5/1/07 Never Forget

[Khan]

That is what DRM is for. You have no right copying a DVD if it's not legit. You are mad at DRM because you can't steal stuff ?

You probably are against carkeys to as they don't allow you to get into any car you please and drive away in it.

No that wasn't my point at all I was merely indicating where the circle andrew was talking about lies. The point I was making is that if the secuity is increased people will be forced to buy DVDs as they will be harder to obtain illegally until cracks are found at which point the corporations will step up their security.

[gryphon]

The point I was making is that if the secuity is increased people will be forced to buy DVDs as they will be harder to obtain illegally until cracks are found at which point the corporations will step up their security.

You are forced to buy them to start with. Unless you know another option ?

There is no circle. Buy a DVD or not. No force, no pressure. They force you imply is what you get when you try to copy a DVD from a friend to share it. Which is illegal. It prohibits you from braking the law.

The point you are making suggest you are gonna share DVD's without owning them.

Now DRM is far more then just copy protection on DVD's and CD's. You can prohibit films to be played on DVD players which are not supported. You can restrict users from sending emails with DRM or even prohibit applications from running on Windows if they are not certified properly. Then all those options are not (widely) in use for commercial software right now.

[nemafakei]

I've not really had much truck with DRM itself, as I'm not really interested in much modern music. I hasten to point out that DRM was not the only thing that my posts have been about (e.g. covert installation of programmes by Sony), it's just the most convenient TLA. I'll keep to the sidelines on most of it, but...

"or even prohibit applications from running on Windows if they are not certified properly"

That in of itself is problematic. It massively disadvantages people who have no/inconsistent internet access. Registration has also long been used for data mining - I doubt that will stop once it becomes compulsory. There's also countless possible issues with what happens when you reinstall or move to another PC or upgrade some of your components, and no way to permit all legal activities without making DRM useless.

"The choice is yours. Not theirs they force upon you"

They (I love the way the malevolent impersonal has now crept in) do force the choices on you. They are the ones saying "you can either do things our way or not at all". They often have monopolies or oligopolies on sectors. And because they are seen to be abusing those monopolies, people react.

If I stopped you somewhere remote and gave you a choice at gunpoint: "Your money or your life", and you chose to keep the latter, would it be childish to moan that I forced you? I mean, I didn't force your hand into your wallet and make me give you the money, did I?

The reason I'd be wrong is not some subjective nonsense about choice - we make decisions that do affect others all the time, that's just life - the reason I'd be wrong is that I've just done something that is objectively wrong, namely to take from you for no good reason money which you have (let's assume for this situation) earnt.

[Khan]

You are forced to buy them to start with. Unless you know another option ?

There is no circle. Buy a DVD or not. No force, no pressure. They force you imply is what you get when you try to copy a DVD from a friend to share it. Which is illegal. It prohibits you from braking the law.

The point you are making suggest you are gonna share DVD's without owning them.

Now DRM is far more then just copy protection on DVD's and CD's. You can prohibit films to be played on DVD players which are not supported. You can restrict users from sending emails with DRM or even prohibit applications from running on Windows if they are not certified properly. Then all those options are not (widely) in use for commercial software right now.

Oh I never said that it wasn't an entirely legal circle or that there is any necessity to buy DVDs at all (although I did make the assumption of taking the perspective of someone who wants to see what is on the DVD.

Of course you're making the assumption that the distributors of DVDs deserve my respect and that the laws which protect them should be followed blindly, but I don't agree with that and piracy is the perfect form of such protest.

[gryphon]

I've not really had much truck with DRM itself, as I'm not really interested in much modern music.

They (I love the way the malevolent impersonal has now crept in) do force the choices on you. They are the ones saying "you can either do things our way or not at all". They often have monopolies or oligopolies on sectors. And because they are seen to be abusing those monopolies, people react.

Nema, in a way we fully agree on the subject ( I think). Any organisation enforcing you to be dependant on their applications and their rules to use them by is wrong.

Unfortunately, private companies make up a large proportion of the economy. Their power is not merely a fiction, or convention of status that can be dispelled by ignoring them.

When Sony installs a root kit people stand up and Sony is recalled. When Microsoft forces software upon us without technical background to make it coexist with other systems they are recalled by European Law. Same for DRM. When DRM prohibits you to use your data like you please (and within technical limitations) companies will be recalled to use DRM.

