DRM/Copy-Protection/Anti-Piracy measures

[Riverwolf]

DRM - 'Digital Rights Management' or as I and many others call it, 'Digital Restrictions Management'.

This issue has been somewhat quiet for a while, but shopping around for video editing software got me to thinking: a lot of software in general has DRM that keeps people from installing the same licensed program on multiple computers. That is to say, if you spend 300 USD on such a program, and a week later your computer dies on you, in order to use that program again on a new computer, that's another 300 bucks, please.

In computer games, there's a lot of highly-intrusive DRM software that keeps you from playing a game without the original disk, keeps you from playing the game WITH the original disk but you have two disk drives, and the most intrusive and problem-ridden, always-online DRM that prevents you from playing even a single-player game without a constant internet connection.

So, obviously, I'm not particularly in favor of this concept. Oftentimes, the DRM is so bad that the pirated versions are reportedly far more functional than the official versions; that means that badly-implemented DRM that punishes the innocent consumer just encourages piracy, since it's not only free, it's functional.

That's not to say I think all DRM should be illegal. (I do believe that limited installs and always-online DRM should be illegal, since they're so anti-consumer and exclusionary). Steam has DRM that keeps games tied to an account, which can make it difficult to share with friends (which isn't illegal in the case of hard copies, so why should it be with software?), but they make up for it with ease of use, excellent customer support, frequent sales, easily managed multiplayer support, and a built-in Workshop for mods and custom content for games which feature such things. Even in the case of sharing, they've recently implemented a way to share games with friends and family. I don't think it's a good way to do it (your entire library is shared, so if you want to lend your friend a game, you can't play ANY of your Steam games at the same time as your friend.

So what do my fellow RFers think? Do you support all forms of DRM? Just some DRM but not others? Are you against the very concept of DRM? Why?

 

[freethinker44]

DRM is a terrible idea. It's funny that you mentioned that it encourages people to pirate. I remember when windows media player started doing this, they made it so you could only download a license a certain number of times, long story short, since I had to reinstall Vista every 6 months or so because it was so terrible I quickly ran out of my license downloads which made almost my entire music library I copied from my CDs unusable. So what do I do? Since I can download way faster than my cd drive can copy, I pirated my own CD collection, not only that but this is how I learned to pirate music and software. So because they used DRM I was forced to learn how to pirate music. Ironic huh?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I don't support any DRM nonsense.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

IMO, DRM is an attempt to suck and blow at the same time. If what we're buying is a licence to a piece of software, then it should be independent of the medium. I should be able to move it from drive to drive or computer to computer as long as I only use one copy at a time (plus maybe a reasonable allowance for a backup).

The way that we're often restricted to a single copy is more like a traditional purchase, not a licencing agreement. When someone buys a car, for instance, they don't have to get permission from the manufacturer to sell it to someone else.

 

[Nymphs]

I support the free sharing of information, files, programs, music, etc.

 

[Mister Emu]

I dislike entirely the notion that I am not purchasing a copy of the code/music/book, but rather a license to use it.

 

[HonestJoe]

I support the free sharing of information, files, programs, music, etc.

Then publish your IP address and open up your firewall.

 

[LuisDantas]

DRM is full of disadvantages and is terribly inconvenient. There is a reason why so many software companies prefer Shareware instead.

It does attempt to address real problems, but it is not very workable. It will die out and be phased out in favor of the subscription model that Steam uses, or for less "serious" applications the Shareware model instead.

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

DRM is the reason why I still only buy hard copies of programs when possible.

At least there has been an audible public outcry condemning DRM. The next generation game consoles nearly went that route. Microsoft was primed and ready to make the Xbox One a 100% online-only digital download device...until Sony--their competitor--revealed at the Electronic Entertainment Expo that they fully support game sharing on hard media. Microsoft was sent reeling for at least a year after that and probably lost whatever chance they had at a market lead. They retracted their decision shortly thereafter.

I support the free sharing of information, files, programs, music, etc.

I do too, to an extent. But the reality is that if developers and publishers can't make a profit, they can't put out software unless it's donation-only or out of the goodness of their generous hearts.

 

[Nymphs]

I do too, to an extent. But the reality is that if developers and publishers can't make a profit, they can't put out software unless it's donation-only or out of the goodness of their generous hearts.

That is true, but there are still many, many people who will buy it. I'd love to buy all the special editions of everything out there, but I am a poor-*** college student who has zilcho money. Nada. Once I have the money I will be paying for things, funding things, etc. I just can't at this time and venture.

