5 ms·
Good for EFF. DRM is futile. There is NO stopping people from recording what's on their screen (with a cell phone camera among other devices). What we've see
by johnvschmitt 13y ago
Good for EFF. DRM is futile.
There is NO stopping people from recording what's on their screen (with a cell phone camera among other devices).
What we've seen is:
A) The more barriers you put in front of legitimate use, the more you see illegitimate use grow.
B) The EFF is rock solid in standing up & protecting our rights & values in the modern, internet, connected age. Please help fund them.
Meaning: DRM all you want. Make it so that you can ONLY see Game of Thrones if you pay $100,000!!! Great! And, imagine how long it'd take for a copy (lower fidelity, sure) to get in the hands of a larger audience that you can't control, who doesn't like you, who you collect no $ from.
Or: Drop DRM, & go for "iTunes or Netflix" or other distribution methods that are EASY & fair. Watch your revenue boom, while you collect user stats to make your next content even more appealing & marketable.
- biot 13y agoHBO should have a Kickstarter campaign for each episode of Game of Thrones. Donate any amount you want, and if the total funds raised is $75 million (or whatever HBO determines is the expected sales figure of the one episode for the next 25 years), HBO releases the DRM-free episode for free to everyone who wants a copy. If the amount isn't reached, then the episode is never released. Repeat the process for each successive episode in each season.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- duncan_bayne 13y agoNetflix uses DRM, and is one of the sponsors of this attempt to add DRM to HTML5.
- johnvschmitt 13y agoYes, that's a shame. But: Netflix makes it easy & convenient. They are not the bad guy. They are really stuck between a rock & a hard place. (Between old school distributors of content (Hollywood), squeezing them for money to make sure they have no margin), and ISP's (Comcast, AT&T) who are saying, "Hey, Netflix is popular, >50% of bandwidth, so let's shake them down" (net neutrality needs to keep them from doing this). Don't blame Netflix for that DRM behavior. They are the early innovator & they look after their customers. They are just squeezed so badly. If you support net neutrality & ban DRM, you'll see more convenient, customer-friendly companies thrive in that ecosystem. If you don't, you'll see only bad players (DRM+$$$$+inconvenience) playing content you like.
- duncan_bayne 13y ago> Don't blame Netflix for that DRM behavior. I'm not. Given the circumstances, it's reasonable for Netflix to use DRM. What I _am_ blaming them for is corrupting W3C: inducing them to ignore their stated missions and goals to introduce DRM into HTML5.
- ihsw 13y ago"Good guys" and "bad guys" are such comforting terms, however they're hardly applicable. Do you honestly see no evil in Netflix, or good in MPAA/RIAA/etc?
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- benatkin 13y agoNo, what's futile is this objection by the EFF. But I think it's a token gesture, so it probably doesn't bother them that much.
- Anonazon 13y agoI've really been disillusioned by EFF lately. It seems like they're more of a black hole of activist's dollars than anything productive. When I donate, I like my dollars to go to more productive and practical use (like FSF) than to support libertarian ideals wrapped in a feel good presentation.
- mwcampbell 13y agoThe FSF is opposing this proposed W3C standard too, of course. What's wrong with having the EFF oppose it too?
- ihsw 13y agoDRM isn't about stopping piracy and it never was. Don't get confused, it's not about consumers of content -- it's about distributors of content. It's to maintain control over who distributes what content, for how long, to whom, and at what price. The laws restricting consumption of content are few and far, however the laws restricting distribution of content are many and broad-sweeping.