What is Digg?51 Comments
- Rickler, on 10/12/2007, -2/+44Actually it's, If you do pirate you don't have trouble with DRM.
- ray901, on 10/12/2007, -3/+32"It's time they start treating their best customers like people who they want to do business with, rather than criminals."
It's the latest trend, first governments, then certain major corporations (e.g. Microsoft), then it becomes a basic premise for dealing with consumers of electronic paraphernalia, especially when control of a market is up for grabs.
DRM will not be dropped unless they have absolutely no other choice. - BHRecon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+29DRM only hurts paying customers.. period.
- bIuebonics, on 10/12/2007, -1/+21yea, you have that backwards, pirated content doesn't have drm... so only paying customers are having restrictions placed on their content. it's well past the point of needing proof that drm does NOT prevent piracy in any way.
- halik, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20I still don't understand pay-for-bittorent. So I am paying to use up my own upstream... or how does that even work?
I don't understand why bittorent is relevant in the case of pay-for-content business model, as a paying customer I really don't have any incentive to use my bandwith to help the content owner. - dongiaconia, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18I would understand it more if it worked like a ratio deal. Uploading more data would earn you credits to get discounts off other purchases, or free content. In essence, you would become a distributor by having more content, and thereby earning more credits by sharing that content.
Since they don't need to pay big bucks to host the content, they could afford to do something like this. In the meantime, I'll stick with iTunes thank you. - Otto, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9@ImTheDarkcyde : You do realize that this is about BitTorrent, the company, trying to *sell* content, right? Not about people using BitTorrent, the protocol, to download things from places like torrentspy.
- naughtyboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8mikefitz2 wrote:
if you don't pirate then you wont have trouble with drm. so what, they control what you can listen to, you shouldn't be listening to it anyway if you didn't pay for it
The main problem with DRM is that it restricts fair use. You can only use a certain media format or worse you are restricted to a proprietary platform. - adougherty, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8@allenu, ImTheDarkcyde
The reason why ImTheDarkcyde got dugg down (to the best of my knowlege) is, while he is semantically correct, he is missing the big picture.
The reason WHY customers are going to various places to download movies is because of the actions of the MPAA.
1) MPAA overcharges for movies, and treats customers like criminals (remember spending 20 minutes trying to get through that plastic coating on a DVD, even before the popularity of P2P clients?)
2) Then, customers download free movies, that they're not willing to spend $20-$200 for.
3) MPAA then scared by piracy further treats customers like criminals by adding unreasonable DRM
4) More customers download free movies. Some out of anger, but many to escape the binds of DRM. (I wanna watch Terminator 3 on my computer with out a Trojan Horse being installed. I want to watch Buffy the Vampire Slayer on my PSP. I want to have a backup of my DVDs on my hard drive, in the event they get lost or damaged, and they do)
5) MPAA scared more furthers its tactics with manipulative advertising, and putting messages into children's programming about why file sharing is as bad as drug use (Disney ran a "Just say no to fire sharing" cartoon)
The escalation continues. The actions of the MPAA, have alienated its customers, and have ultimately encouraged the problem they are trying to fix. Instead of fixing it's own internal problems, they are attacking their loyal customers in an effort to get more money. - vbrtrmn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Exactly, why I will not buy DRM encrypted crap. I want a file that I can play on my Windows desktop, on my Mac Book, and on a Linux PVR. If a company cannot provide an open standard, I will not do business with them.
- Otto, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7A better choice would be to not buy the CD at all and stop giving your money to those people.
Pirate it instead. - Otto, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Yeah. That worked until the customer became an ass and put all those stores out of business. Nowadays, the customer is trying to rip off the businessman.
I'm not defending the **AA's here, BTW. DRM is suck, but not because it limits fair use or promotes lock-in. DRM sucks because it destroys interoperability and reduces the marketplace for the content. Content sold sans-DRM would sell faster and better. - Philluminati, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4
Look, DRM is pointless.
Whats the point of allowing people access to files and then encrypting the contents only to then allow them to decrypt it later. At the end of the day, DRM or not, the file contains the content you want.
DRM creates a lock-in that stops iTunes users the freedom to easily keep their music on other digital devices....It harms THEM, the legitimate payers, as well as everyone else.
If the industry focused on making music cheaper and more predictable (I like the subscription model) and just as easy to access as iTunes then I'm up for paying and I don't give away music I've paid for. I won't break my end of the agreement.