However. The code in this topic, same for the reasons memtioned in this topic against DRM are based upon copying illegit materials. And as you mentioned. No one really has that much truck with DRM. Frankly DRM is overhyped.

All that nice stuf, like prohibiting application installations, prohibit CD's to be played on non-Sony players does not exsist in wild now. The few companies who tried have failed, it's against laws in almost every European country to force those rules upon your customers.

DRM at present has no global protocol nor a universal application which can be used. It's isolated to DVD's and games mostly. The whole discussion about DRM rights is overhyped by the same media who are claiming the whole world is pirating music. And when discussed every one stands up acting like their personal freedom is at stake.

My stake at it. DRM when fully applied is hideous. And every company who tried to uphold it has been called back by law or customers running away. Not by every child in the playground standing up to fight the big bully. And when it comes down to pure argumentation about DRM. Thost children who have been bullied are infact users who want to copy their friends DVD's or never realised you can not share your iTunes music.

That's why, in a topic or discussion like this. Argumentation is done based upon socalled data freedom and large corrupting corporations. And sure every one then stands up fighting for their freedom. But think before you start your fight and make sure to start the right fight. DRM is not limiting you nor any one else on this board (not sure of course :) ). Yet you all act like it's invading your personal privacy. Something which DRM is not mature enough to do. And something European law for one is perfectly well capable of handeling if any company should think otherwise.

The gun-point analogy always is nice in argumentation's to win sympathy for your statement. But be carefull not to make it an onology. Where buying music and film media is hardly a matter of life and death.

The money you have so called taken from me is just as real as the missed claimed profits of the music industry.

Khan, that discussion is about overpriced media or some other personal vendetta. And however true your goals may be. I bet copy right protection itself is not part of that. Fight each fight at it's own ground.

[nemafakei]

Erm, I refer you back to my previous point about it being symbolic. Reposting this stuff is about building a culture of solidarity, not the specifics of DRM. It's encouraging people to make their voice heard, albeit in small ways, over issues that are a bit wider than "which soap star has the coolest hair". Hell, it's the internet, if it weren't a string of hex digits, it would be a string of leet.

"When Sony installs a root kit people stand up and Sony is recalled. When Microsoft forces software upon us without technical background to make it coexist with other systems they are recalled by European Law."

First, it took a lot of time. Second... Microsoft has lost the odd fight, sure, but it's ignored the odd ruling until it went away, it's fought back, and it's evolving faster than the EU can keep up. Third, if companies are forewarned that people will kick up a fuss about this stuff beforehand, they are dissuaded. This episode, whatever the outcome, will make more musicians etc. think twice about copy protection, both in terms of its effectiveness and its popularity.

[gryphon]

I'd say it is creating a culture of suppression without a real suppressor. Warning people for a danger that just isn't there. But that is a matter of interpretation. :)

To the second. Welcome to the real world where unlike on the Internet decision's take time. And Microsoft has changed his policy verry drastically the last couple of years. Unfortunately due to the general opinion on the Internet, it largely has been unnoticed.

Every programmer (I know of) who broke the copy rights and was sued was cleared in court as the companies have no ground to stand on. That without a angry mob of bloggers helping them and without the 5 year waith of European courts.

DRM or "whatever evil company" isn't doing anything like what we are talking about right now. And just a word of warning, discuss and warm people all you like. But then when the time comes

if companies are forewarned that people will kick up a fuss about this stuff beforehand, they are dissuaded. This episode, whatever the outcome...

people might not listen anymore as you have been crying wolf for to long.

btw. I havn't seen you posted this frequently for a long time in general. :)

[nemafakei]

Ok, it's not crying wolf, because *it's a symbol*. It's like the use of the CND sign (the one that looks like the Mercedes Benz logo) as a peace symbol. When people are waving that, particularly outside of the UK, it doesn't mean they're opposed to nukes or that they support any of the CND's rather odder principles. It just means what they're using it to mean, which is largely "we are opposed to [whatever war is being threatened or waged right now]".

[Andrew]

I just stumbled upon this (via a link on the frontpage at futureshop.ca). It is a music download site based in Canada.

Apparently you must use IE 5 or higher to view the website (awesome!)

And it also notes that it is not mac compatible because of microsoft copy protection stuff.

And companies wonder why people pirate music? It is difficult to purchase. Having to use specific software/hardware to play it. How do I know that the music I purchase today will play on devices I buy tomorrow simply because of "security" measures taken to prevent piracy?

