5 ms·

If what you say is true, since they have started producing their own content (House of Cards), maybe they could experimentally distribute those shows (or at lea

If what you say is true, since they have started producing their own content (House of Cards), maybe they could experimentally distribute those shows (or at least some episodes) without DRM and use the results as a proof to convince studios that DRM is unnecessary and pointless.

threedaymonk 14y ago
The experiment's already been done. House of Cards was only released with web DRM, and yet it was available via the usual unauthorised channels almost immediately. Even when no non-DRM alternatives are available, DRM is still useless in preventing dissemination.
- hysan 14y ago
  Maybe I'm misreading this but isn't DrJokepu saying to release the show without DRM, not with? If > House of Cards was only released with web DRM then how has the experiment been performed? Or did you mean to say the show was released without web DRM?
  - threedaymonk 14y ago
    OK, the experiment isn't exactly the same, but it tests the same hypothesis: that the presence of DRM does not affect the dissemination of the content. In fact, I'm not sure that performing DrJokepu's experiment as stated would prove anything: releasing episodes of HoC without DRM would have little effect, as they have been copied despite not having been made available without DRM.
    - DrJokepu 14y ago
      My idea was that if it can be shown that piracy levels are about the same with and without DRM an argument could be made that perhaps investing in DRM is a waste of time and money.
- fryguy 14y ago
  It also sort of depends on the scale of copying. Having easily available "download movie from netflix" versus "download movie from shady piracy website". Obviously, the analog hole is always there, so there will always be that vulnerability.
- stormbrew 14y ago
  Are you under the impression that anyone had ever in the history of anything proposed the hypothesis that lack of DRM defeats piracy? The hypothesis is that it does just as good (really bad) job of preventing it while encumbering legitimate customers less.
elq 14y ago
I'm pretty sure Netflix doesn't completely own the rights to HoC - MRC[1] does. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Rights_Capital http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Rights_Capital
- DrJokepu 14y ago
  While this is probably true, surely their special role in the financing and distribution of the show would have allowed Netflix to negotiate such exploitation rights if they wanted to.
RyanMcGreal 14y ago
The main function of DRM is not to prevent copying; it's to provide content rightsholders with a legal hook on which to hang people who make/distribute/use unauthorized copies.

threedaymonk 14y ago

The experiment's already been done. House of Cards was only released with web DRM, and yet it was available via the usual unauthorised channels almost immediately. Even when no non-DRM alternatives are available, DRM is still useless in preventing dissemination.

hysan 14y ago
Maybe I'm misreading this but isn't DrJokepu saying to release the show without DRM, not with? If > House of Cards was only released with web DRM then how has the experiment been performed? Or did you mean to say the show was released without web DRM?
- threedaymonk 14y ago
  OK, the experiment isn't exactly the same, but it tests the same hypothesis: that the presence of DRM does not affect the dissemination of the content. In fact, I'm not sure that performing DrJokepu's experiment as stated would prove anything: releasing episodes of HoC without DRM would have little effect, as they have been copied despite not having been made available without DRM.
  - DrJokepu 14y ago
    My idea was that if it can be shown that piracy levels are about the same with and without DRM an argument could be made that perhaps investing in DRM is a waste of time and money.
fryguy 14y ago
It also sort of depends on the scale of copying. Having easily available "download movie from netflix" versus "download movie from shady piracy website". Obviously, the analog hole is always there, so there will always be that vulnerability.
stormbrew 14y ago
Are you under the impression that anyone had ever in the history of anything proposed the hypothesis that lack of DRM defeats piracy? The hypothesis is that it does just as good (really bad) job of preventing it while encumbering legitimate customers less.

elq 14y ago

I'm pretty sure Netflix doesn't completely own the rights to HoC - MRC[1] does. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Rights_Capital http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Rights_Capital

DrJokepu 14y ago
While this is probably true, surely their special role in the financing and distribution of the show would have allowed Netflix to negotiate such exploitation rights if they wanted to.

RyanMcGreal 14y ago

The main function of DRM is not to prevent copying; it's to provide content rightsholders with a legal hook on which to hang people who make/distribute/use unauthorized copies.