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

That is true, but there are still many, many people who will buy it. I'd love to buy all the special editions of everything out there, but I am a poor-*** college student who has zilcho money. Nada. Once I have the money I will be paying for things, funding things, etc. I just can't at this time and venture.

There is a great deal of digital content in existence that simply could not be available if it was free. It's like asking people to work for free. Or work on the hunch that they might get a pay check if the consumer feels so inclined.

All I want is the freedom to use the content offline and freely transferable from one device to another.

 

[FerralRabbit]

am completely against DRM,especialy when it makes it incredibly difficult to copy products that are legaly owned for private use,but do like a type of payment for digital products that was made famous by radiohead with their 'in rainbows' album,they said the downloader can pay whatever they feel its worth so it was available for anything from free onwards but the majority of people paid for it,perhaps an answer to piracy.

 

[Riverwolf]

I recently took a quick check for torrents (not to download, but for information), and I noticed something interesting.

There's a website called GOG.com, which sells classic games, indie games, and some new games completely DRM-free (with a pseudo-exception for ARMA II's multiplayer). It generally supplies its own installer for those games in order to keep compatibility up, especially in regards to classic DOS and Windows 3.x games. Those installers are not common torrents, and the ones that are there aren't anywhere near as seeded as DRM-laden games.

I think that's quite telling.

 

[Nymphs]

There is a great deal of digital content in existence that simply could not be available if it was free. It's like asking people to work for free. Or work on the hunch that they might get a pay check if the consumer feels so inclined.

I understand that idea, but I feel differently. I feel that enough money is made by the big bucks guys (corporations) that could actually be passed to the people who created the content.

All I want is the freedom to use the content offline and freely transferable from one device to another.

Me too.

 

[Riverwolf]

I understand that idea, but I feel differently. I feel that enough money is made by the big bucks guys (corporations) that could actually be passed to the people who created the content.

I'm not defending the megacorporations' practices necessarily, because I do generally agree with this assessment(some of the better publishers actually do pay their creators well), but your wording of it compels me to ask something.

Do you know how running a business works?

 

[Nymphs]

Do you know how running a business works?

You act as if I'm a child, but yes, I do know how a business works. There are several different models of running a business. Most corporations run on the same one.

 

[Riverwolf]

You act as if I'm a child,

No, it's a legitimate question. People who've never had to run a business, regardless of age, oftentimes have no idea how it works. "Making money" isn't really accurate to keeping a business going, since it implies just people "getting" money; balancing revenue and profit is more accurately what's going on. I just wanted to make sure you were aware of the distinction.

"Know thy enemy and know thyself, and in a hundred battles, you will never lose." -Sun Tzu, Art of War

but yes, I do know how a business works. There are several different models of running a business. Most corporations run on the same one.

Indeed, hence why there's such a problem. Doesn't help that they are completely unaware of the world outside their own experience; fine for us Average Joes and Janes, but completely unacceptable for anyone with power that basically trumps the US government. I do wonder if many of them truly understand the position they are in.

But there are some promising signs. Linux is slowly, but steadily, gaining in popularity among PC gamers, and hopefully that will spread to other people. (Largely because Windows 8 is an abomination). Open-source software is becoming more prevalent and available, as it's becoming increasingly clearer and clearer that it's generally superior to closed-source software(though not always). And consumers are becoming more and more fed up and vocally critical of the anti-consumer practices that many megacorporations engage in; even now, that's reflected in sales.

 

[Mister Emu]

That is true, but there are still many, many people who will buy it. I'd love to buy all the special editions of everything out there, but I am a poor-*** college student who has zilcho money. Nada. Once I have the money I will be paying for things, funding things, etc. I just can't at this time and venture.

So you only steal what you can't afford...

Also, the promise of paying for future items at a later date when you have funds... how very generous of you.

 

[Nymphs]

So you only steal what you can't afford...Also, the promise of paying for future items at a later date when you have funds... how very generous of you.

Judge and be sarcastic all you would like. I don't see it as stealing. If I was 'stealing' I wouldn't be bragging about it. If I like something I've downloaded, I will often save up until I can afford it. Often times, if I didn't download it first, I wouldn't have known I would like it, and would have completely ignored it.

Because I had the ability to download it, I've gotten interested it, paid for it, as well as spread the word to other people about this new cool song/alum/game/program/etc. I can't gush about things I have no clue about, and that is what I want to do, I want to be able to fall in love with new things and then be able to tell other people about it.

There is a video that I watched on YouTube about people who feel similarly, and as soon as I find it, I will share it with you. It shares it much better than I could explain.

 

[Nymphs]

Then publish your IP address and open up your firewall.

Pardon?

And as a side note, I do share things with family and friends.