What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Geek Squad employee sings for Best Buy in holiday campaign. view!
youtube.com/bestbuy0 - Valerie DeAngelo explains the moment she got the casting call.
24 Comments
- Yoshi39, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18Not being able to make legal copys of my Dvds (or play them on linux) until Dvd-Jon cracked them, not being able to play my legaly bought aac tracks on my generic mp3-player (until I cracked them), not being able to make legal backups of my ps2 games unless I ship it off to get chipped wich I fell is to expensive, do I need to go on?
- Kosterfield, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14There is a middle ground. They just happen to being trying to eliminate it right now. They are looking at putting MORE DRM on our music. Not keeping it at the barely tolerable level it has been at for the last two years. The more they add the more the reason we have to protest. There is a middle ground, I'm sure a great majority of people would love that, but the RIAA and MPAA keep pushing it to the total DRM side.
- niceyuk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10@michaelstone:
"Barely tolerable?
I have never had a problem with DRM. Seriously, explain a problem with DRM you've personally had."
How about the Sony rootkit on music CDs, or Starforce hidden drivers causing problems with my DVD drive even after I uninstalled the game that was protected by Starforce?? - Snuffkin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Unfortunately, the biggest problem I can see with this whole campaign is that *the website sucks*. It's practically guaranteed that these protests they have done have gotten people interested, and those people have then lost interest simply because of the website.
Specifically, the website tells people that the fight over DRM is really, really important, yet it does nothing to tell them what the ***** it is. By clicking the tiny 'About' link in the top right, you get a short, boilerplate definition of DRM which does nothing to actually educate people beyond some minimal definition.
There are some links to sources of better information on DRM, but they're in a sidebar item far down the page. Nobody will spot that.
I think the whole thing is good, but their website isn't winning them any favours. - tokachu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7This should've been a link to the real web site: http://defectivebydesign.org/
- randomc0de, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"I have never had a problem with DRM. Seriously, explain a problem with DRM you've personally had."
I can't legally play any DVD I own on my computer. I run Linux as my only OS. Right now I'm forced to violate a federal law to play the movies I paid for. Also, all the ogg's and mp3's I have on my audio player are ripped from CD's. This has not been tested in court, but is assumed to be illegal. I use MythTV to timeshift tv programs, which may be illegal in the future, and the current status is dubious. These are not abnormal activities... I just want to watch TV when I have the time, play my music without using a CD player, and watch DVD's on my computer monitor, which is a fair bit larger than my TV screen. These activities are all being made illegal. This is wrong.
Edit: This was supposed to be up and under a few comments up... digg's reply system needs work. - ACalcutt, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8DVDs uses a standard DRM (CSS if i rember right)... the problem with DRM on music is everybody has their own DRM, there is no standard. and some drm(most) prevents fair use of something that you own
- SmeRndmGy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8I've said it before, and I guess I will say it again. These people should be going after apple! Apple sells more DRM infected files than anyone, and they have the ignorant masses begging for more. If anyone needs to be made aware of the evils of DRM, it is the legions of apple fanatics who are supporting DRM daily. As long as these people keep buying it, they will keep selling it. You are being shaken down by the music industry. "Buy (I use this term loosely, because according to them, you do not own the music, only the right to listen to it) our malware infected music files or we will sue you for hilariously large amounts of money. Even buying cds and ripping them onto your mp3 player is now considered piracy! Stop being intimidated by these companies and help bring about the demise of all DRM.
- MySchizoBuddy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3does anyone know the DRM restrictions of Apple Itunes and the various other music stores. Like a table comparing em.
- RadiantBeing, on 10/12/2007, -9/+12Perhaps they can explain why DVDs did $21.2 billion in business in 2004 and why the iTunes music store has sold over 1 billion songs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dvd#History
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itunes#iTunes_Music_Store
Could it be that there's a sensible middle ground where creators's rights are respected and consumers aren't treated like dirt? - amphora, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3SmeRndmG, this was a launch and Bill Gates' keynote was a target of opportunity. Expect each participant in DRM to receive attention from Defective By Design. Microsoft, Apple, Real, Intel, MPAA, RIAA, Sony, etc...
michaelstone, Apple's FairPlay are loose shackles. Once Apple has a solid grip on the download market there is nothing stopping them from changing the terms of FairPlay. They could even make such changes retroactive.
