I am still waiting for a vendor who realizes the goal is to make purchase more convenient than stealing. Paizo is actually pretty damn good about this, but a music/video retailer with the same policies would actually get my money.
I am not condoning intellectual property theft. I am suggesting that aggressive DRM policies actually incentivize theft while reducing the vendor's ability to provide convenience to the customer.
With Paizo, any time I buy a book, it is there for me on their server an infinite number of times. When my computer dies (that is WHEN not IF) I do not need to repurchase books. If I had stolen a Paizo product, I would need to go to considerably more effort to redownload it from some sketchy site than to just log into my account and grab it.
In the end, I'm paying money for a service, not for the zeros and ones that represent the intellectual property. IP rights are important, but we need to be realistic about the business model — it is really, really, hard to defend zeros and ones. If a company sells me a service that makes it easier and safer to access my purchases, I will give them money for that. If they are charging money for something that is considerably more difficult than stealing and costs money, the temptation is there.
The nature of information is such that we can never completely protect IP. Thinking that fighting piracy is the ONLY action to take in order to adapt to the online world is folly. There will always be paying customers if you provide them a value, and they will pay instead of steal if you can make paying better than stealing.
|
Evil Lincon, I couldn't agree with you more. Hell, I couldn't say it any better than you can.
Silliness such as being limited to installing OS XYZ on 2 computers is something I try to stay away from. I'm no Richard Stallman, but limiting the end user in what they can do is severely frustrating, and leads people like me to do something crazy like replace my entire Windows OS with GNU/Linux.. (or worse)
DRM? An emphatic NO!
Why? DRM does nothing to stop "piracy". There is not a DRM system currently in use that has not already been cracked and any future system probably has an effective lifetime measured in weeks, if not days. All DRM does is inconvenience honest customers by limiting their use of books that they have paid money for and force them to illegally breal the DRM on their purchases to get full use of them.
I generally make it a habit to avoid buying DRM'd ebooks for these reasons.
|
DRM? An emphatic NO!
Why? DRM does nothing to stop "piracy". There is not a DRM system currently in use that has not already been cracked and any future system probably has an effective lifetime measured in weeks, if not days. All DRM does is inconvenience honest customers by limiting their use of books that they have paid money for and force them to illegally breal the DRM on their purchases to get full use of them.
I generally make it a habit to avoid buying DRM'd ebooks for these reasons.
And there's not a lock made that can't be picked or bypassed. Yet I'm willing to place a large bet that you lock the doors of your house when you leave.
DRM, like locks, may not keep a determined thief/pirate from doing their thing, but it may keep the 'mostly' honest Avg. Joe from stealing what doesn't belong to them.
DRM fails.
DRM inconveniences paying customers, while hardly serving as a speed bump to those willing to violate intellectual property (note I did not say "steal," as that word, at least before it was co-opted, does not apply).
If I wanted to illegally copy a product, I would. There is nothing that can be done to avoid this. Why? Because in order to have a usable product, along with the encrypted content, you have to get the key. That's right: Media encryption is a trick.
However, since I generally choose not to illegally copy products*, all DRM does is (1) waste resources, and (2) annoy me.
* I routinely rip my (legally purchased) DVDs for use on my iPod. Yes, I know this is a violation of the DMCA. No, I do not care.
9...
8...
7...
|
I am adamantly against DRM that punishes legitimate buyers. I am filled with frothing rage at outfits like SecurRom and Starforce. I want to charge into Sony BGM's corporate office in a Captain America costume and deck whoever was responsible for putting rootkit software on audio CDs.
I DO support companies like Stardock for rewarding legitimate buyers. I DO gladly use Steam.
Also 4
3
2
1
disclaimer
Sounds like a pretty awesome movie...
OK! I'll do it!
How did it get burned? HOW DID IT GET BURNED? HOW DID IT GET BURNED? HOW DID IT GET BURNED? HOW DID IT GET BUUUUURNED!
OH GOD NOT THE BEES! NOT THE BEES! OH GOD MY EYES!
DRM, like locks, may not keep a determined thief/pirate from doing their thing, but it may keep the 'mostly' honest Avg. Joe from stealing what doesn't belong to them.
The problem with that analogy is that when a thief breaks in to your home he doen't make copies of the keys to give to anyone that wants to steal your things. Locks keep everyone but the dedicated thiefs in. DRM keeps everyone out UNTIL the first hacker cracks it, then anyone with google can find a dozen different ways to bypass it.
|
In all honesty, I cannot see a way to stop the spread of media sharing. Ever since you were able to make a copy of VHS tapes, people have been "acquiring" stuff that they didn't pay for. This "sharing" is inevitable and irreversible. DRM just gives honest customers less incentive to buy things the legit way. If they actually purchase an item, but then are limited to how they can transfer it, etc. what incentive do they have to purchase that item the next time? None because if they "acquire" it, they can do whatever they want with it.
4...
