4 ms·

2a. Distributors that don't accept that go out of business, because none of the publishers from 1. want anything to do with them.

shmerl 13y ago
For example GOG is a successful DRM free distributor - they only accept DRM free games from various publishers. There are others as well (for music, e-books and etc.). It's mostly video industry which lacks DRM-free distribution options (services like this are virtually non existent worldwide: https://www.headweb.com/en/ https://www.headweb.com/en/ See their DRM-free terms of purchase: https://www.headweb.com/en/100237/purchase-terms https://www.headweb.com/en/100237/purchase-terms). Supporting unethical practice can't be excused with fear of going out of business by the way. Also, publishers need distributors and users not any less than distributors and users need publishers, if not even more. Therefore voting with your wallet (on either distributor or user level) is not senseless. Except that distributors have more leverage on publishers, because of their scale, in comparison with an individual who buys only DRM-free products. Therefore distributors can be blamed more for DRM proliferation.
- jonhendry 13y ago
  Unless I'm mistaken (I may be) GOG is primarily in the business of selling old games, which is why the publishers are willing to forgo DRM on the titles. Publishers of new games (especially expensively developed new games) are more likely to fear a loss of revenue, especially in the crucial early period after release, without DRM.
  - shmerl 13y ago
    GOG sells new games from those who have common sense. As I said elsewhere in this thread, it's mostly innovative, forward thinking self published studios or crowdfunded projects. GOG isn't focused on old games exclusively anymore. They are focused on DRM free games though. I'm not really sure why bigger size of the budget should reduce the common sense of the publisher. Legacy publishers are obsessed with DRM, but DRM has nothing to do with revenue whatsoever. It doesn't reduce any piracy, and only cripples the experience for legitimate users. It's stupid from common sense business perspective, and there is an increasing amount of big budget games which come out DRM free. I view it as simply mentality issue. Legacy publishers can't understand that they should start being customer focused. New ones have no issues understanding it, therefore they don't use any DRM.

shmerl 13y ago

For example GOG is a successful DRM free distributor - they only accept DRM free games from various publishers. There are others as well (for music, e-books and etc.). It's mostly video industry which lacks DRM-free distribution options (services like this are virtually non existent worldwide: https://www.headweb.com/en/ https://www.headweb.com/en/ See their DRM-free terms of purchase: https://www.headweb.com/en/100237/purchase-terms https://www.headweb.com/en/100237/purchase-terms). Supporting unethical practice can't be excused with fear of going out of business by the way. Also, publishers need distributors and users not any less than distributors and users need publishers, if not even more. Therefore voting with your wallet (on either distributor or user level) is not senseless. Except that distributors have more leverage on publishers, because of their scale, in comparison with an individual who buys only DRM-free products. Therefore distributors can be blamed more for DRM proliferation.

jonhendry 13y ago
Unless I'm mistaken (I may be) GOG is primarily in the business of selling old games, which is why the publishers are willing to forgo DRM on the titles. Publishers of new games (especially expensively developed new games) are more likely to fear a loss of revenue, especially in the crucial early period after release, without DRM.
- shmerl 13y ago
  GOG sells new games from those who have common sense. As I said elsewhere in this thread, it's mostly innovative, forward thinking self published studios or crowdfunded projects. GOG isn't focused on old games exclusively anymore. They are focused on DRM free games though. I'm not really sure why bigger size of the budget should reduce the common sense of the publisher. Legacy publishers are obsessed with DRM, but DRM has nothing to do with revenue whatsoever. It doesn't reduce any piracy, and only cripples the experience for legitimate users. It's stupid from common sense business perspective, and there is an increasing amount of big budget games which come out DRM free. I view it as simply mentality issue. Legacy publishers can't understand that they should start being customer focused. New ones have no issues understanding it, therefore they don't use any DRM.