But I can't use iTunes on my platform, ergo, I must find another way... - ropers, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Because I never grow tired of pointing people here:
http://www.the-fifth-hope.org/mp3/drm.mp3
There are 8 seconds of silence at the start. After that it's an extremely eloquent lecture by Michael SIms on just what is wrong with DRM and how it's set to invade your computer whether you want it or not. The talk was recorded in 2004 and is more relevant than ever. - dongiaconia, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@Otto, it's only faster if people are sharing it. If there is no advantage to continuing to share it, then do you really believe people will keep the torrents shared indefinitely, just for the sake of altruism? It is far more likely the download will complete and then people will kill their bit torrent client.
That pretty much negates your argument for 'faster downloads.' Unless there is a personal benefit, the masses will not keep things shared. It is unfortunate, but people just are not that altruistic. Everyone cares more about getting their own download right now than helping other people get their downloads. I'm not arguing this as a 'good thing' I'm just saying that is how it works--I'm just pointing out a gargantuan point of failure in their business model.
The fix for this would be to provide incentive where none currently exists. - SeBBBe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The thing that's so incredibly dumb about this is that it's not like you're gonna pirate more if the music you can buy is not protected. There are tons of unprotected MP3s out there. If you decide only to legally buy songs, and a friend happens to want to copy your music, he might as well get it from a file sharing app. I just dont see what they intend DRM to do.
- maxhrk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4i recall saw a historic sign nearby a store in ancient time:
"Customer is always right." - Scott2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Words of wisdom? Thats the most ridiculous thing that I've ever heard.
And the iTunes Store seems to have a DRM based model that works. Last I checked, it was was selling quite a few songs. - lcohiomatty86, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@dongi...
you make a very good point.. there is ABSOLUTLY no reason to tie up your bandwith.. risking getting flagged by your isp, and just in general making your conection slow for another companies profit. if you are kind and share your bandwith with them.. they sure as heck better be kind and share their content with you. you give them the service of hours/days of bandwith.. you deserve a movie or tv show or w/e... or.. at the very least. mayby a half off discount off of a future purchase if you agree to upload say.. 200mb after the torrent has finished.. (which for most US broadband users, takes a few hours to do). - IsaacA, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2So are you saying, we should not give any of the startups a chance? That way it will never get any better. Your reasoning is the problem. We talk down everything that could become great, just because it is possible that they mess it up later. How about Wikipedia, they could be making a lot of money from it as well, but they haven't abandoned their ideals yet, should we not have given it a chance? What's the point in making these assumptions and create a horror scenario based on those assumptions? Why not give http://www.sellaband.com a chance? We can always bail on them later should they have abandoned their ideals, and then we go with the next startup with great ideals. But in the meantime we can enjoy what they provide. Would you rather that we would not do anything? Don't start a relationship, it is all nice in the beginning, but it doesn't last, so better not to start it in the first place? We are all gonna die some day, so why bother? What have you got to lose?
Enjoy it while you can! Enjoy it while it lasts. If we don't try, we will fail for sure. If we give them a chance, we might succeed. What have we got to lose? So let's just pick a couple of startups like http://www.sellaband.com and support them. - zbeast, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The only drm that is user transparent is DVD's in the case of the dvd the drm was invisible to the end users.
In the case of digital downloads the drm and the file are separate. So if you have to move the restricted file to a different computer
you have to jump thought hoops to preform that task. You also stand a 60 / 40 chance of the loss of your key files.
Then all that content you paid real money for is effectively gone! DRM I believe is not just there to prevent piracy its there
to prevent market entry by other competitors. We all know by the is point no drm stops any dedicated pirate.
All of the current drm systems out there have been hacked or circumvented. DRM stops the casual copier but it also frustrates the hell
out of the casual end users. I returned to the store a digitalCD audio system after it printed on my tv that it could no use my digital
audio out because of the restrictions on the disk. Vote with your feet when they say the only way you can get this is with drm.
- Atomic1fire, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1theres always ppv
and a vcr or tivo if your watching satalite - tiny1001, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@tonycubed
Microsoft was mentioned because EMI was hoping it would get a deal similar to universal with a % of each zune sold being slated to go to EMI - Philluminati, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2If it's faster to torrent than get over HTTP then I've no real issue with it,
Although I don't expect to pay as much as other services since all there doing is sending me a torrent file. - 1911wolf, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Here's my New Years Resolution:
If I like a CD put out by an artist that is signed to a member of the RIAA, I shall download a FLAC copy of the CD. Then take a $5 bill out of my wallet and anonymously send it directly to the artist. That's more money than they would ever get from a CD sale after the RIAA extorts their cut. - Meowbiusfox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I simply don't care how stupid they are.