I am sitting in a cafe in the University District in Seattle. 1/2 the people in here have laptops and are under 25. It is a pretty educated lot. I just asked 4 people if they knew what Digital Rights Management or DRM was. None of them knew. The answers ranged from "I don't know" to something that will protect my "Digital Rights." The public, our society is ignorant of DRM and Treacherous Computing.
We could look back on this period of time and say "Why didn't we stop this while we could?" I don't want to be in that position looking out from my freesoftware ghetto, free but marginalized. - amphora, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4RadiantBeing, I took that photo and yes I think that doing something outlandish to draw attention to Digital Restrictions Management is the best way to go about it. This was the launch of the campaign and we have people talking.
The end game of Defective By Design is to inform the average consumer about the threat posed to them by DRM. The first stage of Defective by Design is to get the attention of technologists.
Could the website be better? Yes!
Should it get fixed pronto? Yes!
Just today I was at FeedomHEC in Seattle and I handed out a few of the fliers I received that day. One individual who was entirely sympathetic to the cause told me, "people would probably take you guys more seriously if your media looked better."
That said, Defective By Design has garnered an incredible amount of attention given the limited resources put into it thus far. Expect it to only get better organized and more sophisticated and in short order.
The campaign is now 5 days old.
I'll be talking about DRM, Treacherous Computing, Free Culture and some crap you won't care about on my blog:
http://www.becherer.org - duality, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This is a bare-bones discussion of what's going on, and it doesn't go into enough detail as I would like. While it might be a good introduction for the uninitiated, it isn't exactly news to anybody who regularly reads Digg.
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2What do you think about Blu-Ray and HDMI, echobucket?
- amphora, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"We oppose the idea that the seller of a song or any kind of work can impose on the consumer the way to read it, forever, and especially in the consumer's home... Can we allow a couple of vendors to establish monopolies tightly controlling their clients and excluding competition?" said French Assembly member Christian Paul.
http://digg.com/security/France_Considers_Anti-DRM_iPod_Law_ - Nerys, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5I am going to try one time to explain this. its LONG so please read it so I dont have to repeat it.
Could it be that there's a sensible middle ground where creators's rights are respected and consumers aren't treated like dirt?
DRM is bad. Period. there is no such thing as a good for consumers DRM as it only serves ONE purpose and that is to take away your property rights to the content you purchased.
APPLE DRM is the WORST because it "appears" less than intrusive.
so explain this to me. you have an ipod 5 years from now you and me have both spent $1000 on our music.
I decide I don't like the "ipod" of 2011 and decide to switch to the X player - YOU come to the same conclusion.
I pull out my CD's and rip them to the new required format unless its MP3 which I already have encoded I simply drag and drop my mp3's to player X
YOU plug player X into your machine and "itunes" says error no joy can't put the music on this its not an apple approved device.
I am happy hunky dorry as I should be I already paid for my music.
You on the other hand have a delimma. you can spend $2,000 to switch to the X Player since you already spent $1000 on music which is not utterly useless and now go and buy $1000 in music for the new player OR what is MORE likely you suck it up return player X and live with the 2011 ipod you now HATE because your STUCK with it its the only thing that will play your music
OH and 2 of your 4 computers stopped playing your itunes because the labels forced apple to reduce the allowed number of machines to 2 OH and then turned off the ability to burn to CD (this is all possible with DRM they can legally impliment ANY RULES they want ANY TIME they want and its retroactive.
How this is ANY different than buying a 27" TV and then a crew comes in a year later and TAKES your 27" TV from you and replaces it with a 13" TV is a mystery to me since that is EXACTLY what they are PERMITTED to do with DRM in place.
DRM is NEVER EVER GOOD. there is no such thing as good DRM and anyone who says otherwise is WITHOUT NEGOTIATION OR DISCUSSION Lying to your face or are completely delusional.
