defectivebydesign.org — "If consumers even know there's a DRM... we've already failed" -Disney ExecTaking inspiration from Disney, DefectiveByDesign.org is asking people to submit ideas for actions for October 3rd - a "world wide day of action against DRM". DBD will highlight the best ideas and award prizes for ideas and actions that raise public awareness.
Aug 31, 2006 View in Crawl 4
Closed AccountSep 1, 2006
@popularmeBecause who needs standards?
phr00tSep 1, 2006
@ babblingOK, I know everyone automatically hates anyone defending DRM...But with that said -- the person who created that music might not want to give public rights to make derivative works from his music... same reason people write closed-source applications. What everyone has to realize is that I don't want to force DRM on anybody, and you all don't have to buy it. I'm just defending it as an available option in the free market. The DRM model we are working on here is very flexible, it can allow for any kinds of rights -- I'm not the one setting what rights you can or can not have, I'm just giving people (anyone, even you) the tools to create and enforce rights. If you don't like what rights the content creator gave you, don't buy from that content provider -- don't blame the tools used to create those rights.And FYI, I do other things here at work... DRM actually isn't my main project, but I know DRM gets alot of bad PR (and many times for good reason), so I'm hoping to convey that there might be some good uses for DRM in the future
johnboiwaltuneSep 1, 2006
Most of the people who come to Digg will be able to work their way around whatever bulls**t DRM comes along... It's the average consumer who will be boned.
nogoodreasonSep 1, 2006
What are DRM-using sites policies on refunds? Presumably, if they grant you one, they just reclaim your license to play that song... in which case there's bound to be a market for people who buy albums, strip them of DRM and make a copy, then get a refund and end up with a free album?
williamdyerSep 1, 2006
@logic6That is the ONLY solution. remember when people used to "steal" phone service? Now it's too cheap to bother stealing. $1 albums and 10 cent (What'll fitty say?) songs are too cheap to steal.Ironically, this is the AllOfMP3 model, and the record industry is trying to kill it. They should give that up and adopt the same model.
imustbeemoSep 2, 2006
@Phr00t, why is there even a need for DRM? Can the entertainment industry not trust its customers? If the industries would actually _LISTEN_ to their customers instead of SUING them, there would be no need for DRM and people like you wouldn't have to kill entertainment.I fail to see how suing your customers for more than your employees could pay with their yearly salary is a great business model. How is still alive? People like you that get payed to help them and think nothing of the evil you create.
nickb1Sep 11, 2006
"Just make sure that anything I buy is mine to do what I please with, or else you are creating evil. That is all, thanks."I don't want you to get the wrong idea, I'm against current DRM. But in American anyone can buy a gun.. should you be allowed to do anything you like with it?Kind of silly comment!
chrizzleSep 12, 2006
@NickB1, there are LAWS to stop you from doing bad things with a gun, NOT TECHNOLOGY.of course you can't do whatever you want with a gun. killing and threatening people under most circumstances is wrong and you shouldn't be allowed to do that stuff. that's why we have laws against that sort of behavior. you can't use a gun to kill, injure, or threaten to kill or injure people because that stuff is against the law.now, lets say that there is a technology that prevents guns from being used on people. sounds great, right? no more accidental shootings, no more murders, no more armed robbery. we can now go back and repeal all those laws and stuff about murder and negligence. oh happy day.but what if you want to use that gun on a person for a legitimate reason, such as to protect your family from a serial killer, or to fight in a war, or to stop some sort of armed coup in your country? now your gun doesn't work on people thanks to that cool technology. now it's not such a cool technology is it?and besides, who decided that you can't use that gun to protect your family? some corporation or industry group? i don't remember electing them, do you? their technology has effectively violated our right to bear arms that has been granted to us by the constitution of the united states.the fact is that you *should* be able to do what you want with that gun AND you *should* suffer the consequences for breaking the law. that's what laws are for. that's also NOT what technology is for.LAWS, drafted and approved thru due process by our elected officials, are what should control what we do with the things we buy. NOT TECHNOLOGY.
andrewescottOct 3, 2006
The original Disney comment has been presented as something sinister, while it's really not. What gets up 99% of consumer's noses about DRM is that it stops them doing things that they would expect to do, e.g. backing it up, lending it to friends, keeping it for 20 years, etc. What they meant is that if DRM allowed all these things to be done, yet kept commercial pirates from buying a single copy that could be on-sold to thousands of others, then it would be a success. In other words, DRM should not be visible to consumers, but it should be very visible to pirates. This is a positive thing!
divatriApr 26, 2007
Ummm... Who's able to open the link?