3 ms·

What if they like the product but would rather have it without the DRM?

by jdong 12y ago

shmerl 12y ago
I'd say they should stop using it until the product drops the DRM. Otherwise their complaints don't sound sincere. Or at least not convincing. It's like as if smokers would complain that cigarets industry ruins public health.
- MichaelGG 12y ago
  Smokers complain, and now we have e-cigarettes which may be less harmful while still allowing the enjoyment of nicotine and the fun of smoking. I'm not sure why it's insincere. I keep buying ThinkPads, but I hate the new designs with a passion. (And they hate me; they literally cause me RSI where the earlier ones didn't.) It doesn't make my arguments against the new ThinkPads any weaker.
  - shmerl 12y ago
    > and now we have e-cigarettes which may be less harmful while still allowing the enjoyment of nicotine and the fun of smoking. So, we can have digital goods sold without DRM, so we could enjoy them without police state methods attached. > I'm not sure why it's insincere. Because by buying from those who push DRM on them, users support and prolong the usage of the said DRM. Complaints won't persuade DRM Lysenkoists. Loss of profits can.
- alttab 12y ago
  Except with Spotify you are not buying music. You are paying a subscription to their streaming services. DRM is the only way they can protect the artists. On top of that, if you are paying 10 dollars a month and ripping the DRM off their streams you are stealing, and completely missing the value proposition of streaming music. confusing Spotify with amazon or apple DRM would only display lack of understanding on part of the consumer. The truth is for streaming services you are NOT buying music!!!
  - shmerl 12y ago
    > Except with Spotify you are not buying music. You are paying a subscription to their streaming services. DRM is the only way they can protect the artists. 1. Renting does not make sense for digital goods (I already explained in the past why). 2. DRM doesn't protect anything. I.e. it can't enforce the renting paradigm. This very article demonstrates that DRM is broken and it can't stop piracy. Therefore there is no need to use it ever even if we assume that it's an ethical practice (it is not). All DRM does is punishing paying customers by crippling the usability of the product (limiting supported devices / platforms / players / formats and so on), while having zero effect on pirates who pirate the same stuff DRM free.

What if they like the product but would rather have it without the DRM?

by jdong 12y ago

What if they like the product but would rather have it without the DRM?

I'd say they should stop using it until the product drops the DRM. Otherwise their complaints don't sound sincere. Or at least not convincing. It's like as if smokers would complain that cigarets industry ruins public health.

MichaelGG 12y ago
Smokers complain, and now we have e-cigarettes which may be less harmful while still allowing the enjoyment of nicotine and the fun of smoking. I'm not sure why it's insincere. I keep buying ThinkPads, but I hate the new designs with a passion. (And they hate me; they literally cause me RSI where the earlier ones didn't.) It doesn't make my arguments against the new ThinkPads any weaker.
- shmerl 12y ago
  > and now we have e-cigarettes which may be less harmful while still allowing the enjoyment of nicotine and the fun of smoking. So, we can have digital goods sold without DRM, so we could enjoy them without police state methods attached. > I'm not sure why it's insincere. Because by buying from those who push DRM on them, users support and prolong the usage of the said DRM. Complaints won't persuade DRM Lysenkoists. Loss of profits can.
alttab 12y ago
Except with Spotify you are not buying music. You are paying a subscription to their streaming services. DRM is the only way they can protect the artists. On top of that, if you are paying 10 dollars a month and ripping the DRM off their streams you are stealing, and completely missing the value proposition of streaming music. confusing Spotify with amazon or apple DRM would only display lack of understanding on part of the consumer. The truth is for streaming services you are NOT buying music!!!
- shmerl 12y ago
  > Except with Spotify you are not buying music. You are paying a subscription to their streaming services. DRM is the only way they can protect the artists. 1. Renting does not make sense for digital goods (I already explained in the past why). 2. DRM doesn't protect anything. I.e. it can't enforce the renting paradigm. This very article demonstrates that DRM is broken and it can't stop piracy. Therefore there is no need to use it ever even if we assume that it's an ethical practice (it is not). All DRM does is punishing paying customers by crippling the usability of the product (limiting supported devices / platforms / players / formats and so on), while having zero effect on pirates who pirate the same stuff DRM free.