Companies are simply failing at supplying the demand of consumers. By the time they catch up it could be too late to even provide a viable solution.

[gryphon]

Andrew, if you want that certainty go to a store and buy a audio CD. You have the choice between DRM free (the store). Or with DRM (online). No one if forcing you to buy your music with DRM online.

( one of my ISP's offers me 10 Euro's a month of free music download with the same restrictions as yours. I need their download manager, Windows Media Player and it's only valid for 1 month. I don't download any music from them and buy my CD's in the store for the same price )

You all keep saying we have no choice and DRM is forced upon us. Which just isn't true.

Nema, I hope you are right. And fighting is the best option for this. Although unless customers can decide between DRM free media in a real-life-store or DRM media online fighting is not the way for me. And maybe symbolism is just like those people if front of the Houses of Parliament, ignored by those it needs to influence and change.

iTunes is already offering DRM free downloads. So are stores all over the world. If you want to fight because people voluntarily download music with DRM. By all means do. Just make sure you are in the front lines then.

[Andrew]

I don't want to buy an entire CD. Maybe I only want a single song off of a CD in V0 format. My point is that it is not offered (or at least not recently, but itunes is changing that, but they still require certain software to download the media, and only offer certain qualities) in the format I want it in. I'm sure there are hundreds of thousands of people who do not want to purchase CDs from a store (more of a pain to have to rip the CD as well to put songs on ipod or whatever). The options of getting the media I want are limited legally. If there were more ways of getting the media online (and more competitive as well), maybe more people would get it that way. Sadly pirated is by far the easiest (about 3 clicks and in 30 seconds you get an entire album), cheapest (duh), high quality way to get what you want. Once the market simplifies the way to download music, removes DRM that restricts use of media, and offers different qualities (v0 or even VBR), people would be more likely to purchase legally.

I'm not sure if itunes or other stores have a policy where the more you buy the cheaper the product gets. Would be interesting to implement.

EDIT: Doing some research it seems itunes does sell some H264 video format tv shows/films (wikipedia). Good for them, best quality for size possible. Although I find it difficult to find anything about quality of audio/video on their website.

[gryphon]

Although I agree with you on that. If you like a song and want it you are forced to buy the whole album. That is if a single is not available. And any comparison like desiring the badge of a Ferrari without the need to buy the whole car is exaggerated in comparison to the price of a full audio CD.

It whould be nice if I could buy high quality audio online. (as I am an audiophile for that matter) Which sadly they don't offer. Your point. Not being offered the desired song in the desired media type is not feasible. Unless you have to financial power to have it custom made for you.

Think of this, artists choose to sign with a record company to producte their music. They want to sell you their latest single hit. Or their album. It's not your music to deside how you get it. Like Weird Al Yankovic offering songs for free to download. Or not. But every customer, consumer has to realise, that music is the product of an artist. Who gives you his work under certain conditions. You like the music, but don't respect the artist who made it.

And before you start all your flaming against evil record companies, realise that artists are free to sign record deals like they please. Many artists give free benefit concerts. And besides all the free artists in the world consumers still want more for free and expect anything to be adjusted to their own personal needs. For free ofcourse.

We all like communisme, where everything is for the people to take. And I am very sorry to be the first to tell you that is not the world we live in.

If your problem is with high prices for audio CD's take your fight there. Then realise that record companies are just protecting the interest of their clientele. Don't like that. Don't listen to the music.

(start listening to artists who offer free music)

If you want to fight something. Fight for the right reason. DRM is here for a right reason. To protect the owner and his rights. That's why Nema's argument will never hold any where else then on message boards. Publishers and artists have the right to sell their work any way they please. And this discussion is not about the use of DRM as a technology more over the fact that customers don't want to pay more then a few dimes. A price which the artist is not willing to sell for apparently. Which in most Western societies is still considered stealing.

I know radio stations have different contracts for their music. Not something like buy more pay less but still they don't have to buy the whole CD to play one song.

[Andrew]

Publishers and artists have the right to sell their work any way they please.

I agree that they can sell it any way they want. But when consumers do not want it in the format they are selling they will look elsewhere for the product. Then the companies complain that no one is purchasing their products and that they are stealing it. If the company will not provide the product the way the consumer wants to acquire it, in a specific format, possibly at a cheaper price than in previous years (how much does it cost for a company to copy/paste a 5 mb digital song 10,000 times in production costs?), the consumer will look elsewhere.

