4 ms·
> Why do people keep equating DRM with proprietary? DRM must be proprietary. The whole point of DRM is that only the authorized devices get the "special source
by nwh 13y ago
> Why do people keep equating DRM with proprietary?
DRM must be proprietary. The whole point of DRM is that only the authorized devices get the "special source". DRM is closed source, obfuscated binaries, tricks and traps to drop people reverse engineering them. If it was open source then the functionality could be duplicated or the special sauce modified for any use.
There's no other conceivable way DRM can function.
- m_mueller 13y agoI think it depends on what you define as DRM. If you see DRM as simply and securely distributing read access permission, then there's no reason this can't be achieved with OSS. If however the provider doesn't accept the fact that the permission to read is equal to the permission to copy something, then you're in trouble. The formula could be so simple - distribute your content on high bandwidth, highly available networks, give access on a per-device or per-account basis (and charge money for that access), thus enable people to watch anything they want instantly and safely, and you gain back pretty much all of the customers you've lost to piracy, that would have bought your physical media before. Restricting copies is mostly useless since there are copies floating around of anything anyways. There's always been means to get content illegally, it's just now that the illegal way has become easier to use, or more importantly, the only way to get the content in a reasonable timeframe in the first place. Letting most of the world wait years between release in the US and the availability to stream and then wondering why they dare to download it anyways, is just not a sane way to go about and it has nothing to do with using DRM or not.
- nwh 13y agoWhat you're talking about is not DRM, much the opposite. > If you see DRM as simply and securely distributing read access permission, then there's no reason this can't be achieved with OSS. There is. If it's open source, the special sauce can't be special any more. The entire mechanism of DRM would be broken.
- m_mueller 13y agoWhat I propose as DRM is nothing but an ACL. This is available with OSS just as you can have file permissions in linux. The reason today's DRM needs 'special sauce' is always because of restricting the copying of content they want to sell people - which is pointless IMO.
- nwh 13y agoAgreed. Short of any break of the obfuscation, there's always going to be exposure of the media in an analogue form where a user can point a damn Polaroid camera at it. DRM just makes it difficult for the legitimate consumer and easier for the illegitimate one.