4 ms·
What I don't understand is that if these companies want so desperately to enforce DRM, why are they using the web? A native application is better suited to what
by shitlord 13y ago
What I don't understand is that if these companies want so desperately to enforce DRM, why are they using the web? A native application is better suited to what they want to do, and they are going to end up writing DRM modules in native code anyway. So why are they targeting the web at all, and why do they insist on getting something that is fundamentally closed (DRM) put into something that was meant to be open (HTML)?
IMO, this is a very dumb approach. This would not be OK anywhere else. Feel free to enforce your copyright, but don't expect me to bear your burden without kicking and screaming.
- dublinben 13y agoContent providers want to be on the web, because that's where the audience is. If they're made to feel unwelcome on the web, they certainly will take their content away. This makes the web less useful and harms users.
- icebraining 13y agoThe web has had copies of that content well before the "content providers" even had a website, and it'll have copies of the content well after they decide to leave. All they can take away is the sources that actually bring them money.
- AJ007 13y agoThe "web" has existed in a mature form for over 2 decades. The web's success has been extraordinary in the same terms of any monumental human achievement -- the discovery of anti-biotics, the moon landing, the Magna Carta. Why would we cripple that set of features just to make a tiny group of people happy (relative to the world's population, the copyright "special interest" cartel is indeed microscopic.) And I thought web sites screwing up keyboard shortcuts was annoying..