I have known about THAT for over 15 years.
Buncha Marc Jacobs all black wearin igmos.. - Scott2, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I'm sorry, but we've already seen what people do with DRMless files - They distribute the ***** out of them. You want companies to trust us with their IP, but we proved long ago that we don't deserve it. For every one of us that would do the right thing with unprotected files, there are 100 more that would take advantage of the situation. Furthering the problem is the fact that these same people that want the companies to trust them also spend time inventing ways to strip the DRM from said files. Doesn't sound like we're on the right path.
The MPAA, RIAA, and other companies are in favor of locking files down so tight that they're almost unusable, and thats not right either. But we have to face it - if communism worked, or if we lived in Star Trek's 24th century world, unprotected files would be no problem. Here and now? Forget it. - IsaacA, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Then the way to go is to support some of the new business models that do hold promise. Like one that cuts out the middleman that are pushing DRM. Take SellaBand ( http://www.sellaband.com ) for example, a crowd sourcing initiative, where the community takes over some of the tasks from the major labels. The community funds the recordings, decides which bands get to record, and profit from it. One of the best features of their model is that everyone will be able to download the music for free, so there is no need for DRM. It cuts out the major labels, we get to decide.
But their community is not very large yet. It needs to build up. If we support it, than we will make it work. But these business models hardly get any attention compared to the thousands of posts about what is wrong with DRM, RIAA, MPAA, etc. We all know what the problem is, we need to focus on the possible solutions that are presented to us. We need to give those a chance and give them more publicity, otherwise we will be waiting till eternity till the established corporations come around to our side.
We can give SellaBand a chance to prove themselves by just investing $10, the worst thing that could happen is that you lose a one or two dollars, or receive an album that doesn't live up to your expectations. But if it works we get thousands of albums to download for free. And that will encourage others to use their business model for books, movies, games and software, which you all could download for free, and legal. If we want to we can make it happen, we just need to grab the opportunity. So instead of reading one more post on DRM, RIAA, MPAA, etc. check out http://www.sellaband.com and be part of the solution. This might sound like SPAM, but to me those thousands of posts about DRM, RIAA, MPAA should be considered SPAM, they are not helpful. I want to read more about some of the solutions, so we can do something about this mess, so digg those articles instead, please! - DougO, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Personally, I'm happy to buy music from iTunes. I rip everything to CD as insurance anyway, so DRM for me is not a big deal. I like the option of purchasing individual tracks, as opposed to entire albums. However, because I can't get certain albums that are released in the US but not in Australia through the Australian iTunes store, the publisher, the artist and Apple don't get my business: I give it instead to BitTorrent and feel perfectly justified in doing so. I'm sure that thought will keep me warm as I lie awake in my jail cell...
- DoodlesMcPooh, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1In large corporations the expression is "Buyers are liars"
I work for the largest US non oil company. - PaulLev, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Absolutely right - the RIAA and the MPAA are dinosaurs - the key is not to get hit by them, as they fall ...http://www.paullevinson.net/archives/fair_use_bill_in_congress.phtml
- d3dm, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2To those of you who can't stand DRM, let me ask you a simple question: Do you think the content owners would make more money or less money by removing all DRM from their content?
If you answered "yes", then why haven't they done it already? If these guys are the greedy bastards that you accuse them of being, why aren't they going for the increased profits?
I'll tell you why, because they've all done the numbers and it all comes back as a loss.
DRM has never, ever bothered me. Want to know why? I rent a DVD, put it in my player and it works. I can take the same DVD and play it on my home computer or laptop and it works. Same thing with CDs that I buy, or games that I rent to play on my XBox. It all just works and the DRM is totally transparent to me. And this may come as a big surprise to some of you, but it isn't just me who shares this experience.
The overwhelming majority of consumers feel the same way, and that is why this isn't a problem for anyone but a very small (albeit, vocal) part of the population. The few of you can kick, scream, and justify theft all you like but nothing about this will change until the content owners can find a way to make MORE money by removing the DRM from the content they deliver to consumers.
I'll further argue that this won't happen because the current content owners are getting their piles of money today from masses of people just like me who don't give a rat's ass about DRM. If they decided to drop the DRM for the whiners but then use that to justify raising the price of a DVD, I'm sorry, but I'll take the cheaper disc with DRM please. And again, I'm not alone in this line of thinking.