DRM serves the SINGLE purpose of RESTRICTING legitimate end users. you see the CRIMINALS don't care about DRM its EASY for them to bypass. DRM does absolutely positively utterly totally NOTHING at all whatsoever to even slow down Piracy. Worst case scenario the criminals will simply STEAL originals if it gets too hard to crack it.
It will NEVER stop piracy or criminals. it will ONLY restrict the legal uses for end users. it never will and never can serve any other purpose. It simply can not.
this stems from "control" the labels are in power because they have overbearing indetured servitude style control over the artists.
name ONE other industry where the "creator" of a work gets a FRACTION of the profit that the seller gets ? name one. the average artists gets a nickel or LESS from each $18 CD sale. it costs LESS than $1 to make package and advertise each CD (maybe as high as $2) there is at least $10 profit on each CD (minimum) and the artists gets a nickel or less ??? explain that to me.
the internet and mp3 (open structure and OPEN format) allow an EMPOWERMENT of the artists. it makes it possible to take the first steps toward the ARTISTS being able to take control of there own creations. right now 99% of artists "suck down" whatever clearly unhealthy terms are in a contract because they really have no choice. its the labels way or the highway and sometimes WORSE since they can "black ball" you from the industry pretty effectively if you dont play ball there way with there ball in there court with there rules for which you have little or NO say in whatsoever. They control production - distribution - marketing - TV - Radio - Store shelves etc.. etc.. etc..
to "get in" you pretty much had to sign with a label and THEY determine if your a success and throw yiou a small bone sometimes if they like you.
the MP3 and Internet potentially EMPOWERS artists so THEY can dictate some terms like a contract negotiation is supposed to be like.
the labels are scared ***** of this !! it makes them "obsolete" no more RAPING the artists making MILLIONS on an artists who ends up in DEBT to you after a year even though the label made millions in profit ???? explain that to me !!!
Indentured Servitude (I thought that was illegal in this country)
CD sales went UP when napster went truly public. but you know what ? people were buying the music they WANTED which happened to NOT be the music the labels were pushing :-)
Itunes is worthless. MY CD has "value" its "worth" something. an itunes song is complete worthless its a few bytes that contractually do not never will and never have belonged to you. you cant resell it you can give it away. it has ZERO value. in fact its a negative value since you PAID a positive amount for something with ZERO value.
People have been deluded into thinking they do not legally OWN there music or movies they purchased. the problem is they forget (and the labels distort) there is TWO ownerships.
there is PERSONAL Property and Intellectual Property.
it is perfectly analogous to compare a WATCH to a SONG or a TV SET to a DVD MOVIE
they both are owned in 2 ways. Personally and Intellectually.
you OWN the TV including everything inside it. you OWN the CD including all the songs on it. they are your PROPERTY.
you can copy it you can hack it remix it and even RESELL IT.
now there are restrictions. you can sell the TV but you can sell a knock off copy of it since that violates intellectual proeperty rights which you don't own unless you invented that TV.
the same applies with your CD or DVD. you OWN the disc AND THE CONTENT ON THAT DISC. its YOURS to do with as you please so long as you do not violate Intellectual Property rights JUST like with the TV
they are ONE AND THE SAME. the only difference is technical. Intellectual Rights for content is called copyright while for HARDWARE its called patent. thats is no different
you OWN the TV or Watch. you can break it fix it hack it modify it COPY IT remake it. do anything you want with it.
the SAME applies to CD and DVD etc.. I feel this even applies to SOFTWARE !!
The industry has been distorting this to somehow eliminate personal property rights to change it from BUYING content to "renting or leasing" content.
I also don'r recognize ANY kind of EULA or TERMS on purchased content in so far as personal property rights go. EULA for intellectual Property rights FINE I can live with that so long as it does not infringe in anyway on my Personal Property rights.
So when I am backing up a disk - decompiling a program - decrypting a DVD - converting between formats or copying for other devices NO restrictions of law or contract should be in place as has always been the case !!
