just know it allows multiple devices and players.
• mschuster91 14y ago
  Where's the difference? I see none, except that the cost of content creation are vastly different between music and movies. But a ordinary user does not care about this. All a user sees is "Hey, they charge $10 for a movie and I can't watch it on my iPad because I need to copy and convert it" and "Hey, this site offers the movie for free and I can dump the file on my NAS and watch the movie on my iPad, my TV and my computer without FBI warnings, unskippable ads etc" I would pay the same amount I'd pay for a DVD, if I were allowed to do whatever the f*ck I want with the content, no matter if the publisher goes bankrupt, has server issues (online "activation" for movies IS possible with BluRay). After all, I could have the exact same movie if I'd just download a BD50 untouched rip instead of buying the BD, reading it and stripping out the DRM/copy protection with AnyDVD HD.