Why should I pay more so that you make copies of your discs or play them on some oddball Linux incantation? I shouldn't, and neither should the 99% of the population that watches DVDs at home today that doesn't even know or care what DRM is. The MPAA, RIAA, BSA, etc. knows this all to well and until DRM begins to affect the home entertainment experience of people like me, DRM is here to stay. - Traiklin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@ IsaacA
Give them time, as they continue to get bigger someone within the group will decide "Hey we could be making a lot of money from this" then they will start charging more without giving a reason as to why (or a very weak reason), then suddenly they start including something without mentioning it, then hey what's this? I can't play their file in half the free players out there, why is this? then all of a sudden we have a new version of the RIAA on our hands.
As it always goes, everything starts off great and has the greatest intentions, then as time goes on power begins to corrupt and the original idea is lost (Look at Disney, Walt said NO SEQUELS and then he dies, the next one kept that motto, then he retired and look what we have here, this new guy starts doing sequels that don't even need to be done.) - RG13, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Je ne understand.
1 language por favor? - my10cent, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Man sometimes I wish we were back in the Vinyl dayz
- tf5bassist, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1From the article:
"Meanwhile, the MPAA sits and waits for some mysterious magical DRM-based business model that everyone loves -- rather than noticing the insanely long history of failed experiments with DRM. The movie industry offers a product where DRM should be the least of its worries. It's an entertainment product that has always been about the experience of seeing the movie. If the MPAA's execs ever realized that they were selling the experience rather than the movie itself, the issue of DRM would be seen as something that blocked their ability to sell more, rather than helped it."
Words of freakin' wisdom, in my book. - IsaacA, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1What people do with the files doesn't have to be a problem. Distributing it doesn't need to be a problem. It's only a problem if the people who produce it won't receive enough money to do the work. Let's say a band expects to sell 100,000 copies of their album and receive $1 million. What if we as organized consumers make them an offer to buy the album for $2 million, but then everyone will be able to download it for free, we will distribute it ourselves. We split the costs among the say 100 million organized consumers, so that's $0.02 each. We get a better deal, and the band gets a better deal. In this case it is not a problem when we 'distribute the ***** out of them'. Could we do this, I think so, consumer groups already exist, just not on this scale yet.
Don't give up so easily, please read the following article from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF):
'A Better Way Forward: Voluntary Collective Licensing of Music File Sharing'
http://www.eff.org/share/?f=collective_lic_wp.html - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0nice story.....liked it
- Otto, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Why do people think that they should somehow earn something for uploading? What you earn is faster downloading. If you want to go back to slow as hell downloading or paying through the nose for the bandwidth or getting low quality content like iTMS sells, then feel free.
If you had absolutely no idea how the protocol worked and it uploaded without telling you, but downloaded faster, then you'd have nothing to say and would just be happy that they made their ***** download so quickly. - tim507, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1http://digg.com/software/How_To_Get_a_website_up_and_running_in_all_opensource_tools_software
- IllBeBack, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I *want* to be a paying customer for non-DRM downloadable content. Is my only choice to buy CDs with a single good song on it?
C'mon, music industry, help me out here. - fjalanis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0You make a really good point, but what happens if one of your CD's or DVD's gets scratched (which is something that can happen very easily)? Then you lost your investment, because you don't have a backup. Or what if you purchased a song from itunes and want it to play somewhere else without buying an ipod-to-everything adapter?
Of course companies are making more money with DRM because they take out the liberties of PAYING customers to then hand them back partially for extra fees (ie. ipod adapters, cds of dvds you buy to replace damaged ones.) It is sad that this happens, that honest people are the ones ending up paying for general dishonesty, and that is why I oppose DRM, because I own a rather large collection of DVDs and an ipod. - alleycat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0you should change you 'nym to "shortsight3d".
- geekee, on 10/12/2007, -6/+4Of course no one on Digg complains about the real criminals, the file sharers, who are ruining it for everyone else. They are the reason DRM exists. UNtil people realize and correct the problem, DRM will continue to exist. Digg users can't even admit there's a problem, so they will never understand.
- TonyCubed, on 10/12/2007, -15/+7How come Microsoft was mentioned?
- allenu, on 10/12/2007, -19/+10@ImTheDarkcyde
You have a point. I don't know why people are burying your comment. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -32/+14"It's time they start treating their best customers like people who they want to do business with, rather than criminals."
and are their best customers the ones who go to torrentspy to get their movies?
last i checked "customers" actually bought the product - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -40/+4if you dont pirate then you wont have trouble with drm. so what, they control what you can listen to, you shouldnt be listening to it anyway if you didnt pay for it
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is