Which in most Western societies is still considered stealing.

Copyright infringement is not stealing. Copyright infringement is copyright infringement. If I steal a cd from the company (say in a CD store or in your house) then I am stealing property. If I make an exact copy of the CD without actually taking the CD or doing any damage or hurting the person/company in any way (other than a lost sale in which I would not purchase the CD even if I were not able to copy it), then it is copyright infringement because I made a copy of something without permission.

[nemafakei]

"And I am very sorry to be the first to tell you that is not the world we live in."

I disagree. *I* would be the first to tell you that we do not live in that world. Doesn't mean we can't fight for it.

What bothers me is that you describe the internal processes of the market as if they are some sort of moral imperative when in fact they're just one way (and a very artificial and inefficient way at that) of many to remunerate musicians for their time.

So no, ultimately, I don't believe DRM is here for any good reason. I don't believe "the right to prevent someone copying a recording you made and publicised" is innate or necessary. In fact, I believe copyright and patent laws the world over to be damaging and pointless to the free evolution of culture, technology, and education, and the industry that surrounds their enforcement to be an enormous waste of the world's resources. Frankly, even if all DRM did was enforce a law, I'd still post that code because I believe in opposing unjust laws (and particularly so when the lawgivers are themselves illegitimate).

[gryphon]

Andrew,

my mis phrase of words. Can we agree then that whenever you have music in your possession which you acquired with unauthorized actions you are directly violating the way te author ment to offer you his works ?

Pirating in my opinion is not the way nor the solution. Starting your own company that does offer the songs in any format at those prices you like to have them at present is a way of rebellion I'd say. And if you are right you will find enough customers to make a decent living. :)

Nema,

as much as I want to believe in that.

You are forcing your ideal economy upon a world that is not waiting for it. However nobel and good those ideas may be. The world is not shaped in that ideal vision. And if you want to fight that civilisation which is limiting you or itself. I'd pick a higher fight then DRM which at present is not limiting anyone.

I don't believe "the right to prevent someone copying a recording you made and publicised" is innate or necessary.

You are gonna hate me for this. But if you want to fight that limiting society we live in. Start with the phrases

Material is not necessarily for public use

and

UK laws apply

on your website. And accept the fact that other people. Musicians, out of their own free will want to publish their works with record companies who use DRM. While you are not respecting their free choice to do so and forcing your indeals upon those others you don't only disagree with society, you also protest against creative minds who choose to use DRM and copyrights to protect their works. Unless you want to tell me inventor are forced to copyright their works and make money from that ?

So no, ultimately, I don't believe DRM is here for any good reason.

DRM, used to write history. Not really but sort of ;)

Documents can be "market" with DRM. Preventing alternation during the cource of history so in the future people can tell which documents are real. And which have been altered during the years as opinion on the subject changed.

You still don't believe DRM is here for a good reason ?

[veK]

you know, this whole copy protection stuff is so stupid. there's always somebody who can hack it eventually and the whole things starts all over again. the industry hasn't understand one of the important facts of the internet yet: you can't stop porn - and as long as there is porn, there will be filesharing, codebreaking and all that other stuff related to it. and as a positive/negative side-effect this affects all other kind of digital media like other films, music, games...

it sounds quite silly. but trust me, it's really that simple...

[nemafakei]

"I'd pick a higher fight then DRM which at present is not limiting anyone."

No harm in fighting on all fronts. In fact, doing so brings people together.

"Material is not necessarily for public use" "UK laws apply"

I certainly shall have to. Just as soon as I remember the password... Though it's interesting to note that when I wrote it all that time ago, it amounted only to me-not-being-sued text, not me-wanting-to-withhold-copyright text.

"While you are not respecting their free choice to do so and forcing your indeals upon those others you don't only disagree with society, you also protest against creative minds who choose to use DRM and copyrights to protect their works."

Extract the meaning from the rhetorical framing, and you've got it.

Only thing to add is that I don't protest against the musicians or the creative minds who make the choice, I protest against the system that means they have to in order to make a living.

"You still don't believe DRM is here for a good reason ?"

Anyone with the capability to replace all electronic copies of an original document in existence with a forgery can probably get round a bit of code like DRM. If you want a guaranteed copy, paper is your best bet.

[gryphon]

veK,

that "o so secret" key is available to any technical developer who requests it.

(so it is funny to see how the common blog poster does not realise how trivial this key is.)