NOW when I want to "pass around" those copies or resell them or resel hacked or modified versions etc.. NOW I have moved OUT of personal property rights and into the realm of Intellectual Property rights NOW EULA's should come into effect NOW laws should come into effect. thats the way it SHOULD BE.
they are twisting and distorting it to be OTHERWISE from this and people who do not know better are just "accepting" that this is how it is how it should be and how it always has been which is as far from the truth as you can be.
DRM is not NEVER was and can never be "good" for anything EXCEPT restricting legal rights and indenturing artists and society to there whims.
That is why I will not buy a format until it is SPLIT wide open and able to be rendered totally unencombered this means I will NEVER buy an HD TV that supports HDCP and I will likely therfore NEVER buy an HD DVD or BluRay player.
I do not recognize there right to impose the limitations they impose.
Period. until people start to realise this they will continue imposing there will. slowly and gently at first. then one day it will be so pervasive and so gently a shift when they flip the switch completely and utterly locking you out of any ownership if your content that you will simply be content never even realizing what it is you have lost. sheeple.
Chris Taylor
http://www.nerys.com/ - michaelstone, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5The insinuation that everybody gets ***** over with DRM is ridiculous. I buy from iTunes, I can use that music on every computer I own (all four of them), my entire family can put all the iTunes songs we want onto our iPods, and it's certainly not malware-infected at all. Perhaps people like iTunes not because they're ignorant, because most people don't give a ***** about getting a physical disc or jewel case and enjoy the actualy MUSIC? Which iTunes and other online stores (excluding allofmp3, no comment on them) sell for cheaper than the stores?
- echobucket, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2This middle ground doesn't really count because.
a) iTunes lets you burn a regular audio CD to get rid of the DRM
b) DVD encryption has been broken for a while now and there are tons of (illegal but highly available nonetheless) programs out there. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4This may be far out in left feild, but why not just avoid buying their stuff. No one is forcing you to by these movies or music. It's a free market. These companies have a right to restrict this to the level they wish.
- hackwrench, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2The thing is, some of the technology that is useful for DRM, is useful to restrict access in other ways, both good and bad. Say I want to make sure there is at least one hardlink to a file, but I want to reorganize my file system, If I could set a flag assuring that I do not delete the last copy, I could delete and reorganize with abandon. Also, if I want a canonical copy, I could set it as copyable but not editable with the provision that all copies loose the not editable flag. DRM and file security permissions are two pools in a vast field of ways of ensuring certain behaviors within the computer instead of leaving things to happenchance.
I'm also thinking about a flag that makes sure that files are local to you as opposed to on a network or on the internet that may not be available when you move your computer to another location or something goes down for maintenance and the like. - babbling, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Should the website say what DRM is? I'm not convinced that it should.
Consider what happens when people see this protest, go to the website, and want to know what DRM is. What are they going to do? They're going to research it, ask people about it, and so on. I think that's a good thing. A quick Google search can tell them what DRM is, but hopefully they'll ask people and get people talking about DRM. - Nerys, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3you can not strip itunes without loss. the simple act of burning to CD is "recompressing them" from aac to wav and then you have to REENCODE that cd to whatever format you want and THAT my friends is illegal. your itunes resitrctions permit you to make the CD legally but do NOT permit you to RIP the CD to mp3 and since you MADE the CD under contractual limitations you do not get the same rights as yiou would if you had purchased the CD.
burning to CD is legal ripping that CD to mp3 is circumvention and illegal under the DMCA - period.
Cute ehh ?
Chris Taylor
http://www.nerys.com/ - RadiantBeing, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Flickr has photos of the activists doing their thing. Somehow I get the impression that outlandish stunts like this do more to alienate support and sympathy than anything else.
Is dressing up like this the best way to present your message:
http://flickr.com/photos/tacomalog/152181943/
Here's the whole set:
http://flickr.com/search/?q=defectivebydesign - michaelstone, on 10/12/2007, -16/+1Barely tolerable?
I have never had a problem with DRM. Seriously, explain a problem with DRM you've personally had.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is