Copy protection is never foolproof and no technique can restrict users from copying and sharing material. Then that is not what this is all about. It's about people who think their point of view is more relevant then that of others. More specifically. People who use moral, technological reasoning and sympathy to convey one simple message:

I do not want to pay for the product you have made and I want to use.

Nema,

like you have mentioned. The world and every one in it can/should use her knowledge to gain more knowledge and hopefully for the good of men. As such any technology (consider DRM as a form of technology for this) at itself can mean progress in the correct content. The reasons against DRM largely depend on prejudgemental views of people who think everything is for take without addressing the true cause.

And you know. That system you so strongly oppose. Are the same people like you, just doing a job the best they can. (ofcourse some CEO's excepted)

Some one rather famous ones mentioned. That the first human who stood up and cliamed a piece of land for himself should have been shot and the idea banned for ever. Unfortunately, we have never lived like that. And maybe instead of trying to establish an elysium buy fighting the system is not always the best way. Understanding it and creating a better way might be more suitable (like the example to Andrew). Why fight DRM which as technology can have uses. Create something better (for music downloads) and people will use it. But keep in mind that it's always easy to take the aggressors side and destroy, then be creative and create a better thing.

[nemafakei]

"But keep in mind that it's always easy to take the aggressors side and destroy, then be creative and create a better thing."

I quite agree.

[veK]

Create something better (for music downloads) and people will use it.

just without drm everthing would be fine. If I was buying a cd in a store and the salesman told me I could only play listen to the cd as long as I keep buying music at his store (like the new napster) or I can only listen to the cd on 1 player (copy protection) I would slap him right into his face and take it with me without paying - basically what people are doing by downloading and sharing it. I think EMI is headed the right way with their announcement to abandon drm. now the tracks just have to get cheaper and more people will download AND pay. I really hope other labels will do it the same way soon.

[gryphon]

Remember the view-5-times VHS tape or the CD that could only be played for 3 days and then disintegrated. I wonder why those never really caught on.. :)

[Andrew]

How to own a 128 bit number. So basically everyone should start making random numbers and sue anyone use uses a number you have created.

Google has 1,780,000 results for the key.

I'm thinking lawyers are gonna be in high demand now.

Gob if you get a takedown notice for the key, please remove the key. But also scan the takedown notice and upload it to show everyone. This takedown notice should contain the key (otherwise you would have no idea what to remove). Thus even if they get the key posted taken down, it will still be up in the form of a takedown notice. Oh how I love silly laws.

BBC Trustees agree to let BBC infect Britain with DRM I guess drm isn't so dead after all.

[Andrew]

Two US States Restrict Used CD Sales

The legislation is supposed to stop the sale of counterfeit and/or stolen music CDs, despite the fact that there has been no proof that this is a particularly pressing problem for record shops in general.

In Florida, Utah, and soon in Rhode Island and Wisconsin, selling your used CDs to the local record joint will be more scrutinized than then getting a driver's license in those states. For retailers in Florida, for instance, there's a "waiting period" statue that prohibits them from selling used CDs that they've acquired until 30 days have passed. Furthermore, the Florida law disallows stores from providing anything but store credit for used CDs. It looks like college students will need to stick to blood plasma donations for beer money.

More stupid laws.

Australia hands over man to US courts

Before he was extradited to the United States, Hew Griffiths, from Berkeley Vale in NSW, had never even set foot in America. But he had pirated software produced by American companies.

I can't wait to be extradited to a Muslim country for drawing a picture of Mohammad and distributing it on the internet.

Heh, someone on slashdot made the same argument

So if you send, say a cartoon picture of Mohammad, to someone who happens to be in Iran when they view the email. You should be extradited to Iran to face charges of insulting Islam since your action was a crime under Iranian law, and did harm to individuals that are protected by Iranian law?

[Acriku]

That's sickening. The power that companies hold over U.S. law is very scary. Copyright infringement violation #1 will likely lead to 5 years in prison. Violation #2 will likely lead to 10 years! That's the level of armed robbery! The level of perspective is out of whack.

[Andrew]

I downloaded itunes, but then found out while searching all over the internet that itunes only sells music in Canada. No tv or movies. Another lost sale.

My googlefu is unable to point me to where Canadians can legally download movies and tv shows (without DRM).

Maybe this is why Canada supposedly represents 70% of all pirated material online (and new york city represents 40% of pirated material online, which means that the MPAA failed math)? They make lots of numbers up.